I am so humbly sorry. I realized this before and tried to edit but the site won't let me I've email the administrator- waiting edit to work again.. Thanks.
when people are paying more than a $1000 for the iphone why lower the price, they don't think the 399 price point makes sense....????? maybe this is for corp buyers why lower the price on a high demand unit??? cheapening the brand??
The market is already saturated with mp3 player phones without good internet experience that cost nothing. The selling point of the iPhone is full internet experience in your pocket, an iPhone without a large touch screen and internet is just another average phone.
Not really- you can't play iTunes purchase on other phone.
Many people myself included don't want or have any need for a data plan and would buy an iPhone without one if offered.
I am not saying that Apple will not sell another iPhone, I am saying Apple will not sell another iPhone with lower specs (being smaller screen or else). In my opinion,the more logical move is to lower the price of the current iPhone (2.5G) and present new redesigned superior 3G iPhone for $499.
Quite possible. It makes sense.
Apple would, however, not just sell the same iPhone at a cheaper price. If it ROUGHLY wants to keep the current iPhone as you describe, it would look at all the technology improvements in the last year (smaller components, lower power, cheaper) and repackage the iPhone. Perhaps it would look identical, but it might also be made 30% thinner with little effort. Remember also that the 3G iphone is rumoured to be slightly thicker.
This would be an interesting cannibalisation - a 2G iPhone vs 3G iPhone, where the face looks almost identical on both, but where the 3G is double the thickness and costs more (but offers great features like GPS, video calling, and 3G).
That thinness and cheap price would be appealing... I might not go for the 3G!
On the other hand - I wouldn't want to have a smaller screen - but Apple may have had to decide whether a cheaper (smaller) screen with the smaller parts now available made sense. A smaller screen would be less attractive and would also mean that the phone couldn't be made thinner. They might decide that a cheaper, smaller, coloured iPhone wouldnt cannibalise 3G sales, but would be perfect for school kids who will upgrade to the REAL thing in a couple of years. And the people who'd like cheaper coloured iPhone Nanos probably have smaller fingers for typing anyway :-)
And here I am saying "abandon B, do C instead, because B is just too GOOD (it'd kill the 3G iPhone!). And yet it makes sense... Apple is criticised so much for not having 3G!
Perhaps the next iPod Touch will look more like B?
It is just really strange that we have not seen any photos of the upgrade yet. I know apple holds these things close to there vest, but we saw photos of the iPhone in January of 2007 before it was released in June of 2007. I am thinking that it will be announced, but be out by the end of 2008 or the beginning of 2009.
As is the case with iPod Nano and MacBook Air, for example, smaller doesn't necessarily equal LOW END. It equals smaller. Sometimes such devices are lower priced, sometimes higher.
Someone buying a nano may not be looking for a low end lower priced device than an iPod Touch, they may just be looking for smaller and perhaps need fewer features.
Personally I want same screen size as iPhone, though lighter and thinner would be very good as long as the iPhone does not have Blackjack-style battery life.
There is no chance that any iPhone device will lack the ability to connect to the internet. Perhaps not full on Safari browsing, but limted to internet applications. But, there simply cannot be a phone device without access to data networks. Can you imagine?
Not really- you can't play iTunes purchase on other phone.
Many people myself included don't want or have any need for a data plan and would buy an iPhone without one if offered.
If Apple sells the iPhone unlocked, which they will soon, then you don't have to buy the data plan. Furthermore, parental controls have the ability to disable the internet. Most people I know don't care about iTunes, they just want their songs on their cheap phone.
firstly, I a jazz musician that loves gadgets , my first computer was a powerbook, I travel quite a bit and since I always have a big ass tenor sax on my back anything I bigger than I can stuff in a shoulder bag in a no no I owned a newton, and I presently own a macbook and iphone . I really think if apple goes smaller screen with plastic body it would totally ruin exactly what made me buy a dam iphone in the first place! it would be flat out stupid. I was actually hoping that they would keep the sleek look of the iphone in metal!!! and go toward a bigger screen something like 4 or 5 inches, faster processor,built in sd card, flash support, and a real camera with video recording. something more like a "iphone newton". going the other direction would mean "GAME OVER" , it would render it totally usless! shit, I would pay almost anything to get a touch screen 7" tablet running real Mac os x
Comments
I agree that this doesn't sound right. But neither does a thicker iPhone.
K
Make sense to a lot of man who don't want the brick footprint in their pants.
Smaller is better. Just as many of us don't want to carry wallets in own pants, we want a smaller phone than what is currently offered.
Of the two, I suspect the low-end model would outsell the high-end by 3 to 1.
C.
And hence fulfill Steve's sale 10MILLION prediction.
Hey- I wonder if he's Hillary Clinton advisor on how to count votes showing that she's ahead?
Think 2 golden gate bridges...
Think 2 iPhone models...
Think how do I reach that $10 Million sales goal without losing face!
iPhone 2.5 same as now 8 gb
iphone nano 2.5g with internet plastic case (same as iphone) 8gb
i'm considering price points, and how the ipod line was expanded
if not june then fall for Christmas, maybe the rumors are more reflective of the iPhone path than june intro (nano)
Think how do I reach that $10 Million sales goal without losing face!
not dollars UNITS 10 million units sold
not dollars UNITS 10 million units sold
I am so humbly sorry. I realized this before and tried to edit but the site won't let me I've email the administrator- waiting edit to work again.. Thanks.
when people are paying more than a $1000 for the iphone why lower the price, they don't think the 399 price point makes sense....????? maybe this is for corp buyers why lower the price on a high demand unit??? cheapening the brand??
The market is already saturated with mp3 player phones without good internet experience that cost nothing. The selling point of the iPhone is full internet experience in your pocket, an iPhone without a large touch screen and internet is just another average phone.
Not really- you can't play iTunes purchase on other phone.
Many people myself included don't want or have any need for a data plan and would buy an iPhone without one if offered.
I am not saying that Apple will not sell another iPhone, I am saying Apple will not sell another iPhone with lower specs (being smaller screen or else). In my opinion,the more logical move is to lower the price of the current iPhone (2.5G) and present new redesigned superior 3G iPhone for $499.
Quite possible. It makes sense.
Apple would, however, not just sell the same iPhone at a cheaper price. If it ROUGHLY wants to keep the current iPhone as you describe, it would look at all the technology improvements in the last year (smaller components, lower power, cheaper) and repackage the iPhone. Perhaps it would look identical, but it might also be made 30% thinner with little effort. Remember also that the 3G iphone is rumoured to be slightly thicker.
This would be an interesting cannibalisation - a 2G iPhone vs 3G iPhone, where the face looks almost identical on both, but where the 3G is double the thickness and costs more (but offers great features like GPS, video calling, and 3G).
That thinness and cheap price would be appealing... I might not go for the 3G!
On the other hand - I wouldn't want to have a smaller screen - but Apple may have had to decide whether a cheaper (smaller) screen with the smaller parts now available made sense. A smaller screen would be less attractive and would also mean that the phone couldn't be made thinner. They might decide that a cheaper, smaller, coloured iPhone wouldnt cannibalise 3G sales, but would be perfect for school kids who will upgrade to the REAL thing in a couple of years. And the people who'd like cheaper coloured iPhone Nanos probably have smaller fingers for typing anyway :-)
I can't believe I'm arguing what I'm arguing
ie:
Today
- iPhone, $400, 2.5G, black, 3.5inch screen, 11.6mm thick
and
Tomorrow's hypothetical choices for Apple...
a- iPhone, $400, 3G, black, 3.5inch screen, 12.5mm thick, GPS, video calls.
b- iPhone, $200, 2.5G, black, 3.5inch screen, 8mm thick
c- iPhone, $200, 2.5G, rainbow, 2.8inch screen, 11mm thick.
And here I am saying "abandon B, do C instead, because B is just too GOOD (it'd kill the 3G iPhone!). And yet it makes sense... Apple is criticised so much for not having 3G!
Perhaps the next iPod Touch will look more like B?
Further to the above (not sure why "edit" doesn't work)...
"edit" barfed for me too today, I just get "invalid post specified".
Someone buying a nano may not be looking for a low end lower priced device than an iPod Touch, they may just be looking for smaller and perhaps need fewer features.
Personally I want same screen size as iPhone, though lighter and thinner would be very good as long as the iPhone does not have Blackjack-style battery life.
There is no chance that any iPhone device will lack the ability to connect to the internet. Perhaps not full on Safari browsing, but limted to internet applications. But, there simply cannot be a phone device without access to data networks. Can you imagine?
Apple's plastic computer cases are plastic polycarbonate.
That "are" is just about to become a "were".
That "are" is just about to become a "were".
I think it's likely, but it's still a rumor, and certainly hasn't been substantiated by Apple.
I think it's likely, but it's still a rumor, and certainly hasn't been substantiated by Apple.
We never needed a rumor to be aware of that. They are over their white plastic stage.
Not really- you can't play iTunes purchase on other phone.
Many people myself included don't want or have any need for a data plan and would buy an iPhone without one if offered.
If Apple sells the iPhone unlocked, which they will soon, then you don't have to buy the data plan. Furthermore, parental controls have the ability to disable the internet. Most people I know don't care about iTunes, they just want their songs on their cheap phone.
Unless Apple is planning to introduce a smaller and cheaper brother for the iPhone.
iPhone mini?
I would pay almost anything to get a touch screen 7" tablet running real Mac os x
I just know you meant to say 10", I'll excuse that typo