But they're made of glass, front and back. Not an appropriate material for people who lead tougher lives than you. We learned with the mini that the aluminum back cost as much as the display, so that sort of machined precision is probably out.
I envision a Volksfone should have a rugged plastic case, with a water-resistant case-to-screen seal, maybe with squared edges like the present aluminum cases rather than the slippery backs of the iPhone 3 and 3S. It wouldn't need a case because nothing would be any tougher that the phone itself.
Of course it's doubtful Apple would go in this direction, but who knows.
I would like an iPhone like you describe for use in outdoor activities such as skiing, boating, even gardening. But how do you make it water-resistant with the speakers and audio jack openings?
Prima facie they are not. The iPad mini is simply a smaller iPad, built to the same, or higher standards as the iPad. It's essentially priced the same as an iPad, given the size difference
This rumored, lower priced iPhone is supposedly essentially the same size as an IP4, but, necessarily, built to a lower standard in order to be able to sell it for less than an IP4 at full price, not subsidized.
So, I ask again, what does the success of the iPad mini have to do with this? The answer appears to be nothing since there is no analogy between the mini and this rumored "cheap" iPhone.
Prima facie they are not. The iPad mini is simply a smaller iPad, built to the same, or higher standards as the iPad. It's essentially priced the same as an iPad, given the size difference
This rumored, lower priced iPhone is supposedly essentially the same size as an IP4, but, necessarily, built to a lower standard in order to be able to sell it for less than an IP4 at full price, not subsidized.
So, I ask again, what does the success of the iPad mini have to do with this? The answer appears to be nothing since there is no analogy between the mini and this rumored "cheap" iPhone.
I suppose the real issue here is that nobody knows what a less expensive iPhone will be. So arguing any comparison to any other product line Apple sells is probably a moot point until we see this rumored device.
However, I see the iPad Mini as a valid comparison. It's a different form factor, has a slower processor, no retina, lesser camera. But, it's lighter, smaller, thinner and less expensive and it's still the same experience as the standard iPad. There are trade-offs. And to many on this forum, these aspects (maybe not feature for feature comparisons) will be much like what we see in a less expensive device...should one surface. I for one think the biggest difference we'll see is in the manufacturing process and key costly components like screen (comparing from iPhone 5 to iPod Touch current gen).
I also see [even more-so] the Macbook Pro Retina 13" and Air 13" as a good comparison too. One is much more powerful, faster, better screen, more I/O's, and heavier...the other is much lighter, thinner, more portable, but has fewer features than it's sibling...but they both run the same OS and are very similar in customer experience.
How Apple might accomplish this in the iPhone is a good question. We can only speculate, but it's not that we haven't seen something like this before from Apple, and I think looking at other product families for hints is good speculation.
iPhone Air it might be, Mini it will not...IMO
Oh, and I think eveyone is looking at the word "cheap" and seeing the negative connotations. One may ask, when has Apple EVER produced a "cheap" product? They make less expensive with fewer features...and but still maintain a high level of quality, design and user experience.
I don't see why Apple needs to create a new cheaper iPhone when they're currently selling 4 and 4S for cheaper price.
Check the street prices for an iPhone 4, 4S and 5 in India. Then compare those to prices for other popular top end phones, such as the HTC One S, and Galaxy S3.
Not to mention mid-range phones. $200 buys a 4" WVGA screen these days, and some other pretty nice specs. And most such phones have memory slots, so larger memory is far less costly than with the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
The success of the iPad mini could be pushing them in this direction.
True, compared to the larger iPad, the iPad mini is an example of getting less cash profit per device, but a higher percentage profit margin... which Wall Street seemed to love.
However, a big difference is that iPhone margins are much higher than for the iPad. It's what, something like 55% gross with the iPhone, and 30% with the iPad. The iPad mini only went up to soemthing like 33%. Keeping the same or higher phone margin seems much more difficult.
So the question becomes, IF Apple did want to follow the same model with a phone, how could Apple accomplish it without marring the brand? Perhaps keep a nice case, but skimp on everything else?
Check the street prices for an iPhone 4, 4S and 5 in India. Then compare those to prices for other popular top end phones, such as the HTC One S, and Galaxy S3.
So the question becomes, IF Apple did want to follow the same model with a phone, how could Apple accomplish it without marring the brand? Perhaps keep a nice case, but skimp on everything else?
agreed, some on this forum don't look beyond their boarders at the larger perspective.
See my posts about how they might reduce costs but keep margins up in the manufacturing process.
Speaking of, here's a crazy thought. What if the current iPod touch added a cellular radio chip and they drop the storage to 8gb and call it the iPhone Air? The current Touch (7.2mm) is thinner than the iPhone 5 (7.6mm) so there is room for it to expand a bit. It already has everything else the iphone 5 has, except for the slightly less featured components. Plus the current iPod Touch starts at $299 for 32gb....+$100 for 64gb. So drop that down a couple notches and you have an iPhone Air for $199 with 8gb and LTE. They could essentially merge the touch and the iPhone into a single device family...more like the iPad.
To save money in tooling and making all new parts, they would just add the most obvious part left out of the Touch, retool the case a bit and you've essentially have an iPod Touch LTE. That would save a lot of money in manufacturing and keep the current supplier happy.
... I see the iPad Mini as a valid comparison. It's a different form factor, has a slower processor, no retina, lesser camera. But, it's lighter, smaller, thinner and less expensive and it's still the same experience as the standard iPad. ...
Where by "standard iPad" you mean, at different times, the 4th gen iPad and the iPad 2, as it suits your argument. The rumor essentially is:
Quote:
As for how Apple plans to shave down the retail price of this so-called lower-cost iPhone, White believes the device will adopt a more cost affordable display, case, memory, wireless, camera and processor.
"The case would be an interesting area of cost savings with a lower priced material (e.g., plastic) versus the aluminum unibody casing on the iPhone 5, while adding colors to excite consumers," he said.
which is nothing like what they did with the iPad mini vs the iPad 2, which is the valid comparison. The success of the mini doesn't bear on whether they will do this at all, the two are entirely different. And it certainly doesn't put pressure on them to do this, as was claimed.
Why in the world would Apple make a phone identical to the 5 or with a larger screen than the 5 and sell it for half the price?
That's a ridiculous assumption that they would do that to price match the Nexus of which is selling poorly.
The cheaper iPhone I would assume will either have a smaller screen or a crappier screen. I personally prefer smaller high quality over a 4 inch low quality screen.
Assuming that the report states that they expect this new lower priced iPhone to go on sale in June, the iPhone 5 may form the basis for the value model while the high end is replaced by the iPhone 6.
By then component prices should have fallen; they may have to replace the back with plastic (not the end of the world if done well) and maybe rip out lte.
And considering the nexus sold half a million in minutes, I wouldn't exactly call it" selling poorly"
Where by "standard iPad" you mean, at different times, the 4th gen iPad and the iPad 2, as it suits your argument. The rumor essentially is:
which is nothing like what they did with the iPad mini vs the iPad 2, which is the valid comparison. The success of the mini doesn't bear on whether they will do this at all, the two are entirely different. And it certainly doesn't put pressure on them to do this, as was claimed.
I think you and I are arguing two different point about the same thing. I've stated my opinion pretty clearly. And no, I was using the iPad Mini compared to the iPad 4th gen. but my POV doesn't come from this rumor, more from the general comparison in strategy. I am stating my take...not what this White thinks.
In what sense are the cited analysts "insiders"? They're the same people with terrible tracks records that repackage rumor and dubious "supply chain checks" that we've been hearing from forever, and they're almost never right.
They have to keep coming up with so-called analysis and guidance because that's what they're payed to do-- they're not allowed to fall silent just because they have no info. So they go with the conventional wisdom, which amounts to little more than a circle-jerk of tech pundits, wishful thinking and deeply average ideas about what Apple "ought to do."
Apple may or may not introduce a cheaper by design iPhone (as opposed to continuing to sell previous models at a discount) but I think we can just assume that these "insiders" don't have any more information than the average blogger with an agenda.
Cheaper doesn't have to mean "cheap". But like many others I am curious if older parts that were used for the iPhone 3GS, 4, and even 4S are cheaper just by the virtue of being older now. Sometimes older parts are actually more expensive but only because they are scarce and not produced in massive volume anymore.
If Apple decides to make this entry level phone, I wonder what they would price it at? Many analysts seem to think $299. That seems about right. Personally I feel it is the right strategy moving forward. Selling the older models for free or $100 only works in countries where carriers subsidize and that is only a tiny share of the world market. If they can't figure out a way to sell a nearly 2 year old iPhone 4S for $299 without a subsidy then they need to just make an entry level phone to address that market.
Many people that started off with an iPod nano or mini also moved up to an iPod touch or an iPhone, and in some cases even a Mac later so it is a good strategy not to ignore this huge segment. Get people into the ecosystem and lock them in early so they will buy more expensive models down the road.
The one size fits all iPhone strategy was great when Steve Jobs was hoping to get just 1% of the market. Now that it has taken off and is the largest profit generator for the whole company it is time to offer more choice. A cheaper one, the classic, and a big display version. Cover all the bases and show Samsung who is boss again.
Apple now offers the option of paying in instalments for its products in developing markets where average income is lower. So why bother with producing a plastic low end iPhone for less money? And Schiller has already said that Apple won't produce such a product. This is all just wishful thinking on the part of analysts, I think.
Apple now offers the option of paying in instalments for its products in developing markets where average income is lower. So why bother with producing a plastic low end iPhone for less money? And Schiller has already said that Apple won't produce such a product. This is all just wishful thinking on the part of analysts, I think.
I don't believe it was ever shown that Schiller said they would not produce a less-expensive iPhone.
Apple now offers the option of paying in instalments for its products in developing markets where average income is lower. So why bother with producing a plastic low end iPhone for less money? And Schiller has already said that Apple won't produce such a product. This is all just wishful thinking on the part of analysts, I think.
Because paying installments over many years for a 2 year old phone that will cost you $500 by the time you finish paying it off is not a great long term strategy. The vast majority of people would rather have a newer model phone for $299 over what they perceive to be an older phone at nearly twice the price. People that don't want to enter carrier contracts don't want to now get locked into a similar contract to pay off the phone itself.
Many people that started off with an iPod nano or mini also moved up to an iPod touch or an iPhone, and in some cases even a Mac later so it is a good strategy not to ignore this huge segment. Get people into the ecosystem and lock them in early so they will buy more expensive models down the road.
The one size fits all iPhone strategy was great when Steve Jobs was hoping to get just 1% of the market. Now that it has taken off and is the largest profit generator for the whole company it is time to offer more choice. A cheaper one, the classic, and a big display version. Cover all the bases and show Samsung who is boss again.
Totally Agree. I was one of those you speak of. Pre-ordered the iPod Shuffle (Gen1) as my first Apple device. If I liked iTunes, I'd buy a bigger iPod...it was a refurb-Mini (Gen2). After that was both the iPod Classic and the iPhone 3G same year. Then refurb iPhone4 and pre-order iPad 2. Last year was my first MBP (even though I had been using my GF's for years) and she also got the pre-order iPad mini. So 8 years later I'm looking at replacing my iPhone and my iPad with updated models this year. that's assuming the Standard iPad is thinner and lighter, and they produce a less expensive iPhone.
For me, the one-size iPhone is long in the tooth. I'm paying $85 just to be able to make phone calls and check email, text, maps and games on the go. That for me is pointless and excessive. So if no-less expensive iPhone and PaYG options, it might be to Walmart plan for me. As much as I despise them, the subsidized model is highway robbery, and other PayG plans force you to buy an unlocked phone through them...total BS. Even shared and bundling in my household is a wash in price. The system is broken, we need an alternative, and I think this low-cost iPhone (rumored) will pave the way for more PaYG data/voice plans.
I agree. This phone is about making a deal with companies like China Mobile for emerging markets. Apple might not even sell it in the US. It could also be for prepaid markets.
I am curious what Apple will be bringing to T-Mobile, which has gone on record saying a deal has been struck.
I think that is the most likely reason for this device and seeing as how China Mobile's homegrown 4G isn't really established yet but their homegrown 3G is creating a device specific for China Mobile would appear to be advantageous.
I'm a bit perplexed, where is there ANY statement attributed to an "insider" in this article as the title would lead one to believe? I don't see one.
Apparently "after discovering several unreleased iPhone prototypes through its research back in December"?! Mwahahahaha wtf does that mean?!
Looks like yet another attempt by Hedge Funds and their Analyst lap dogs to manipulate the stock vie one of those anonymous whispers some vested trading interest made up? Jim Cramer says you can invent those all day because Apple will never deny them.
1) Insiders are super, super, super careful to talk to people at investment firms. It is potentially an SEC violation which can get you thrown in jail.
2) Apple does not compete on price, they never have and never will. Dell did, and we saw what happened to them.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxMacCary
APPLE ALREADY HAS CHEAP PHONES!!
THEY'RE CALLED iPHONE 4 & iPhone 4S!!!!!!
Jesus ....
But they're made of glass, front and back. Not an appropriate material for people who lead tougher lives than you. We learned with the mini that the aluminum back cost as much as the display, so that sort of machined precision is probably out.
I envision a Volksfone should have a rugged plastic case, with a water-resistant case-to-screen seal, maybe with squared edges like the present aluminum cases rather than the slippery backs of the iPhone 3 and 3S. It wouldn't need a case because nothing would be any tougher that the phone itself.
Of course it's doubtful Apple would go in this direction, but who knows.
I would like an iPhone like you describe for use in outdoor activities such as skiing, boating, even gardening. But how do you make it water-resistant with the speakers and audio jack openings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
And I would ask, how are they not?
Prima facie they are not. The iPad mini is simply a smaller iPad, built to the same, or higher standards as the iPad. It's essentially priced the same as an iPad, given the size difference
This rumored, lower priced iPhone is supposedly essentially the same size as an IP4, but, necessarily, built to a lower standard in order to be able to sell it for less than an IP4 at full price, not subsidized.
So, I ask again, what does the success of the iPad mini have to do with this? The answer appears to be nothing since there is no analogy between the mini and this rumored "cheap" iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Hmmm. Interestingly logical reasoning there.
it's very logical. To gain more PC marketshare, would Apple release an iMac with a plastic design to be cheaper than the aluminum one?
No it won't. Same with the iphone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Prima facie they are not. The iPad mini is simply a smaller iPad, built to the same, or higher standards as the iPad. It's essentially priced the same as an iPad, given the size difference
This rumored, lower priced iPhone is supposedly essentially the same size as an IP4, but, necessarily, built to a lower standard in order to be able to sell it for less than an IP4 at full price, not subsidized.
So, I ask again, what does the success of the iPad mini have to do with this? The answer appears to be nothing since there is no analogy between the mini and this rumored "cheap" iPhone.
I suppose the real issue here is that nobody knows what a less expensive iPhone will be. So arguing any comparison to any other product line Apple sells is probably a moot point until we see this rumored device.
However, I see the iPad Mini as a valid comparison. It's a different form factor, has a slower processor, no retina, lesser camera. But, it's lighter, smaller, thinner and less expensive and it's still the same experience as the standard iPad. There are trade-offs. And to many on this forum, these aspects (maybe not feature for feature comparisons) will be much like what we see in a less expensive device...should one surface. I for one think the biggest difference we'll see is in the manufacturing process and key costly components like screen (comparing from iPhone 5 to iPod Touch current gen).
I also see [even more-so] the Macbook Pro Retina 13" and Air 13" as a good comparison too. One is much more powerful, faster, better screen, more I/O's, and heavier...the other is much lighter, thinner, more portable, but has fewer features than it's sibling...but they both run the same OS and are very similar in customer experience.
How Apple might accomplish this in the iPhone is a good question. We can only speculate, but it's not that we haven't seen something like this before from Apple, and I think looking at other product families for hints is good speculation.
iPhone Air it might be, Mini it will not...IMO
Oh, and I think eveyone is looking at the word "cheap" and seeing the negative connotations. One may ask, when has Apple EVER produced a "cheap" product? They make less expensive with fewer features...and but still maintain a high level of quality, design and user experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by capoeira4u
I don't see why Apple needs to create a new cheaper iPhone when they're currently selling 4 and 4S for cheaper price.
Check the street prices for an iPhone 4, 4S and 5 in India. Then compare those to prices for other popular top end phones, such as the HTC One S, and Galaxy S3.
Not to mention mid-range phones. $200 buys a 4" WVGA screen these days, and some other pretty nice specs. And most such phones have memory slots, so larger memory is far less costly than with the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
The success of the iPad mini could be pushing them in this direction.
True, compared to the larger iPad, the iPad mini is an example of getting less cash profit per device, but a higher percentage profit margin... which Wall Street seemed to love.
However, a big difference is that iPhone margins are much higher than for the iPad. It's what, something like 55% gross with the iPhone, and 30% with the iPad. The iPad mini only went up to soemthing like 33%. Keeping the same or higher phone margin seems much more difficult.
So the question becomes, IF Apple did want to follow the same model with a phone, how could Apple accomplish it without marring the brand? Perhaps keep a nice case, but skimp on everything else?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
it's very logical. To gain more PC marketshare, would Apple release an iMac with a plastic design to be cheaper than the aluminum one?
No it won't. Same with the iphone.
Stunning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Check the street prices for an iPhone 4, 4S and 5 in India. Then compare those to prices for other popular top end phones, such as the HTC One S, and Galaxy S3.
So the question becomes, IF Apple did want to follow the same model with a phone, how could Apple accomplish it without marring the brand? Perhaps keep a nice case, but skimp on everything else?
agreed, some on this forum don't look beyond their boarders at the larger perspective.
See my posts about how they might reduce costs but keep margins up in the manufacturing process.
Speaking of, here's a crazy thought. What if the current iPod touch added a cellular radio chip and they drop the storage to 8gb and call it the iPhone Air? The current Touch (7.2mm) is thinner than the iPhone 5 (7.6mm) so there is room for it to expand a bit. It already has everything else the iphone 5 has, except for the slightly less featured components. Plus the current iPod Touch starts at $299 for 32gb....+$100 for 64gb. So drop that down a couple notches and you have an iPhone Air for $199 with 8gb and LTE. They could essentially merge the touch and the iPhone into a single device family...more like the iPad.
To save money in tooling and making all new parts, they would just add the most obvious part left out of the Touch, retool the case a bit and you've essentially have an iPod Touch LTE. That would save a lot of money in manufacturing and keep the current supplier happy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
... I see the iPad Mini as a valid comparison. It's a different form factor, has a slower processor, no retina, lesser camera. But, it's lighter, smaller, thinner and less expensive and it's still the same experience as the standard iPad. ...
Where by "standard iPad" you mean, at different times, the 4th gen iPad and the iPad 2, as it suits your argument. The rumor essentially is:
Quote:
As for how Apple plans to shave down the retail price of this so-called lower-cost iPhone, White believes the device will adopt a more cost affordable display, case, memory, wireless, camera and processor.
"The case would be an interesting area of cost savings with a lower priced material (e.g., plastic) versus the aluminum unibody casing on the iPhone 5, while adding colors to excite consumers," he said.
which is nothing like what they did with the iPad mini vs the iPad 2, which is the valid comparison. The success of the mini doesn't bear on whether they will do this at all, the two are entirely different. And it certainly doesn't put pressure on them to do this, as was claimed.
Assuming that the report states that they expect this new lower priced iPhone to go on sale in June, the iPhone 5 may form the basis for the value model while the high end is replaced by the iPhone 6.
By then component prices should have fallen; they may have to replace the back with plastic (not the end of the world if done well) and maybe rip out lte.
And considering the nexus sold half a million in minutes, I wouldn't exactly call it" selling poorly"
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Where by "standard iPad" you mean, at different times, the 4th gen iPad and the iPad 2, as it suits your argument. The rumor essentially is:
which is nothing like what they did with the iPad mini vs the iPad 2, which is the valid comparison. The success of the mini doesn't bear on whether they will do this at all, the two are entirely different. And it certainly doesn't put pressure on them to do this, as was claimed.
I think you and I are arguing two different point about the same thing. I've stated my opinion pretty clearly. And no, I was using the iPad Mini compared to the iPad 4th gen. but my POV doesn't come from this rumor, more from the general comparison in strategy. I am stating my take...not what this White thinks.
In what sense are the cited analysts "insiders"? They're the same people with terrible tracks records that repackage rumor and dubious "supply chain checks" that we've been hearing from forever, and they're almost never right.
They have to keep coming up with so-called analysis and guidance because that's what they're payed to do-- they're not allowed to fall silent just because they have no info. So they go with the conventional wisdom, which amounts to little more than a circle-jerk of tech pundits, wishful thinking and deeply average ideas about what Apple "ought to do."
Apple may or may not introduce a cheaper by design iPhone (as opposed to continuing to sell previous models at a discount) but I think we can just assume that these "insiders" don't have any more information than the average blogger with an agenda.
If Apple decides to make this entry level phone, I wonder what they would price it at? Many analysts seem to think $299. That seems about right. Personally I feel it is the right strategy moving forward. Selling the older models for free or $100 only works in countries where carriers subsidize and that is only a tiny share of the world market. If they can't figure out a way to sell a nearly 2 year old iPhone 4S for $299 without a subsidy then they need to just make an entry level phone to address that market.
Many people that started off with an iPod nano or mini also moved up to an iPod touch or an iPhone, and in some cases even a Mac later so it is a good strategy not to ignore this huge segment. Get people into the ecosystem and lock them in early so they will buy more expensive models down the road.
The one size fits all iPhone strategy was great when Steve Jobs was hoping to get just 1% of the market. Now that it has taken off and is the largest profit generator for the whole company it is time to offer more choice. A cheaper one, the classic, and a big display version. Cover all the bases and show Samsung who is boss again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1983
Apple now offers the option of paying in instalments for its products in developing markets where average income is lower. So why bother with producing a plastic low end iPhone for less money? And Schiller has already said that Apple won't produce such a product. This is all just wishful thinking on the part of analysts, I think.
I don't believe it was ever shown that Schiller said they would not produce a less-expensive iPhone.
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Oh AppleInsider. An "analyst" is not an "insider."
Should the site be renamed AppleAnalyst?
I guess, due to the symmetric property of equality, the site could also be named DoomedAnalyst.
It's actually pretty fitting, when you think about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1983
Apple now offers the option of paying in instalments for its products in developing markets where average income is lower. So why bother with producing a plastic low end iPhone for less money? And Schiller has already said that Apple won't produce such a product. This is all just wishful thinking on the part of analysts, I think.
Because paying installments over many years for a 2 year old phone that will cost you $500 by the time you finish paying it off is not a great long term strategy. The vast majority of people would rather have a newer model phone for $299 over what they perceive to be an older phone at nearly twice the price. People that don't want to enter carrier contracts don't want to now get locked into a similar contract to pay off the phone itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Cheaper doesn't have to mean "cheap".
Many people that started off with an iPod nano or mini also moved up to an iPod touch or an iPhone, and in some cases even a Mac later so it is a good strategy not to ignore this huge segment. Get people into the ecosystem and lock them in early so they will buy more expensive models down the road.
The one size fits all iPhone strategy was great when Steve Jobs was hoping to get just 1% of the market. Now that it has taken off and is the largest profit generator for the whole company it is time to offer more choice. A cheaper one, the classic, and a big display version. Cover all the bases and show Samsung who is boss again.
Totally Agree. I was one of those you speak of. Pre-ordered the iPod Shuffle (Gen1) as my first Apple device. If I liked iTunes, I'd buy a bigger iPod...it was a refurb-Mini (Gen2). After that was both the iPod Classic and the iPhone 3G same year. Then refurb iPhone4 and pre-order iPad 2. Last year was my first MBP (even though I had been using my GF's for years) and she also got the pre-order iPad mini. So 8 years later I'm looking at replacing my iPhone and my iPad with updated models this year. that's assuming the Standard iPad is thinner and lighter, and they produce a less expensive iPhone.
For me, the one-size iPhone is long in the tooth. I'm paying $85 just to be able to make phone calls and check email, text, maps and games on the go. That for me is pointless and excessive. So if no-less expensive iPhone and PaYG options, it might be to Walmart plan for me. As much as I despise them, the subsidized model is highway robbery, and other PayG plans force you to buy an unlocked phone through them...total BS. Even shared and bundling in my household is a wash in price. The system is broken, we need an alternative, and I think this low-cost iPhone (rumored) will pave the way for more PaYG data/voice plans.
I think that is the most likely reason for this device and seeing as how China Mobile's homegrown 4G isn't really established yet but their homegrown 3G is creating a device specific for China Mobile would appear to be advantageous.
Apparently "after discovering several unreleased iPhone prototypes through its research back in December"?! Mwahahahaha wtf does that mean?!
Looks like yet another attempt by Hedge Funds and their Analyst lap dogs to manipulate the stock vie one of those anonymous whispers some vested trading interest made up? Jim Cramer says you can invent those all day because Apple will never deny them.
1) Insiders are super, super, super careful to talk to people at investment firms. It is potentially an SEC violation which can get you thrown in jail.
2) Apple does not compete on price, they never have and never will. Dell did, and we saw what happened to them.
This is BS.