Apple rumored to eliminate 32GB tier with 'iPhone 8,' with capacity starting at 64GB

Posted:
in iPhone
While not much has been said up until now about Apple's possible intentions for user storage on the "iPhone 8," a new report claims that the high-end device will have at least 64 gigabytes of flash storage, with a second configuration boasting 256 gigabytes.




TrendForce research suggests that not only is Apple looking to build 100 million of the rumored high-end "iPhone 8" before the end of the year, but also that it will not allow only 32 gigabytes of storage on the potentially $1000 and up device. Only two configurations will be made available, according to the report, with 64- and 256-gigabyte versions shipping at launch.

Also expected in the fall, the "iPhone 7s" and "iPhone 7s Plus" are expected to retain 32-gigabyte configurations at the low-end, and have 2 and 3 gigabytes of RAM, respectively.

Additionally, the device is said to carry 3 gigabytes of mobile DRAM of an unspecified type. For comparison. the currently shipping iPhone 7 has 2 gigabytes of LPDDR4 RAM, and the iPhone 7 Plus has 3 gigs.

At present, the only new iPhone still available with 16 gigabytes is the $399 iPhone SE, with a 64-gigabyte version selling for $449. The iPhone 6s and 6s Plus are still available, but the 16-gigabyte versions have been discontinued in favor of updated low-end versions with 32 gigabytes retailing for $549 and $649 respectively.

Apple is thought to be working on three new iPhones, including two modest "iPhone 7s" upgrades and a flagship "iPhone 8," which is rumored to include a 5.2-inch curved OLED display with embedded sensors, wireless charging of some sort, and possibly some form of facial recognition technology.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,769member
    It may be true for iphone 8/X with 64/256GB but iphone 7S might come in 32/128/256GB sizes. iPhone SE at 16GB should be gone and offer as 32/64/128GB with few upgrades in next updates. In my humble opinion, since 32GB is new 16GB base, so 64GB is ideal for most. My last family upgrade was all 64GB iphones 6S(4), SE(1). Good thing about IOS vs Android; IOS and it's Apps take lot less space than android.
    edited February 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 47
    So is 64GB going to be at the 32GB price point? Doubtful. And I won't be surprised if they don't offer 128GB. They won't offer that until they got enough people to cough up for 256GB and are confident enough they won't downgrade. It will be just like 16 > 64 all over again.
    avon b7
  • Reply 3 of 47
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,489member
    As the largest NAND consumer this is heavily dependent on their ability to source the necessary components.

    If they do move to 64GB I think we'll likely see less concern for IOS 11's size, which could impact those with older devices.
  • Reply 4 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,213member
    Soli said:
    As the largest NAND consumer this is heavily dependent on their ability to source the necessary components.

    If they do move to 64GB I think we'll likely see less concern for IOS 11's size, which could impact those with older devices.
    It's not about components. It's about marketing and greed. iPods were so successful in part because Apple invested in assuring capacity. That was then a problem for competitors as they couldn't get their hands on enough components, much less at the prices Apple was getting. 
    mr squid
  • Reply 5 of 47
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,489member
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    As the largest NAND consumer this is heavily dependent on their ability to source the necessary components.

    If they do move to 64GB I think we'll likely see less concern for IOS 11's size, which could impact those with older devices.
    It's not about components. It's about marketing and greed. iPods were so successful in part because Apple invested in assuring capacity. That was then a problem for competitors as they couldn't get their hands on enough components, much less at the prices Apple was getting. 
    As usual you don't know what you're talking about and have thought through your irrational Apple hate. Are you really going to say "Apple is simpler being less greedy" when they finally bump their capacity again? Of course not, you'll just find some other reeks to claim they are greedy.
    jbdragonStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 47
    Yes, I'd say this is likely. The iPhone 7 Plus was a litmus test for this product.

    The iPhone x will have 2 high capacity storage options (64 GB and 256 GB are perfect), and neither will be cheap

    .rogifan_new said:
    So is 64GB going to be at the 32GB price point? Doubtful.
    No. It is simply going to cost more. With the primary method of purchase these days being installment plans, Apple can charge more per device and it is less of barrier to entry. Not to mention, the iPhone 7s and iPhone 7s Plus will also be modestly new models for the more budget conscious.


  • Reply 7 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    And all for the low-low price of $1,000. Or 7.35 shares in Sog-metric.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 8 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    sog35 said:
    I think this makes PERFECT sense as far as price:

    iPhone 7s - 32GB $650
    iPhone 7s - 64GB $750
    iPhone 7s - 128GB $850

    iPhone X - 64GB $949
    iPhone X - 128GB $1049

    So basically you pay $199 more to jump from 7s to X. 
    So Apple don't have a 64 GB 7 and you expect them to have a 64 GB 7s? Sog-logic.
  • Reply 9 of 47
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,489member
    sog35 said:
    I think this makes PERFECT sense as far as price:

    iPhone 7s - 32GB $650
    iPhone 7s - 64GB $750
    iPhone 7s - 128GB $850

    iPhone X - 64GB $949
    iPhone X - 128GB $1049

    So basically you pay $199 more to jump from 7s to X. 
    Where are you getting this info? What technologies and innovation are responsible for the $250 bump in cost?
    ireland
  • Reply 10 of 47
    Makes sense...

    Having in your pocket the best supercomputer in the history of man with the best iOS ever produced and a great video/still camera seems like the future.

    As Verizon, ATT, Sprint, etc., are finding out, it's almost like "not a phone" anymore.

    Best.

    P.S. Coupled w/ the Apple Watch I'm picking up my iPhone a lot less to answer calls, texts. :)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 47
    sog35 said:
    I think this makes PERFECT sense as far as price:

    iPhone 7s - 32GB $650
    iPhone 7s - 64GB $750
    iPhone 7s - 128GB $850

    iPhone X - 64GB $949
    iPhone X - 128GB $1049

    So basically you pay $199 more to jump from 7s to X. 
    Those price rises will put an awful lot of people off of buying/renting one. Me included.
    Apple should have the 'courage' to sell the iPhone 8 at the same price point at the iPhone 7.
    They'll sell an awful lot more devices.

  • Reply 12 of 47
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 1,966member
    I take all these rumors with a grain of salt. That's all they're worth. As we get closer to launch the truth will start to come out, but at this point, much of it is laughable. Same old rumors every year that never pan out. Who know's for sure what phones Apple plans to release, and at what price point until Apple says something or there is a real leak a week or 2 before hand. 6 months out, most of this is just garbage as far as I'm concerned.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 47
    sog35 said:
    I think this makes PERFECT sense as far as price:

    iPhone 7s - 32GB $650
    iPhone 7s - 64GB $750
    iPhone 7s - 128GB $850

    iPhone X - 64GB $949
    iPhone X - 128GB $1049

    So basically you pay $199 more to jump from 7s to X. 
    Why are you so obsessed with Apple charging more and more for products? It must be because deep down you don't think Apple has any other cards to play to increase revenues and profits other than making the iPhone more expensive. But do you really think people will keep paying more and more for their phone? I already have friends and family not upgrading because they think the prices are ridiculous.
    ireland
  • Reply 14 of 47
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,349member
    jbdragon said:
    I take all these rumors with a grain of salt. That's all they're worth. As we get closer to launch the truth will start to come out, but at this point, much of it is laughable. Same old rumors every year that never pan out. Who know's for sure what phones Apple plans to release, and at what price point until Apple says something or there is a real leak a week or 2 before hand. 6 months out, most of this is just garbage as far as I'm concerned.
    Wise man.

    Indeed, I'd say that 98% of these rumors don't come true or what actually happens is materially different from the original rumor. If one could actually bet on Apple rumors, you'd bet against all of them and walk away with a pile of money.

     I know a lot of people enjoy discussing this sort of stuff, however many of the forum contributed theories are like Rube Goldberg machines.

    Best not to lend much credence to these prognostications in any case.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,213member
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    As the largest NAND consumer this is heavily dependent on their ability to source the necessary components.

    If they do move to 64GB I think we'll likely see less concern for IOS 11's size, which could impact those with older devices.
    It's not about components. It's about marketing and greed. iPods were so successful in part because Apple invested in assuring capacity. That was then a problem for competitors as they couldn't get their hands on enough components, much less at the prices Apple was getting. 
    As usual you don't know what you're talking about and have thought through your irrational Apple hate. Are you really going to say "Apple is simpler being less greedy" when they finally bump their capacity again? Of course not, you'll just find some other reeks to claim they are greedy.
    Hmmm. I give you the reasoning based on historical fact and you still don't get it. Let me present this another way. The components exist. They are not bleeding edge. No one else in the industry will see a shortfall in the missing components. It must be pure coincidence that the second tier option on second tier models (the sweet spot, most demanded capacity) mysteriously vanishes as an option. This has been a constant in Apple's marketing strategy for a long time.

    I even gave you the information to debunk your component availability theory. When Apple has needed capacity in the past, it has invested to get it and at industry best prices.

    Shortages have been due to lack of higher capacity modules or external factors such as earthquakes etc.

    I call it greed because there is no other reason to deny users the ideal capacity at any point in time. The reason is that you are effectively holding users over a barrel.

    Or they go to the latest line with premium pricing or to last year's line but without the most demanded capacity and have to choose between not enough or more than they want.

    Next you will be telling me Apple doesn't include micro SD cards because there isn't enough production capacity to satisfy demand!

    Have you ever met an owner (present or past) that enjoyed their time with a 16GB iPhone/iPad? Just one.

    I have seen nothing but pure vitriol on those devices. Made worse when Apple decided to take up what little space was available to download iOS upgrades! Automatically, and in the background and without asking. Yeah, they changed that in the end and things are better now but it happened.

    And when Gruber questioned Schiller on the subject of woefully low capacities of those 16GB devices, Schiller claimed that it wasn't a problem because users had their stuff in the cloud. That's when Gruber bottled it. He should have followed up with 'what percentage of iPads had cellular capability? But he let Schiller off the hook.

    My guess is that the vast majority of those iPads were wi-fi only and cloud use would be severely hampered for regular cloud use.

    rogifan_new
  • Reply 16 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,213member
    ireland said:
    sog35 said:
    I think this makes PERFECT sense as far as price:

    iPhone 7s - 32GB $650
    iPhone 7s - 64GB $750
    iPhone 7s - 128GB $850

    iPhone X - 64GB $949
    iPhone X - 128GB $1049

    So basically you pay $199 more to jump from 7s to X. 
    So Apple don't have a 64 GB 7 and you expect them to have a 64 GB 7s? Sog-logic.
    And where is the iPhone 7 in there? Not even present as a second tier option? And If it were still available, would it slip into that guesstimate range of prices at sub $600?
    ireland
  • Reply 17 of 47
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,005member
    Honestly, at the rate devices use memory (especially with 'photos' that are actually short movie clips) the 32GB models were becoming less and less useful anyway. If Apple holds with it's past history, they'll also stop selling a 128GB iPhone 7, forcing you to ether a 32 GB or a 256 GB model. 

    But yeah, I'm with a lot of other people. My 6s is still working just fine; no way I can justify dropping a grand to replace it.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Makes sense...

    Having in your pocket the best supercomputer in the history of man with the best iOS ever produced and a great video/still camera seems like the future.

    As Verizon, ATT, Sprint, etc., are finding out, it's almost like "not a phone" anymore.

    Best.

    P.S. Coupled w/ the Apple Watch I'm picking up my iPhone a lot less to answer calls, texts. :)
    Is that a comment or an Apple ad transcript.
  • Reply 19 of 47
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    As the largest NAND consumer this is heavily dependent on their ability to source the necessary components.

    If they do move to 64GB I think we'll likely see less concern for IOS 11's size, which could impact those with older devices.
    It's not about components. It's about marketing and greed. iPods were so successful in part because Apple invested in assuring capacity. That was then a problem for competitors as they couldn't get their hands on enough components, much less at the prices Apple was getting. 
    As usual you don't know what you're talking about and have thought through your irrational Apple hate. Are you really going to say "Apple is simpler being less greedy" when they finally bump their capacity again? Of course not, you'll just find some other reeks to claim they are greedy.

    Next you will be telling me Apple doesn't include micro SD cards because there isn't enough production capacity to satisfy demand!

    Have you ever met an owner (present or past) that enjoyed their time with a 16GB iPhone/iPad? Just one.

    I have seen nothing but pure vitriol on those devices. Made worse when Apple decided to take up what little space was available to download iOS upgrades! Automatically, and in the background and without asking. Yeah, they changed that in the end and things are better now but it happened. [...]

    My guess is that the vast majority of those iPads were wi-fi only and cloud use would be severely hampered for regular cloud use.

    1) Apple is not withholding removable media from you because they're twirling their mustaches at ways to make you pay more. They don't have SD slots because they think it's a better product because of it. I'm inclined to agree -- faster, more reliable, more energy efficient, smaller.

    2) Of course. Most of my family members are "normals" not techies, and always use the entry-level models. My parents don't download many apps or games and just want a stupid-simple machine for the web, email, Facebook, and messaging. And some family pictures. Guess what's perfect for that? Yeah, an entry-level iPad. 

    3) Not following your logic on wifi-only iPad being hampered. All of my iPads are wifi-only, and I always have wifi. Especially when updating apps or OS.
    edited February 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 47
    ireland said:
    Makes sense...

    Having in your pocket the best supercomputer in the history of man with the best iOS ever produced and a great video/still camera seems like the future.

    As Verizon, ATT, Sprint, etc., are finding out, it's almost like "not a phone" anymore.

    Best.

    P.S. Coupled w/ the Apple Watch I'm picking up my iPhone a lot less to answer calls, texts. :)
    Is that a comment or an Apple ad transcript.
    It's simply truth. Techies are quick to whine about this product or that not matching the fantasy product in their heads, but the reality is our iPhones are amazing devices. They are so much faster and more capable than much larger computers of decades past it's not even funny. Yet -- not good enough for the haters.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.