I'll give you #2 to a degree (plastic is still cheap to me regardless of the manufacturing process) but #1??!! Are you kidding??!! That is all we hear on this forum. Apple is a premium phone!! Apple is a premium phone!! You pay more because you get more!!
Maybe Apple didn't intend it, as you say (although I don't agree), but almost every Apple fan on here would agree that Apple's image is that of a "premium" phone maker.
[... and I never said that Apple based its premium status on exclusivity or high price. ]
???
No.
Apple is only a "premium" brand in the sense that people typically accept a pile of crap as average or good...while Apple says forget what the market says, lets make the best possible phone and we'll charge whatever we think its worth.
Maybe its the fact that you can't distinguish Apple from any other company, which is your own failure. But they have a unique approach that no one else has. And the result is what is it is.
You calling it "premium" doesn't accurately describe them at all....it DOES however accurately describe your interpretation of what you're seeing......
You believe that crap is the norm and something decent is premium. That's not so uncommon as most Americans have gotten used to junk they're expected to pay for being the norm.
Are you nuts? On ATT an iPhone 5 costs effectively $1100 + $199 or $1300 when compared to an equivalent BYOD plan on t-Mobile. In other words thats how much extra you pay over 2 years for a similar data plan but with subsidized phone.
The 5C effectively costs $1200.
Nowhere near half. Methinks effective marketing has sucked you in nicely.
And did you expect that to change? Phone service is expensive, and is the joke of the entire pricing scheme. It was either going to be 1300 vs. 1200, or 1300 vs. 1100. Makes no difference at all, except to the idiot consumer in the store looking at the devices and deciding that $99 is a good deal for this pretty blue iPhone.
The more I hear and see from Tim Cook the less impressed I get. This was an opportunity for Apple to completely capture the Chinese market for decades by launching a lower cost phone. If they had made a phone exclusively for China Mobile and priced at $450 unlocked, it would have been a game changer. They could have used cheaper components to keep margins around 25 to 30 percent and no one could use the phone elsewhere because China Mobile has a unique 4G frequency. Instead the 5C is priced over $700 in China while competitors are selling smartphones as low as $200. Apple would sacrifice a little bit of margin but be able to griw its ecosystem which is the key value driver for its share price. Instead, Apple is rapidly losing share in China to Android. The content in China is quickly moving away from iOS and once it's lost it's very hard to get back. Tim Cook seems incapable of appreciating this and I really think he needs to go. He's become a hinderence and a very high priced hinderence at that.
Oh FFS, blah blah blah blah blah. "If only Apple did this they would rule the world."
Do you have any idea how pedantic, dated, and uninformed this gibberish sounds to other people?
Apple has enough frigging money. They are not interested in a race to the bottom. They are not, NOR SHOULD THEY EVER BE, interested in compromising their products to create a "game changer" in China.
Guess what? They already did create a game changer in China. Its called the iPhone 5C and the iPhone 5S. Both are stunning, and as affordable as they've ever been. People are going to buy them because they like them, and that's the end of it.
Huge exposure in China and new carrier opportunities are going to make this the best year in China, ever. You don't just magically accomplish the same thing or better by lowering the price another $100. Grow up for crying out loud.
Apple is only a "premium" brand in the sense that people typically accept a pile of crap as average or good...while Apple says forget what the market says, lets make the best possible phone and we'll charge whatever we think its worth.
Maybe its the fact that you can't distinguish Apple from any other company, which is your own failure. But they have a unique approach that no one else has. And the result is what is it is.
You calling it "premium" doesn't accurately describe them at all....it DOES however accurately describe your interpretation of what you're seeing......
You believe that crap is the norm and something decent is premium. That's not so uncommon as most Americans have gotten used to junk they're expected to pay for being the norm.
Maybe you should re-read my comment... you know... the part about "maybe Apple didn't intend it".
Or maybe the part about other people's constant chants that Apple is a premium product.
Or maybe the fact that when some people said what you are saying, that Apple is not a premium phone as in the vein of RR, Rolex etc., then all you got was an endless stream of people refuting the idea that Apple isn't premium.
You either haven't been paying attention or, as others have said, this forum just blows in whatever direction is suitable at the time.
And did you expect that to change? Phone service is expensive, and is the joke of the entire pricing scheme. It was either going to be 1300 vs. 1200, or 1300 vs. 1100. Makes no difference at all, except to the idiot consumer in the store looking at the devices and deciding that $99 is a good deal for this pretty blue iPhone.
I do expect it to change. T-mobiles BYOD plans are very affordable and they have 0% purchase plans, the actual cost (not bloated cost) of the device is amortized over 24 months. It has been a big success for t-mobile and I'm sure other carriers will follow.
My family of 4 have 4 smartphones, unlimited talk/text on all and 2.5GB data on 3 phones (no data on 4th), in total we pay less than $100/month on BYOD plan.
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Rogifan</strong> <a href="/t/159473/apples-iphone-5c-uses-unique-design-precision-manufacturing-to-avoid-plastic-stigma/40#post_2394236"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><br />
Apple can't win when Wall Street wants cheap products but high margins and huge profits.</div></div><p> </p>
I think the "issue" here is that the analysts were hoping that Apple would make a phone that was cheap enough for emerging markets where the carriers don't offer subsidies. The 5C really doesn't do that, although it certainly gets closer to the mark. What the analysts are upset about is that Apple may be cannibalizing 5S sales with the 5C. The 5C will sell like hotcakes, sure, but the question is how many of those folks would've just bought the higher-profit 5S is the 5C didn't exist. In order to really reach China and India, the belief is that the 5C needs to be a lot lower than $550. We'll see if that belief is correct, though I hope it's not.
The assumption that the 5c has lower margins than the 5s may be quite wrong.
The 5c may be faster to manufacture and since metal machining capacity was in the past one significant supply constraint, going polycarbonate may mean being able to fill orders more quickly.
I'd not be surprised if Apple made more money on each 5c than on each 5s, because the newer and added tech and more expensive manufacturing adds up.
Apple tries to hit certain price points, irrespective of margins.
In the end Apple may want the 5c to massively cannibalize the 5s, because they may make more on each device and ship them faster. It's sufficient for the 5s to set new standards in the market, it is not required for the majority to buy one for Apple to be wildly successful.
I'd be willing to bet that the 5C will sell better than had they stood with the 5 as it is now.
#1 reason is cost, there's a finite amount of aluminum in the world thus subjective to supply and demand price increases whereas plastic can be produced over and over again keeping the price relatively static.
There are likely more 5c sold than 5 would have been sold: the 5 is only "last years inferior model" while the 5c is this years younger, hipper, more colorful and more youthful alternative to the staid, grown-up, business-like 5s.
As for the thing about plastic vs. aluminum/glass: there's less of a shortage of the latter than there is of oil to make from the former. Aluminum is quite plentiful, just energy intensive to make unless using recycled aluminum; the beauty being that aluminum can be recycled very well.
Maybe you should re-read my comment... you know... the part about "maybe Apple didn't intend it".
Or maybe the part about other people's constant chants that Apple is a premium product.
Or maybe the fact that when some people said what you are saying, that Apple is not a premium phone as in the vein of RR, Rolex etc., then all you got was an endless stream of people refuting the idea that Apple isn't premium.
You either haven't been paying attention or, as others have said, this forum just blows in whatever direction is suitable at the time.
Sorry to see you're getting tangled up with that word "premium." It's disgusting marketingspeak.
Apple is a mass manufacturer of stuff that is supposed to make people's lives better, as well as possible according to the best technology they can pull together from everywhere, as well as develop themselves, e.g., their chip designs or software.
They're not making jewelry or luxury items, which is where your marketing term "premium" belongs.
What they're conveying with their new plastic brick with soft edges and bright pastels is a combination of solidity, warmth and fun, along with the usual best computer-in-your-pocket experience possible for ordinary people, i.e., not geeks. It's got nothing to do with premium.
The solidity of the rectangular plastic brick, the simplicity of the shape, and the colorful warmth is how they are distinguished from the likes of Samsung's thoughtless contours, seaminess, and ugly laminations. Samsung even uses a plastichrome bezel which wears off its shine in months.
To think in terms of "premium" is just too vague and rag trade.
People seem to forget that not long ago all iPhones were plastic. I loved the 3GS. The contour of the plastic back was very ergonomic. No one called the 3G or 3GS cheap back then...
I'd have to argue that these aren't "ergonomic" shapes once they come out of your pocket. They're too slippery and they present you with no edges for control in handling.
Once Apple realized that they were making cameras as much as anything else with their pocket computers, they squared off the sides and flattened the back for a more ergonomic approach to handling and setting up on a table or tripod.
The plastic 5C continues with this precision in shape. Why can't anyone see this simple fact? Do they not have hands and fingers?
Here's an ad Apple should do, just for the fun of it.
Take some burned out hippie that tripping on LSD going to an Apple Store to buy a iPhone 5c and walking in and saying to the Apple sales person the following:
"WOW MAN!!! I'm tripping. Colors man, WOW!! I can't decide which colors to get. WOW MAN!!!, F it, I'll buy em all, COLORS MAN!!!"
The Apple sales rep says the following:
"Maybe you'd be interested in looking at the iPhone 5s"
The Hippie replies:
"Oh man, that's too many colors, man!!! I'm tripping heavily." "whatever, just load me with colors, I'll take them all!!!" " Oh WOW man, I"m out of cash, do you take shrooms and weed instead?"
Apple reps says "NO, MAN!!" "Cash, check or charge, MAN!"
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>patpatpat</strong> <a href="/t/159473/apples-iphone-5c-uses-unique-design-precision-manufacturing-to-avoid-plastic-stigma/80#post_2394288"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><p>Are you nuts? On ATT an iPhone 5 costs effectively $1100 + $199 or $1300 when compared to an equivalent BYOD plan on t-Mobile. In other words thats how much extra you pay over 2 years for a similar data plan but with subsidized phone.</p><p> </p><p>The 5C effectively costs $1200. </p><p> </p><p>Nowhere near half. Methinks effective marketing has sucked you in nicely.</p></div></div><p> </p>
Yup you nailed it.
I for one would spend the extra 100 and get the 5s(which I will)... no brainer. But... there are probably a significant portion that that $100 makes a difference. Time will tell.
Plus next year the price will drop after the new iphone... maybe.
Another 'tech site' asked its readers if they are the updating and if so which iphone would they get- ~59% 5s to ~3% 5c ~ (~35% will not upgrade) ... 5s is the huge winner for that un-scientific survey.
Pure opinion here....
While Jony is unapologetic (think about it, he had to say it... that says a lot), IMO, the 5C phone 'looks' like a Fisher-Price toy... something a Weeble would use. Yes other iphones where plastic, but the iP 4 set the bar so high on 'quality build/feel etc'. To go back...just seems a step back.
And the colors... its ok to have Pink and neon green etc.. to each their own. But how about some colors that are shifted in the palette(to dare I say 'normal'.. ok conservative.. alright boring ), a dark blue for example, ... something to compliement these Weeble colors.
People seem to forget that not long ago all iPhones were plastic. I loved the 3GS. The contour of the plastic back was very ergonomic. No one called the 3G or 3GS cheap back then...
It's probably more the idea of going back to plastic. The Macbook moved from plastic to metal. If the Air moved from metal to plastic, it would seem like a downgrade, same with the MBP, Mac Pro and iMac. Metal and glass set them apart from the competition. The G4 towers used to be plastic as did the iMacs and Pismo laptops and the new designs feel more premium quality. The original iPhone did downgrade but it also went from very chunky grey metal to very slim shiny plastic and had performance upgrades. The 5 has gone from slim metal back to thicker plastic and there's no performance change from the 5 to 5C.
One of the reviews of the 5C said that it feels more like ceramic the way they did it. Part of what makes plastic feel cheap is it being hollow behind. Not having a curved back allows them to pack the components tightly to lessen the chances of any gaps. The biggest problem with plastic has always been that it cracks and this plagued Apple's plastic laptops with cracked palm rests. The unibody design helped as it reduced any flex but they still got the crack lines in them at stress points:
Part of the reason I prefer the metal designs is that no matter how much damage you put it through, it would never really appear broken. Something that's cracked looks broken, something that has a few dents or scratches just looks used. This was an issue with the iPhone 4's glass back but that usually breaks a different way e.g by a severe impact damage. The 5C at least has a reinforced port to prevent the cracking caused on the 3G/3GS but the sides have no metallic protection.
And it's needed for Apple to get a new phone into the $99 on contract category.
It's also needed for manufacturing volume.
The 5 saw manufacturing struggles keep the phone out of many hands at launch for months.
Now they have perfected the manufacturing, so it makes sense to go the "5S" route.
But the plastic phone does a number of things:
1) It distinguishes visually and physically the two markets: kind of like the old Macs - pro and consumer level. Better understood as high end and not so high end.
2) It aids the ease of manufacturing. Being Apple, they won't just do what everyone else does. They step it up. But in the end, it's still "just plastic" and the real reason for it is the cost and ease of manufacturing.
3) It gives Apple investors confidence in a return to more respectable profit margins.
4) It gives end users a much greater variety and easier accessibility.
5) It fulfills the same role as simply selling old phones at a discount, while being marketed as NEW and fresh.
It's a grreat move.
Ultimately, I and many others really hoped for a larger screen. Not stupid large like a note or something. but larger than what the 5S is.
I imagine that comes with the 6.
However, with iOS 7, a rip-snorting CPU, the Touch ID security, etc.
They have really established themselves as the daddy of all other smartphone manufacturers.
The game has changed once again.
Just give it a bigger screen and no one has any reason whatsover to want anything else.
..."effective plastic smartphone with a "premium" feel"...
Sure it's plastic. But it has that "premium" feel. See the difference?
Maybe it looks better in real, but on pictures it really looks cheap plastic to me. Maybe the shape, maybe the gloss. Wondering if non-gloss would look better..?
People seem to forget that not long ago all iPhones were plastic. I loved the 3GS. The contour of the plastic back was very ergonomic. No one called the 3G or 3GS cheap back then...
I'm still using my 3Gs. Again, based on available photos - 5c plastic back just looks cheaper, uglier to me than 3Gs. Maybe because of the shape, 3Gs had nice curve while 5c is basically boxy flat. Maybe it is the metal frame on 3Gs, or metallic logo and other info on the back; I think those elements have added nice premium touch to plastic. Which is missing on 5c.
Maybe it looks better in real, but on pictures it really looks cheap plastic to me. Maybe the shape, maybe the gloss. Wondering if non-gloss would look better..?
The shape is dictated by function: bigger batteries, straighter edges for taking pictures (e.g. bracing the phone against a wall, etc.)
Non-gloss would be a nightmare: looks nice for about 5 days, after which greasy fingers would make it look part-gloss, part-matte, part-just-plain-greasy-dirty. Just think of what happens to egg-shell wall paint in conjunction with small kids who touch the wall with food on their fingers, and you know how a non-gloss iPhone would look like a few days after unpacking...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
I'm still using my 3Gs. Again, based on available photos - 5c plastic back just looks cheaper, uglier to me than 3Gs. Maybe because of the shape, 3Gs had nice curve while 5c is basically boxy flat. Maybe it is the metal frame on 3Gs, or metallic logo and other info on the back; I think those elements have added nice premium touch to plastic. Which is missing on 5c.
The only thing that made the 3g/3gs look "more premium" was the staid black& white "non-color" scheme. But the whole point of the 5c is to be the fun phone, because the stuck up premium phone snobs are supposed to buy the 5s.
There's a reason why Smart-Car (made by Mercedes) looks different than an A-class Mercedes (not sold in the US) which looks different than a C-class Mercedes, which looks different from an E-class Mercedes which again looks different from an S-class mercedes.
To stick with the car analogy: everyone was expecting the iPhone 5c to be a SmartCar, but it turned out to be equivalent to an A-to-C-class Mercedes, while the 5s is equivalent to an E-to-S-class Mercedes.
Similarly people forget that Mercedes outside the US isn't a "premium" car manufacturer, but instead they make everything from SmartCar to dump trucks, delivery vans, city busses and police cars. What they don't make (and what for that matter no German car manufacturer makes) is cheap shit. Neither does Apple. In some ways, Apple is the most German of US companies these days.
Until now, Apple has never intentionally made a less capable phone. Every model (aside from storage capacity) has been the most capable phone they could make at the time it was designed.
Since the 3GS, Apple has always offered the previous flagship model at a discount. Nothing about the previous model was changed and certainly no capability was removed. The previous model didn't have the capabilities of the current flagship model simply because the capabilities were not available when the previous model was designed.
I think this new direction apple is taking will be more obvious when the next 2 models of iPhone are released. Right now, the iPhone 5c is just as capable as the iPhone 5. The only difference is the exterior. I think when the next models of iPhone are released, you will find that some capabilities of the current iPhone 5s will not be passed on to the next non-flagship phone. For example, perhaps Touch ID will only be available on whatever flagship phone is selling at the time. Meaning the only way to have Touch ID is to buy the current flagship phone, since the previous flagship phone will no longer be available.
I'm not sure what the cost difference is for Apple on the iPhone 5 vs the iPhone 5c. I understand that plastic is probably cheaper, but you have to also consider the additional cost of redesign and additional manufacturing. The iPhone 5 is a turnkey product. It's cost of design and new manufacturing has already been filled.
I think the biggest cost advantage for Apple will be in future phones. I think this is simply laying the ground work. You will never again be able to buy last years model. And the current cheaper phone may end up being less capable then the previous flagship phone.
Comments
I'll give you #2 to a degree (plastic is still cheap to me regardless of the manufacturing process) but #1??!! Are you kidding??!! That is all we hear on this forum. Apple is a premium phone!! Apple is a premium phone!! You pay more because you get more!!
Maybe Apple didn't intend it, as you say (although I don't agree), but almost every Apple fan on here would agree that Apple's image is that of a "premium" phone maker.
[... and I never said that Apple based its premium status on exclusivity or high price. ]
???
No.
Apple is only a "premium" brand in the sense that people typically accept a pile of crap as average or good...while Apple says forget what the market says, lets make the best possible phone and we'll charge whatever we think its worth.
Maybe its the fact that you can't distinguish Apple from any other company, which is your own failure. But they have a unique approach that no one else has. And the result is what is it is.
You calling it "premium" doesn't accurately describe them at all....it DOES however accurately describe your interpretation of what you're seeing......
You believe that crap is the norm and something decent is premium. That's not so uncommon as most Americans have gotten used to junk they're expected to pay for being the norm.
Are you nuts? On ATT an iPhone 5 costs effectively $1100 + $199 or $1300 when compared to an equivalent BYOD plan on t-Mobile. In other words thats how much extra you pay over 2 years for a similar data plan but with subsidized phone.
The 5C effectively costs $1200.
Nowhere near half. Methinks effective marketing has sucked you in nicely.
And did you expect that to change? Phone service is expensive, and is the joke of the entire pricing scheme. It was either going to be 1300 vs. 1200, or 1300 vs. 1100. Makes no difference at all, except to the idiot consumer in the store looking at the devices and deciding that $99 is a good deal for this pretty blue iPhone.
Nice pun
The more I hear and see from Tim Cook the less impressed I get. This was an opportunity for Apple to completely capture the Chinese market for decades by launching a lower cost phone. If they had made a phone exclusively for China Mobile and priced at $450 unlocked, it would have been a game changer. They could have used cheaper components to keep margins around 25 to 30 percent and no one could use the phone elsewhere because China Mobile has a unique 4G frequency. Instead the 5C is priced over $700 in China while competitors are selling smartphones as low as $200. Apple would sacrifice a little bit of margin but be able to griw its ecosystem which is the key value driver for its share price. Instead, Apple is rapidly losing share in China to Android. The content in China is quickly moving away from iOS and once it's lost it's very hard to get back. Tim Cook seems incapable of appreciating this and I really think he needs to go. He's become a hinderence and a very high priced hinderence at that.
Oh FFS, blah blah blah blah blah. "If only Apple did this they would rule the world."
Do you have any idea how pedantic, dated, and uninformed this gibberish sounds to other people?
Apple has enough frigging money. They are not interested in a race to the bottom. They are not, NOR SHOULD THEY EVER BE, interested in compromising their products to create a "game changer" in China.
Guess what? They already did create a game changer in China. Its called the iPhone 5C and the iPhone 5S. Both are stunning, and as affordable as they've ever been. People are going to buy them because they like them, and that's the end of it.
Huge exposure in China and new carrier opportunities are going to make this the best year in China, ever. You don't just magically accomplish the same thing or better by lowering the price another $100. Grow up for crying out loud.
???
No.
Apple is only a "premium" brand in the sense that people typically accept a pile of crap as average or good...while Apple says forget what the market says, lets make the best possible phone and we'll charge whatever we think its worth.
Maybe its the fact that you can't distinguish Apple from any other company, which is your own failure. But they have a unique approach that no one else has. And the result is what is it is.
You calling it "premium" doesn't accurately describe them at all....it DOES however accurately describe your interpretation of what you're seeing......
You believe that crap is the norm and something decent is premium. That's not so uncommon as most Americans have gotten used to junk they're expected to pay for being the norm.
Maybe you should re-read my comment... you know... the part about "maybe Apple didn't intend it".
Or maybe the part about other people's constant chants that Apple is a premium product.
Or maybe the fact that when some people said what you are saying, that Apple is not a premium phone as in the vein of RR, Rolex etc., then all you got was an endless stream of people refuting the idea that Apple isn't premium.
You either haven't been paying attention or, as others have said, this forum just blows in whatever direction is suitable at the time.
And did you expect that to change? Phone service is expensive, and is the joke of the entire pricing scheme. It was either going to be 1300 vs. 1200, or 1300 vs. 1100. Makes no difference at all, except to the idiot consumer in the store looking at the devices and deciding that $99 is a good deal for this pretty blue iPhone.
I do expect it to change. T-mobiles BYOD plans are very affordable and they have 0% purchase plans, the actual cost (not bloated cost) of the device is amortized over 24 months. It has been a big success for t-mobile and I'm sure other carriers will follow.
My family of 4 have 4 smartphones, unlimited talk/text on all and 2.5GB data on 3 phones (no data on 4th), in total we pay less than $100/month on BYOD plan.
The assumption that the 5c has lower margins than the 5s may be quite wrong.
The 5c may be faster to manufacture and since metal machining capacity was in the past one significant supply constraint, going polycarbonate may mean being able to fill orders more quickly.
I'd not be surprised if Apple made more money on each 5c than on each 5s, because the newer and added tech and more expensive manufacturing adds up.
Apple tries to hit certain price points, irrespective of margins.
In the end Apple may want the 5c to massively cannibalize the 5s, because they may make more on each device and ship them faster. It's sufficient for the 5s to set new standards in the market, it is not required for the majority to buy one for Apple to be wildly successful.
There are likely more 5c sold than 5 would have been sold: the 5 is only "last years inferior model" while the 5c is this years younger, hipper, more colorful and more youthful alternative to the staid, grown-up, business-like 5s.
As for the thing about plastic vs. aluminum/glass: there's less of a shortage of the latter than there is of oil to make from the former. Aluminum is quite plentiful, just energy intensive to make unless using recycled aluminum; the beauty being that aluminum can be recycled very well.
Sorry to see you're getting tangled up with that word "premium." It's disgusting marketingspeak.
Apple is a mass manufacturer of stuff that is supposed to make people's lives better, as well as possible according to the best technology they can pull together from everywhere, as well as develop themselves, e.g., their chip designs or software.
They're not making jewelry or luxury items, which is where your marketing term "premium" belongs.
What they're conveying with their new plastic brick with soft edges and bright pastels is a combination of solidity, warmth and fun, along with the usual best computer-in-your-pocket experience possible for ordinary people, i.e., not geeks. It's got nothing to do with premium.
The solidity of the rectangular plastic brick, the simplicity of the shape, and the colorful warmth is how they are distinguished from the likes of Samsung's thoughtless contours, seaminess, and ugly laminations. Samsung even uses a plastichrome bezel which wears off its shine in months.
To think in terms of "premium" is just too vague and rag trade.
I'd have to argue that these aren't "ergonomic" shapes once they come out of your pocket. They're too slippery and they present you with no edges for control in handling.
Once Apple realized that they were making cameras as much as anything else with their pocket computers, they squared off the sides and flattened the back for a more ergonomic approach to handling and setting up on a table or tripod.
The plastic 5C continues with this precision in shape. Why can't anyone see this simple fact? Do they not have hands and fingers?
Take some burned out hippie that tripping on LSD going to an Apple Store to buy a iPhone 5c and walking in and saying to the Apple sales person the following:
"WOW MAN!!! I'm tripping. Colors man, WOW!! I can't decide which colors to get. WOW MAN!!!, F it, I'll buy em all, COLORS MAN!!!"
The Apple sales rep says the following:
"Maybe you'd be interested in looking at the iPhone 5s"
The Hippie replies:
"Oh man, that's too many colors, man!!! I'm tripping heavily." "whatever, just load me with colors, I'll take them all!!!" " Oh WOW man, I"m out of cash, do you take shrooms and weed instead?"
Apple reps says "NO, MAN!!" "Cash, check or charge, MAN!"
Hippie says as the ad fades "Oh Man, COLORS"
iPhone 5c. For the colorful.
It's probably more the idea of going back to plastic. The Macbook moved from plastic to metal. If the Air moved from metal to plastic, it would seem like a downgrade, same with the MBP, Mac Pro and iMac. Metal and glass set them apart from the competition. The G4 towers used to be plastic as did the iMacs and Pismo laptops and the new designs feel more premium quality. The original iPhone did downgrade but it also went from very chunky grey metal to very slim shiny plastic and had performance upgrades. The 5 has gone from slim metal back to thicker plastic and there's no performance change from the 5 to 5C.
One of the reviews of the 5C said that it feels more like ceramic the way they did it. Part of what makes plastic feel cheap is it being hollow behind. Not having a curved back allows them to pack the components tightly to lessen the chances of any gaps. The biggest problem with plastic has always been that it cracks and this plagued Apple's plastic laptops with cracked palm rests. The unibody design helped as it reduced any flex but they still got the crack lines in them at stress points:
Part of the reason I prefer the metal designs is that no matter how much damage you put it through, it would never really appear broken. Something that's cracked looks broken, something that has a few dents or scratches just looks used. This was an issue with the iPhone 4's glass back but that usually breaks a different way e.g by a severe impact damage. The 5C at least has a reinforced port to prevent the cracking caused on the 3G/3GS but the sides have no metallic protection.
Everyone knows how to run Apple better than Tim Cook. Put the complainers in charge: it's the first step to guaranteeing the company's doom.
You might be, but 95% of the worlds population aren't
And it's needed for Apple to get a new phone into the $99 on contract category.
It's also needed for manufacturing volume.
The 5 saw manufacturing struggles keep the phone out of many hands at launch for months.
Now they have perfected the manufacturing, so it makes sense to go the "5S" route.
But the plastic phone does a number of things:
1) It distinguishes visually and physically the two markets: kind of like the old Macs - pro and consumer level. Better understood as high end and not so high end.
2) It aids the ease of manufacturing. Being Apple, they won't just do what everyone else does. They step it up. But in the end, it's still "just plastic" and the real reason for it is the cost and ease of manufacturing.
3) It gives Apple investors confidence in a return to more respectable profit margins.
4) It gives end users a much greater variety and easier accessibility.
5) It fulfills the same role as simply selling old phones at a discount, while being marketed as NEW and fresh.
It's a grreat move.
Ultimately, I and many others really hoped for a larger screen. Not stupid large like a note or something. but larger than what the 5S is.
I imagine that comes with the 6.
However, with iOS 7, a rip-snorting CPU, the Touch ID security, etc.
They have really established themselves as the daddy of all other smartphone manufacturers.
The game has changed once again.
Just give it a bigger screen and no one has any reason whatsover to want anything else.
Maybe it looks better in real, but on pictures it really looks cheap plastic to me. Maybe the shape, maybe the gloss. Wondering if non-gloss would look better..?
I'm still using my 3Gs. Again, based on available photos - 5c plastic back just looks cheaper, uglier to me than 3Gs. Maybe because of the shape, 3Gs had nice curve while 5c is basically boxy flat. Maybe it is the metal frame on 3Gs, or metallic logo and other info on the back; I think those elements have added nice premium touch to plastic. Which is missing on 5c.
Maybe it looks better in real, but on pictures it really looks cheap plastic to me. Maybe the shape, maybe the gloss. Wondering if non-gloss would look better..?
The shape is dictated by function: bigger batteries, straighter edges for taking pictures (e.g. bracing the phone against a wall, etc.)
Non-gloss would be a nightmare: looks nice for about 5 days, after which greasy fingers would make it look part-gloss, part-matte, part-just-plain-greasy-dirty. Just think of what happens to egg-shell wall paint in conjunction with small kids who touch the wall with food on their fingers, and you know how a non-gloss iPhone would look like a few days after unpacking...
I'm still using my 3Gs. Again, based on available photos - 5c plastic back just looks cheaper, uglier to me than 3Gs. Maybe because of the shape, 3Gs had nice curve while 5c is basically boxy flat. Maybe it is the metal frame on 3Gs, or metallic logo and other info on the back; I think those elements have added nice premium touch to plastic. Which is missing on 5c.
The only thing that made the 3g/3gs look "more premium" was the staid black& white "non-color" scheme. But the whole point of the 5c is to be the fun phone, because the stuck up premium phone snobs are supposed to buy the 5s.
There's a reason why Smart-Car (made by Mercedes) looks different than an A-class Mercedes (not sold in the US) which looks different than a C-class Mercedes, which looks different from an E-class Mercedes which again looks different from an S-class mercedes.
To stick with the car analogy: everyone was expecting the iPhone 5c to be a SmartCar, but it turned out to be equivalent to an A-to-C-class Mercedes, while the 5s is equivalent to an E-to-S-class Mercedes.
Similarly people forget that Mercedes outside the US isn't a "premium" car manufacturer, but instead they make everything from SmartCar to dump trucks, delivery vans, city busses and police cars. What they don't make (and what for that matter no German car manufacturer makes) is cheap shit. Neither does Apple. In some ways, Apple is the most German of US companies these days.
Since the 3GS, Apple has always offered the previous flagship model at a discount. Nothing about the previous model was changed and certainly no capability was removed. The previous model didn't have the capabilities of the current flagship model simply because the capabilities were not available when the previous model was designed.
I think this new direction apple is taking will be more obvious when the next 2 models of iPhone are released. Right now, the iPhone 5c is just as capable as the iPhone 5. The only difference is the exterior. I think when the next models of iPhone are released, you will find that some capabilities of the current iPhone 5s will not be passed on to the next non-flagship phone. For example, perhaps Touch ID will only be available on whatever flagship phone is selling at the time. Meaning the only way to have Touch ID is to buy the current flagship phone, since the previous flagship phone will no longer be available.
I'm not sure what the cost difference is for Apple on the iPhone 5 vs the iPhone 5c. I understand that plastic is probably cheaper, but you have to also consider the additional cost of redesign and additional manufacturing. The iPhone 5 is a turnkey product. It's cost of design and new manufacturing has already been filled.
I think the biggest cost advantage for Apple will be in future phones. I think this is simply laying the ground work. You will never again be able to buy last years model. And the current cheaper phone may end up being less capable then the previous flagship phone.