Going by that metric European iPhones would have FCC either. They do.
While I don't have any direct knowledge of how phones are labeled in Europe or Asia, I wouldn't put too much onto the fact that these cases are unlabeled. Apple undoubtedly produces large numbers of prototypes for testing purposes and I don't believe they can use FCC labels on a prototype until it has been approved by the FCC.
Since it enables more thinner, lighter, more rigid and less crack prone mobile electronics devices. And it's metal; metal looks cooler than plastic.
From the OS X Dictionary:
Itsresistance to corrosion, lightness, and strength (especially in alloys) have led to widespread use in domestic utensils, engineering parts, and aircraft construction.
Ah but we only tend to keep our phones 2 years and sometimes less. Utensils, airplanes, and engineering parts are made to last for a very long time.
But the problem is that the thinness is obviated by the need to use a case if you are worried about scratches and it seems this plastic iPhone will not need a case which could make it as thin if not thinner than a 5S in a case. That is the dilemma with aluminum, it may look nicer as you assert but if you want to protect the resale value of your phone then a case is generally a wise decision and the case is what you see not the aluminum iPhone. My iPhones have always been in a case and probably always will so I suppose that is why I really am not all that concerned about color, materials, or exterior design that will be hidden.
It will also be interesting to see how the C vs. S does in drop test.
Plastic, being more durable, is ideal for those who work in more physical careers such as construction, field service technicians, law enforcement, and strenuous outdoor jobs of all sorts.
More scratch resistant is not more durable. Plastic always likes to crack.
Unless the 5S has some kind of killer feature (so far I dont see it), I am replacing my 4s for the 5C this fall.
And that's fair enough. You're decision is based on the cost of the 5S, which means you're probably not the potential target audience for it.
In terms of what ways the 5S will be better than the 5C?
Let's see:
Lighter
Thinner
Better camera
Faster processor
More durable; less crack prone
Metal
Higher storage 32 - 128 GB
Fingerprint scanner
Gold option for those looking for a little more variety in the 5S given the 5C colours
Don't underestimate the fingerprint scanner feature. If it's done right, and I mean really right. It'll be the most important feature on the iPhone in years.
More scratch resistant is not more durable. Plastic always likes to crack.
Always is a pretty strong word. Scientists are improving the quality and durability of plastics all the time. I have a drawer full of older plastic phones and none have cracked and they certainly did't use a plastic anywhere close to as good as what the iPhone 5C will use.
Kevlar is a type of plastic and is 5 times stronger than steel less you forget.
Always is a pretty strong word. Scientists are improving the quality and durability of plastics all the time. I have a drawer full of older plastic phones and none have cracked and they certainly did't use a plastic anywhere close to as good as what the iPhone 5C will use.
What is it with people who are completely unable to comprehend the fact that plastic doesn't necessarily mean 'cheap'. And 'cheap' doesn't necessarily mean 'low quality'.
Apple has a super reputation of making high quality products affordable for the masses (remember when the iPad came out at half the price everyone expected? or the MBA which no one was able to compete with until Intel started to subsidize them?)
Apple is Apple. They're not going to produce crap. They might produce a plastic phone and it might even be less expensive than the 5S, but that doesn't mean it will be crap nor that it will ruin Apple's reputation.
Having a product introduce at half the imagined price does not a affordable product make by that fact alone.
In most every way cheap means low quality. Plastic is cheaper and lower quality then metal. Apple moved away from plastic for a reason. Apple is a high end manufacturer.
If plastic was not cheap, then why are all the iPods not plastic to save money? Do I really need a nano or shuffle in metal? No, but Apple chose to for a reason.
But you will only get hate for such dissenting opinions.
No hate here.
Maybe you need to just open your mind up a bit more...plastic does not mean cheap to many people. Plastic by itself does not mean a compromise to Apple's brand/image if the device meets or exceed the customer's expectations. I'm not trying to justify Apple's (rumored) decisions, just giving opinion of how I think consumers will react.
Just because we don't agree with you doesn't mean we hate you or don't like you personally.
Having a product introduce at half the imagined price does not a affordable product make by that fact alone.
In most every way cheap means low quality. Plastic is cheaper and lower quality then metal. Apple moved away from plastic for a reason. Apple is a high end manufacturer.
If plastic was not cheap, then why are all the iPods not plastic to save money? Do I really need a nano or shuffle in metal? No, but Apple chose to for a reason.
So you're simply making things up and pretending they have validity.
You don't know a thing about the phone, its construction, its materials, or its features, so you have no way of knowing whether it's a quality device or not. You simply jumped to the conclusion that it must be cheap junk - no need for facts, the world is supposed to simply accept your imagination.
The pencil hardness test is for testing scratch resistance of coatings, not to be confused with hardness of a solid material. We can be 99% sure that this plastic case is polycarbonate of some form. In that case, the proper hardness measure is Rockwell hardness. Furthermore, the pencil test is not a administered by randomly scratching away with a pencil. There is a special fixture for this.
I realize this is a "cursory" test. But it really doesn't mean very much.
I'm all for a plastic rear case. My iPhone 3GS felt much better in the hand than my 4 and 4S. Jobs made such an issue at the intro of the iPhone 4 about it being a mm thinner - which I'm sure it was at it's thickest point. But picking them up it felt the other way round because of the 4's squarer edges.
The 3GS didn't feel cheap - plastic comes in varying quality and it seemed fine. There was no flex which made earlier plastic phones like the palm treo / centro feel cheap.
And it wears well - better than some of the iPhone 5s on display at Apple Stores. I've no complaints about the prospects of a plastic backed 5c
For all we know, this phone may only be aimed at China or other emerging markets...maybe this phone will not be available in the US or EU...maybe that's why there are no FCC markings?
But I think it's a bad move for Apple. It's sucking into a race to the bottom. Apple is trying to be Samsung. What's the point?
First, I don't think this will be a race to the bottom, more a race to the middle third.
When Apple was just a computer company selling high-end CPUs, they almost got put out of business by cheap Wintel. I think the smartphone market is a similar story. Apple already has the big profits, but they need to maintain a large percentage of the user base to maintain relevance so that the developers won't put their focus on Android and such. There is now way they can do that with 2 billion+ people in China and India coming online, but not being able to afford a high-end Apple phone.
I think it will be the best selling iPhone by a very wide margin. It will be far more affordable but not cheaply built. It will likely have the same internals as the 5 which is a fast phone and no need to buy a case which can also be a selling point for many.
And since when was aluminum consider to be a premium or expensive material?
Since last September. I don't see anything wrong with using plastic, but there are now a plethora of hypocrites on this site that ridiculed the competition for using plastic yet now laud Apple for it.
It's a platform war, so the point is market share. Also, the top model of the iPhone is already pushing $1,000.
Suppose you need a 64GB or 128GB phone for your job, but you aren't some rich asshole? You should spin in the wind?
Remember these things are going to be upgraded yearly or every two years at most.
If you want ubiquity and to "win" the platform war, at some point you have to go for market share. This is that.
I thought Apple didn't care about market share? And when exactly does one 'win' the platform war? There is no endgame, and there isn't any 'winning', because if someone does win we as consumers lose.
I thought Apple didn't care about market share? And when exactly does one 'win' the platform war? There is no endgame, and there isn't any 'winning', because if someone does win we as consumers lose.
"...didn't care about market share?" Are you speaking for yourself or are you facetiously trying to represent Apple fanboys (whatever that is)?
I agree that there is no 'win' to the platform war, however, there is a constant struggle, ebb & flow. But market share is VERY important, always has been, always will.
Nobody can say exactly what is the target market share since it depends on the specific product segment, the competitors strengths, future/anticipated evolution of that segment, geography and surrounding/halo products.
Don't listen to naysayers who think that Apple has no concept nor desire to meet, beat or sustain a certain market share. It could very well be, though, that Apple culture is unique in that quality of products and customer satisfaction is MORE important than market share. But to conveniently or arrogantly dismiss market share is just plain stupid.
Comments
While I don't have any direct knowledge of how phones are labeled in Europe or Asia, I wouldn't put too much onto the fact that these cases are unlabeled. Apple undoubtedly produces large numbers of prototypes for testing purposes and I don't believe they can use FCC labels on a prototype until it has been approved by the FCC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Since it enables more thinner, lighter, more rigid and less crack prone mobile electronics devices. And it's metal; metal looks cooler than plastic.
From the OS X Dictionary:
Its resistance to corrosion, lightness, and strength (especially in alloys) have led to widespread use in domestic utensils, engineering parts, and aircraft construction.
Ah but we only tend to keep our phones 2 years and sometimes less. Utensils, airplanes, and engineering parts are made to last for a very long time.
But the problem is that the thinness is obviated by the need to use a case if you are worried about scratches and it seems this plastic iPhone will not need a case which could make it as thin if not thinner than a 5S in a case. That is the dilemma with aluminum, it may look nicer as you assert but if you want to protect the resale value of your phone then a case is generally a wise decision and the case is what you see not the aluminum iPhone. My iPhones have always been in a case and probably always will so I suppose that is why I really am not all that concerned about color, materials, or exterior design that will be hidden.
It will also be interesting to see how the C vs. S does in drop test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Plastic, being more durable, is ideal for those who work in more physical careers such as construction, field service technicians, law enforcement, and strenuous outdoor jobs of all sorts.
More scratch resistant is not more durable. Plastic always likes to crack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou
Unless the 5S has some kind of killer feature (so far I dont see it), I am replacing my 4s for the 5C this fall.
And that's fair enough. You're decision is based on the cost of the 5S, which means you're probably not the potential target audience for it.
In terms of what ways the 5S will be better than the 5C?
Let's see:
Lighter
Thinner
Better camera
Faster processor
More durable; less crack prone
Metal
Higher storage 32 - 128 GB
Fingerprint scanner
Gold option for those looking for a little more variety in the 5S given the 5C colours
Don't underestimate the fingerprint scanner feature. If it's done right, and I mean really right. It'll be the most important feature on the iPhone in years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
More scratch resistant is not more durable. Plastic always likes to crack.
Always is a pretty strong word. Scientists are improving the quality and durability of plastics all the time. I have a drawer full of older plastic phones and none have cracked and they certainly did't use a plastic anywhere close to as good as what the iPhone 5C will use.
Kevlar is a type of plastic and is 5 times stronger than steel less you forget.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
inexpensive != cheap
$400 != cheap
plastic == cheap
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Always is a pretty strong word. Scientists are improving the quality and durability of plastics all the time. I have a drawer full of older plastic phones and none have cracked and they certainly did't use a plastic anywhere close to as good as what the iPhone 5C will use.
"always likes to"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail
AppleTV.
Good point, I forgot the hobby project. I guess I would have been better to say Apple does not make a handheld or desktop product in plastic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
What is it with people who are completely unable to comprehend the fact that plastic doesn't necessarily mean 'cheap'. And 'cheap' doesn't necessarily mean 'low quality'.
Apple has a super reputation of making high quality products affordable for the masses (remember when the iPad came out at half the price everyone expected? or the MBA which no one was able to compete with until Intel started to subsidize them?)
Apple is Apple. They're not going to produce crap. They might produce a plastic phone and it might even be less expensive than the 5S, but that doesn't mean it will be crap nor that it will ruin Apple's reputation.
Having a product introduce at half the imagined price does not a affordable product make by that fact alone.
In most every way cheap means low quality. Plastic is cheaper and lower quality then metal. Apple moved away from plastic for a reason. Apple is a high end manufacturer.
If plastic was not cheap, then why are all the iPods not plastic to save money? Do I really need a nano or shuffle in metal? No, but Apple chose to for a reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
But you will only get hate for such dissenting opinions.No hate here.
Maybe you need to just open your mind up a bit more...plastic does not mean cheap to many people. Plastic by itself does not mean a compromise to Apple's brand/image if the device meets or exceed the customer's expectations. I'm not trying to justify Apple's (rumored) decisions, just giving opinion of how I think consumers will react.
Just because we don't agree with you doesn't mean we hate you or don't like you personally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
Having a product introduce at half the imagined price does not a affordable product make by that fact alone.
Would you agree that at half the price, it becomes MORE affordable?
Wrong. There are some plastics that do not crack (unless you cool them in liquid nitrogen). There are metals that do crack.
You're simply making ridiculous assumptions about things that you clearly don't understand.
So you're simply making things up and pretending they have validity.
You don't know a thing about the phone, its construction, its materials, or its features, so you have no way of knowing whether it's a quality device or not. You simply jumped to the conclusion that it must be cheap junk - no need for facts, the world is supposed to simply accept your imagination.
This doesn't smell quite right.
The pencil hardness test is for testing scratch resistance of coatings, not to be confused with hardness of a solid material. We can be 99% sure that this plastic case is polycarbonate of some form. In that case, the proper hardness measure is Rockwell hardness. Furthermore, the pencil test is not a administered by randomly scratching away with a pencil. There is a special fixture for this.
I realize this is a "cursory" test. But it really doesn't mean very much.
The 3GS didn't feel cheap - plastic comes in varying quality and it seemed fine. There was no flex which made earlier plastic phones like the palm treo / centro feel cheap.
And it wears well - better than some of the iPhone 5s on display at Apple Stores. I've no complaints about the prospects of a plastic backed 5c
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
I understand that, and I won't buy it.
But I think it's a bad move for Apple. It's sucking into a race to the bottom. Apple is trying to be Samsung. What's the point?
First, I don't think this will be a race to the bottom, more a race to the middle third.
When Apple was just a computer company selling high-end CPUs, they almost got put out of business by cheap Wintel. I think the smartphone market is a similar story. Apple already has the big profits, but they need to maintain a large percentage of the user base to maintain relevance so that the developers won't put their focus on Android and such. There is now way they can do that with 2 billion+ people in China and India coming online, but not being able to afford a high-end Apple phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
I understand that, and I won't buy it.
But I think it's a bad move for Apple. It's sucking into a race to the bottom. Apple is trying to be Samsung. What's the point?
It's a platform war, so the point is market share. Also, the top model of the iPhone is already pushing $1,000.
Suppose you need a 64GB or 128GB phone for your job, but you aren't some rich asshole? You should spin in the wind?
Remember these things are going to be upgraded yearly or every two years at most.
If you want ubiquity and to "win" the platform war, at some point you have to go for market share. This is that.
Since last September. I don't see anything wrong with using plastic, but there are now a plethora of hypocrites on this site that ridiculed the competition for using plastic yet now laud Apple for it.
I thought Apple didn't care about market share? And when exactly does one 'win' the platform war? There is no endgame, and there isn't any 'winning', because if someone does win we as consumers lose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soloman
I thought Apple didn't care about market share? And when exactly does one 'win' the platform war? There is no endgame, and there isn't any 'winning', because if someone does win we as consumers lose.
"...didn't care about market share?" Are you speaking for yourself or are you facetiously trying to represent Apple fanboys (whatever that is)?
I agree that there is no 'win' to the platform war, however, there is a constant struggle, ebb & flow. But market share is VERY important, always has been, always will.
Nobody can say exactly what is the target market share since it depends on the specific product segment, the competitors strengths, future/anticipated evolution of that segment, geography and surrounding/halo products.
Don't listen to naysayers who think that Apple has no concept nor desire to meet, beat or sustain a certain market share. It could very well be, though, that Apple culture is unique in that quality of products and customer satisfaction is MORE important than market share. But to conveniently or arrogantly dismiss market share is just plain stupid.