"According to White, there's been a sense of "disappointment" among some Chinese carriers regarding customer demand for the iPhone 5s."
I will tell you something about the typical Chinese businessman. If you ask them how business is, they will always tell you, usually with a sigh for full effect, "It's not that good". Why? First of all, crowing about how great you're doing is bad form in the Asian Pacific rim cultures (where I grew up). Second, why reveal to your suppliers (especially one as big and profitable as Apple) how well you're doing and weaken your negotiating position? And third, there's always the taxman to consider.
And you're some person they don't know asking about how their businesses are doing? Expect nothing other than the full sad sack routine.
Most people didn't spend hours staring at the display of their Motorola Razr which is why smaller was a good thing back then. People now spend a lot of time staring at the screen on smartphones which is why bigger is a good thing now.
I did. I played those Java games on the RAZR. For hours. I texted. I even had an IM chat client installed. I never once felt the screen needed to bigger.
That still hasn't stopped Apple from modifying its specs... upward.
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
Specs aren't where apple fights it's wars... performance on the job is the critical measure.
doubling storage goes against apple ecosystem model, esp. on the phone.
Same reason why apple doesn't build a phablet.
On the CPU I agree. Apple offers a lower clocked but far more efficient CPU. But we are talking about storage. How exactly can you justify Apple sticking with the exact same storage especially now that the camera and video needs far more storage than than the iPhone 3's camera? Are you suggesting Apple never upgrade their storage and if that is not your position then when should they? 2016, 2018?
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
... and that wasn't my point.
My point is that Apple does increase spec... and I don't believe for a minute it's only when it works for them. Competition does play into it to some degree.
On the CPU I agree. Apple offers a lower clocked but far more efficient CPU. But we are talking about storage. How exactly can you justify Apple sticking with the exact same storage especially now that the camera and video needs far more than the iPhone 3's camera? Are you suggesting Apple never upgrade their storage and if that is not your position then when should they? 2016, 2018?
Justification: 802.11ac, LTE/commodity pipes, and the cloud. It's the endgame of the the iCloud model.... "All your data are belong to us!"
and I didn't say never... I just said goes against the model.... they will go to larger memory once the price/perf/size/battery-drain fits.
I did. I played those Java games on the RAZR. For hours. I texted. I even had an IM chat client installed. I never once felt the screen needed to bigger.
And I am sure you were not alone but guess what, that RAZR you spent hours looking at also had one of the largest screen at the time. It was considered small due to how thin it was but when it came to dumb phones the display size was not small. If you really wanted small you would have chosen the Sony T616. Your RAZR was a phbalet compared the the Sony.
That is a well thought out argument. And I agree with the bezel comment, because they really like one-handed operation, and 4" is pretty much the limit for that, so if they are going to go to 4.5" they must be going to reduce the bezel at the same time to allow the thumb to reach further.
But they may not be limiting themselves to one handed operation. I completely see what Sol is saying but I am wondering if the market hasn't changed over the years and there are many people for whom the iPhone will be their only computer, specially in the Asian market. If Apple is interested in bringing out a larger screened iPhone, could they rethink resolution altogether and transition to a higher resolution across all devices that will accommodate a larger iPhone without having to scale up the present 5s? If so, that could open the possibilities for a larger iPad and a larger iPhone at full retina resolution. The new versions of the present sizes would need a higher resolution screen. Apps would slowly transition to the new format. Would it be possible for a device with a lower resolution to satisfactorily display a higher res app?
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
Yeah and I never said otherwise. You were the one that brought in the argument saying Apple doesn't go to war on specs. Apple will make improvements as they always do based on the needs of Apple customers and any technical or price hurdles. I have a 64GB iPhone and I am not even a heavy user of photos or videos and my iPhone is nearly full. After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option.
My point is that Apple does increase spec... and I don't believe for a minute it's only when it works for them. Competition does play into it to some degree.
Your belief and my opinion differ. and i believe wholeheartedly that specs are for techs.
Show me one apple ad that says... 'Other phones suck because they don't have NNN spec!" Even Retina display was not about 326dpi (or whatever... see, it doesn't matter), it was about the 'clearest crispest image on a phone' That people buy. Even then they don't fight on Spec, they fight on function... so if you're saying 'when it works for them' means that, of course they introduce newer, faster, more performing technology... but they don't do it as marketing checkbox, and hope it makes a difference in a sale or an app.
The 'competition does come playing into play' is when Apple can build a handset that a developer can build a capability or a responsiveness that Apple can hold a competitors phone and say 'Their's performs like crap' Then they put that app up on the stage and market the hell out of it.
I am much less interested in having a larger screen phone than my current iPhone (5s) than I am interested in how it would be implemented. To just say "a bigger screen" to me, means nothing. Is it sharper at all viewing angles? Have they thwarted the battery drain a larger screen would require while still increasing the batter life compared to the 5s and keep it thin? How about the heat? How about the ratio (16x9 and narrow or will it go wider)?
To me, screen size is just a spec number. Those vary in importance to every individual user so it doesn't matter to everyone the same way. Spec numbers don't mean much to Apple user base, the implementation is more important – how it ties to a feature to be actually useful and not just something to brag about like Camera MPs.
However, if there is a reason, like if they add tactile feedback on/under the screen and want a wider keyboard for it – that makes sense. If the screen gets better for actual features instead of "now it's as big as other phones", then I can see it spurring upgrades from the install base.
Here's the thing though, I don't think Apple will get more sales out of "just" a bigger screen at at the end of all this. I think Android users making fun of apple's screen size would just find another spec to bitch about (nfc, MPs, "open") why they won't be switching and the iPhone users who envy the 5" screens will be nullified by those who would rather keep a manageable size for one handed oppression. If it happens I can potentially see people looking to upgrade going with a 5s (for it's size, abundance of accessories, cheaper price) just as much as those wanting the bigger screen (weather they have been waiting for that feature or just want a visual way to show people this is the "new" one).
Yeah and I never said otherwise. You were the one that brought in the argument saying Apple doesn't go to war on specs. Apple will make improvements as they always do based on the needs of Apple customers and any technical or price hurdles. I have a 64GB iPhone and I am not even a heavy user of photos or videos and my iPhone is nearly full. After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option.
Opinions vary. Once I started using iCloud to store photos, and iTunes Match, I got 10GB free on my 32GB iPhone.
I just think technically and strategically, it's easier to say 'No' to 128GB than to improve other facets of the phone/ipad hw base to support the end game of the apple ecosystem, because in the end, all phones will be commodities, and storage is probably the most commodity of them all.
Your belief and my opinion differ. and i believe wholeheartedly that specs are for techs.
Show me one apple ad that says... 'Other phones suck because they don't have NNN spec!" Even Retina display was not about 326dpi (or whatever... see, it doesn't matter), it was about the 'clearest crispest image on a phone' That people buy. Even then they don't fight on Spec, they fight on function... so if you're saying 'when it works for them' means that, of course they introduce newer, faster, more performing technology... but they don't do it as marketing checkbox, and hope it makes a difference in a sale or an app.
The 'competition does come playing into play' is when Apple can build a handset that a developer can build a capability or a responsiveness that Apple can hold a competitors phone and say 'Their's performs like crap' Then they put that app up on the stage and market the hell out of it.
Wow. You just love putting words in other people's mouths. When did I ever say anything about Apple advertising specs? Ummmm... oh yea... never.
... and it's always good to know that we can rely on you, an insider at Apple Inc., to provide us with the details as to why Apple does and does not do things.
By the way... I'm really curious as to how the 4" solved a problem over the 3.5" iPhone. I didn't know there was a problem with my Wife's 4s.
How does he know the people aren't buying the domestic cellphones because they're domestic? Even if they have larger screens, maybe that's not the reason people are buying them, maybe they're just being patriotic.
One thesis I read that I can see the underlying logic in is that for people of modest means who cannot buy multiple gadgets and who want a more convenient input device the larger screen fills those multiple roles better than smaller devices. So the larger screen sized phones are a compromise for that one attainable device.
I can see that because if I were forced to distill down my 5s, iPad Air and MacBook Pro into one mobile device I'd probably choose a Retina LTE iPad Mini over an iPhone myself... a loss in convenient mobility for better content creation capability...
Your belief and my opinion differ. and i believe wholeheartedly that specs are for techs.
Show me one apple ad that says... 'Other phones suck because they don't have NNN spec!" Even Retina display was not about 326dpi (or whatever... see, it doesn't matter), it was about the 'clearest crispest image on a phone' That people buy. Even then they don't fight on Spec, they fight on function... so if you're saying 'when it works for them' means that, of course they introduce newer, faster, more performing technology... but they don't do it as marketing checkbox, and hope it makes a difference in a sale or an app.
The <span style="line-height:1.4em;">'competition does come playing into play' </span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">is when Apple can build a handset that a developer can build a capability or a responsiveness that Apple can hold a competitors phone and say 'Their's</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> performs like crap' Then they put that app up on the stage and market the </span>
hell out<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> of it.</span>
Whether you define it simply by a number or you regurgitate the marketing line, a spec is a spec, and it is important in selling a phone. Apple bumps the specs of the iPhone annually because the competition does the same. Apple can't be left behind in that regard. This fall when Apple releases the A8 in a new phone it won't be because the A7 is insufficient in its own right; the A7 is an incredibly capable chip. Rather the A8 will be used because Apple's competitors will be releasing phones with faster chips.
I am much less interested in having a larger screen phone than my current iPhone (5s) than I am interested in how it would be implemented. To just say "a bigger screen" to me, means nothing. Is it sharper at all viewing angles? Have they thwarted the battery drain a larger screen would require while still increasing the batter life compared to the 5s and keep it thin? How about the heat? How about the ratio (16x9 and narrow or will it go wider)?
To me, screen size is just a spec number. Those vary in importance to every individual user so it doesn't matter to everyone the same way. Spec numbers don't mean much to Apple user base, the implementation is more important – how it ties to a feature to be actually useful and not just something to brag about like Camera MPs.
However, if there is a reason, like if they add tactile feedback on/under the screen and want a wider keyboard for it – that makes sense. If the screen gets better for actual features instead of "now it's as big as other phones", then I can see it spurring upgrades from the install base.
Here's the thing though, I don't think Apple will get more sales out of "just" a bigger screen at at the end of all this. I think Android users making fun of apple's screen size would just find another spec to bitch about (nfc, MPs, "open") why they won't be switching and the iPhone users who envy the 5" screens will be nullified by those who would rather keep a manageable size for one handed oppression. If it happens I can potentially see people looking to upgrade going with a 5s (for it's size, abundance of accessories, cheaper price) just as much as those wanting the bigger screen (weather they have been waiting for that feature or just want a visual way to show people this is the "new" one).
Being seriously myopic here. If you deny that there is a market for bigger phones, then why not apply the same to tablets and PCs? Should Apple end the I-Pad line and only sell I-Pad minis? Should their PCs have no screen sizes larger than 13 inches because anyone who wants something bigger can just mirror their screens on an HDTV? Of course not. It is just another option available for people who want it.
It is not just the bigger screen but the implementation? My point exactly. Apple should come out with a real phablet, a legitimate hybrid or tweener device, instead of just a bigger phone that is called a phablet.
And it isn't about shutting up the Android people. Like it or not, there are people who actually LIKE the Android OS. Android has its fans. Big deal. But there is nothing keeping Apple from making a phablet for A) Apple fans who want one and people who want a phablet and don't care who makes it. The goal here is not just to get Android users to switch. Get it into your thinking: Apple is never going to crush Android, not through lawsuits or any other means. Some people - lots of people - legitimately like Android just as they legitimately liked Wintel in the 1990s and 2000s. And people who can't or don't want to pay Apple's prices will always choose an Android device over not having one at all. Instead, the goal is to offer an Apple phablet for people who wants phablets. Samsung has proven that a large, lucrative phablet market exists so why not make money servicing that market? This is not the same as wearables, a product looking for a market. This is something for which a proven market already exists, and moreover is just a version of what Apple already makes a mint off. The only reason not to do it is because Samsung did it first. Big deal. Other companies had MP3 players, tablets, smart phones and PCs first too. Apple just came along later and made theirs better.
Opinions vary. Once I started using iCloud to store photos, and iTunes Match, I got 10GB free on my 32GB iPhone.
I just think technically and strategically, it's easier to say 'No' to 128GB than to improve other facets of the phone/ipad hw base to support the end game of the apple ecosystem, because in the end, all phones will be commodities, and storage is probably the most commodity of them all.
I agree but I do think we might be hitting the wall at the low end with 16GB (especially with the size of the last OTA updates) and it's been several years since they doubled the capacity so I think we could see that this year.
I don't agree with [@]gwmac[/@]'s wording of "After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option." He makes it sound like we've been stuck at 64GB for 7 years now or that 128GB was somehow possible back in 2007.
I whipped up this chart to show the relative time between capacity doubling in the various models…
We might assume that the exponentially of this effect may also includes the additional time between doubling of capacity or think that Apple would rather wait for a tock instead of introducing it with a new design.
I'll be getting an iPhone 6 no matter what size the screen is since my contract will be up and AT&T doesn't have a discount for off contract phones. I don't like paying a full monthly bill unless it is for a new subsidized phone. I have a 64GB right now and I haven't even begun to fill it up so I probably won't bother with the 128 even if it is offered. One nice thing about AT&T though, is that they let you unlock your old phone after the contract is up, which allows me to upgrade my international phone using the recently replaced phone. In this case my iPhone 5 will become my new international phone.
I'll be getting an iPhone 6 no matter what size the screen is since my contract will be up and AT&T doesn't have a discount for off contract phones. I don't like paying a full monthly bill unless it is for a new subsidized phone. I have a 64GB right now and I haven't even begun to fill it up so I probably won't bother with the 128 even if it is offered. One nice thing about AT&T though, is that they let you unlock your old phone after the contract is up, which allows me to upgrade my international phone using the recently replaced phone. In this case my iPhone 5 will become my new international phone.
Any reason not to jump to Verizon where the GSM is already unlocked so you can use just the one device in and out US when you travel?
Any reason not to jump to Verizon where the GSM is already unlocked so you can use just the one device in and out US when you travel?
I need two phones while in Central America, so my stateside contacts can continue to call me on my regular number, plus a local number for my local contacts, and we are on a group plan with AT&T.
Comments
"According to White, there's been a sense of "disappointment" among some Chinese carriers regarding customer demand for the iPhone 5s."
I will tell you something about the typical Chinese businessman. If you ask them how business is, they will always tell you, usually with a sigh for full effect, "It's not that good". Why? First of all, crowing about how great you're doing is bad form in the Asian Pacific rim cultures (where I grew up). Second, why reveal to your suppliers (especially one as big and profitable as Apple) how well you're doing and weaken your negotiating position? And third, there's always the taxman to consider.
And you're some person they don't know asking about how their businesses are doing? Expect nothing other than the full sad sack routine.
I did. I played those Java games on the RAZR. For hours. I texted. I even had an IM chat client installed. I never once felt the screen needed to bigger.
That still hasn't stopped Apple from modifying its specs... upward.
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
Specs aren't where apple fights it's wars... performance on the job is the critical measure.
doubling storage goes against apple ecosystem model, esp. on the phone.
Same reason why apple doesn't build a phablet.
On the CPU I agree. Apple offers a lower clocked but far more efficient CPU. But we are talking about storage. How exactly can you justify Apple sticking with the exact same storage especially now that the camera and video needs far more storage than than the iPhone 3's camera? Are you suggesting Apple never upgrade their storage and if that is not your position then when should they? 2016, 2018?
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
... and that wasn't my point.
My point is that Apple does increase spec... and I don't believe for a minute it's only when it works for them. Competition does play into it to some degree.
On the CPU I agree. Apple offers a lower clocked but far more efficient CPU. But we are talking about storage. How exactly can you justify Apple sticking with the exact same storage especially now that the camera and video needs far more than the iPhone 3's camera? Are you suggesting Apple never upgrade their storage and if that is not your position then when should they? 2016, 2018?
Justification: 802.11ac, LTE/commodity pipes, and the cloud. It's the endgame of the the iCloud model.... "All your data are belong to us!"
and I didn't say never... I just said goes against the model.... they will go to larger memory once the price/perf/size/battery-drain fits.
I did. I played those Java games on the RAZR. For hours. I texted. I even had an IM chat client installed. I never once felt the screen needed to bigger.
And I am sure you were not alone but guess what, that RAZR you spent hours looking at also had one of the largest screen at the time. It was considered small due to how thin it was but when it came to dumb phones the display size was not small. If you really wanted small you would have chosen the Sony T616. Your RAZR was a phbalet compared the the Sony.
That is a well thought out argument. And I agree with the bezel comment, because they really like one-handed operation, and 4" is pretty much the limit for that, so if they are going to go to 4.5" they must be going to reduce the bezel at the same time to allow the thumb to reach further.
But they may not be limiting themselves to one handed operation. I completely see what Sol is saying but I am wondering if the market hasn't changed over the years and there are many people for whom the iPhone will be their only computer, specially in the Asian market. If Apple is interested in bringing out a larger screened iPhone, could they rethink resolution altogether and transition to a higher resolution across all devices that will accommodate a larger iPhone without having to scale up the present 5s? If so, that could open the possibilities for a larger iPad and a larger iPhone at full retina resolution. The new versions of the present sizes would need a higher resolution screen. Apps would slowly transition to the new format. Would it be possible for a device with a lower resolution to satisfactorily display a higher res app?
but they don't upgrade to compete with the competition... they upgrade when the price/performance/weight/battery-load works AND it solves a user problem.
When was the last time you saw apple talk about RAM and ghz in a presentation? Even 64bits was about performance... they didn't talk about 'wow, we can address Petabytes of Virtual Memory' they talked about how fast the thing ran.
How it performs in your hand is the only spec that matters.
Yeah and I never said otherwise. You were the one that brought in the argument saying Apple doesn't go to war on specs. Apple will make improvements as they always do based on the needs of Apple customers and any technical or price hurdles. I have a 64GB iPhone and I am not even a heavy user of photos or videos and my iPhone is nearly full. After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option.
... and that wasn't my point.
My point is that Apple does increase spec... and I don't believe for a minute it's only when it works for them. Competition does play into it to some degree.
Your belief and my opinion differ. and i believe wholeheartedly that specs are for techs.
Show me one apple ad that says... 'Other phones suck because they don't have NNN spec!" Even Retina display was not about 326dpi (or whatever... see, it doesn't matter), it was about the 'clearest crispest image on a phone' That people buy. Even then they don't fight on Spec, they fight on function... so if you're saying 'when it works for them' means that, of course they introduce newer, faster, more performing technology... but they don't do it as marketing checkbox, and hope it makes a difference in a sale or an app.
The 'competition does come playing into play' is when Apple can build a handset that a developer can build a capability or a responsiveness that Apple can hold a competitors phone and say 'Their's performs like crap' Then they put that app up on the stage and market the hell out of it.
I am much less interested in having a larger screen phone than my current iPhone (5s) than I am interested in how it would be implemented. To just say "a bigger screen" to me, means nothing. Is it sharper at all viewing angles? Have they thwarted the battery drain a larger screen would require while still increasing the batter life compared to the 5s and keep it thin? How about the heat? How about the ratio (16x9 and narrow or will it go wider)?
To me, screen size is just a spec number. Those vary in importance to every individual user so it doesn't matter to everyone the same way. Spec numbers don't mean much to Apple user base, the implementation is more important – how it ties to a feature to be actually useful and not just something to brag about like Camera MPs.
However, if there is a reason, like if they add tactile feedback on/under the screen and want a wider keyboard for it – that makes sense. If the screen gets better for actual features instead of "now it's as big as other phones", then I can see it spurring upgrades from the install base.
Here's the thing though, I don't think Apple will get more sales out of "just" a bigger screen at at the end of all this. I think Android users making fun of apple's screen size would just find another spec to bitch about (nfc, MPs, "open") why they won't be switching and the iPhone users who envy the 5" screens will be nullified by those who would rather keep a manageable size for one handed oppression. If it happens I can potentially see people looking to upgrade going with a 5s (for it's size, abundance of accessories, cheaper price) just as much as those wanting the bigger screen (weather they have been waiting for that feature or just want a visual way to show people this is the "new" one).
Yeah and I never said otherwise. You were the one that brought in the argument saying Apple doesn't go to war on specs. Apple will make improvements as they always do based on the needs of Apple customers and any technical or price hurdles. I have a 64GB iPhone and I am not even a heavy user of photos or videos and my iPhone is nearly full. After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option.
Opinions vary. Once I started using iCloud to store photos, and iTunes Match, I got 10GB free on my 32GB iPhone.
I just think technically and strategically, it's easier to say 'No' to 128GB than to improve other facets of the phone/ipad hw base to support the end game of the apple ecosystem, because in the end, all phones will be commodities, and storage is probably the most commodity of them all.
Your belief and my opinion differ. and i believe wholeheartedly that specs are for techs.
Show me one apple ad that says... 'Other phones suck because they don't have NNN spec!" Even Retina display was not about 326dpi (or whatever... see, it doesn't matter), it was about the 'clearest crispest image on a phone' That people buy. Even then they don't fight on Spec, they fight on function... so if you're saying 'when it works for them' means that, of course they introduce newer, faster, more performing technology... but they don't do it as marketing checkbox, and hope it makes a difference in a sale or an app.
The 'competition does come playing into play' is when Apple can build a handset that a developer can build a capability or a responsiveness that Apple can hold a competitors phone and say 'Their's performs like crap' Then they put that app up on the stage and market the hell out of it.
Wow. You just love putting words in other people's mouths. When did I ever say anything about Apple advertising specs? Ummmm... oh yea... never.
... and it's always good to know that we can rely on you, an insider at Apple Inc., to provide us with the details as to why Apple does and does not do things.
By the way... I'm really curious as to how the 4" solved a problem over the 3.5" iPhone. I didn't know there was a problem with my Wife's 4s.
Oh boy...
How does he know the people aren't buying the domestic cellphones because they're domestic? Even if they have larger screens, maybe that's not the reason people are buying them, maybe they're just being patriotic.
One thesis I read that I can see the underlying logic in is that for people of modest means who cannot buy multiple gadgets and who want a more convenient input device the larger screen fills those multiple roles better than smaller devices. So the larger screen sized phones are a compromise for that one attainable device.
I can see that because if I were forced to distill down my 5s, iPad Air and MacBook Pro into one mobile device I'd probably choose a Retina LTE iPad Mini over an iPhone myself... a loss in convenient mobility for better content creation capability...
Whether you define it simply by a number or you regurgitate the marketing line, a spec is a spec, and it is important in selling a phone. Apple bumps the specs of the iPhone annually because the competition does the same. Apple can't be left behind in that regard. This fall when Apple releases the A8 in a new phone it won't be because the A7 is insufficient in its own right; the A7 is an incredibly capable chip. Rather the A8 will be used because Apple's competitors will be releasing phones with faster chips.
I am much less interested in having a larger screen phone than my current iPhone (5s) than I am interested in how it would be implemented. To just say "a bigger screen" to me, means nothing. Is it sharper at all viewing angles? Have they thwarted the battery drain a larger screen would require while still increasing the batter life compared to the 5s and keep it thin? How about the heat? How about the ratio (16x9 and narrow or will it go wider)?
To me, screen size is just a spec number. Those vary in importance to every individual user so it doesn't matter to everyone the same way. Spec numbers don't mean much to Apple user base, the implementation is more important – how it ties to a feature to be actually useful and not just something to brag about like Camera MPs.
However, if there is a reason, like if they add tactile feedback on/under the screen and want a wider keyboard for it – that makes sense. If the screen gets better for actual features instead of "now it's as big as other phones", then I can see it spurring upgrades from the install base.
Here's the thing though, I don't think Apple will get more sales out of "just" a bigger screen at at the end of all this. I think Android users making fun of apple's screen size would just find another spec to bitch about (nfc, MPs, "open") why they won't be switching and the iPhone users who envy the 5" screens will be nullified by those who would rather keep a manageable size for one handed oppression. If it happens I can potentially see people looking to upgrade going with a 5s (for it's size, abundance of accessories, cheaper price) just as much as those wanting the bigger screen (weather they have been waiting for that feature or just want a visual way to show people this is the "new" one).
Being seriously myopic here. If you deny that there is a market for bigger phones, then why not apply the same to tablets and PCs? Should Apple end the I-Pad line and only sell I-Pad minis? Should their PCs have no screen sizes larger than 13 inches because anyone who wants something bigger can just mirror their screens on an HDTV? Of course not. It is just another option available for people who want it.
It is not just the bigger screen but the implementation? My point exactly. Apple should come out with a real phablet, a legitimate hybrid or tweener device, instead of just a bigger phone that is called a phablet.
And it isn't about shutting up the Android people. Like it or not, there are people who actually LIKE the Android OS. Android has its fans. Big deal. But there is nothing keeping Apple from making a phablet for A) Apple fans who want one and
people who want a phablet and don't care who makes it. The goal here is not just to get Android users to switch. Get it into your thinking: Apple is never going to crush Android, not through lawsuits or any other means. Some people - lots of people - legitimately like Android just as they legitimately liked Wintel in the 1990s and 2000s. And people who can't or don't want to pay Apple's prices will always choose an Android device over not having one at all. Instead, the goal is to offer an Apple phablet for people who wants phablets. Samsung has proven that a large, lucrative phablet market exists so why not make money servicing that market? This is not the same as wearables, a product looking for a market. This is something for which a proven market already exists, and moreover is just a version of what Apple already makes a mint off. The only reason not to do it is because Samsung did it first. Big deal. Other companies had MP3 players, tablets, smart phones and PCs first too. Apple just came along later and made theirs better.
I agree but I do think we might be hitting the wall at the low end with 16GB (especially with the size of the last OTA updates) and it's been several years since they doubled the capacity so I think we could see that this year.
I don't agree with [@]gwmac[/@]'s wording of "After 7 years I think it is about time Apple introduced a 128GB option." He makes it sound like we've been stuck at 64GB for 7 years now or that 128GB was somehow possible back in 2007.
I whipped up this chart to show the relative time between capacity doubling in the various models…
We might assume that the exponentially of this effect may also includes the additional time between doubling of capacity or think that Apple would rather wait for a tock instead of introducing it with a new design.
I'll be getting an iPhone 6 no matter what size the screen is since my contract will be up and AT&T doesn't have a discount for off contract phones. I don't like paying a full monthly bill unless it is for a new subsidized phone. I have a 64GB right now and I haven't even begun to fill it up so I probably won't bother with the 128 even if it is offered. One nice thing about AT&T though, is that they let you unlock your old phone after the contract is up, which allows me to upgrade my international phone using the recently replaced phone. In this case my iPhone 5 will become my new international phone.
Any reason not to jump to Verizon where the GSM is already unlocked so you can use just the one device in and out US when you travel?
Any reason not to jump to Verizon where the GSM is already unlocked so you can use just the one device in and out US when you travel?
I need two phones while in Central America, so my stateside contacts can continue to call me on my regular number, plus a local number for my local contacts, and we are on a group plan with AT&T.
BTW does Verizon iPad also have GSM capability?