Interesting rendering that has the display wrapping around the home button.
That rendering his hideous and ridiculous to boot. IF Touch ID gets integrated into the display it's not going to be a physical button with a silver or gold ring.
Right. To place a hole in an x-y pixel grid, you'd have to drive the x and y lines from both sides of the panel in the region where the hole is. You'd also have to clear some area around the hole for bonding the panel layers together. It would probably be easier to get the display to sense the fingerprint, allowing the entire screen to operate for Touch-ID.
The rendering is a fantasy, concocted by someone who doesn't understand the technology.
But emerging markets don't want a small screened phone, they want a large screen because the phone is a do-everything device. That is why Samsung phablets were such a run away success. within the last week I exchanged messages with someone wherein I suggested they do something on a PC because similar software was not available on a mobile platform. They replied they only had a phone and didn't really know anyone who had a PC. Think they were in India.
This is more a device suited to developed markets for people who don't want an S6 sized phone.
Sure. But in China and India they still prefer a 4 inch iPhone rather than a generic android phablet... and then they get an excuse to upgrade to the larger sizes once they are hooked on the IOS platform (which some 95% are).
It is very clever to have more basic entry points, which gets people onboard - while still having them envy the more expensive models....
Actually they don't. iOS has nothing remotely close to 95% market share in those markets. as of Dec. 2015, iOS had 1.82% marketshare in India, Android had 64.32%. In China, iOS had 23.85% while Android had 74.25%
On a recent trip to India, I was stunned by how
ubiquitous Samsung was there, especially their high-end and larger
screen size smartphones. Among business people and among people
patronizing higher-end hotels, restaurants, and stores. Every single
person seemed to have one. There were a handful of iPhones, almost
always the the 6/6s or +. (I did see a fair number of Apple billboards
though, which I had not seen when I was there a couple of years ago).
The
general sense was that the iPhone was terribly overpriced, and that a
high-end Android phone offered pretty much the same functionality. The
'ecosystem' argument did not play well, since co-offerings such as
iTunes, App Store, and ApplePay are poorly developed or implemented in
India.
With 3G ubiquitous now, and 4G being aggressively rolled
out, the smartphone market is clearly taking off there. It will be a
HUGE market. Apple can be successful, but it's not a gimme given the
incumbency of Android. I predict it'll be a slog.
I would say that having a mid-cycle phone makes a ton of sense for Apple, but also that maybe it should be a top tier version. No reason not to have 3 sizes that are more or less equivalent in features rather than an "old" phone. People can buy the "old" phone the next year when it's also sold but there's still a new, top end smaller phone being sold.
Having the 4" phone that has all or most of the 6S features (live photos, 3D touch, etc) but is sold starting 5-6 months later will help smooth out the peaks and valleys of the iphone calendar and probably make it easier to maintain production and meet demand since you aren't trying to build three different phone version all before the sep launch. Also, you don't have to predict the phone size mix perfectly if you stagger the launches.
Maybe the 4" phone could sell for $50-70 less than the 6S, $579 or $599 for the 16gb version.
The iPhone 6 has A8, 1 GB ram, 8mp camera, NFC, finger print. What is the 6c rumored to have?
The primary selling feature(s) of the iPhone 6s was Force Touch and a stronger body material.
Not for me it wasn't. I never bent my 6, and I never use Force Touch on my watch or phone. The primary selling point for me, and the reason I upgraded from the 6 to the 6s, was the bump to 2GB of RAM because I was so sick of safari refreshing everytime I clicked over to a different page. I know it's the more tech savvy like me who care about that sort of thing, but I'm not the only one in my personal life or on this website that I know of who feel the same.
Why the F* people keep referring to "emerging market" for this upcoming iPhone 5SE or 6C 4"incher iphone with all the goodies tech inside. There are millions of Americans and Europeans and rest of the non-emerging world people still using and love their 4S/5/5S iphones who eager to replace and move to this upcoming iphone. So, just say, those who like smaller size phone will love to have this new iphone. It is insulting to put my family into emerging market countries. As of today, 4 out of 5 people in my family still using one of 4S/5/5S.
Huh?
1. Apple does not enjoy the brand name power in emerging markets that they do in developed ones. In those areas, Apple is not an aspirational brand.
2. Emerging markets prefer bigger screen devices. In fact, in many of them the 4.7' iPhone 6 is considered small. That is because - see #1 - the iPhone 2, 3, 4, 5 did not set the expectations and reference frames for mobile devices to where anything over 4' was considered big. In those markets, 4' inch phones are now seen as very cheap budget phones like the LG Destiny or Blu Advance.
3. As a result, when these folks see the iPhone 6 Plus as a "normal" phone, an iPhone 6 as a "small phone", they are going to see the iPhone 6c - as it will cost $200 less than an iPhone 6 and $350 less than a 6 Plus - as a cheap, bad phone that Apple is for some reason charging way more than everyone else charges for their low end models. (And it doesn't help matters that Samsung has been charging way too much for their own cheap models in emerging markets for years. That is the main reason why Samsung has lost so much business to the likes of Xiaomi, Oppo, Intex, Yu and Huawei in those markets ... they charge much less for much better phones.)
In other words, this shows that Apple really does not get the emerging markets. They are thinking that everyone is like China. The problem is that while China does have a huge "emerging market" of hundreds of millions of people, they also have a sizable middle and upper class of hundreds of millions of people! So even the hundreds of millions of lower income people know about Apple products in China because the middle and upper class people in China have them. (And also because emulating western fashions and trends and buying western products is fashionable among the Chinese upper class.) That makes Apple an aspirational brand. But in places where the middle and upper classes are nowhere near as large - and are less likely to emulate the rich and famous in America - paying $400 for a 4 inch phone when you can get a 6.3" phone from LeTV (that is right, phones in emerging markets get really big, up to 7" because in those areas they are primary computing devices, replacing the tablet and the laptop) for $250.
Now I don't think that Apple is as badly misplaying the Indian and other emerging markets as Google did with their failed Android One program (and Microsoft did trying to blanket the market with budget Windows phones over there and wound up taking an even bigger loss). I think that the real reason is Apple is paving the way to offer a mid-tier line. The first dip in the water will be 4' phones that they claim will be for developing countries, but they will follow it up with 5' phones for the same price that they market everywhere after the precedent is set. This is the first step in having an iPhone equivalent of the iPod Shuffle ($30), MacBook Air (currently can be had for $720 new on eBay) or Mac Mini ($499) and of course the iPad Mini ($250, which is the same price as a small Android tablet like the Nexus 7 or an Asus MemoPad 7).
Bottom line: the maturation of the smartphone market means that Apple is going to have to start coming down on prices just like everybody else. This is just a face-saving way to do it.
You seem pretty confident and smug with yourself and your "knowledge". Sadly, much of it is built upon faulty generalizations which you present as facts. They are actually based on nothing more than your imagination and opinion. I disagree with all of your conclusions and most of your suppositions. Better luck next time.
I would say that having a mid-cycle phone makes a ton of sense for Apple, but also that maybe it should be a top tier version. No reason not to have 3 sizes that are more or less equivalent in features rather than an "old" phone. People can buy the "old" phone the next year when it's also sold but there's still a new, top end smaller phone being sold.
Having the 4" phone that has all or most of the 6S features (live photos, 3D touch, etc) but is sold starting 5-6 months later will help smooth out the peaks and valleys of the iphone calendar and probably make it easier to maintain production and meet demand since you aren't trying to build three different phone version all before the sep launch. Also, you don't have to predict the phone size mix perfectly if you stagger the launches.
Maybe the 4" phone could sell for $50-70 less than the 6S, $579 or $599 for the 16gb version.
If the "5se" rumor is true, it does actually allow Apple to sell an iPhone for $350, now that customers know the actual cost of their phones (i.e. the 5s, just moves down another $100 as it's done for the past 3 years, but still allows them to offer Pay). It also allows them to sell the 6 for $450, without dropping their premium screen size below the previous threshold, and creates a new entry level price point. At the same time I believe Apple plans to offer the "6c" which is essentially a 6S in a smaller package without a couple of features -- in the same way the 6S is a smaller version of the 6S Plus, without a couple of features. Apple can price this phone at $600 if they want to, and that way maximizes the amount of money they will get from the 4" customer base, without leaving the money on the table they would sacrifice if those customers mostly opted for the "5se" because it was the only 4" option and otherwise 'good enough'. When you look at the iPod line-up (which just got a major overhaul, but priced less than it's predecessor for a declining market product), there's absolutely no reason not to do this, especially if the "5se" an be used as a budget phone in developing markets.
If you guys confused and keep debating what should be the name of this new 4" iphone. How about iphone 5SJ or 6SJ or 7SJ, where SJ means Steve Jobs who loved, proponent of small manageable one handed use iphone.
Interesting rendering that has the display wrapping around the home button.
That rendering his hideous and ridiculous to boot. IF Touch ID gets integrated into the display it's not going to be a physical button with a silver or gold ring.
It slays me that people are arguing about the name of the device based on a feature set which has not been announced or even strongly rumoured. The only data that we know "almost" for sure is that the screen size will be 4".
I don't believe that it is being built to "Kickstarter sales in emerging markets" as this article suggests. I think that is the authors speculation and not at all part of the rumor he is reporting.
it will be a huge mistake is there is a 5 in the name. Even a name with a 6 in it is questionable at this point. I know many of you think that the name of the device has to be tied to a specific feature or attribute of the device - but it really doesn't. If the name of this 4" phone contains a number at all - I hope to god it's a 7. Any other number is a marketing mistake.
I've said it twice before in two other recent threads and I'll say it once more here (without all of the justifications and explanations I included in the other threads). The main 2016 lineup should include 5 phones instead of 2. The first 4 would be identical in features and priced like a pair of jeans. You don't pay more for a 38 waist vs a 36 waist vs a 32 waist. You pay a set price for the jeans and take the size that fits you. Same thing with the phones. Pay a common price for the capabilities and take the size that suits you best. The main 4 phones should be: 3.5" - iPhone 7 Nano 4.0" - iPhone 7 Mini 4.7" - iPhone 7 5.5" - iPhone 7 Plus
The fifth model should be the same size as the iPhone 7 plus (5.5") but thicker - just thick enough to include enough battery to last 3 days without recharging.
If I were running the company, that's what would be released this year. Of course, we'd also sell last years model for $100 off and a 2-year old model even cheaper... But they should definitely make available their flagship product in 5 configurations instead of just 2.
But emerging markets don't want a small screened phone, they want a large screen because the phone is a do-everything device.
Not so much. What everything? They don't even use the Internet, their Facebook "just connects", they have no knowledge of LTE and even of 3G. They don't know what Android or iOS are. They don't email, they don't browse the web, don't do Internet banking, don't shop online, don't play games except candy, maybe they take a couple of videos. A few, mostly younger, have managed to somewhat put a few songs in it. The most sophisticated use of their "for everything" phones and phablets is to swipe their photos from left to right then from right to left, SMS, and to some extent, Facebook...
Huh?
1. Apple does not enjoy the brand name power in emerging markets that they do in developed ones. In those areas, Apple is not an aspirational brand.
2. Emerging markets prefer bigger screen devices. In fact, in many of them the 4.7' iPhone 6 is considered small. That is because - see #1 - the iPhone 2, 3, 4, 5 did not set the expectations and reference frames for mobile devices to where anything over 4' was considered big. In those markets, 4' inch phones are now seen as very cheap budget phones like the LG Destiny or Blu Advance.
3. As a result, when these folks see the iPhone 6 Plus as a "normal" phone, an iPhone 6 as a "small phone", they are going to see the iPhone 6c - as it will cost $200 less than an iPhone 6 and $350 less than a 6 Plus - as a cheap, bad phone that Apple is for some reason charging way more than everyone else charges for their low end models. (And it doesn't help matters that Samsung has been charging way too much for their own cheap models in emerging markets for years. That is the main reason why Samsung has lost so much business to the likes of Xiaomi, Oppo, Intex, Yu and Huawei in those markets ... they charge much less for much better phones.)
In other words, this shows that Apple really does not get the emerging markets. They are thinking that everyone is like China. The problem is that while China does have a huge "emerging market" of hundreds of millions of people, they also have a sizable middle and upper class of hundreds of millions of people! So even the hundreds of millions of lower income people know about Apple products in China because the middle and upper class people in China have them. (And also because emulating western fashions and trends and buying western products is fashionable among the Chinese upper class.) That makes Apple an aspirational brand. But in places where the middle and upper classes are nowhere near as large - and are less likely to emulate the rich and famous in America - paying $400 for a 4 inch phone when you can get a 6.3" phone from LeTV (that is right, phones in emerging markets get really big, up to 7" because in those areas they are primary computing devices, replacing the tablet and the laptop) for $250.
Now I don't think that Apple is as badly misplaying the Indian and other emerging markets as Google did with their failed Android One program (and Microsoft did trying to blanket the market with budget Windows phones over there and wound up taking an even bigger loss). I think that the real reason is Apple is paving the way to offer a mid-tier line. The first dip in the water will be 4' phones that they claim will be for developing countries, but they will follow it up with 5' phones for the same price that they market everywhere after the precedent is set. This is the first step in having an iPhone equivalent of the iPod Shuffle ($30), MacBook Air (currently can be had for $720 new on eBay) or Mac Mini ($499) and of course the iPad Mini ($250, which is the same price as a small Android tablet like the Nexus 7 or an Asus MemoPad 7).
Bottom line: the maturation of the smartphone market means that Apple is going to have to start coming down on prices just like everybody else. This is just a face-saving way to do it.
If you wish for more people to read your comments, may I suggest that you break it up into smaller paragraphs. Very difficult to read.
AppleInsider is probably backing the wrong horse in the naming game here. It's been said before by me and many others, but "iPhone 6c" makes absolutely zero sense as a name for this purported device. It's is a ridiculous name for a device that has none of the iPhone 6 level features, and doesn't (as far as we know) come in multiple colours.
I'm not convinced on "iPhone 5se" either, but it makes some kind of sense for a device that is based on an iPhone 5s.
AppleInsider is probably backing the wrong horse in the naming game here. It's been said before by me and many others, but "iPhone 6c" makes absolutely zero sense as a name for this purported device. It's is a ridiculous name for a device that has none of the iPhone 6 level features, and doesn't (as far as we know) come in multiple colours.
I'm not convinced on "iPhone 5se" either, but it makes some kind of sense for a device that is based on an iPhone 5s.
6c makes perfect sense. No one confirmed so far tha "c" meant "color". Device with form factor of iPhone 6 is enough to call it 6c...A8, 1GB of RAM is the same as in iPhone 6.
Huh?
1. Apple does not enjoy the brand name power in emerging markets that they do in developed ones. In those areas, Apple is not an aspirational brand.
2. Emerging markets prefer bigger screen devices. In fact, in many of them the 4.7' iPhone 6 is considered small. That is because - see #1 - the iPhone 2, 3, 4, 5 did not set the expectations and reference frames for mobile devices to where anything over 4' was considered big. In those markets, 4' inch phones are now seen as very cheap budget phones like the LG Destiny or Blu Advance.
3. As a result, when these folks see the iPhone 6 Plus as a "normal" phone, an iPhone 6 as a "small phone", they are going to see the iPhone 6c - as it will cost $200 less than an iPhone 6 and $350 less than a 6 Plus - as a cheap, bad phone that Apple is for some reason charging way more than everyone else charges for their low end models. (And it doesn't help matters that Samsung has been charging way too much for their own cheap models in emerging markets for years. That is the main reason why Samsung has lost so much business to the likes of Xiaomi, Oppo, Intex, Yu and Huawei in those markets ... they charge much less for much better phones.)
In other words, this shows that Apple really does not get the emerging markets. They are thinking that everyone is like China. The problem is that while China does have a huge "emerging market" of hundreds of millions of people, they also have a sizable middle and upper class of hundreds of millions of people! So even the hundreds of millions of lower income people know about Apple products in China because the middle and upper class people in China have them. (And also because emulating western fashions and trends and buying western products is fashionable among the Chinese upper class.) That makes Apple an aspirational brand. But in places where the middle and upper classes are nowhere near as large - and are less likely to emulate the rich and famous in America - paying $400 for a 4 inch phone when you can get a 6.3" phone from LeTV (that is right, phones in emerging markets get really big, up to 7" because in those areas they are primary computing devices, replacing the tablet and the laptop) for $250.
Now I don't think that Apple is as badly misplaying the Indian and other emerging markets as Google did with their failed Android One program (and Microsoft did trying to blanket the market with budget Windows phones over there and wound up taking an even bigger loss). I think that the real reason is Apple is paving the way to offer a mid-tier line. The first dip in the water will be 4' phones that they claim will be for developing countries, but they will follow it up with 5' phones for the same price that they market everywhere after the precedent is set. This is the first step in having an iPhone equivalent of the iPod Shuffle ($30), MacBook Air (currently can be had for $720 new on eBay) or Mac Mini ($499) and of course the iPad Mini ($250, which is the same price as a small Android tablet like the Nexus 7 or an Asus MemoPad 7).
Bottom line: the maturation of the smartphone market means that Apple is going to have to start coming down on prices just like everybody else. This is just a face-saving way to do it.
If you wish for more people to read your comments, may I suggest that you break it up into smaller paragraphs. Very difficult to read.
Actually I realized it was nonsense after the first few sentences. Saved me a lot of time.
If there were a name, for a phone that includes iPhone 6 tech, that is going to be the new 4" version. Call it a iPhone 6m, as in mini.
Nope...same size as iPhone 5 and iPhone 5 was never considered "mini" in Apple line up. Apple only called something "mini" when they made bigger one first...like iPod. I would bet that they will give it an alphabet after that number 5 or 6...if it has iPhone 5c form factor, they may call it New iPhone 5c or 6alphabet if it carries iPhone 6 form factor.
AppleInsider is probably backing the wrong horse in the naming game here. It's been said before by me and many others, but "iPhone 6c" makes absolutely zero sense as a name for this purported device. It's is a ridiculous name for a device that has none of the iPhone 6 level features, and doesn't (as far as we know) come in multiple colours.
I'm not convinced on "iPhone 5se" either, but it makes some kind of sense for a device that is based on an iPhone 5s.
AppleInsider is probably backing the wrong horse in the naming game here. It's been said before by me and many others, but "iPhone 6c" makes absolutely zero sense as a name for this purported device. It's is a ridiculous name for a device that has none of the iPhone 6 level features, and doesn't (as far as we know) come in multiple colours.
I'm not convinced on "iPhone 5se" either, but it makes some kind of sense for a device that is based on an iPhone 5s.
6c makes perfect sense. No one confirmed so far tha "c" meant "color". Device with form factor of iPhone 6 is enough to call it 6c...A8, 1GB of RAM is the same as in iPhone 6.
Disagree. The only reason to call it 6 anything is it's general physical resemblance to the 6 series. That makes some sort of sense which is why I said that my preference would probably be "iPhone 6 mini."
Your argument about the A8 is unconvincing given that what the processor is inside is still up in the air and the internals are currently unknown. As recently as yesterday, 9to5Mac reported that multiple models with multiple different processors were being tested. Also as I've noted previously, the internal specs are something that the average consumer doesn't give a rat's behind about and are not the features the phone is "sold" on.
Finally, Apple doesn't generally explain what the letters mean, but to argue that the "c" didn't stand for colour, when colourful plastic bodies were one of the major selling points and design features is a bit weak IMO. What, pray-tell does the "c" stand for, if not for colour? It certainly isn't "cheaper." I suppose it could stand for "carbonate" as in the polycarbonate it's made from. Some people say it stands for "choice"but that's pretty lame and unlikely.
Comments
The rendering is a fantasy, concocted by someone who doesn't understand the technology.
Having the 4" phone that has all or most of the 6S features (live photos, 3D touch, etc) but is sold starting 5-6 months later will help smooth out the peaks and valleys of the iphone calendar and probably make it easier to maintain production and meet demand since you aren't trying to build three different phone version all before the sep launch. Also, you don't have to predict the phone size mix perfectly if you stagger the launches.
Maybe the 4" phone could sell for $50-70 less than the 6S, $579 or $599 for the 16gb version.
Not for me it wasn't. I never bent my 6, and I never use Force Touch on my watch or phone. The primary selling point for me, and the reason I upgraded from the 6 to the 6s, was the bump to 2GB of RAM because I was so sick of safari refreshing everytime I clicked over to a different page. I know it's the more tech savvy like me who care about that sort of thing, but I'm not the only one in my personal life or on this website that I know of who feel the same.
I don't believe that it is being built to "Kickstarter sales in emerging markets" as this article suggests. I think that is the authors speculation and not at all part of the rumor he is reporting.
it will be a huge mistake is there is a 5 in the name. Even a name with a 6 in it is questionable at this point. I know many of you think that the name of the device has to be tied to a specific feature or attribute of the device - but it really doesn't. If the name of this 4" phone contains a number at all - I hope to god it's a 7. Any other number is a marketing mistake.
I've said it twice before in two other recent threads and I'll say it once more here (without all of the justifications and explanations I included in the other threads). The main 2016 lineup should include 5 phones instead of 2. The first 4 would be identical in features and priced like a pair of jeans. You don't pay more for a 38 waist vs a 36 waist vs a 32 waist. You pay a set price for the jeans and take the size that fits you. Same thing with the phones. Pay a common price for the capabilities and take the size that suits you best. The main 4 phones should be:
3.5" - iPhone 7 Nano
4.0" - iPhone 7 Mini
4.7" - iPhone 7
5.5" - iPhone 7 Plus
The fifth model should be the same size as the iPhone 7 plus (5.5") but thicker - just thick enough to include enough battery to last 3 days without recharging.
If I were running the company, that's what would be released this year. Of course, we'd also sell last years model for $100 off and a 2-year old model even cheaper... But they should definitely make available their flagship product in 5 configurations instead of just 2.
Nope...same size as iPhone 5 and iPhone 5 was never considered "mini" in Apple line up. Apple only called something "mini" when they made bigger one first...like iPod. I would bet that they will give it an alphabet after that number 5 or 6...if it has iPhone 5c form factor, they may call it New iPhone 5c or 6alphabet if it carries iPhone 6 form factor.
Your argument about the A8 is unconvincing given that what the processor is inside is still up in the air and the internals are currently unknown. As recently as yesterday, 9to5Mac reported that multiple models with multiple different processors were being tested. Also as I've noted previously, the internal specs are something that the average consumer doesn't give a rat's behind about and are not the features the phone is "sold" on.
Finally, Apple doesn't generally explain what the letters mean, but to argue that the "c" didn't stand for colour, when colourful plastic bodies were one of the major selling points and design features is a bit weak IMO. What, pray-tell does the "c" stand for, if not for colour? It certainly isn't "cheaper." I suppose it could stand for "carbonate" as in the polycarbonate it's made from. Some people say it stands for "choice"but that's pretty lame and unlikely.