One of the biggest complaints about the iPhone earnings is due to them only releasing one model a year that the sales drop precipitously the last 2 quarters prior to a new model release. If Apple ever decided to have multiple models I can see them releasing an iPhone 5S alongside a cheaper model at the same time. But for a larger screen and pricier model I would think that would make more sense to space that about 6 months apart to keep some excitement the whole year.
A larger 4.8" iPhone example would make a bigger splash if released on it's own in the Spring while the standard and possibly a cheaper model would be released in the Autumn. This is not unlike what they used to do with the iPad. A larger iPhone release 6 months later would also likely get the next generation CPU first as an incentive to pay a higher price and also to keep them competitive with Android phones that tend to release in the Spring. The larger display would allow for more space for a CPU that might need more time to be shrunk down and optimized more for the smaller standard iPhone.
Two big iPhone releases a year spaced apart by 6 months would keep the excitement and interest level up year round. Standard sized and a separate more affordable version around September followed by a larger and more expensive version around April/May. Releasing a large iPhone right around the same time as the Samsung Galaxy S5 would take all the wind out of Samsung's sails.
If Apple is going to make multiple sized & priced new model iPhones they will likely space the releases
Come on Apple put out a bigger iPhone. Who cares if the screen isn't as good as the 5. Have you seen the screen on the 4.7" HTC One, it's great. I couldn't tell a difference between that and the iPhone 5 screen in person.
Come on Apple put out a bigger iPhone. Who cares if the screen isn't as good as the 5. Have you seen the screen on the 4.7" HTC One, it's great. I couldn't tell a difference between that and the iPhone 5 screen in person.
I have seen it in person as well. I also saw the HTC Droid DNA which is only on Verizon and a little larger at 5". That came out a few months ago and my buddy has one so I have had more time to see it up close. Both are simply gorgeous displays. Maybe it is no better than the iPhone 5 display but to me it looked brighter and just clearer. Perhaps it is just because it is larger that it looks so much better but I sat my iPhone 5 next to it and viewed some websites and some same apps like Modern War on both phones and the HTC to my eyes easily won out. All these people saying that Apple doesn't need a larger iPhone might change their mind if they have some hands on time in person with an HTC One or DNA and see it side by side with their iPhone 5.
Under $300 would surprise me, too. Heck, even Google sold the Galaxy Nexus direct for $399 and the Nexus 4 (with half the memory) for $299. Apple's unlikely to sell an 8gb phone (like the base Nexus 4), so I would guess no lower than $399 for an off-contract new device.
Agreed. I just can't see selling it for less than a Galaxy Nexus. It just sends the wrong signal. And they don't NEED to sell it too low.
Careful about saying anything about the Apple TV software revamp. I posted a comment on here about that when the logo/announcement for WWDC was announced, and how I thought that was a possibility, and I was basically laughed at and called an idiot for thinking so...by a moderator.
oh! need to go check out that logo...
and tallestskill is no big fan of the Apple TV set, if you got flame by him. imo we will get the software revamp way before the actual TV set, so its going to be on the Apple TV box at first.
update:
The WWDC logo could indeed be TV related. Of course, we cant be sure but this reinforce other rumors I saw about a TV software revamp and a new Apple TV box introduction. I think I will buy a few options calls that expires after the WWDC. There is also a good case for it to be watch related.
As long as they maintain margin what difference does the final selling price make? Further an iPhone priced right will significantly expand the customer base. Since Apple makes good profit of the customer base after the sale of the device it really doesn't matter if the device is $300 or $150. As long as they maintain quality it is all gravy to Apple.
Ugh. Apple will not sell a phone for less than $300 off contract. Apple doesn't do cheap.
You really don't understand the difference between cheap and low cost. High price tags do not imply high quality.
I like how demand outweighing supply was considered a "slow start".
In a nut shell the analyst are idiots. They got all worked up over Mac sales when Apple didn't have an iMac on the market ready for sale. Instead of fretting about Apples future they should have been doing a bit of math to get a better picture as to iMacs proportion of the market. Likewise with iPhone, heavy demand at production ramp up is somehow interpreted to mean poor sales. It is really twisted at times what these guys come up with to promote the party line.
and tallestskill is no big fan of the Apple TV set, if you got flame by him. imo we will get the software revamp way before the actual TV set, so its going to be on the Apple TV box at first.
update:
The WWDC logo could indeed be TV related. Of course, we cant be sure but this reinforce other rumors I saw about a TV software revamp and a new Apple TV box introduction. I think I will buy a few options calls that expires after the WWDC. There is also a good case for it to be watch related.
I think it will be in Apple's best interest and the consumers to revamp the Apple TV software. It would be an excellent lead in from that interface to a full fledged TV. It will also, show Wallstreet and investors that Apple can make a TV, and it be successful. A revamp of the Apple TV software would also make for a great game console especially with the millions of iDevices being used for controllers. Just about a month away...all eyes will be on WWDC.
As long as they maintain margin what difference does the final selling price make? Further an iPhone priced right will significantly expand the customer base. Since Apple makes good profit of the customer base after the sale of the device it really doesn't matter if the device is $300 or $150. As long as they maintain quality it is all gravy to Apple.
You really don't understand the difference between cheap and low cost. High price tags do not imply high quality.
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
That's like asking this question last year:
"If they make $200 per iPad, then why would Apple sell a cheaper iPad mini with lower margins? Especially as it cannibalizes regular iPad sales!"
If they think a cheap iphone without a bigger screen will sell in Hong Kong they have another thing coming. Most locals have moved on to big screen Samsungs.
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
I think Wizard69 is suggesting that Apple makes money on the device after the sale, through e.g. 30% of every app/media transaction.
That's certainly Amazon's philosophy with its devices, but (1) I don't think Apple believes in loss leaders and (2) while people may spend enough on media for their apps/media on a tablet, I doubt that's true for phones. Most people buy some apps for their phone, but use their tablets for media. If I'm right, it wouldn't make sense to sell the phone cheap. (Personally, I've spend maybe $150 on apps for my iPad, and thousands on media for my Kindle. I occasionally read news publications (on which Apple's making nothing, since I get the app free with my print subscription) on my phone, but that's about it for media.)
Uh, Apple. You obviously know nothing about the company.
Originally Posted by herbapou
and tallestskill is no big fan of the Apple TV set, if you got flame by him. imo we will get the software revamp way before the actual TV set, so its going to be on the Apple TV box at first.
I dunno. I think I'm still out on it. Leaning away, but out.
I'm 100% out on 1080p for it, but…
Content deals are still more important than both the UI (which they already have down pat) and a stupid, expensive, worthless TV panel.
Uh, Apple. You obviously know nothing about the company.
I dunno. I think I'm still out on it. Leaning away, but out.
I'm 100% out on 1080p for it, but…
Content deals are still more important than both the UI (which they already have down pat) and a stupid, expensive, worthless TV panel.
Content deals are what stalling this indeed. But the still need to revamp that interface, its getting old.
Regarding content deals, cant wait to see if Apple will go by itself and bypass cable or work with cable. I am watching the QAM (cable) vs IPTV (DSL) war in both Canada and the US and its getting interesting. Cable is not reacting to well against the first real competition they face. If apple goes by itselft it wont be able to get a lot of channels because almost all of them are own by Cable/DSL giants. I wish Apple could introduce a third choice with internet but its only doable with pre-recorded content. There is still no technical way to broadcast live channels over the net in volume other than making an IPTV structure inside the ISP network.
I am pilling up cash for my giant worthless TV panel... cant wait :-)
But the still need to revamp that interface, its getting old.
There are certainly some problems with the current interface (SCROLL, NOT JUMP, YOU STUPID USELESS…), but it's almost exactly what I came up with for the Apple TV, so I like it. I need to sketch out notifications and the UI for scheduling next…
"After a slow start, iPhone 5, is now on track to meet carrier volume expectations and iPhone 4 price cuts could stimulate incremental demand near-term," Huberty wrote.
What slow start? Is Huberty ignorant or just dishonest?
The iPhone 5 went on sale September 14, 2012, at which point Apple took 2 million orders within 24 hours. They sold 6 million iPhone 5 units in calendar Q3, i.e. by the end of that same month, just two weeks later. Apple then went on to sell another 27.4 million units in Q4, making it the #1 selling smartphone worldwide (source: http://tinyurl.com/cjetve8).
Comments
Come on Apple put out a bigger iPhone. Who cares if the screen isn't as good as the 5. Have you seen the screen on the 4.7" HTC One, it's great. I couldn't tell a difference between that and the iPhone 5 screen in person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplePi
Come on Apple put out a bigger iPhone. Who cares if the screen isn't as good as the 5. Have you seen the screen on the 4.7" HTC One, it's great. I couldn't tell a difference between that and the iPhone 5 screen in person.
I have seen it in person as well. I also saw the HTC Droid DNA which is only on Verizon and a little larger at 5". That came out a few months ago and my buddy has one so I have had more time to see it up close. Both are simply gorgeous displays. Maybe it is no better than the iPhone 5 display but to me it looked brighter and just clearer. Perhaps it is just because it is larger that it looks so much better but I sat my iPhone 5 next to it and viewed some websites and some same apps like Modern War on both phones and the HTC to my eyes easily won out. All these people saying that Apple doesn't need a larger iPhone might change their mind if they have some hands on time in person with an HTC One or DNA and see it side by side with their iPhone 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
Under $300 would surprise me, too. Heck, even Google sold the Galaxy Nexus direct for $399 and the Nexus 4 (with half the memory) for $299. Apple's unlikely to sell an 8gb phone (like the base Nexus 4), so I would guess no lower than $399 for an off-contract new device.
Agreed. I just can't see selling it for less than a Galaxy Nexus. It just sends the wrong signal. And they don't NEED to sell it too low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abobrek
Careful about saying anything about the Apple TV software revamp. I posted a comment on here about that when the logo/announcement for WWDC was announced, and how I thought that was a possibility, and I was basically laughed at and called an idiot for thinking so...by a moderator.
oh! need to go check out that logo...
and tallestskill is no big fan of the Apple TV set, if you got flame by him. imo we will get the software revamp way before the actual TV set, so its going to be on the Apple TV box at first.
update:
The WWDC logo could indeed be TV related. Of course, we cant be sure but this reinforce other rumors I saw about a TV software revamp and a new Apple TV box introduction. I think I will buy a few options calls that expires after the WWDC. There is also a good case for it to be watch related.
You really don't understand the difference between cheap and low cost. High price tags do not imply high quality.
In a nut shell the analyst are idiots. They got all worked up over Mac sales when Apple didn't have an iMac on the market ready for sale. Instead of fretting about Apples future they should have been doing a bit of math to get a better picture as to iMacs proportion of the market. Likewise with iPhone, heavy demand at production ramp up is somehow interpreted to mean poor sales. It is really twisted at times what these guys come up with to promote the party line.
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
That's like asking this question last year:
"If they make $200 per iPad, then why would Apple sell a cheaper iPad mini with lower margins? Especially as it cannibalizes regular iPad sales!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
If they make $300 per iPhone 5 now, why would they sell a cheap iPhone for razor thin margins? It does matter. They can't make $200-300 if it sells for less than $300.
I think Wizard69 is suggesting that Apple makes money on the device after the sale, through e.g. 30% of every app/media transaction.
That's certainly Amazon's philosophy with its devices, but (1) I don't think Apple believes in loss leaders and (2) while people may spend enough on media for their apps/media on a tablet, I doubt that's true for phones. Most people buy some apps for their phone, but use their tablets for media. If I'm right, it wouldn't make sense to sell the phone cheap. (Personally, I've spend maybe $150 on apps for my iPad, and thousands on media for my Kindle. I occasionally read news publications (on which Apple's making nothing, since I get the app free with my print subscription) on my phone, but that's about it for media.)
Originally Posted by ApplePi
Who cares if the screen isn't as good as the 5.
Uh, Apple. You obviously know nothing about the company.
Originally Posted by herbapou
and tallestskill is no big fan of the Apple TV set, if you got flame by him. imo we will get the software revamp way before the actual TV set, so its going to be on the Apple TV box at first.
I dunno. I think I'm still out on it. Leaning away, but out.
I'm 100% out on 1080p for it, but…
Content deals are still more important than both the UI (which they already have down pat) and a stupid, expensive, worthless TV panel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Uh, Apple. You obviously know nothing about the company.
I dunno. I think I'm still out on it. Leaning away, but out.
I'm 100% out on 1080p for it, but…
Content deals are still more important than both the UI (which they already have down pat) and a stupid, expensive, worthless TV panel.
Content deals are what stalling this indeed. But the still need to revamp that interface, its getting old.
Regarding content deals, cant wait to see if Apple will go by itself and bypass cable or work with cable. I am watching the QAM (cable) vs IPTV (DSL) war in both Canada and the US and its getting interesting. Cable is not reacting to well against the first real competition they face. If apple goes by itselft it wont be able to get a lot of channels because almost all of them are own by Cable/DSL giants. I wish Apple could introduce a third choice with internet but its only doable with pre-recorded content. There is still no technical way to broadcast live channels over the net in volume other than making an IPTV structure inside the ISP network.
I am pilling up cash for my giant worthless TV panel... cant wait :-)
Originally Posted by herbapou
But the still need to revamp that interface, its getting old.
There are certainly some problems with the current interface (SCROLL, NOT JUMP, YOU STUPID USELESS…), but it's almost exactly what I came up with for the Apple TV, so I like it. I need to sketch out notifications and the UI for scheduling next…
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"After a slow start, iPhone 5, is now on track to meet carrier volume expectations and iPhone 4 price cuts could stimulate incremental demand near-term," Huberty wrote.
What slow start? Is Huberty ignorant or just dishonest?
The iPhone 5 went on sale September 14, 2012, at which point Apple took 2 million orders within 24 hours. They sold 6 million iPhone 5 units in calendar Q3, i.e. by the end of that same month, just two weeks later. Apple then went on to sell another 27.4 million units in Q4, making it the #1 selling smartphone worldwide (source: http://tinyurl.com/cjetve8).
Again, what slow start?