One or the reasons Apple might develop a new 'cheaper' iPhone is to have consistency across its mobile devices with the Lightning connector. Apples current cheap phone the 4s, as everybody knows uses the now obsolete 30 pin dock connector, which Apple wants to phase out.
One or the reasons Apple might develop a new 'cheaper' iPhone is to have consistency across its mobile devices with the Lightning connector. Apples current cheap phone the 4s, as everybody knows uses the now obsolete 30 pin dock connector, which Apple wants to phase out.
iPhone 4 and 4S both use it, as do the iPad 2 and iPod classic.
This is what will happen, the cheap plastic iphone will be released, maybe just in china, but reguardless it will sell like none other because people will think they are getting an iphone at a samsung price.
The funny thing is that, if Apple does release a less expensive (possibly plastic-encased) iPhone and these people buy it...they won't just think they are getting an iPhone at a Samsung price...they will be getting an iPhone at a Samsung price (or closer anyway.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sector7G
the idiots at apple will come out will say how surprised they are at the demand and will release it in the US and other countys and thats the day apple slips in between samsung, lg , sony and the rest of the smartphone companys. things will go back to what it was like before the iphone. steves dead, scott is gone. im really losing faith in apple
My whole thing to convert people to apple was apple doesnt make cheap plastic phones. looks like that maybe out of the window
Hmmm.
A few things here:
This is simply a rumor.
The rumor does not necessarily suggest that Apple will produce a "cheap" plastic phone simply a more affordable one.
Apple previously created a phone with a plastic case, was that a "cheap plastic phone"?
If your problem is with the more affordable part, then maybe your problem is about status and elitism of some kind.
Perhaps you (and others) are far too focused on the physical materials than is warranted.
Maybe your strategy in converting people should have been centered around the functionality and usability of the phone first and the materials second.
Possibly you need to chill and wait to see what Apple actually does.
One other thing to note in all these rumors. There are multiple things that could be going on:
Apple may be experimenting with or looking into different options, even getting quotes on parts and materials that never ends up happening because they pull the whole thing together and decide to use X instead of Y. But the analyst picked up a signal and ran with it.
Apple could be sending up false flags to smoke out leaks.
Apple could be working on multiple products (some of which aren't even slated for this year) and the various "signals" an analyst uses are getting crossed and mixed up.
A "cheaper" iPhone is directly aimed at the emerging markets of China/India/Asia, where the average cell phone user cannot afford a premium product like the iPhone 5. This is the WHOLE reason why Apple is even considering a "low cost alternative". We don't know if this model will even be available outside of the emerging markets. It's not a bad strategy, either....there are nearly two billion consumers in these markets that could be potential new customers to introduce to the Apple ecosystem....could be worth billions to the company and significantly increase the share price.
Yes, and don't ignore the fact that the existence of the Lexus makes buying the Corolla acceptable to many...
And the existence of the Corolla makes the potential buyer aspire for the Lexus...
This is non-sense. Why would Apple want to cut the price of the phone by $200-$300 while they can only reduce material cost by less 10 bucks (non-retina and plastic chassis)? It would be better to cut iPhone 5 by $100 to get more sale than doing that.
The developing world - once a polite misnomer for poor - is now the fact. Its developing, we're not. Most people in the (once 3rd now) developing world can afford moderately priced mobile phones on PAYG. We know this because they are buying phones. Even sub-Saharan Africa has a high rate of phone ownership but is much poorer than China. I recommend the TED talks of Hans Rosling for an explanation of the stellar growth of the developing world.
Since Apple sells not just hardware but software services it makes sense to enter this market now - the 20 year old chinese guy who can just afford a $250 iPhone now will get the top of the range in a decade, and in the meantime buy content.
Very insightful comment...
Also, one of the "services" that Apple could provide in these markets is low cost (or no cost) financing -- to make an entry-level quality iPhone more attainable.
Will say it again, this will sell more iPhone 5's. It's a psych issue, people want choice, but when the rubber hits the road, they bend and purchase the nicer unit.
I think it was the 3GS, when the 3 was held in the market, they expected demand to go nuts since everyone was clamoring for a $99 iPhone, but in the end, the clamoring stopped and the sales didn't materialize.
you have no proof of sales by individual model, since Apple doesn't release those numbers publicly. They only release overall iPhone sales. There have been predictions that the lower-cost previous models sell much better than the premium model. Why else would the 3GS have stayed on the market so long. At first, Apple only kept the current and the previous model in the line up. Since the 3GS went to a free model, Apple has kept 2 previous models around. Same goes with the iPad 2.
Rogifan....No one is sayng make a "cheap" phone...I'm sure any phone they make will be of good quality, but it doesn't need to be a top of the line phone either. Apple could make an "entry level" phone that doesn't have all the bells and whistles in it, but is still well made and designed for particular markets like China or India. These markets right now are mostly closed to Apple because the people in these markets cannot afford a $600 phone and the carriers do not subsidize them enough to make up the difference. Remember, we are talking about countries where middle class workers might make $8k-$10k a year. Perhaps Apple could redesign the iPhone 3G with a slightly larger screen...to make it work in these countries...that wouldn't be so bad, would it? A $300 phone would allow Apple entry into these markets in a big time way. They don't even need to sell them outside of the emerging markets if they don't want to. And even with a $300 "entry level" phone, there is still plenty of margin room for Apple to make a nice profit! It's a win win for everyone!
Ok if all this is true why has it taken 6 years for Apple to figure it out? How does this not look like anything more than reactionary? Or Apple totally underestimating Android? I dunno I still have a feeling Apple will do something we're not expecting. Look what they did with the iPad mini. The build quality is not cheap (in fact some say its one of Apple's best designs ever) and its not $199.
AIR, the iPhone really hit its stride in 2009-2010... So it has really been more like 3-4 years!
Even if it were 6 years -- if it is a good idea, and [with economies of scale] Apple is in a position to do it -- wtf, 6 years is better than 7 years!
Part of the trouble with the Amazon comparison is it's not clear if Amazon is doing a give away the razors to sell the blades thing here. Are they selling the Kindles at zero profit (or even a loss)?
You're right (about the blades and razors, or equally HP printers and ink cartridges and paper), but actually Jeff Bezos has admitted that the Kindle is sold at cost, and we can assume the same for the Nexus, because both of those companies have a different business model, where exactly as with the razors, the products aren't the profit, it's the content you buy from their stores (and with Google, additionally beyond Google Plus there is the increased information they call use to sell to advertisers). Apple's business model is, "get the profit from the hardware sale." This is of course setting aside the whole difference in build materials and components.
Retina Display : Silly word apple made up. Now that there are multiple phones with PPI higher than the Iphone's "Retina display" what will apple do? Make a super Retina display? Why cant apple use industry standard terms?
Plastic, smaller, non Retina display iphone: Isnt that the 3GS?
Right, "made up", because a display that operates at the limit of the human retina SURE doesn't sound like it should be called a 'retina display'¡
Laugh at those who think Pentile is a proper resolution?
BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE THAT CREATED THE INDUSTRY AND THE STANDARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I swear, these trolls…
Except for the major problem of "Retina Display" is not a standard; apple did not even invent the display they call "Retina" (Samsung did). Can you be any more gullible?
Right, "made up", because a display that operates at the limit of the human retina SURE doesn't sound like it should be called a 'retina display'¡
"Retina" was made up for marketing. It's simply advertising shorthand for very old science facts.
A display doesn't "operate at the limit of the human retina", unless it's at least a certain distance away.
For example, a display with one inch wide pixels ( 1 PPI) becomes "retina" when it's a football field away.
Likewise, the iPhone 4 screen at 326 PPI isn't "retina' unless it's held at least 11" away (for normal users, or up to 18" if a person has better than normal eyesight).
BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE THAT CREATED THE INDUSTRY AND THE STANDARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I swear, these trolls…
The standard equation has been around for years, and is best known as the basis for the term "print quality", which is 300 DPI at 12" distance.
As for the industry, the Toshiba Portege G900 smartphone had a WVGA "retina" (310 PPI) screen back in mid 2007 when the very first 162 PPI iPhone was just going on sale.
By 2008, there were other well known smartphones (e.g. Diamond, Touch Pro) with 286 - 298 PPI, which is so close to 300 PPI that we're only talking about a 1/2" further distance requirement for the lower one (and almost nothing for the higher).
I've mentioned before that the Toshiba was advertised as the "first print quality phone screen", which is undoubtedly why Apple marketing felt compelled to come up with a different term.
Ummm, two key points for all the negatrons out there:
1) why not bring back the 3gs? the 3gs processor is out of date so most new apps woouldn't be supported
2) these 'lower price' phones are meant for emerging markets like brazil and india. in these countries, phones usually are not subsidized the way they are in the US. those 'free' or $50 android phones with high res displays (with 2 year contract) still would cost $350+ to buy outright. that's probably half the average person's monthly salary in emerging countries, so a certain level of scaling down is required to get a very low unsubsidized pricepoint
Comments
Originally Posted by 1983
One or the reasons Apple might develop a new 'cheaper' iPhone is to have consistency across its mobile devices with the Lightning connector. Apples current cheap phone the 4s, as everybody knows uses the now obsolete 30 pin dock connector, which Apple wants to phase out.
iPhone 4 and 4S both use it, as do the iPad 2 and iPod classic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sector7G
This is what will happen, the cheap plastic iphone will be released, maybe just in china, but reguardless it will sell like none other because people will think they are getting an iphone at a samsung price.
The funny thing is that, if Apple does release a less expensive (possibly plastic-encased) iPhone and these people buy it...they won't just think they are getting an iPhone at a Samsung price...they will be getting an iPhone at a Samsung price (or closer anyway.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sector7G
the idiots at apple will come out will say how surprised they are at the demand and will release it in the US and other countys and thats the day apple slips in between samsung, lg , sony and the rest of the smartphone companys. things will go back to what it was like before the iphone. steves dead, scott is gone. im really losing faith in apple
Mkay. Whatever.
My whole thing to convert people to apple was apple doesnt make cheap plastic phones. looks like that maybe out of the window
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sector7G
My whole thing to convert people to apple was apple doesnt make cheap plastic phones. looks like that maybe out of the window
Hmmm.
A few things here:
This is simply a rumor.
The rumor does not necessarily suggest that Apple will produce a "cheap" plastic phone simply a more affordable one.
Apple previously created a phone with a plastic case, was that a "cheap plastic phone"?
If your problem is with the more affordable part, then maybe your problem is about status and elitism of some kind.
Perhaps you (and others) are far too focused on the physical materials than is warranted.
Maybe your strategy in converting people should have been centered around the functionality and usability of the phone first and the materials second.
Possibly you need to chill and wait to see what Apple actually does.
One other thing to note in all these rumors. There are multiple things that could be going on:
Apple may be experimenting with or looking into different options, even getting quotes on parts and materials that never ends up happening because they pull the whole thing together and decide to use X instead of Y. But the analyst picked up a signal and ran with it.
Apple could be sending up false flags to smoke out leaks.
Apple could be working on multiple products (some of which aren't even slated for this year) and the various "signals" an analyst uses are getting crossed and mixed up.
Of course it will have to be non-retina, all retina display production will be tied up producing millions of iWatches.
You will get a free plastic iPhone with every iWatch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordon Eagan
A "cheaper" iPhone is directly aimed at the emerging markets of China/India/Asia, where the average cell phone user cannot afford a premium product like the iPhone 5. This is the WHOLE reason why Apple is even considering a "low cost alternative". We don't know if this model will even be available outside of the emerging markets. It's not a bad strategy, either....there are nearly two billion consumers in these markets that could be potential new customers to introduce to the Apple ecosystem....could be worth billions to the company and significantly increase the share price.
Yes, and don't ignore the fact that the existence of the Lexus makes buying the Corolla acceptable to many...
And the existence of the Corolla makes the potential buyer aspire for the Lexus...
This is non-sense. Why would Apple want to cut the price of the phone by $200-$300 while they can only reduce material cost by less 10 bucks (non-retina and plastic chassis)? It would be better to cut iPhone 5 by $100 to get more sale than doing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
The developing world - once a polite misnomer for poor - is now the fact. Its developing, we're not. Most people in the (once 3rd now) developing world can afford moderately priced mobile phones on PAYG. We know this because they are buying phones. Even sub-Saharan Africa has a high rate of phone ownership but is much poorer than China. I recommend the TED talks of Hans Rosling for an explanation of the stellar growth of the developing world.
Since Apple sells not just hardware but software services it makes sense to enter this market now - the 20 year old chinese guy who can just afford a $250 iPhone now will get the top of the range in a decade, and in the meantime buy content.
Very insightful comment...
Also, one of the "services" that Apple could provide in these markets is low cost (or no cost) financing -- to make an entry-level quality iPhone more attainable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner
Will say it again, this will sell more iPhone 5's. It's a psych issue, people want choice, but when the rubber hits the road, they bend and purchase the nicer unit.
I think it was the 3GS, when the 3 was held in the market, they expected demand to go nuts since everyone was clamoring for a $99 iPhone, but in the end, the clamoring stopped and the sales didn't materialize.
you have no proof of sales by individual model, since Apple doesn't release those numbers publicly. They only release overall iPhone sales. There have been predictions that the lower-cost previous models sell much better than the premium model. Why else would the 3GS have stayed on the market so long. At first, Apple only kept the current and the previous model in the line up. Since the 3GS went to a free model, Apple has kept 2 previous models around. Same goes with the iPad 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordon Eagan
Rogifan....No one is sayng make a "cheap" phone...I'm sure any phone they make will be of good quality, but it doesn't need to be a top of the line phone either. Apple could make an "entry level" phone that doesn't have all the bells and whistles in it, but is still well made and designed for particular markets like China or India. These markets right now are mostly closed to Apple because the people in these markets cannot afford a $600 phone and the carriers do not subsidize them enough to make up the difference. Remember, we are talking about countries where middle class workers might make $8k-$10k a year. Perhaps Apple could redesign the iPhone 3G with a slightly larger screen...to make it work in these countries...that wouldn't be so bad, would it? A $300 phone would allow Apple entry into these markets in a big time way. They don't even need to sell them outside of the emerging markets if they don't want to. And even with a $300 "entry level" phone, there is still plenty of margin room for Apple to make a nice profit! It's a win win for everyone!
Ok if all this is true why has it taken 6 years for Apple to figure it out? How does this not look like anything more than reactionary? Or Apple totally underestimating Android? I dunno I still have a feeling Apple will do something we're not expecting. Look what they did with the iPad mini. The build quality is not cheap (in fact some say its one of Apple's best designs ever) and its not $199.
AIR, the iPhone really hit its stride in 2009-2010... So it has really been more like 3-4 years!
Even if it were 6 years -- if it is a good idea, and [with economies of scale] Apple is in a position to do it -- wtf, 6 years is better than 7 years!
...there is a tide in the affairs of men...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Part of the trouble with the Amazon comparison is it's not clear if Amazon is doing a give away the razors to sell the blades thing here. Are they selling the Kindles at zero profit (or even a loss)?
You're right (about the blades and razors, or equally HP printers and ink cartridges and paper), but actually Jeff Bezos has admitted that the Kindle is sold at cost, and we can assume the same for the Nexus, because both of those companies have a different business model, where exactly as with the razors, the products aren't the profit, it's the content you buy from their stores (and with Google, additionally beyond Google Plus there is the increased information they call use to sell to advertisers). Apple's business model is, "get the profit from the hardware sale." This is of course setting aside the whole difference in build materials and components.
Plastic, smaller, non Retina display iphone: Isnt that the 3GS?
Originally Posted by davestall
Retina Display : Silly word apple made up.
Right, "made up", because a display that operates at the limit of the human retina SURE doesn't sound like it should be called a 'retina display'¡
Now that there are multiple phones with PPI higher than the Iphone's "Retina display" what will apple do?
Laugh at those who think Pentile is a proper resolution?
Why cant apple use industry standard terms?
BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE THAT CREATED THE INDUSTRY AND THE STANDARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I swear, these trolls…
Brilliant!
daveuninQuote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Right, "made up", because a display that operates at the limit of the human retina SURE doesn't sound like it should be called a 'retina display'¡
Laugh at those who think Pentile is a proper resolution?
BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE THAT CREATED THE INDUSTRY AND THE STANDARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I swear, these trolls…
Except for the major problem of "Retina Display" is not a standard; apple did not even invent the display they call "Retina" (Samsung did). Can you be any more gullible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Right, "made up", because a display that operates at the limit of the human retina SURE doesn't sound like it should be called a 'retina display'¡
"Retina" was made up for marketing. It's simply advertising shorthand for very old science facts.
A display doesn't "operate at the limit of the human retina", unless it's at least a certain distance away.
For example, a display with one inch wide pixels ( 1 PPI) becomes "retina" when it's a football field away.
Likewise, the iPhone 4 screen at 326 PPI isn't "retina' unless it's held at least 11" away (for normal users, or up to 18" if a person has better than normal eyesight).
BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE THAT CREATED THE INDUSTRY AND THE STANDARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I swear, these trolls…
The standard equation has been around for years, and is best known as the basis for the term "print quality", which is 300 DPI at 12" distance.
As for the industry, the Toshiba Portege G900 smartphone had a WVGA "retina" (310 PPI) screen back in mid 2007 when the very first 162 PPI iPhone was just going on sale.
By 2008, there were other well known smartphones (e.g. Diamond, Touch Pro) with 286 - 298 PPI, which is so close to 300 PPI that we're only talking about a 1/2" further distance requirement for the lower one (and almost nothing for the higher).
I've mentioned before that the Toshiba was advertised as the "first print quality phone screen", which is undoubtedly why Apple marketing felt compelled to come up with a different term.
Originally Posted by davestall
Except for the major problem of "Retina Display" is not a standard…
Just like USB "isn't" a standard.
…apple did not even invent the display they call "Retina" (Samsung did).
Talk about splitting hairs.
Can you be any more gullible?
Can you be any more trollish?
Originally Posted by KDarling
A display doesn't "operate at the limit of the human retina", unless it's at least a certain distance away.
So either sue Apple because it's physically possible to hold your iPhone closer than some magical limit… or realize that's not what we're discussing.
Ummm, two key points for all the negatrons out there:
1) why not bring back the 3gs? the 3gs processor is out of date so most new apps woouldn't be supported
2) these 'lower price' phones are meant for emerging markets like brazil and india. in these countries, phones usually are not subsidized the way they are in the US. those 'free' or $50 android phones with high res displays (with 2 year contract) still would cost $350+ to buy outright. that's probably half the average person's monthly salary in emerging countries, so a certain level of scaling down is required to get a very low unsubsidized pricepoint
Quote:
Originally Posted by thechamp
Ummm, two key points for all the negatrons out there:
1) why not bring back the 3gs? the 3gs processor is out of date so most new apps woouldn't be supported
I'm fairly certain that most people who mention the 3gs mean the form factor... but with an updated processor.