Apple's 'iPhone 8' to come with 64, 256 or 512GB of storage, 3GB of RAM - report

AppleInsider

Apple is planning to ramp up storage options across the board with this fall's "iPhone 8," selling 64-, 256-, and 512-gigabyte models, according to a Chinese report.

The device will also have 3 gigabytes of RAM, GeekBar claimed on Wednesday. That's at least a gigabyte less than some competing Android phones, like the Samsung Galaxy S8, but Apple has often used less RAM and worked to compensate through optimization.

The 64- and 256-gigabyte storage modules will be supplied by Toshiba and Western Digital's SanDisk, but 512-gigabyte modules will come from Samsung and SK Hynix, GeekBar said.

The latest rumor conflicts with recent claims that the iPhone 8 will ship in 64- and 128-gigabyte variants. The GeekBar scenario may be more likely, in part because of multiple reports suggesting Apple will sell configurations costing over $1,000.

The iPhone 7 and 7 Plus are available in 32-, 128-, and 256-gigabyte versions, the most expensive model hitting $969. Those devices were also Apple's first iPhones to ship with a default capacity higher than 16 gigabytes, reflecting the growing size of apps, media, and iOS.

The "iPhone 8" will likely be announced at a September press event. Its signature features are expected to be an edge-to-edge, 5.8-inch OLED display and 3D facial recognition, the latter replacing Touch ID.

suddenly newton

I am not sure why all this attention keeps getting heaped on the price of the most expensive configuration of the iPhone. Do most people choose 256GB of storage for their phone? Do most people buy the most expensive configuration of the MacBook Pro?

roger_fingas

suddenly newton said:

I am not sure why all this attention keeps getting heaped on the price of the most expensive configuration of the iPhone. Do most people choose 256GB of storage for their phone? Do most people buy the most expensive configuration of the MacBook Pro?

It's an important psychological barrier in the case of smartphones. People are used to paying over $1,000 for a laptop or desktop, not the thing in their pocket.

suddenly newton

BTW, the most expensive factory configuration of MacBook Pro costs $4200, BTW.

Seriously, a $969 iPhone 7 Plus is already plenty expensive. What happens when you cross the imaginary line between $969 and $1000? That's just $31, isn't it?

peteo

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

georgebmac

Very interesting...   For myself, I am frankly a bit confused about the need for "large" storage:

Not long ago the need was clear:   If you used your phone for music you stored entire libraries on it.  And, it you took pictures, you either stored them on your phone or made an effort to archive them onto a PC or other storage (or both).

But, Apple Music and iCloud have changed that equation:   You can get all the music you want and more from Apple Music with storing even a single song on your device and store all of your picture on iCloud instead of the phone.

While the article is correct that the OS & apps are taking more storage making 16Gb simply too small to be viable, there remains a question over the need for storage greater than 32Gb or 64Gb:   Is it a trade-off of initial purchase cost vs ongoing costs to maintain subscriptions to Apple Music and (large) iCloud storage?

But, all that aside, just a comment from an old-fart:  for years now 512Gb was and still is the standard size for harddrives in my home computers -- and I have never filled one up.   Now that size is becoming available in an iPhone?  Wow!   Or, another analogy:  when I entered IT in 1983 we were using IBM 3350 disks that were later upgraded to double density 3380's that could hold a wopping 5 whole Gb's!   (and we ran entire Fortune 100 corporations on those drives!)  Some will remember the year 2000 crunch where most computer enterprise level software could not handle the year '00' and that was the reason:   storing a 4 digit year was simply not feasible on disk drives that could only hold (the case or early 3350's one-third of a gigabyte.   We scrutinized every single bit and byte of data that we stored.

rogifan_new

peteo said:

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

Yep I can already hear Schiller now: for only $100 more you get 4x the storage!

mattrogers_2

GeorgeBMac said:

Very interesting...   For myself, I am frankly a bit confused about the need for "large" storage:

Not long ago the need was clear:   If you used your phone for music you stored entire libraries on it.  And, it you took pictures, you either stored them on your phone or made an effort to archive them onto a PC or other storage (or both).

But, Apple Music and iCloud have changed that equation:   You can get all the music you want and more from Apple Music with storing even a single song on your device and store all of your picture on iCloud instead of the phone.

While the article is correct that the OS & apps are taking more storage making 16Gb simply too small to be viable, there remains a question over the need for storage greater than 32Gb or 64Gb:   Is it a trade-off of initial purchase cost vs ongoing costs to maintain subscriptions to Apple Music and (large) iCloud storage?

But, all that aside, just a comment from an old-fart:  for years now 512Gb was and still is the standard size for harddrives in my home computers -- and I have never filled one up.   Now that size is becoming available in an iPhone?  Wow!   Or, another analogy:  when I entered IT in 1983 we were using IBM 3350 disks that were later upgraded to double density 3380's that could hold a wopping 5 whole Gb's!   (and we ran entire Fortune 100 corporations on those drives!)  Some will remember the year 2000 crunch where most computer enterprise level software could not handle the year '00' and that was the reason:   storing a 4 digit year was simply not feasible on disk drives that could only hold (the case or early 3350's one-third of a gigabyte.   We scrutinized every single bit and byte of data that we stored.

Yes...but that was before 12 MP cameras and 4k video. I shoot a lot of video on my iPhone and I use Cloud library. My photo library is 300GB+. The cloud really takes care of most of it...and iOS11 offloads apps automatically (AND KEEPS YOUR APP DATA). That is a big deal as well. I have a 16 GB iPad and I'm always fighting lack of storage on it. I have a 128 GB iPhone and NEVER run out of space. I honestly thing 64GB would be plenty and 256GB would be a complete overkill. The average person will do perfectly fine with 32GB....I am not average.

leavingthebigg

The $1,000+ iPhone has been rumored for most of 2017. If Samsung announces a $1,000+ Note 8 today, will Apple be considered a follower, a copy cat, a non-innovative company, etc? And, will Samsung be considered a leader, a trendsetter, an innovative company, etc?

muthuk_vanalingam

peteo said:

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

rogifan_new said:

peteo said:

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

Yep I can already hear Schiller now: for only $100 more you get 4x the storage!

I don't think so... Of course, it is my personal opinion and you can disagree with me. Upselling requires Apple to remove the configuration which would be useful to "most" of the users (what is called as "sweet spot") at the time of launch year. In this year 2017, it is 64GB option which would suit needs of "most" users. The fact that Apple has retained it (instead of launching a 32GB model) as "base" model clearly indicates upsell is not the main criteria for iPhone Pro. There is a good possibility that 64GB to 256GB would cost more than $100 (more like $150) and going to 512GB would cost another $200.

strangedays

rogifan_new said:

peteo said:

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

Yep I can already hear Schiller now: for only $100 more you get 4x the storage!

How is this wrong? Why do you feel you’re entitled to more value without paying for it? If paying more for more value is offensive to you, surely there is a competitor product that gives value away for free that is more compelling? If not surely you could found your own company that gives away value for free if it makes so much sense?

leavingthebigg

On the 512GB front, wow! I purchased an 256GB iPhone 7 Plus because I repeatedly hit the 128GB limit of my iPad Pro. I currently have 130.97GB of space available on the iPhone. I look forward to seeing how a 512GB iPhone gets used by customers!!

peteo

muthuk_vanalingam said:

I don't think so... Of course, it is my personal opinion and you can disagree with me. Upselling requires Apple to remove the configuration which would be useful to "most" of the users (what is called as "sweet spot") at the time of launch year. In this year 2017, it is 64GB option which would suit needs of "most" users. The fact that Apple has retained it (instead of launching a 32GB model) as "base" model clearly indicates upsell is not the main criteria for iPhone Pro. There is a good possibility that 64GB to 256GB would cost more than $100 (more like $150) and going to 512GB would cost another $200.

Your forgetting there was no iPhone 7 64GB option, so people going from the iPhone 6S 64GB went the iPhone 7 128GB option (not the 32gb). Now there is no 128GB option, so they will need to go to the 256GB option because they use more than 64gb now.

greenmeenie

leavingthebigg said:

On the 512GB front, wow! I purchased an 256GB iPhone 7 Plus because I repeatedly hit the 128GB limit of my iPad Pro. I currently have 130.97GB of space available on the iPhone. I look forward to seeing how a 512GB iPhone gets used by customers!!

I think it would be overkill for most. But I'm one of those people for whom it wouldn't be. Let me explain. I am a travel blogger/photographer. I recently traded my bulky dslr & lenses for an iphone as my main camera. I take hundreds and hundreds of pics while traveling. Yes, there is the cloud, but I am not always in range of wifi or cellular where i go. So for me, 512GBs isn't overkill. :-)

thompr

leavingthebigg said:

The $1,000+ iPhone has been rumored for most of 2017. If Samsung announces a $1,000+ Note 8 today, will Apple be considered a follower, a copy cat, a non-innovative company, etc? And, will Samsung be considered a leader, a trendsetter, an innovative company, etc?

Once Apple has its launch event, the lion's share of the attention will be squarely on the new iPhone(s), as if Samsung Note didn't even exist.  Sure, there will be comparisons made in the media (as there should be) and we may see some instances of the "Samsung as leader" narrative that you suggested.  But that will be just noise which gets washed away in the "iPhone as Jesus Phone" narrative.  The 3-D facial recognition will get a huge amount of air play, as will the 3-D supported AR/VR that work with the backside sensors, and so let's hope it all works as well as rumors suggest.

mike1

GeorgeBMac said:

Very interesting...   For myself, I am frankly a bit confused about the need for "large" storage:

Not long ago the need was clear:   If you used your phone for music you stored entire libraries on it.  And, it you took pictures, you either stored them on your phone or made an effort to archive them onto a PC or other storage (or both).

But, Apple Music and iCloud have changed that equation:   You can get all the music you want and more from Apple Music with storing even a single song on your device and store all of your picture on iCloud instead of the phone.

While the article is correct that the OS & apps are taking more storage making 16Gb simply too small to be viable, there remains a question over the need for storage greater than 32Gb or 64Gb:   Is it a trade-off of initial purchase cost vs ongoing costs to maintain subscriptions to Apple Music and (large) iCloud storage?

But, all that aside, just a comment from an old-fart:  for years now 512Gb was and still is the standard size for harddrives in my home computers -- and I have never filled one up.   Now that size is becoming available in an iPhone?  Wow!   Or, another analogy:  when I entered IT in 1983 we were using IBM 3350 disks that were later upgraded to double density 3380's that could hold a wopping 5 whole Gb's!   (and we ran entire Fortune 100 corporations on those drives!)  Some will remember the year 2000 crunch where most computer enterprise level software could not handle the year '00' and that was the reason:   storing a 4 digit year was simply not feasible on disk drives that could only hold (the case or early 3350's one-third of a gigabyte.   We scrutinized every single bit and byte of data that we stored.

I am sure Apple considers their customer's use cases pretty thoroughly. First, I, for one do not pay monthly to rent music and prefer to keep my photos local until I offload them to my computer and then its back up hard drive. Second, I do not want to be at the mercy of a public WiFi or cell network that determines how quickly (if at all) I can access my current files. I will probably opt for the 256GB version of whichever phone I decide to get.

rogifan_new

StrangeDays said:

rogifan_new said:

peteo said:

No 128gb, Apple knows how to up sell!

Yep I can already hear Schiller now: for only $100 more you get 4x the storage!

How is this wrong? Why do you feel you’re entitled to more value without paying for it? If paying more for more value is offensive to you, surely there is a competitor product that gives value away for free that is more compelling? If not surely you could found your own company that gives away value for free if it makes so much sense?

But some are getting more value without paying more. It’s just the people at the low end because Apple wants to get as many into the mid to high end knowing most will never downgrade. The only reason Apple’s storage goes from 32 > 128 instead of 64 > 128 is because if they offered the latter that’s what most people would choose. Not offering it is a way to upsell people and raise ASPs. Hence the 4x more storage for only $100 more.

tzeshan

suddenly newton said:

I am not sure why all this attention keeps getting heaped on the price of the most expensive configuration of the iPhone. Do most people choose 256GB of storage for their phone? Do most people buy the most expensive configuration of the MacBook Pro?

Because they want to convince people iPhone is very expensive. Despite the fact that iPhone SE is much better than the cheapest smartphones sold by Samsung and Huawei. 

tzeshan

mike1 said:

GeorgeBMac said:

Very interesting...   For myself, I am frankly a bit confused about the need for "large" storage:

Not long ago the need was clear:   If you used your phone for music you stored entire libraries on it.  And, it you took pictures, you either stored them on your phone or made an effort to archive them onto a PC or other storage (or both).

But, Apple Music and iCloud have changed that equation:   You can get all the music you want and more from Apple Music with storing even a single song on your device and store all of your picture on iCloud instead of the phone.

While the article is correct that the OS & apps are taking more storage making 16Gb simply too small to be viable, there remains a question over the need for storage greater than 32Gb or 64Gb:   Is it a trade-off of initial purchase cost vs ongoing costs to maintain subscriptions to Apple Music and (large) iCloud storage?

But, all that aside, just a comment from an old-fart:  for years now 512Gb was and still is the standard size for harddrives in my home computers -- and I have never filled one up.   Now that size is becoming available in an iPhone?  Wow!   Or, another analogy:  when I entered IT in 1983 we were using IBM 3350 disks that were later upgraded to double density 3380's that could hold a wopping 5 whole Gb's!   (and we ran entire Fortune 100 corporations on those drives!)  Some will remember the year 2000 crunch where most computer enterprise level software could not handle the year '00' and that was the reason:   storing a 4 digit year was simply not feasible on disk drives that could only hold (the case or early 3350's one-third of a gigabyte.   We scrutinized every single bit and byte of data that we stored.

I am sure Apple considers their customer's use cases pretty thoroughly. First, I, for one do not pay monthly to rent music and prefer to keep my photos local until I offload them to my computer and then its back up hard drive. Second, I do not want to be at the mercy of a public WiFi or cell network that determines how quickly (if at all) I can access my current files. I will probably opt for the 256GB version of whichever phone I decide to get.

Could a 32 GB handle if you have 256 GB data in the iCloud?

fallenjt

There I predicted it. Apple tries to differentiate the 8 from 7s refresh. 

muthuk_vanalingam

leavingthebigg said:

The $1,000+ iPhone has been rumored for most of 2017. If Samsung announces a $1,000+ Note 8 today, will Apple be considered a follower, a copy cat, a non-innovative company, etc? And, will Samsung be considered a leader, a trendsetter, an innovative company, etc?

Apple will be considered a follower/copycat with iPhone Pro launch for "other" reasons, not for pricetag!!! OLED display AND less bezel design are the aspects of iPhone Pro that would give the follower/copycat criticisms. Sharp (the original company which launched less bezel screen 3 years back) would be considered as the "trend setter"/"Leader" in this case, not the copycats Xiaomi/LG/Samsung who already copied Sharp. And by that same definition, Apple should NOT be considered as "leader"/"trendsetter" for less bezel design in future, even if 100 new Chinese phones pop-up with less bezel design right after iPhone Pro.

Having said all of that, I have a feeling Apple would incorporate TouchID successfully under the screen for iPhone Pro and would be the innovator in this aspect. In the display department, 120Hz refresh rate would be another aspect of innovation (implemented already in iPad Pros, carry over to iPhones as next logical step). Another less talked about topic - Battery life. I have a feeling iPhone Pro/7s plus with A11 would become battery endurance champions (due to optimizations both in SoC and iOS) even with smaller battery while being more powerful than ANY competing phone in the planet. That would be an innovation on its own.