Alleged 'iPhone 6c' rear shell suggests Apple will repackage iPhone 5s parts

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 100
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,293member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Not at all.  The average selling price of iPhones are reported by Apple each quarter.

    The rise in unit prices is an obvious sign that more people are buying the high-end phone
    Sure, but you were stating percentage breakdowns by model as tho it's factual. IMHO it's no more than an "edumacated guess".
  • Reply 62 of 100
    capnbobcapnbob Posts: 388member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    No it won't.

     

    It will just cause more people to buy the mid-range phone instead of the top-end.

     

    There needs to be a CLEAR distinction between the top end phone vs mid range.

     

    Using a plastic shell ( 5S vs 5C ) or different body ( 6 vs 5S ) does this.

     

    The 5C was very successful.  Its purpose was to prop up the 5S and be the phone for those who are price sensitive but still want an iPhone.

     

    Strange that you think Apple needs help with their marketing stragegy after they just had the most profitable quarter in the history of man.


    I respectfully think you are wrong in several of your basic premises which impacts your conclusions:

    1) that people will opt for the lesser phone and pocket $100. That has been proven demonstrably false in the past and will not change in the future.

    2) That the US tier pricing model is still important. It isn't now that the US carriers have almost killed traditional subsidized contract pricing and the difference in monthly cost on an installment plan is negligible over 1-2 years.

    3) That is is remotely easy to make 6 internals in a 4" 5C shell - it isn't. The drilling of extra holes in the 5C shell is TRIVIAL in comparison.

     

    I believe the lineup will be (FWIW):

    6+S - 32/64/128

    6S - 32/64/128

    6 - 16 only (huge differentiator to waverers)

    6C - (5S internals + NFC (maybe))

     

    6 will still be made since they will still be making the same shell for the 6S (economies of scale) but will lack key 6S features (A9/RAM/Cam/ForceTouch/etc.) and only be 16GB storage to clearly differentiate it (so only the small number of skinflints will buy it)

    5S will be dropped since they don't want to be milling 2 Aluminium shells if necessary - hence the 6C will be a 5S inside

    5S internals with NFC will be fine and pretty future proof (64-Bit, TID, (NFC) - will be a good setup for at least 2 more OS' and future features.

    Just my 2c (and worth less ;-)

  • Reply 63 of 100
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     

    The problem is NOT every one wants the 4" at mid-tier price. Apple can't just kill 4.7" for mid tier and force people to buy a new released phone if they want 4.7".


    Why not? Not being argumentative, but doesn't Apple usually take the position with their products that if you want 4.7" then you should pay the premium? I'm not saying they won't, but to offer it and remove the main reason to upgrade to a 6S, suggests that the 4.7" screen is the most popular screen size sold of any smart phone (otherwise people might leave Apple to get a cheaper 4.7" screen). Do we know this is the case? 

     

    Budget forces the $99 choice, and a 4" screen costs less. And think about it this way. If Apple relegates the 4" screen to just the free 5sc which I think I can accurately say sells less than any other model, will limit Apple's being power, so they end up paying more for a 4" for a phone they're going to give away. On the other hand, if they offer the 4" screen on the mid-tier as well, then that lowers their cost per screen. 

     

    Moreover, IF Apple addresses those of us who want a 4" screen, then the mid-tier is the place to do it, not create a "mini" 6S -- yet a third offering on the high end. The 6 still has most of the desirable features likely of the 6S for those who want a smaller phone, and serves double duty as an entry-level phone for others. It's sort of win-win. 

  • Reply 64 of 100
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    IMO this new plastic phone should be called iPhone Color.

     

    Calling it iPhone 5SC would be silly unless they get rid of selling the 5S all together.

     

    Calling it iPhone 6C would not make sense unless this comes in 4.7 inch sizes also.

     

    Sept 2015

    iPhone 6S - $199

    iPhone Color - $99 - 4 inch screen, iPhone6 internals

    iPhone 5S - $0

     

    Sept 2016

    iPhone 7 - $199

    iPhone 6C - $99

    iPhone Color - $0


     

    too confusing -- what does "C" stand for, if not "color"?

  • Reply 65 of 100
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by David Garon View Post

     

    I was under the impression that the 5C was a relatively unsuccessful product. 


     

    luckily for apple, youre under the wrong impression. it was the #2 or 3 best selling handset in the US carrier stores. it was a successful product. the tech pundits decided to call it a failure because they wanted it to be one very badly. when they were wrong, they didnt let truth get in the way of their trolling.

     

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/03/22/apples-iphone-5c-failure-flop-outsold-blackberry-windows-phone-and-every-android-flagship-in-q4

     

    also, there is nothing particularly cheap feeling about the 5c -- certainly no more than the 3G or 3GS, which were hailed as premium phones. personally, i prefer the supple casing of the smooth, curved 3G/S models than the new flat designs.

  • Reply 66 of 100
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PatchyThePirate View Post

     

     

    Seems very logical to have a 4.7" 6c at the $99 price point. The polycarbonate and year old internals would be enough of a differentiator from the aluminum 6s (especially if Force Touch comes into play).


    Except, it seems pretty obvious that they are going to transplant the 5S into the 5C shell. So, both the free phone, and the mid-tier phone are going to be plastic? I just don't see Apple doing that. I see them keeping the 5S in plastic because it's all set up to do that and it's a free phone. But I would be surprised if Apple keeps the plastic phone after the 5SC falls off the lineup. 

     

    Whether 4" or 4.7", the mid-tier 6-based model will likely be aluminum (maybe something like the iPod Touch in anodized colors). In which case, next year, they will offer a free aluminum. It really all depends on whether the plastic vs. aluminum issue is driven strictly from a cost standpoint,or from a manufacturing capacity issue. If the 5C was introduced in plastic to relieve the strain on producing two aluminum phones from their limited resources, then it was merely a stop gap effort until Apple could build a larger infrastructure to handle the volume of aluminum products.

  • Reply 67 of 100
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     

    Look at the 6 board, do you think it can fit in 4" chassis without redesigning it?


    My contention is that they already have. They did it when developing prototypes for the 6 series phones before they committed to the 4.7" and 5.5" marketing plan. This is of course speculation, but they most likely designed the 5C and 5S to be simple swap outs with this exact marketing plan in mind. So all they have to do now, is mass produce the prototype with the final hardware. Again, this is assuming that Apple never intended to abandon the 4" model, only delay it while they launched the larger flagship phones. Once they do that, they will have a case design that they can bump down to the free phone next year, and possibly the 6S in two years, which they can likewise engineer for the smaller phone.

     

    Look, the 5C was a redesign of the 5, however minimal. And who knows they may have had this plastic road map on the drawing board from the 5 development. But they still had to R&D it and everything else, just like any new phone. Whether it's made out of plastic or aluminum, is irrelevant if they have the capability to manufacture it at the volume necessary. It all depends on whether they want to be a maker of mostly plastic phones or not.

  • Reply 68 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post



    It's almost certainly going to come with Apple Pay. If Apple indeed goes along the 4 inch route for the C series that's great and it will be my next buy for sure.

    That makes sense about ApplePay, Clemy. And the C for me, too.

     

    Best.

  • Reply 69 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,056member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    So will Joe avearge be able to tell difference between the 6 and the 6S?  Will he be willing to pay an extra $100?  I think not.


    How do you think about these average Joe on 4 and 4S because 4S blew the heck sale# of 4 out of the water?

  • Reply 70 of 100
    sdbryansdbryan Posts: 351member
    fallenjt wrote: »
    Sure, but if people want Apple Pay, buy mid or high tier. This new C phone with 5S body should be in the third tier if there's nothing else updated.

    Seriously, no one wants ApplePay more than Apple. Releasing any i-device without ApplePay would be a bizarre move since inclusion promotes both the ApplePay service and the Apple Watch. I will definitely get a 4" iPhone if it is offered and probably take a pass otherwise. Releasing the larger sizes was a great business decision but dropping the true one-handed size makes iPhones just smaller iPads that make phone calls.
  • Reply 71 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,056member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post



    I think a 4" iPhone 6C is plausible. If Apple were to build it, I would be shocked if it were to not include Touch ID. I would be surprised if were to not include NFC, because it would be stupid to not include support for Apple Pay. That makes the A8 chip the logical choice, even if the camera and flash might be taken from the iPhone 5S.

    No, it's not. Why? Design 4" iPhone from the ground up for mid-tier is not cost effective (R&D, Testing, hardware design...). It's even less possible to see 6C at top tier because Plastic and Top Tier don't go really well with each other.

    I would be completely shocked if 4" 6C is in top tier or even in mid-tier. If there's a 6C in mid-tier, 4.7" would be the one, not 4". 

    Apple Pay will only be included for new design, not existing version rebadged with new case. So if, 6C is a 5S rebadge for low tier, you will not see Apple Pay at all. But if this 4" 6C (5S rebadged) is for mid tier, you may see NFC chip added for Apple Pay. That's the only way they can sell 5S plastic at mid tier.

    My speculation is still this: 5S rebadged with plastic case for lowest tier without adding any upgrade to it. It's just easier to manufacture the plastic 5S than the Aluminum 5S.

  • Reply 72 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,056member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sdbryan View Post





    Seriously, no one wants ApplePay more than Apple. Releasing any i-device without ApplePay would be a bizarre move since inclusion promotes both the ApplePay service and the Apple Watch. I will definitely get a 4" iPhone if it is offered and probably take a pass otherwise. Releasing the larger sizes was a great business decision but dropping the true one-handed size makes iPhones just smaller iPads that make phone calls.

    Apple do not release new device, but rebadging the existing one: 5S -> 5C. Remember, Apple Watch is compatible with 5S, 5 and 5C, so Apple Pay  doesn't have problem with old 5 series phone.

    So, you don't mind 5S->5C if it's Apply Pay capable? I hope Apple will add NFC chip in this 5S rebadged phone for these 4" lovers. They may do that and keep the phone at mid-tier, who knows? But if they move this rebadged 4" to 3 tier, you won't see NFC with it.

  • Reply 73 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,056member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

     

    My contention is that they already have. They did it when developing prototypes for the 6 series phones before they committed to the 4.7" and 5.5" marketing plan. This is of course speculation, but they most likely designed the 5C and 5S to be simple swap outs with this exact marketing plan in mind. So all they have to do now, is mass produce the prototype with the final hardware. Again, this is assuming that Apple never intended to abandon the 4" model, only delay it while they launched the larger flagship phones. Once they do that, they will have a case design that they can bump down to the free phone next year, and possibly the 6S in two years, which they can likewise engineer for the smaller phone.

     

    Look, the 5C was a redesign of the 5, however minimal. And who knows they may have had this plastic road map on the drawing board from the 5 development. But they still had to R&D it and everything else, just like any new phone. Whether it's made out of plastic or aluminum, is irrelevant if they have the capability to manufacture it at the volume necessary. It all depends on whether they want to be a maker of mostly plastic phones or not.


    If your point is right, you'll see this 4" logic board leaks in coming months. My prediction is NO. I doubt that Apple would do too much for mid-term refresh products. This year, they focus more on their flagship 6S/6+S which give them more margin. I would be very shocked if they make iP6 logic board for 4" and release it this year. Based on this leaked case, it's simply just a 5S rebadged in plastic case for the third tier to replace the current discontinuing 5C and 5S as rumored.

  • Reply 74 of 100
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Got the line up wrong

    Sept 2016

    iPhone 7 - $199
    iPhone 6S - $99
    iPhone 6C - $0

    Those numbers bear no resemblance to the real prices.
  • Reply 75 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,056member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Capnbob View Post

     

    I believe the lineup will be (FWIW):

    6+S - 16/64/128: $299, $399, $499 sub or $749, $849, $949

    6S - 16/64/128: $199/$299/$399 sub or $649/$749/$849

    6 - 16/64 only (huge differentiator to waverers): $99/$199 sub or $549/$649

    6C - (5S internals + NFC (maybe)): $0 sub or $449

     

    6 will still be made since they will still be making the same shell for the 6S (economies of scale) but will lack key 6S features (A9/RAM/Cam/ForceTouch/etc.) and only be 16GB storage to clearly differentiate it (so only the small number of skinflints will buy it)

    5S will be dropped since they don't want to be milling 2 Aluminium shells if necessary - hence the 6C will be a 5S inside

    5S internals with NFC will be fine and pretty future proof (64-Bit, TID, (NFC) - will be a good setup for at least 2 more OS' and future features.

    Just my 2c (and worth less ;-)


    Most logical comments so far. I think the same with some minor revisions.

    NFC may not be included in 6C since it's in the third tier and most people buying third tier won't care much of this feature. If they do, they would buy other tiers. Third tier is for students, teenagers or those in third world countries, so implementing NFC + Apple Pay in it is overkilled. If Apple will include NFC + Apple Pay in this 5S rebadged 6C, it won't be sold at lowest tier but mid range unless Apple all the sudden become super generous to give users something free there.

  • Reply 76 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,545member
    nolamacguy wrote: »
    luckily for apple, youre under the wrong impression. it was the #2 or 3 best selling handset in the US carrier stores. it was a successful product. the tech pundits decided to call it a failure because they wanted it to be one very badly. when they were wrong, they didnt let truth get in the way of their trolling.

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/03/22/apples-iphone-5c-failure-flop-outsold-blackberry-windows-phone-and-every-android-flagship-in-q4

    also, there is nothing particularly cheap feeling about the 5c -- certainly no more than the 3G or 3GS, which were hailed as premium phones. personally, i prefer the supple casing of the smooth, curved 3G/S models than the new flat designs.

    I think what happened was that it was expected that the 5C would be about 50% of sales, but instead ended up at about 30%. While that was characterized as a failure, to a certain point, it still outsold the Galaxy S4, and then the S5.

    I've thought that Apple's plan was to have a phone that was $100 less to produce as a new phone, so that they could drop the out of contract price to below $400 after some time. While dropping the price of a $650 phone that far is difficult, and in order to do so they sometimes have to drop the storage to half the previous minimum, moving down from $550 wouldn't be as much of a problem. I wonder if Apple was considering $350 in third world markets.
  • Reply 77 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,545member
    fallenjt wrote: »
    No, it's not. Why? Design 4" iPhone from the ground up for mid-tier is not cost effective (R&D, Testing, hardware design...). It's even less possible to see 6C at top tier because Plastic and Top Tier don't go really well with each other.
    I would be completely shocked if 4" 6C is in top tier or even in mid-tier. If there's a 6C in mid-tier, 4.7" would be the one, not 4". 
    Apple Pay will only be included for new design, not existing version rebadged with new case. So if, 6C is a 5S rebadge for low tier, you will not see Apple Pay at all. But if this 4" 6C (5S rebadged) is for mid tier, you may see NFC chip added for Apple Pay. That's the only way they can sell 5S plastic at mid tier.
    My speculation is still this: 5S rebadged with plastic case for lowest tier without adding any upgrade to it. It's just easier to manufacture the plastic 5S than the Aluminum 5S.

    I believe that Apple's long term plans is to have Touch ID in all their mobile devices, and possibly in all of their devices, period.

    I also believe that they have the same plans for Apple Pay. But we should know Apple well enough to know that they do things in stages.
  • Reply 78 of 100
    I'm sold. This is real. We will have this after September
  • Reply 79 of 100
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by melgross View Post



    I think what happened was that it was expected that the 5C would be about 50% of sales, but instead ended up at about 30%. While that was characterized as a failure, to a certain point, it still outsold the Galaxy S4, and then the S5.

     

    no one really knows what % of models were flagship vs 5C. apple doesnt release expected vs actual per-model sales numbers, and looking at the US sales for it in carrier stores (#2 or #3 most popular device, you can guess what #1 was), i cant see it being anything other than a success. Cook said it was less than they thought, but committed nothing further. anything else is just rumor and speculation....and the WSJ is not particularly reliable.

     

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/27/tim-cook-admits-iphone-5c-share-lower-than-expected-says-demand-was-different-than-we-thought

  • Reply 80 of 100
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sdbryan View Post





    Seriously, no one wants ApplePay more than Apple. Releasing any i-device without ApplePay would be a bizarre move since inclusion promotes both the ApplePay service and the Apple Watch.

    The current 5, 5c & 5s are all without ?Pay. The ?Watch offers ?Pay. Why reengineer the 5S to include NFC, which requires R&D, when they can just sell the 5sc as compatible with the ?Watch which offers ?Pay? In other words, 'here's your free phone' if you want ?Pay, upgrade or buy the ?Watch'.

     

    Something else to consider is that the roll out of NFC compatible terminals won't be complete per the credit card industry mandate until the end of 2015. Considering the slow adoption rate of ?Pay so far, I'm guessing it will be another year before ?Pay is widely enough accepted and supported that even the free phones will add to Apple's bottom line, by which time, the free phone will have ?Pay through natural attrition without any re-engineering needed.

Sign In or Register to comment.