It's just a bad picture, as are almost all pictures of this type. If you throw it into photoshop, adjust it for how stupidly dark it is, and then assume that the yellow one is a normal bright yellow colour and adjust for that, then they all look a lot better.
These appear to me to be very standard colours along the lines of "lemon yellow," "choral pink," and "lime green."
Steve told Tim to not ask, "What would Steve do?" Just do it because Apple was now his company. Steve trusted Tim to do right by the company. So far Tim has not done wrong by the company! Product sales continue break records. Profits continue to break records. Innovation continues to be designed and developed by the company. WWDC was a major success and folks are still analyzing iOS 7 to understand exactly what is coming for the operating system later this year. Looking at what Tim did before and has done since Steve died is absolutely amazing.
Well, I know they aren't "finished" as they need a lot of country specific info, bit wouldn't the red at least be the color of, and have the logo of, the Product (Red) products?
It depends a lot on the lighting of the picture.
Here is a Product Red iPod nano that looks like almost the exact same colour to me:
And the colours they have available depend on the material also.
Anodised red metal will always be a different colour than red plastic and different types of plastic will look like different shades of red even when dyed with the exact same colourant.
I got a good laugh. These aren't real. Maybe in bootleg China
They might be real. If not they are a pretty good fake IMO.
One fact that I find kind of hilarious is that the leaked "iPhone 5s" motherboards from last week have exactly the same attachment points as the screw holes in these snaps.
I think it would just be hilarious if this is not only an Apple product, but actually is the iPhone 5s.
Overall though, I can see this product being real. A slightly thicker body means even longer battery life, possibly pushing more than 20 hours. If it has "last years" guts in it, and a plastic super durable body, it could easily sell for less than $200 off contract and a device like that would literally fly off the shelves.
If ever there was a moment that Apple would reach for market share for a product, this is probably it. The top end of the market is already saturating. If they can pull this off then they will have it all.
The main thing that I think argues against this low cost iPhone is the fact that they just finished turning iOS into something that almost requires a super fast processor and tons of system memory to work well at all. So unless this thing runs iOS 6, that doesn't make much sense. Alternatively, the "low cost" iPhone could have last year's everything *except* the processor could be still be "this year's" if in fact they have found a way to ramp up production on the processors and reduce their overall costs. Considering they own all the tech for them, it's possible.
I remember when the iBook first came out. I got one of the neon lime green ones. It was fun at the time.
iMacs too, but those tones were better looking than what appears in these photos--brighter, not "neon". Well, I guess I stand corrected insofar as saying Apple would never use bright green. But these look unusually tacky. I hope that Apple's actual shades are more tasteful than these. I still think that these are clever forgeries. I hope I'm right.
And the colours they have available depend on the material also.
Anodised red metal will always be a different colour than red plastic and different types of plastic will look like different shades of red even when dyed with the exact same colourant.
No, the Apple photo appears (to me) to be a darker and more uniform red. Maybe the color balance is off in the spy photo. You know how these spy photos are taken with cheap, grainy Android cameras.
No, the Apple photo appears (to me) to be a darker and more uniform red. Maybe the color balance is off in the spy photo. You know how these spy photos are taken with cheap, grainy Android cameras.
Well exactly. I made this point myself earlier. People saying "ugh!" over a crappy spy photo aren't thinking straight. Apple takes a huge amount of care and time to get the colours and lighting just right in their product shots. These kind of snaps are obviously not going to be anything like that.
Even then they can grow on you. The latest iPod touches looked pretty hideous to me at first, now they don't. This is also a fairly standard human reaction to something that is new.
Edit: I should add that I am still not 100% convinced and probably won't be until I see the value proposition that these are really Apple phones. But the idea that they "couldn't be" is not right. They could very well be.
They might be real. If not they are a pretty good fake IMO.
One fact that I find kind of hilarious is that the leaked "iPhone 5s" motherboards from last week have exactly the same attachment points as the screw holes in these snaps.
I think it would just be hilarious if this is not only an Apple product, but actually is the iPhone 5s. :)
Overall though, I can see this product being real. A slightly thicker body means even longer battery life, possibly pushing more than 20 hours. If it has "last years" guts in it, and a plastic super durable body, it could easily sell for less than $200 off contract and a device like that would literally fly off the shelves.
If ever there was a moment that Apple would reach for market share for a product, this is probably it. The top end of the market is already saturating. If they can pull this off then they will have it all.
The main thing that I think argues against this low cost iPhone is the fact that they just finished turning iOS into something that almost requires a super fast processor and tons of system memory to work well at all. So unless this thing runs iOS 6, that doesn't make much sense. Alternatively, the "low cost" iPhone could have last year's everything *except* the processor could be still be "this year's" if in fact they have found a way to ramp up production on the processors and reduce their overall costs. Considering they own all the tech for them, it's possible.
iOS 7 shouldn't require anything more than an A5.
Certainly, the iPhone "lite" could use "last year's" internals, which would be an A6.
I think the bigger hurdle would be retina display, which is almost required for iOS 7.
I meant to run flawlessly. In the past, certain iOS releases have run on older hardware but with limited features.
And yeah, I don't see Apple ever releasing a phone sans retina display. But that presents a hurdle as far as price.
Perhaps they'll forgoe the rear camera a la the new iPod touch.
Well I bow to your superior knowledge on processing power because I am not sure myself, but aren't a great deal of iOS 7's new features unavailable on older phones for this exact reason? This has always been true with each release of course, but I've read numerous reports of it being quite marked with iOS 7.
It would seem that the internals of this thing would have to at least be iPhone 5 level (camera filter, AirDrop) for it to make sense but I guess by the time it comes out, that will be "last years" guts.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpvn
Apple would never use colors like that.
It's just a bad picture, as are almost all pictures of this type. If you throw it into photoshop, adjust it for how stupidly dark it is, and then assume that the yellow one is a normal bright yellow colour and adjust for that, then they all look a lot better.
These appear to me to be very standard colours along the lines of "lemon yellow," "choral pink," and "lime green."
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73
Well, I know they aren't "finished" as they need a lot of country specific info, bit wouldn't the red at least be the color of, and have the logo of, the Product (Red) products?
It depends a lot on the lighting of the picture.
Here is a Product Red iPod nano that looks like almost the exact same colour to me:
And the colours they have available depend on the material also.
Anodised red metal will always be a different colour than red plastic and different types of plastic will look like different shades of red even when dyed with the exact same colourant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtd2870
I got a good laugh. These aren't real. Maybe in bootleg China
They might be real. If not they are a pretty good fake IMO.
One fact that I find kind of hilarious is that the leaked "iPhone 5s" motherboards from last week have exactly the same attachment points as the screw holes in these snaps.
I think it would just be hilarious if this is not only an Apple product, but actually is the iPhone 5s.
Overall though, I can see this product being real. A slightly thicker body means even longer battery life, possibly pushing more than 20 hours. If it has "last years" guts in it, and a plastic super durable body, it could easily sell for less than $200 off contract and a device like that would literally fly off the shelves.
If ever there was a moment that Apple would reach for market share for a product, this is probably it. The top end of the market is already saturating. If they can pull this off then they will have it all.
The main thing that I think argues against this low cost iPhone is the fact that they just finished turning iOS into something that almost requires a super fast processor and tons of system memory to work well at all. So unless this thing runs iOS 6, that doesn't make much sense. Alternatively, the "low cost" iPhone could have last year's everything *except* the processor could be still be "this year's" if in fact they have found a way to ramp up production on the processors and reduce their overall costs. Considering they own all the tech for them, it's possible.
iMacs too, but those tones were better looking than what appears in these photos--brighter, not "neon". Well, I guess I stand corrected insofar as saying Apple would never use bright green. But these look unusually tacky. I hope that Apple's actual shades are more tasteful than these. I still think that these are clever forgeries. I hope I'm right.
No, the Apple photo appears (to me) to be a darker and more uniform red. Maybe the color balance is off in the spy photo. You know how these spy photos are taken with cheap, grainy Android cameras.
Right. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
No, the Apple photo appears (to me) to be a darker and more uniform red. Maybe the color balance is off in the spy photo. You know how these spy photos are taken with cheap, grainy Android cameras.
Well exactly. I made this point myself earlier. People saying "ugh!" over a crappy spy photo aren't thinking straight. Apple takes a huge amount of care and time to get the colours and lighting just right in their product shots. These kind of snaps are obviously not going to be anything like that.
Even then they can grow on you. The latest iPod touches looked pretty hideous to me at first, now they don't. This is also a fairly standard human reaction to something that is new.
Edit: I should add that I am still not 100% convinced and probably won't be until I see the value proposition that these are really Apple phones. But the idea that they "couldn't be" is not right. They could very well be.
If I had to guess these are real. They are also very similar to the new colors in iOS 7 if you look at the marketing materials on apple.com
I really doubt if it is true, more like a bad fake to me.
Considering the regular iPhone sells for $600, lowering the price by $200 requires sacrifices.
iOS 7 shouldn't require anything more than an A5.
Certainly, the iPhone "lite" could use "last year's" internals, which would be an A6.
I think the bigger hurdle would be retina display, which is almost required for iOS 7.
In fact, as it runs on an A4...
An iPhone without a retina display would truly be a phone for idiots.
Actually I'm pretty sure they're not real because they're missing model number "designed by apple in california" all the FCC symbols.
I meant to run flawlessly. In the past, certain iOS releases have run on older hardware but with limited features.
And yeah, I don't see Apple ever releasing a phone sans retina display. But that presents a hurdle as far as price.
Perhaps they'll forgoe the rear camera a la the new iPod touch.
An iPhone without a CAMERA? The most popular camera in the world... without a camera? :wow:
There's a limit to the stinginess of the people to whom Apple wants to sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpvn
Apple would never use colors like that.
Disgusting obnoxious pastels? I'm guessing you haven't seen the iPod Nano or Touch line, then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
I meant to run flawlessly. In the past, certain iOS releases have run on older hardware but with limited features.
And yeah, I don't see Apple ever releasing a phone sans retina display. But that presents a hurdle as far as price.
Perhaps they'll forgoe the rear camera a la the new iPod touch.
Well I bow to your superior knowledge on processing power because I am not sure myself, but aren't a great deal of iOS 7's new features unavailable on older phones for this exact reason? This has always been true with each release of course, but I've read numerous reports of it being quite marked with iOS 7.
It would seem that the internals of this thing would have to at least be iPhone 5 level (camera filter, AirDrop) for it to make sense but I guess by the time it comes out, that will be "last years" guts.