In another beathless "announcement" showing that image they casually mentioned the originator had never been heard of before now.
Yeah that's a reliable source...
Not.
I expect rrality will show up alongside the China Mobile announcement, which will most likely coincide with the China Mobile compatible iPhone "5s" announcement.
Just like every other low-end iPhone. What's the big deal?
Not a good strategy, or argument. If they released a low end iPhone with 1 year OS updates, it would be a disaster. This explains why a model is better than last years stuff - a strategy not used by any other company as far as I can see ( except to clear lines),
I don't see the low end iPhone being sold in the US market. This will be a phone for China and India and other markets where people can't afford the unsubsidized cost.
This looks almost like the iPhone 3GS plastic back. Put an iPhone 4S inside and I think you have a reasonable overseas product...
That's ugly... but it reminds me of the old plastic macbooks.
It does look like the white polycarbonate macbook, which makes sense. Apple has had a lower priced Macbook for many years made from polycarbonate and I can see them using that as a design reference both in terms of material and form.
A cheaper version of the already existing iPhone is not something they would do. People forget that the iPods are all different sizes but they all do different things, and fit different use-cases while at the same time maintaining the basic killer function, in this case ... portable music.
The "killer" or central function of an iPhone (or any smartphone) is not actually making calls. A cheaper iPhone without the ability to play apps for instance (in the same way that the cheaper iPods can't access the store) would be a failure. A cheaper iPhone that didn't do WiFi would be a similar failure. There simply aren't any features or things that you could remove from an iPhone and have it still remain an iPhone in the same way that an iPod nano is still an iPod.
IMO there are only three scenarios that make any kind of sense:
1) It's something completely different and new that makes it's own use case.
2) It replaces the selling of "last year's iPhone" by putting last year's iPhone guts in a cheap plastic case, and somehow this saves enough money that it can basically be given away at the same price as the "year before last year's" iPhone.
3) It isn't happening at all.
The 3.5" screen on this leak would seem to argue very strongly for number 3.
2012 called and wants it's arguments about iPad mini's never happening back.
I mean , as bad as these arguments were last year ( Apple does models across it's entire hardware line, and it also does cheap), you would think that the idea there wouldn't be a cheaper iDevice would be well and truly buried by now. Apparently not.
The cheaper iPhone will, like all cheaper models of the Mac line, do most, or all, of the top end models do but:
1) Look worse in terms of design.
2) Be slower. Have older chips, or less memory, or less capable GPU. Or all of this.
3) Not get all the software advantages of a new OS, but be compatible with the newest OSes going forward for the same length of time as any top end model released that year.
Kinda like the iPad mini - except they made the mistake of making the iPad mini look better, which explains so much canibalisation.
In short an ugly cheaper iPhone may well be in the future - but this same company did release plastic iBooks, to little upset. The brand will still remain intact if the top end models are purdy.
But they wouldn't be releasing it. You said so yourself; it's the iPhone 4S. It's two years old. I'm not talking about a new phone, nor were you.
No. I said that if Apple were to ( in future) release an cheaper iPhone, it would (in future) be considered bad practice to only have 1 years OS support. Which is why the present day strategy is not optimal. Along with other reasons.
Even if we pretend this IS true, the argument then becomes over the means by which this is accomplished. Whether it be wasting resources on a horrible phone like this or just dropping the 4S to $300 off-contract.
Heck, what is it now, $450? $350 off-contract would be enough.
In the long run, I think Apple would make a lower margin by dropping the price of the 4S to $300 off-contract or last year's generation that have high quality materials than by releasing each year a new phone with cheaper materials and last year's components.
While margins are a good thing, I think Apple has to offer at least one iPhone model in the $250-350 range. It won't damage the brand, because Apple will keep on offering and focusing the innovation in a high-end model.
No. I said that if Apple were to ( in future) release an cheaper iPhone, it would (in future) be considered bad practice to only have 1 years OS support. Which is why the present day strategy is not optimal. Along with other reasons.
But that's not the part of your post to which I was responding, so I'm confused why you'd respond to me in that way.
They also did this with the MacBook, remember the polycarbonate version of that? Just because it isn't as nice as say the iPhone 5 in that it doesn't use metal as it's chassis, doesn't mean it can't still be a quality product at a lower price point.
2012 called and wants it's arguments about iPad mini's never happening back.
I mean , as bad as these arguments were last year ( Apple does models across it's entire hardware line, and it also does cheap), you would think that the idea there wouldn't be a cheaper iDevice would be well and truly buried by now. Apparently not.
The cheaper iPhone will, like all cheaper models of the Mac line, do most, or all, of the top end models do but:
1) Look worse in terms of design.
2) Be slower. Have older chips, or less memory, or less capable GPU. Or all of this.
3) Not get all the software advantages of a new OS, but be compatible with the newest OSes going forward for the same length of time as any top end model released that year.
Kinda like the iPad mini - except they made the mistake of making the iPad mini look better, which explains so much canibalisation.
In short an ugly cheaper iPhone may well be in the future - but this same company did release plastic iBooks, to little upset. The brand will still remain intact if the top end models are purdy.
You're kinda all over the place on this one IMO, but I would point out that as you yourself note, the iPad mini caused rather huge cannibalisation of the iPad (regular) market.
I would also note that the iPad mini actually solves a lot of problems that the larger iPad has (weight, size, and therefore portability), and is in many ways a better product than the full sized iPad, so the idea that a smaller iPad is actually comparable to a cheaper iPhone is not really true. The iPad mini was not at all simply a cheaper version of the iPad in the same way as this cheaper iPhone would be, it's a different product altogether (which was in fact my argument).
This looks pretty legit, and pretty nice actually. I don't know what people expect a lower end iPhone to look like, certainly not like the premium product theyre trying to upsell. Besides, all these complaints were played out already with the 3G/3GS, and what a disaster that product turned out to be (/s). Apple would benefit greatly from a lower end iPhone. What is lower end in developed nations is still high end in developing nations, which would be a shame to just give up on, particularly with the emerging wealth. Always a heavy Debbie Downer contingent here on AI.
This is absolutely horrible if true. I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves. I don't want these idiot whiners to dictate company policy. We'll never have any future products that way. The iPhone would have had a keyboard and the iPad would have run OS X. And the mouse never would have gone into a consumer product.
Ugh, look at that thing. The case curves up around to the front; there's a lip there… ????
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
What do you expect? This is what you get when you try to make something cheap....which is why I don't think Apple needs to make a cheap phone. If you can't afford it then oh well. You can't always get everything you want. Apple has always said they aren't going to be in a race to the bottom and this is exactly what a cheap phone does. They're starting to compete on price, which is exactly what you don't want to do.
This is what happens when you start to listen to shareholders, customers, analysts, etc and lose focus on just creating great products.
Oh God. The sensationalism is so predictable. Noone knows if these are real or fake. But you know what? Every single iPhone that has leaked online in this fashion before being unveiled was declared "the ugliest thing ever" and "no way in hell this is from Apple" by the internet, including the iPhone 4 and 5.
The heart of Apple's mobile products are iOS and the ecosystem. The product isn't automatically shit because it's made out of plastic/polycarbonate. Samsung is selling billions of plastic devices, and consumers don't seem to mind. And I have no doubt this thing, if it exists, will be of significantly higher quality than what Samsung has been putting out. There's a ton of people (like me) that buy their phones unlocked, especially outside of NA. The iPhone 4 is still $450 unlocked for God's sakes. Being able to buy a brand new iPhone, unlocked, for a reasonable price would be fantastic. Not everyone needs ultra-high build quality with a micron of precision- for many, merely "great" build quality is enough. This is the same useless shrieking that happened before the iPad mini was unveiled, you should know buy now Apple does not make shit products, it's not in their DNA, and they know the value of the brand.
I find it hilarious that people here ignore the fact that Steve Jobs went from aluminum to plastic for TWO generations of the iPhone, but now if Apple offers such an OPTION, hey're doomed and Tim Cook is burning the company to the ground. There's literally BILLIONS of people around the world that would benefit from a cheaper iPhone. There's nothing wrong with the concept if done well. It's just always absolutely stunning to be how people that have followed Apple for so long (ie. Tallest Ski) still have no confidence in them to pull anything off, even when they're proven wrong over and over again by history.
Looks like crap! Hope its fake, the pixelization on Apple identifiers makes me think it might be - hope my hunch is right, if not then I hope this product is better than the sum of its parts.
What NEW iPhone has had a 3.5" display since the iPhone 5? Zero. Zilch. Zip. ...Apple has a long history of controlled, systematic obsolescence that makes it easy on the developer and consumer. Sticking with 3.5 for a brand new device limit the ease in which they can add another size display.
You are operating under the assumption that the 3.5" screen is somehow a problem, when in fact it's a well tried display with proven OS solutions to address different-sized screens. Moreover, it has only been 5 months since the iPhone 5 has been released. Have any new iPhones been released? Have any new iPod Touches been released. This is a specious argument. There's still plenty of time in Apple's usual product cycles to add a new 3.5" device to the lineup.
Besides, what you suggest would mean the 13" MacBook Pro should not exist, since somehow Apple never moves backwards in a device category, once they drop it.
I'm not the only person who would like a smaller iPhone, not a larger one. If they can figure out how to keep the 3.5" form factor with a 4" screen then I'm all for it. But until then, there's nothing wrong with keeping the 3.5" screen around. I've said all along it helps differentiate between a low-end product and a premium product.
Your assumption also is predicated on the notion that Apple will be delivering a larger iPhone with a rumored 4.5" or 5" screen. Again, I'm not sure how the presence of an additional larger screen really thwarts developers from maintaining the original form factor they've been developing for all along. Besides, developers can chose not to support it if its so much trouble for them (yet another distinction between a low-end model over the premium). And if anything, I'm more skeptical Apple will be following Samsung into the decidedly faddish phablet territory anyway. But if they do, who's to say it won't be the same aspect ratio as the 3.5" display anyway? That would certainly simplify keeping the 3.5" around.
No, I can't write off the 3.5" display completely until the iPhone 5s comes out. At that point, then your argument may have merit.
The Apple that I know and love is now making third rate phones for third world people. Maybe all of those people whining about cheap phones finally got to them.
I used to look forward to the keynotes and new product announcements, but what is there to look forward to now, if this is the kind of products they'll be making?
Going from ",If true" to flat out statements like "is now making third rate phones for third world people.". Is rather illogical.
This was put up by a completey unknown source who probably didn't exist before a few days ago.
In the long run, I think Apple would make a lower margin by dropping the price of the 4S to $300 off-contract or last year's generation that have high quality materials than by releasing each year a new phone with cheaper materials and last year's components.
Isn't this almost exactly what they did with the white polycarbonate MacBook? Even after they switched it to aluminum, they went back to the polycarbonate design and continued to sell millions for several years, even after introducing a 13" aluminum Pro model.
You are operating under the assumption that the 3.5" screen is somehow a problem, when in fact it's a well tried display with proven OS solutions to address different-sized screens. Moreover, it has only been 5 months since the iPhone 5 has been released. Have any new iPhones been released? Have any new iPod Touches been released. This is a specious argument. There's still plenty of time in Apple's usual product cycles to add a new 3.5" device to the lineup.
I think this is a valid point. The fact that developers now must produce apps that conform to the 4" display does not negate the 3.5 continuing. The main reason to continue with the 3.5 size is cost. If they can continue production of the 4s and repackage in a more robust and less expensive to produce polycarbonate shell, that, I imagine, would make the best possible 'low end' phone. Clearly there will be some other differences such as the 19-pin connector but I cant see Apple engineering a 'new' low end phone. It makes very little sense when they already have one in the 4s.
Comments
In another beathless "announcement" showing that image they casually mentioned the originator had never been heard of before now.
Yeah that's a reliable source...
Not.
I expect rrality will show up alongside the China Mobile announcement, which will most likely coincide with the China Mobile compatible iPhone "5s" announcement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Just like every other low-end iPhone. What's the big deal?
Not a good strategy, or argument. If they released a low end iPhone with 1 year OS updates, it would be a disaster. This explains why a model is better than last years stuff - a strategy not used by any other company as far as I can see ( except to clear lines),
This looks almost like the iPhone 3GS plastic back. Put an iPhone 4S inside and I think you have a reasonable overseas product...
Originally Posted by asdasd
If they released a low end iPhone…
But they wouldn't be releasing it. You said so yourself; it's the iPhone 4S. It's two years old. I'm not talking about a new phone, nor were you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009
That's ugly... but it reminds me of the old plastic macbooks.
It does look like the white polycarbonate macbook, which makes sense. Apple has had a lower priced Macbook for many years made from polycarbonate and I can see them using that as a design reference both in terms of material and form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Exactly.
A cheaper version of the already existing iPhone is not something they would do. People forget that the iPods are all different sizes but they all do different things, and fit different use-cases while at the same time maintaining the basic killer function, in this case ... portable music.
The "killer" or central function of an iPhone (or any smartphone) is not actually making calls. A cheaper iPhone without the ability to play apps for instance (in the same way that the cheaper iPods can't access the store) would be a failure. A cheaper iPhone that didn't do WiFi would be a similar failure. There simply aren't any features or things that you could remove from an iPhone and have it still remain an iPhone in the same way that an iPod nano is still an iPod.
IMO there are only three scenarios that make any kind of sense:
1) It's something completely different and new that makes it's own use case.
2) It replaces the selling of "last year's iPhone" by putting last year's iPhone guts in a cheap plastic case, and somehow this saves enough money that it can basically be given away at the same price as the "year before last year's" iPhone.
3) It isn't happening at all.
The 3.5" screen on this leak would seem to argue very strongly for number 3.
2012 called and wants it's arguments about iPad mini's never happening back.
I mean , as bad as these arguments were last year ( Apple does models across it's entire hardware line, and it also does cheap), you would think that the idea there wouldn't be a cheaper iDevice would be well and truly buried by now. Apparently not.
The cheaper iPhone will, like all cheaper models of the Mac line, do most, or all, of the top end models do but:
1) Look worse in terms of design.
2) Be slower. Have older chips, or less memory, or less capable GPU. Or all of this.
3) Not get all the software advantages of a new OS, but be compatible with the newest OSes going forward for the same length of time as any top end model released that year.
Kinda like the iPad mini - except they made the mistake of making the iPad mini look better, which explains so much canibalisation.
In short an ugly cheaper iPhone may well be in the future - but this same company did release plastic iBooks, to little upset. The brand will still remain intact if the top end models are purdy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
But they wouldn't be releasing it. You said so yourself; it's the iPhone 4S. It's two years old. I'm not talking about a new phone, nor were you.
No. I said that if Apple were to ( in future) release an cheaper iPhone, it would (in future) be considered bad practice to only have 1 years OS support. Which is why the present day strategy is not optimal. Along with other reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Even if we pretend this IS true, the argument then becomes over the means by which this is accomplished. Whether it be wasting resources on a horrible phone like this or just dropping the 4S to $300 off-contract.
Heck, what is it now, $450? $350 off-contract would be enough.
In the long run, I think Apple would make a lower margin by dropping the price of the 4S to $300 off-contract or last year's generation that have high quality materials than by releasing each year a new phone with cheaper materials and last year's components.
While margins are a good thing, I think Apple has to offer at least one iPhone model in the $250-350 range. It won't damage the brand, because Apple will keep on offering and focusing the innovation in a high-end model.
Originally Posted by asdasd
No. I said that if Apple were to ( in future) release an cheaper iPhone, it would (in future) be considered bad practice to only have 1 years OS support. Which is why the present day strategy is not optimal. Along with other reasons.
But that's not the part of your post to which I was responding, so I'm confused why you'd respond to me in that way.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Sent from my iPhone 3GS
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
2012 called and wants it's arguments about iPad mini's never happening back.
I mean , as bad as these arguments were last year ( Apple does models across it's entire hardware line, and it also does cheap), you would think that the idea there wouldn't be a cheaper iDevice would be well and truly buried by now. Apparently not.
The cheaper iPhone will, like all cheaper models of the Mac line, do most, or all, of the top end models do but:
1) Look worse in terms of design.
2) Be slower. Have older chips, or less memory, or less capable GPU. Or all of this.
3) Not get all the software advantages of a new OS, but be compatible with the newest OSes going forward for the same length of time as any top end model released that year.
Kinda like the iPad mini - except they made the mistake of making the iPad mini look better, which explains so much canibalisation.
In short an ugly cheaper iPhone may well be in the future - but this same company did release plastic iBooks, to little upset. The brand will still remain intact if the top end models are purdy.
You're kinda all over the place on this one IMO, but I would point out that as you yourself note, the iPad mini caused rather huge cannibalisation of the iPad (regular) market.
I would also note that the iPad mini actually solves a lot of problems that the larger iPad has (weight, size, and therefore portability), and is in many ways a better product than the full sized iPad, so the idea that a smaller iPad is actually comparable to a cheaper iPhone is not really true. The iPad mini was not at all simply a cheaper version of the iPad in the same way as this cheaper iPhone would be, it's a different product altogether (which was in fact my argument).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Looks pretty REAL to me.
This is absolutely horrible if true. I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves. I don't want these idiot whiners to dictate company policy. We'll never have any future products that way. The iPhone would have had a keyboard and the iPad would have run OS X. And the mouse never would have gone into a consumer product.
Ugh, look at that thing. The case curves up around to the front; there's a lip there… ????
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
What do you expect? This is what you get when you try to make something cheap....which is why I don't think Apple needs to make a cheap phone. If you can't afford it then oh well. You can't always get everything you want. Apple has always said they aren't going to be in a race to the bottom and this is exactly what a cheap phone does. They're starting to compete on price, which is exactly what you don't want to do.
This is what happens when you start to listen to shareholders, customers, analysts, etc and lose focus on just creating great products.
Oh God. The sensationalism is so predictable. Noone knows if these are real or fake. But you know what? Every single iPhone that has leaked online in this fashion before being unveiled was declared "the ugliest thing ever" and "no way in hell this is from Apple" by the internet, including the iPhone 4 and 5.
The heart of Apple's mobile products are iOS and the ecosystem. The product isn't automatically shit because it's made out of plastic/polycarbonate. Samsung is selling billions of plastic devices, and consumers don't seem to mind. And I have no doubt this thing, if it exists, will be of significantly higher quality than what Samsung has been putting out. There's a ton of people (like me) that buy their phones unlocked, especially outside of NA. The iPhone 4 is still $450 unlocked for God's sakes. Being able to buy a brand new iPhone, unlocked, for a reasonable price would be fantastic. Not everyone needs ultra-high build quality with a micron of precision- for many, merely "great" build quality is enough. This is the same useless shrieking that happened before the iPad mini was unveiled, you should know buy now Apple does not make shit products, it's not in their DNA, and they know the value of the brand.
I find it hilarious that people here ignore the fact that Steve Jobs went from aluminum to plastic for TWO generations of the iPhone, but now if Apple offers such an OPTION, hey're doomed and Tim Cook is burning the company to the ground. There's literally BILLIONS of people around the world that would benefit from a cheaper iPhone. There's nothing wrong with the concept if done well. It's just always absolutely stunning to be how people that have followed Apple for so long (ie. Tallest Ski) still have no confidence in them to pull anything off, even when they're proven wrong over and over again by history.
You are operating under the assumption that the 3.5" screen is somehow a problem, when in fact it's a well tried display with proven OS solutions to address different-sized screens. Moreover, it has only been 5 months since the iPhone 5 has been released. Have any new iPhones been released? Have any new iPod Touches been released. This is a specious argument. There's still plenty of time in Apple's usual product cycles to add a new 3.5" device to the lineup.
Besides, what you suggest would mean the 13" MacBook Pro should not exist, since somehow Apple never moves backwards in a device category, once they drop it.
I'm not the only person who would like a smaller iPhone, not a larger one. If they can figure out how to keep the 3.5" form factor with a 4" screen then I'm all for it. But until then, there's nothing wrong with keeping the 3.5" screen around. I've said all along it helps differentiate between a low-end product and a premium product.
Your assumption also is predicated on the notion that Apple will be delivering a larger iPhone with a rumored 4.5" or 5" screen. Again, I'm not sure how the presence of an additional larger screen really thwarts developers from maintaining the original form factor they've been developing for all along. Besides, developers can chose not to support it if its so much trouble for them (yet another distinction between a low-end model over the premium). And if anything, I'm more skeptical Apple will be following Samsung into the decidedly faddish phablet territory anyway. But if they do, who's to say it won't be the same aspect ratio as the 3.5" display anyway? That would certainly simplify keeping the 3.5" around.
No, I can't write off the 3.5" display completely until the iPhone 5s comes out. At that point, then your argument may have merit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
This is disappointing, if true.
The Apple that I know and love is now making third rate phones for third world people. Maybe all of those people whining about cheap phones finally got to them.
I used to look forward to the keynotes and new product announcements, but what is there to look forward to now, if this is the kind of products they'll be making?
Going from ",If true" to flat out statements like "is now making third rate phones for third world people.". Is rather illogical.
This was put up by a completey unknown source who probably didn't exist before a few days ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138
Going from ",If true" to flat out statements like "is now making third rate phones for third world people.". Is rather illogical.
This was put up by a completey unknown source who probably didn't exist before a few days ago.
The other statements are obviously dependent upon this rumor being true.
If it's not true, then great, because I've never been a fan of the low end strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
You are operating under the assumption that the 3.5" screen is somehow a problem, when in fact it's a well tried display with proven OS solutions to address different-sized screens. Moreover, it has only been 5 months since the iPhone 5 has been released. Have any new iPhones been released? Have any new iPod Touches been released. This is a specious argument. There's still plenty of time in Apple's usual product cycles to add a new 3.5" device to the lineup.
I think this is a valid point. The fact that developers now must produce apps that conform to the 4" display does not negate the 3.5 continuing. The main reason to continue with the 3.5 size is cost. If they can continue production of the 4s and repackage in a more robust and less expensive to produce polycarbonate shell, that, I imagine, would make the best possible 'low end' phone. Clearly there will be some other differences such as the 19-pin connector but I cant see Apple engineering a 'new' low end phone. It makes very little sense when they already have one in the 4s.