Apple could eschew plastic back for new metal case with 'iPhone 6c,' rumor says

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 47
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,913member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Apple will not sell the 6/6+ at a $100 discount compared to the 6S.

     

    That will lead to massive canibalization at the high end (people choosing the cheaper 6/Plus).

     

    Do you think people will be willing to pay an extra $100 just for force touch and a slightly faster CPU?  Hell no.  Most will opt for the 6 for $100 less.  Apple learned this with the iPhone5 and 5S launches.




    Think about. When you are ready for upgrade with your sweetheart or children, you think you would fend of $100 extra when they demand 6S/Plus which has better CPU, extra RAM, force touch and some more.  Apple knows that we like to pay for better things. That is history. Even Android manufacturers try to differentiate(or tout against iphone) based on little faster CPU,RAM,

  • Reply 22 of 47
    carthusiacarthusia Posts: 583member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jameskatt2 View Post



    Just revert back to the metal shell of the iPhone 5 that the 5c is based on. Simple. Elegant.



    I personally skipped the entire 5 series iPhone because of the scratch/ding-prone metal casing. That and the horrific glass forehead and chin on the back. Also, wasn't that iteration very hard to mill?

  • Reply 23 of 47
    All of this has happened before and will happen again.
    iPhone 3GS (plastic) --> iPhone 4 (glass, stainless steel)
  • Reply 24 of 47
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,054member
    wood1208 wrote: »

    You spoke the words of many.  Apple needs to release such device in 2015 and not 2016 and at lower price point.  I would say take iphone 6 internals and put in 4" screen casings and you got refreshed lower end iphone and let iphone 6S/Plus have extra goodies like force touch, A9 processor, 2GB RAM etc.
    basically, it's completely new design from ground up and sell at mid tier? Unless Phil Schillers is on drug, it's unlikely. How many times have we talked about this? New 4" chassis, new board, new chip, new screen. You sound like Apple just shrink the damn 4.7" 6 like forging a metal. Damn...
  • Reply 25 of 47
    sirlance99sirlance99 Posts: 1,293member
    wood1208 wrote: »
    Awesome. Not everyone care to use larger screen iphones(or android phones). Phone's main purpose in life is for helping with much as possible clear call/talk. So, Apple better to include VOLTE, VO-WiFi features in 6C and off-course others like ApplePay, force touch, bla,bla features are good to have. But, supporting most possible clear VOICE is the main purpose for a phone's existence. And we know iphone 5/5S is missing such important features. Besides supporting VOLTE on their own network , all four carriers are working to support carrier-to-carrier VOLTE calls in 2015. So, why bother to upgrade to any future phone if it does not have such HD VOICE(VOLTE) feature.

    The phone app is the least used app on my iPhone. I use my iPhone as a smart device for everything in my life. My iPhone is indispensable for me. You are so wrong with this.
    sog35 wrote: »
    Thats your opinion.  An opinion the majority dont agree with.

    I'm okay with the new mid-tier phone being metal as long as the screen is 4 inches.

    I agree with this
  • Reply 26 of 47
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,054member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Not going to happen.  Apple has already showed its hand with the 5S rollout.

    No way on earth will they sell the 6 for $99.  That will do massive canibalization of the 6S.

    Top end - 6S/Plus
    Mid - 6C - 4 inch metal phone, 4 inch screen
    Bottom - 5S

    end of story.

    If you think Apple will do something different you have not been paying attention the last 3 years
    Want to bet on that? There's no 6C 4" mid tier this year. It's still either current 6 or 6+ or both. You guys complicated things too much. With ForceTouch, non-protrude camera and a little cosmetic touch (matching colors for antenna bands?), "S" version will sell like hot cake. Don't forget new color option: Rose Gold. Yup, that's a selling factor there too.
  • Reply 27 of 47
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,054member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Apple will not sell the 6/6+ at a $100 discount compared to the 6S.

    That will lead to massive canibalization at the high end (people choosing the cheaper 6/Plus).

    Do you think people will be willing to pay an extra $100 just for force touch and a slightly faster CPU?  Hell no.  Most will opt for the 6 for $100 less.  Apple learned this with the iPhone5 and 5S launches.
    i bet they will. Apple don't separate individual model sale number anymore, but report them together. They can really do that. Many have been waiting to buy second year models with large screens, and here's their chance.
  • Reply 28 of 47
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Apple will not sell the 6/6+ at a $100 discount compared to the 6S.

    That will lead to massive canibalization at the high end (people choosing the cheaper 6/Plus).

    Do you think people will be willing to pay an extra $100 just for force touch and a slightly faster CPU?  Hell no.  Most will opt for the 6 for $100 less.  Apple learned this with the iPhone5 and 5S launches.

    Well you seemed to think people would pay $100 more for Touch ID with iPad mini.

    Personally I think it makes zero sense to have two phones with 4" screens. I know Apple does now but it shouldn't continue. Sure there is a market for smaller screens but the 6 and 6 Plus have shown that most people want larger screens. Apple should be designing products because they think there is a specific market for them. They shouldn't be designing things with the express purpose of not cannibalizing something else.
  • Reply 29 of 47
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    fallenjt wrote: »
    Want to bet on that? There's no 6C 4" mid tier this year. It's still either current 6 or 6+ or both. You guys complicated things too much. With ForceTouch, non-protrude camera and a little cosmetic touch (matching colors for antenna bands?), "S" version will sell like hot cake. Don't forget new color option: Rose Gold. Yup, that's a selling factor there too.

    According to 9to5Mac leaks there is no aesthetic difference between this year and last years phone. Anyone expecting aesthetic design changes in a 'S' year are going to be disappointed IMO.
  • Reply 30 of 47
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    sirlance99 wrote: »
    I agree with this

    Because you want a 4" phone or because you think a 4.7" phone would cannibalize the new phones?
  • Reply 31 of 47
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    sirlance99 wrote: »
    The phone app is the least used app on my iPhone. I use my iPhone as a smart device for everything in my life. My iPhone is indispensable for me. You are so wrong with this.

    Wood1208's point is not relevant to your usage pattern, but to areas of the world where phone calls are still important to people. Why is everyone having such trouble grasping this?

    And no, they maybe don't want to stick themselves on a flip phone when they can manage something more aspirational, like a touchscreen communicator.
  • Reply 32 of 47
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    sog35 wrote: »
    I'll make a bet.

    Ban of one week if 6/6+ is the mid tier - I'll ban myself.

    If 6/6+ is  not the mid tier you ban yourself for 1 week.

    By the way, you repeatedly insisted that AAPL will see $150 by end of year, I said $140...you still defending your position?
  • Reply 33 of 47
    19831983 Posts: 1,225member

    A 4" iPhone 6C with metal body and Touch ID sounds ideal for a base model, and for those who want a more compact device. The plastic iPhone 5C was a good design, but still didn't feel premium enough for an Apple device, after all there are plenty of cheap plastic Androids to choose from. With last years iPhone 6 as the new mid-tier device and the 6S/6S Plus topping up the range, you've got a good lineup going into the holiday season.

  • Reply 34 of 47
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,913member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    According to 9to5Mac leaks there is no aesthetic difference between this year and last years phone. Anyone expecting aesthetic design changes in a 'S' year are going to be disappointed IMO.



    It will be nice iPhone with faster processor, new power savings Qualcom modem with 2X faster LTE and additional LTE band-12 for t-mobile, more RAM, better structural integrity casing, probably force touch, improved touchID over already good touchID, etc,etc,,etc. I can go on and on to make next iphone a nice upgrade and people will love it.

  • Reply 35 of 47
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,913member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post







    Wood1208's point is not relevant to your usage pattern, but to areas of the world where phone calls are still important to people. Why is everyone having such trouble grasping this?



    And no, they maybe don't want to stick themselves on a flip phone when they can manage something more aspirational, like a touchscreen communicator.

    You said so true in few words.

  • Reply 36 of 47
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    sog35 wrote: »
    those places you speak of (Africa, Eastern Europe, ect) will not buy iPhones anyway.  Way to expensive for those regions.

    Add Southeast Asia as well. We shall see. Somehow I think Wood1208 has an inside view worth considering.
  • Reply 37 of 47
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,913member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    That makes zero sense.

     

    Why would someone buy an iPhone if all they need is a basic cell phone?

     

    No. The world has changed.  The smartphone is more of a computer than a phone.


    Those who can understand, no proof is necessary and those who don't, no proof is sufficient. Everyday, countless people use their phone for voice conversation(personal or business) and are pleased when have good audio get through phone/network. Millions of employees across the world use their phone to tap into conference call and get annoyed when voice/audio is not good( due to phone codec quality or network connection or audio packets poorly relayed through network or whatever). So, often less used feature can be most critical one. Morevoer, smartphones bring continence of good UI to those who use less function of smartphone.

  • Reply 38 of 47
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,286member
    Whether or not the replacement phone is metal or plastic, it is just wrong to insinuate that the polycarbonate shell is not robust. Having seen the abuse that several 5Cs are subject to, I can attest that if nothing else, they are well built and "robust".
  • Reply 39 of 47
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,552member
    That would be great an coherent with Apple's strategy to date.
  • Reply 40 of 47
    theothergeofftheothergeoff Posts: 2,081member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    You are living in the 1990's

    [...]

    All the stats show that talking on the phone only makes up about 10% of usage.  

    Every year there are less and less feature phones being sold and more and more smartphones.

     

    Its time for you get out of your cave.

     

    You want more proof?  

     

    [Smartphone] Consumers only spend 5% of time using their smartphones making voice calls.

    [...]


    SOG, while I agree with your premise,  your data doesn't convince me

     

    1) The question is is that 10% of the 'usage' when measure against 'phone usage' in the 1990s.

         - I used to make 400 minutes of phone calls a month and make 200 texts

         - Now I make 400 minutes of phone calls a month, 200 texts, 1000 twitter posts, and scan pinterest for 3000 minutes (50 hours - 1.5 hours a day)... total time... 4000 minutes

     

    if I have no interest in pinterest( ;-) )... and I don't tweet, why spend 50/month more on the net net cost of owning a smartphone and a data plan, over a cost of a pre-paid feature phone.

     

    2) non smartphone phone consumers spend 100% of their time using their feature phones doing non smartphone stuff.

     

    If all I need is voice and SMS (how much of that 'smartphone' 95% is glorified SMS?), why switch?

     

     

    and while it's less and less, it's still significant

     

    Looking at the @asmyco graph... it still looks like market penetration is still less than 60%.  

    last month, Bloomberg says there are 7.1Billion 'Cell Phones' out there.  Last I looked there are about 1.5B Smartphones sold a year... assuming 3 years useful life of a phone that means there is about 4.5B phones... again... around 60%

     

    So, there are 2.5BILLION feature phones (ToG math).

     

    and if you get to 90% penetration, (when the growth curve drops), you'll still have 700MILLION feature phones.  (3 year life 250M a year... more phones than apple sells per year now).

Sign In or Register to comment.