regarding the design... i would expected one more closely related with iPad. That is, the back of the device could be just like the aluminum back of the iPad, in the same way the radii of the rounded corners is already the same, the home button is identical, etc. The slim profile would be very attractive, and the unified line of products would made harder to Samsung to copy that one also.
Somehow, you're not very believable, considering that even if you narrow it down to the SIII phone, there are multiple different varieties. Different CPUs, different amounts of RAM.
I think it's unlikely that everyone who buys a Samsung phone knows exactly what they bought.
I did not say a Samsung phone, I said a Galaxy. My parents have a samsung phone, but it is a cheap phone that runs what Samsung used to use as the OS. I doubt they know the model.
If somebody buys a Samsung Galaxy, they know they are buying a Galaxy. Varieties do not matter, the phone is still a Galaxy.
For some reason, you seem to be blatantly discrediting some valid points. Seems like you're bent on refuting whatever this guy has said, because instead of coming up with logical answers you criticize his questions, asking where they even come from.
Many of the poster's points are valid: if this is the next iPhone model, it would in fact possibly be disappointing to some to see essentially the same design that has been used in every iPhone. Apple may feel they have the perfect phone design and therefore do not need to make any changes, but a completely refreshed, new design accompanying logical changes (bigger screen, etc.) would be and nice and would surely entice many to buy it. Apple has released a phone with the same design for two years now - a phone which looks almost exactly the same with only minor dimensional changes seems to say that Apple is comfortable extending this for a third year.
Even by looking at mock ups, for example from last years supposed iPhone 5 with the slightly curved design, or even those stored in google image results, I can see some design, or elements of designs, which would not only make perfect sense in the next iPhone but would make it a far better product.
Anyway, I don't mean to criticize or be offensive, it's just my opinion after all.
I think your argument falls down at the point where you try to argue that this purported new iPhone is essentially only slightly different from the 4's and the 4s'.
In fact, it's constructed differently, out of different materials, it's a different size (both taller and thinner), the two main ports are different and/or differently located, and the screen is not only a different size but a different aspect ratio as well. These are also just the "macro" cosmetic changes. There are many more differences in the software and OS.
If it arrives as expected and is similar to the rumours, this year's iPhone will definitely be a "tick" instead of a "tock."
Ok, I want to understand how you jailbreak a phone on your parents plan to stop paying for a data service? Huh? You signed up for a two-year committment when your parents bought the phone. I don't get it.
What a lot of rot. You are basically arguing that if stupid people think the sky is green instead of blue that therefore the sky is green.
There isn't really a logical pattern to iPhone naming so far, but of the most popular possibilities floated from time to time the "most wrong" is indeed "iPhone 5." The pattern behind the reasoning is:
3 > 3something > 4 > 4something > 5 > 5something
But the "3" phone was actually the "2," the "4something" was actually the "5," the "5" would be the "6," the "5something" will be the "7."
No one knows what the next phone will be called, but it's inarguable that calling it the iPhone 5 would be highly inaccurate in almost every way and "more wrong" than calling it "iPhone 6" since it will be the sixth phone and will have iOS 6.0 on it.
Your equating "the sky is green" with "the iPhone 5 follows the iPhone 4" shows how ridiculous your stance is. I realize living in a binary world where everything is based on a *certain kind* of technical correctness makes it easier for you, but I'm sorry to say that "identity" comes from more than internal build numbers. Giving the next iPhone a *nickname* of iPhone 5 is not only correct, it is sensible. Why? Because there is a precedent now for incremental naming. 3, 3GS, 4, 4S. I'm sorry to have to ask, but do you see a pattern there?
Now, I'll also let you take back your "iPhone 6 == iOS 6" argument, because even you can't be that off to think that hardware #s should be linked to software #s. After all, doesn't iOS 5 run on the "4" and "3GS"?
I'm sorry to say that "identity" comes from more than internal build numbers.
The iPhone 4 was, internally, iPhone 3,1. Oops!
Giving the next iPhone a *nickname* of iPhone 5 is not only correct, it is sensible. Why? Because there is a precedent now for incremental naming.
So 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5. Makes sense. Incremental. Well, at least the latter two syllables.
Now, I'll also let you take back your "iPhone 6 == iOS 6" argument, because even you can't be that off to think that hardware #s should be linked to software #s. After all, doesn't iOS 5 run on the "4" and "3GS"?
That's not the point. The software with which the thing ships is the point he's making. The iPhone 4 was the 4th iPhone, had an A4 processor and shipped with iOS 4. The new iPhone will be the 6th iPhone, ship with iOS 6, and would've had an A6 had Apple chosen to change out the processor in the third iPad.
The music was more expensive than the device.
Same with the 3GS and a data plan.
What's your point?
My point is, what functional features are you shaving off the iPhone to make it fit your list? If you say glass size, are you shrinking the pixels to run all the apps then require a stylus, or shrinking the interface to less than 480x320, and then no current apps, games will run, videos will look worse than a SVGA screen, and you can't read a web page or an email.
hardly a compelling experience.
And glass is the most expensive of component, followed by battery, the 2 things that define the dimensions.
I think Apple will gladly say... no thank you and say they want
1) a compelling visual experience with our phones
2) the right feel in the hand
3) a rich set of features that applications can take advantage of.
4) a set of applications that run on our entire fleet of devices, from the low end phone, to the high end iPad.
Anything less than an iPhone 4 feature set at this point is not a smartphone. It's a feature phone...
My original point is that I would like to see Apple create an iPhone Nano but they can make it whatever they want it to be.
For such a product to be worthwhile it would have to be unique from the main iPhone and compel buyers from a particular market to purchase it. They could make it a phone in the vein of the iPod nano except with a screen big enough for videos and text messaging, which I think has potential especially with FaceTime and cameras. Or they could produce a phone for the prepaid market, which Cook said about a year ago he was interested in Apple entering that market. That phone would be more or less like a 3GS but it would have to be updated for different wireless radios and I think an updated casing would be a welcome addition to the phone. Either device has potential to draw new clients to the iPhone and increase Apple sales and market share globally. That's my case for an iPhone nano.
Hi TS, it's funny, but I thought you would show up on my post.
So, you said, "The iPhone 4 was, internally, iPhone 3,1. Oops!"
I'm glad you agree. The numbers *beneath* the popular perceptions don't matter, just as calling the next version the "iPhone 6" is rooted in a inflexible technical straight-jacket of logic.
You said, "So 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5. Makes sense. Incremental. Well, at least the latter two syllables."
Huh? People didn't call it the "iPhone 3" and then again the "iPhone 3", and then the "iPhone 4" and then the "iPhone 4". Apple used 3, then 4, with "minor rev" model suffixes, and so now we're up to 5. It doesn't matter that there isn't a "1" or "2". Did I really need to point that out to you?
You said, "That's not the point..."
Though I disagree, I think that was his point, it's more important to note that you're putting words in his mouth. Whether or not that was his point is unknown, and any support *he* gives of *your* assertions are now suspect. Is there any unbiased reason you came to that statement's rescue?
[quote name="kustardking" url="/t/151294/purported-next-gen-iphone-front-panel-has-centered-facetime-camera/40#post_2147886"]The numbers *beneath* the popular perceptions don't matter, just as calling the next version the "iPhone 6" is rooted in a inflexible technical straight-jacket of logic.[/QUOTE]
Any more when we say 6 we mean '6th device', as in the next one, as in the phone coming out in Octoberish.
After that comes out, saying 'iPhone 5' won't make any sense, as people will think you mean the iPhone 4S when you mean the 6th iPhone, the new iPhone, called 'iPhone'.
[QUOTE]Huh? People didn't call it the "iPhone 3" and then again the "iPhone 3", and then the "iPhone 4" and then the "iPhone 4". Apple used 3, then 4, with "minor rev" model suffixes, and so now we're up to 5.[/QUOTE]
Your equating "the sky is green" with "the iPhone 5 follows the iPhone 4" shows how ridiculous your stance is. I realize living in a binary world where everything is based on a *certain kind* of technical correctness makes it easier for you, but I'm sorry to say that "identity" comes from more than internal build numbers. Giving the next iPhone a *nickname* of iPhone 5 is not only correct, it is sensible. Why? Because there is a precedent now for incremental naming. 3, 3GS, 4, 4S. I'm sorry to have to ask, but do you see a pattern there?
Now, I'll also let you take back your "iPhone 6 == iOS 6" argument, because even you can't be that off to think that hardware #s should be linked to software #s. After all, doesn't iOS 5 run on the "4" and "3GS"?
The pattern you are basing your logic off isn't actually there.
There was never an iPhone "3"... it was the iPhone "3G", as in 3G radio. So if we take that into account, let's see how this all shakes out...
iPhone (original)
iPhone 3G (named after major new feature)
iPhone 3GS (speed bump, nothing to do with phone revision)
iPhone 4 (the first iPhone with the identifier tied to the revision)
iPhone 4S (speed bump)
So your pattern now looks like: 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... there is no pattern there.
The pattern you are basing your logic off isn't actually there.
There was never an iPhone "3"... it was the iPhone "3G", as in 3G radio. So if we take that into account, let's see how this all shakes out...
iPhone (original)
iPhone 3G (named after major new feature)
iPhone 3GS (speed bump, nothing to do with phone revision)
iPhone 4 (the first iPhone with the identifier tied to the revision)
iPhone 4S (speed bump)
So your pattern now looks like: 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... there is no pattern there.
Anyone who truly doesn't see a pattern here is broken. And anyway, you *do* see the pattern, so give it up.
Here's a test, though I know those who "don't" see the pattern won't dare try it: ask a *non techie* person (99% of people) what will come after the iPhone 4S. They will not say iPhone 6. And yes, I tried it out on four people at the grocery store yesterday. One said "the new iPhone", one said "iPhone 5?", and two didn't use iPhones and had no idea. I expect that if I kept asking, someone would have come up with iPhone 6 eventually, but if the responses in this thread are an indication, that person would have been overly proud of "coming up with it". Now, why did I do a spot survey even though I'm so sure of myself - *JUST LIKE YOU ARE SURE OF YOURSELVES* - ??? Because I live in the real world with real people, and if we're arguing about what it should be called, then it make sense to ask someone other than yourself. If it helps any, it only takes two points to make a line, and 3...4 is a line. If you had to guess the next number, it *could* be 7, 12, -1, 34, blah blah, but the *best*, *no-tricks* answer is 5.
Now, I'm only going on about this because I see this as a deficiency of generic techies (and by-the-by I'm a programmer and software company owner): an inability to see how things are perceived by the general public, accompanied by a patronizing dismissal of what would otherwise be called common sense.
UPDATE: Now a 5th person has said "iPhone 5" after being informed that the one she had (she didn't know) was a 4S
I'm looking forward to seeing how Apple improves the next iPhone.
One rumored aspect I especially like is the new position of the headphone jack. I've found that the current placement is quite cumbersome. When it's in my pocket, the iPhone has to be upright so that it's not sitting on top of the headphone plug. But when I take it out of my pocket from this position, it is upside down, so I have to rotate the iPhone in my hand to use it properly. This is quite a hassle when you need to check your phone intermittently while listening to music.
This change alone may be enough to get me to upgrade.
Agreed. Also, while talking on the phone in the rain, there will be less chance of moisture getting into the phone.
Ugh... the fact of the matter is this. Apple is a tech company and they do things that technically make sense. This is why no matter what you say, they will not call it iPhone 5. They know that the customers don't care what it is called, they only care that it is the same iPhone that all of their friends have or that they see in the new snazzy commercials. So they will stick with their naming conventions of naming after major feature, revision, or just drop the identifier all together like they did with the iPad.
I understand your argument, and I give you credit for trying to push your perspective. But, since when has apple done something because that is just the way it is done?
And just for fun, could you please expand this sequence by 10 more places:
Anyone who truly doesn't see a pattern here is broken. And anyway, you *do* see the pattern, so give it up.
Here's a test, though I know those who "don't" see the pattern won't dare try it: ask a *non techie* person (99% of people) what will come after the iPhone 4S. They will not say iPhone 6. And yes, I tried it out on four people at the grocery store yesterday. One said "the new iPhone", one said "iPhone 5?", and two didn't use iPhones and had no idea. I expect that if I kept asking, someone would have come up with iPhone 6 eventually, but if the responses in this thread are an indication, that person would have been overly proud of "coming up with it". Now, why did I do a spot survey even though I'm so sure of myself - *JUST LIKE YOU ARE SURE OF YOURSELVES* - ??? Because I live in the real world with real people, and if we're arguing about what it should be called, then it make sense to ask someone other than yourself. If it helps any, it only takes two points to make a line, and 3...4 is a line. If you had to guess the next number, it *could* be 7, 12, -1, 34, blah blah, but the *best*, *no-tricks* answer is 5.
Now, I'm only going on about this because I see this as a deficiency of generic techies (and by-the-by I'm a programmer and software company owner): an inability to see how things are perceived by the general public, accompanied by a patronizing dismissal of what would otherwise be called common sense.
UPDATE: Now a 5th person has said "iPhone 5" after being informed that the one she had (she didn't know) was a 4S
Just so you know, no one really predicted that the 3rd iPad will be named "the new iPad" rather than an iPad 3. I asked a lot of people too. ^_^
Its not all about what common folk feel. Its about how crazy Apple wants to be with naming the thing.
Comments
regarding the design... i would expected one more closely related with iPad. That is, the back of the device could be just like the aluminum back of the iPad, in the same way the radii of the rounded corners is already the same, the home button is identical, etc. The slim profile would be very attractive, and the unified line of products would made harder to Samsung to copy that one also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Really?
Somehow, you're not very believable, considering that even if you narrow it down to the SIII phone, there are multiple different varieties. Different CPUs, different amounts of RAM.
I think it's unlikely that everyone who buys a Samsung phone knows exactly what they bought.
I did not say a Samsung phone, I said a Galaxy. My parents have a samsung phone, but it is a cheap phone that runs what Samsung used to use as the OS. I doubt they know the model.
If somebody buys a Samsung Galaxy, they know they are buying a Galaxy. Varieties do not matter, the phone is still a Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis Schepper
For some reason, you seem to be blatantly discrediting some valid points. Seems like you're bent on refuting whatever this guy has said, because instead of coming up with logical answers you criticize his questions, asking where they even come from.
Many of the poster's points are valid: if this is the next iPhone model, it would in fact possibly be disappointing to some to see essentially the same design that has been used in every iPhone. Apple may feel they have the perfect phone design and therefore do not need to make any changes, but a completely refreshed, new design accompanying logical changes (bigger screen, etc.) would be and nice and would surely entice many to buy it. Apple has released a phone with the same design for two years now - a phone which looks almost exactly the same with only minor dimensional changes seems to say that Apple is comfortable extending this for a third year.
Even by looking at mock ups, for example from last years supposed iPhone 5 with the slightly curved design, or even those stored in google image results, I can see some design, or elements of designs, which would not only make perfect sense in the next iPhone but would make it a far better product.
Anyway, I don't mean to criticize or be offensive, it's just my opinion after all.
I think your argument falls down at the point where you try to argue that this purported new iPhone is essentially only slightly different from the 4's and the 4s'.
In fact, it's constructed differently, out of different materials, it's a different size (both taller and thinner), the two main ports are different and/or differently located, and the screen is not only a different size but a different aspect ratio as well. These are also just the "macro" cosmetic changes. There are many more differences in the software and OS.
If it arrives as expected and is similar to the rumours, this year's iPhone will definitely be a "tick" instead of a "tock."
Sorry but the form factor is getting dated and now its the stretch limo version.
I confess I liked the look of the S3 until I saw someone in real life put one to his ear. It looked like someone put a shoe to his ear.
Whats going to be innovative about it, Maps ? Google maps is better.
Some decent multi-tasking would be good, so you can read a message while watching a movie.
4S was a let down, I hope Apple has something up its sleeve.
Anyone followed Steve Ballmer Announcement which just finished? http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/presskits/office/liveevent.aspx
Could you give us the condensed version? I'm too cool to view this video. Or so I was told a few years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
What a lot of rot. You are basically arguing that if stupid people think the sky is green instead of blue that therefore the sky is green.
There isn't really a logical pattern to iPhone naming so far, but of the most popular possibilities floated from time to time the "most wrong" is indeed "iPhone 5." The pattern behind the reasoning is:
3 > 3something > 4 > 4something > 5 > 5something
But the "3" phone was actually the "2," the "4something" was actually the "5," the "5" would be the "6," the "5something" will be the "7."
No one knows what the next phone will be called, but it's inarguable that calling it the iPhone 5 would be highly inaccurate in almost every way and "more wrong" than calling it "iPhone 6" since it will be the sixth phone and will have iOS 6.0 on it.
Your equating "the sky is green" with "the iPhone 5 follows the iPhone 4" shows how ridiculous your stance is. I realize living in a binary world where everything is based on a *certain kind* of technical correctness makes it easier for you, but I'm sorry to say that "identity" comes from more than internal build numbers. Giving the next iPhone a *nickname* of iPhone 5 is not only correct, it is sensible. Why? Because there is a precedent now for incremental naming. 3, 3GS, 4, 4S. I'm sorry to have to ask, but do you see a pattern there?
Now, I'll also let you take back your "iPhone 6 == iOS 6" argument, because even you can't be that off to think that hardware #s should be linked to software #s. After all, doesn't iOS 5 run on the "4" and "3GS"?
If you're with a carrier that has the iPhone legitimately, you don't, as the telecom will just add the plan back on.
I want to understand what that has to do with the thread.
The iPhone 4 was, internally, iPhone 3,1. Oops!
So 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5. Makes sense. Incremental. Well, at least the latter two syllables.
That's not the point. The software with which the thing ships is the point he's making. The iPhone 4 was the 4th iPhone, had an A4 processor and shipped with iOS 4. The new iPhone will be the 6th iPhone, ship with iOS 6, and would've had an A6 had Apple chosen to change out the processor in the third iPad.
For such a product to be worthwhile it would have to be unique from the main iPhone and compel buyers from a particular market to purchase it. They could make it a phone in the vein of the iPod nano except with a screen big enough for videos and text messaging, which I think has potential especially with FaceTime and cameras. Or they could produce a phone for the prepaid market, which Cook said about a year ago he was interested in Apple entering that market. That phone would be more or less like a 3GS but it would have to be updated for different wireless radios and I think an updated casing would be a welcome addition to the phone. Either device has potential to draw new clients to the iPhone and increase Apple sales and market share globally. That's my case for an iPhone nano.
Hi TS, it's funny, but I thought you would show up on my post.
So, you said, "The iPhone 4 was, internally, iPhone 3,1. Oops!"
I'm glad you agree. The numbers *beneath* the popular perceptions don't matter, just as calling the next version the "iPhone 6" is rooted in a inflexible technical straight-jacket of logic.
You said, "So 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5. Makes sense. Incremental. Well, at least the latter two syllables."
Huh? People didn't call it the "iPhone 3" and then again the "iPhone 3", and then the "iPhone 4" and then the "iPhone 4". Apple used 3, then 4, with "minor rev" model suffixes, and so now we're up to 5. It doesn't matter that there isn't a "1" or "2". Did I really need to point that out to you?
You said, "That's not the point..."
Though I disagree, I think that was his point, it's more important to note that you're putting words in his mouth. Whether or not that was his point is unknown, and any support *he* gives of *your* assertions are now suspect. Is there any unbiased reason you came to that statement's rescue?
Any more when we say 6 we mean '6th device', as in the next one, as in the phone coming out in Octoberish.
After that comes out, saying 'iPhone 5' won't make any sense, as people will think you mean the iPhone 4S when you mean the 6th iPhone, the new iPhone, called 'iPhone'.
[QUOTE]Huh? People didn't call it the "iPhone 3" and then again the "iPhone 3", and then the "iPhone 4" and then the "iPhone 4". Apple used 3, then 4, with "minor rev" model suffixes, and so now we're up to 5.[/QUOTE]
No, we're up to six.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
Your equating "the sky is green" with "the iPhone 5 follows the iPhone 4" shows how ridiculous your stance is. I realize living in a binary world where everything is based on a *certain kind* of technical correctness makes it easier for you, but I'm sorry to say that "identity" comes from more than internal build numbers. Giving the next iPhone a *nickname* of iPhone 5 is not only correct, it is sensible. Why? Because there is a precedent now for incremental naming. 3, 3GS, 4, 4S. I'm sorry to have to ask, but do you see a pattern there?
Now, I'll also let you take back your "iPhone 6 == iOS 6" argument, because even you can't be that off to think that hardware #s should be linked to software #s. After all, doesn't iOS 5 run on the "4" and "3GS"?
The pattern you are basing your logic off isn't actually there.
There was never an iPhone "3"... it was the iPhone "3G", as in 3G radio. So if we take that into account, let's see how this all shakes out...
iPhone (original)
iPhone 3G (named after major new feature)
iPhone 3GS (speed bump, nothing to do with phone revision)
iPhone 4 (the first iPhone with the identifier tied to the revision)
iPhone 4S (speed bump)
So your pattern now looks like: 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... there is no pattern there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kent909
As opposed to the content of this article, showing what the case for the new iPhone is. This is official and is reality.
Nope, not until Phil Schiller pulls one out of his pocket on stage. Nobody except Apple can make it 'official'. Until then, it's RUMOR.
The pattern you are basing your logic off isn't actually there.
There was never an iPhone "3"... it was the iPhone "3G", as in 3G radio. So if we take that into account, let's see how this all shakes out...
iPhone (original)
iPhone 3G (named after major new feature)
iPhone 3GS (speed bump, nothing to do with phone revision)
iPhone 4 (the first iPhone with the identifier tied to the revision)
iPhone 4S (speed bump)
So your pattern now looks like: 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... there is no pattern there.
Anyone who truly doesn't see a pattern here is broken. And anyway, you *do* see the pattern, so give it up.Here's a test, though I know those who "don't" see the pattern won't dare try it: ask a *non techie* person (99% of people) what will come after the iPhone 4S. They will not say iPhone 6. And yes, I tried it out on four people at the grocery store yesterday. One said "the new iPhone", one said "iPhone 5?", and two didn't use iPhones and had no idea. I expect that if I kept asking, someone would have come up with iPhone 6 eventually, but if the responses in this thread are an indication, that person would have been overly proud of "coming up with it". Now, why did I do a spot survey even though I'm so sure of myself - *JUST LIKE YOU ARE SURE OF YOURSELVES* - ??? Because I live in the real world with real people, and if we're arguing about what it should be called, then it make sense to ask someone other than yourself. If it helps any, it only takes two points to make a line, and 3...4 is a line. If you had to guess the next number, it *could* be 7, 12, -1, 34, blah blah, but the *best*, *no-tricks* answer is 5.
Now, I'm only going on about this because I see this as a deficiency of generic techies (and by-the-by I'm a programmer and software company owner): an inability to see how things are perceived by the general public, accompanied by a patronizing dismissal of what would otherwise be called common sense.
UPDATE: Now a 5th person has said "iPhone 5" after being informed that the one she had (she didn't know) was a 4S
Quote:
Originally Posted by am8449
I'm looking forward to seeing how Apple improves the next iPhone.
One rumored aspect I especially like is the new position of the headphone jack. I've found that the current placement is quite cumbersome. When it's in my pocket, the iPhone has to be upright so that it's not sitting on top of the headphone plug. But when I take it out of my pocket from this position, it is upside down, so I have to rotate the iPhone in my hand to use it properly. This is quite a hassle when you need to check your phone intermittently while listening to music.
This change alone may be enough to get me to upgrade.
Agreed. Also, while talking on the phone in the rain, there will be less chance of moisture getting into the phone.
Ugh... the fact of the matter is this. Apple is a tech company and they do things that technically make sense. This is why no matter what you say, they will not call it iPhone 5. They know that the customers don't care what it is called, they only care that it is the same iPhone that all of their friends have or that they see in the new snazzy commercials. So they will stick with their naming conventions of naming after major feature, revision, or just drop the identifier all together like they did with the iPad.
I understand your argument, and I give you credit for trying to push your perspective. But, since when has apple done something because that is just the way it is done?
And just for fun, could you please expand this sequence by 10 more places:
3G, 3GS, 4, 4S...
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
Anyone who truly doesn't see a pattern here is broken. And anyway, you *do* see the pattern, so give it up.Here's a test, though I know those who "don't" see the pattern won't dare try it: ask a *non techie* person (99% of people) what will come after the iPhone 4S. They will not say iPhone 6. And yes, I tried it out on four people at the grocery store yesterday. One said "the new iPhone", one said "iPhone 5?", and two didn't use iPhones and had no idea. I expect that if I kept asking, someone would have come up with iPhone 6 eventually, but if the responses in this thread are an indication, that person would have been overly proud of "coming up with it". Now, why did I do a spot survey even though I'm so sure of myself - *JUST LIKE YOU ARE SURE OF YOURSELVES* - ??? Because I live in the real world with real people, and if we're arguing about what it should be called, then it make sense to ask someone other than yourself. If it helps any, it only takes two points to make a line, and 3...4 is a line. If you had to guess the next number, it *could* be 7, 12, -1, 34, blah blah, but the *best*, *no-tricks* answer is 5.
Now, I'm only going on about this because I see this as a deficiency of generic techies (and by-the-by I'm a programmer and software company owner): an inability to see how things are perceived by the general public, accompanied by a patronizing dismissal of what would otherwise be called common sense.
UPDATE: Now a 5th person has said "iPhone 5" after being informed that the one she had (she didn't know) was a 4S
Just so you know, no one really predicted that the 3rd iPad will be named "the new iPad" rather than an iPad 3. I asked a lot of people too. ^_^
Its not all about what common folk feel. Its about how crazy Apple wants to be with naming the thing.
If you were to give that month a number what would it be? 8? 10? Something else? Based on the comments in this thread I'm guessing many would say 9.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That all looks very legit to me. I hope to see that arrive.
If you were to give that month a number what would it be? 8? 10? Something else? Based on the comments in this thread I'm guessing many would say 9.
Didn't you learn your months as a kid?
May, June, June 3G, August, August S, so September HAS to be next. That's month 9.