Not from a monetary standpoint. Apple stands to lose billions of $ a year from lost upgrades from users who want the latest and greatest iPhone.
Exactly, I am saving $850+tax this year by missing a 2-year upgrade cycle for the first time. Hopefully not for long until OLED and edge-to-edge screen rumors are materialized.
Another reason to not update the industrial design as often is to provide better support to case, battery case, game controller, slide on camera lens, and other third party accessory manufacturers.
Why do apple fans think that there will be years, if not decades, or iphone improvements keeping the massive cash cow going? One only needs to look to other devices in our lives to see what the future holds. How often do we upgrade:
1) TV sets
2) Computers
3) Monitors
4) tablets
5) DVR's
etc, etc, etc
At some point innovation leaps are far and few between. The iphone was a huge leap when it launched. It was new so plenty of new low hanging fruit for innovation was laying around to implement over the last 10 years. However today almost a decade past the difference between releases grows far smaller. Sure I can buy a PC today that smokes the one I bought 3 years ago but it won't do anything better or faster than the real world usage it is for everyday. If you are a video editor or heavy photoshop user it will pay but anyone else not a chance.
I don't see how apple shareholders and fans can't simply look out 3, 5 and 10 years and think every year apple will release some must have reason to pay up 100% or more for a new iphone as compared to any other android phone which BTW also has fewer breakthroughs in the mature market.
If apple has a 3 year cycle it's going to be a slide down in sales and profits. Apple is not going to disappear. But it may go from a 500B market cap to half of that in the next 2 to 5 years as a result of declining iphone sales and lower average selling prices (ASP's). Also apple may be spending huge dollars for cars and other initiatives which could possibly not pan out. Remember these are all done now without the very genius that made Apple what it is today (steve jobs). Without him I fear the success rate of any new initiatives shall be at great risk.
---
Just to understand your reasoning on the Steve Jobs comment. You're saying that all the other companies out there, with their 20 or 30x multiples. Those companies, which NEVER EVEN HAD Steve Jobs. Those companies will be fine and deserve their higher multiples. But Steve Jobs was so great that without him, the only company that ever ACTUALLY HAD HIM is doomed, even though it's the only technology company that was actually shaped by him. Is that your reasoning? Because it's nonsense.
In a tech industry that is lightning fast moving and highly competitive.. Good luck with that 3 year cycle Apple.. Hope you survive it.
I think you misread the article. New models will be released yearly, but major outer design changes will be carried out once every 3 years rather than once every 2 years, as Apple’s current iPhone practice. This will also mean Apple will most likely expand their naming scheme to N, Ns & possibly Nse, if the 5se is any indication. Since a “generation” of CPUs is 18 months, then Apple’s switch could be meant coincide with more apparent technology improvements, and thus avoid the curse of the “it looks the same & isn’t much faster than the previous #s’. It also means that the “se” models might be on par with the next gen “s” models. This would give Apple a 3 phone lineup that were differentiated between cutting edge, new look and cutting edge & new look, and deflate arguments about the lack of options beyond Flash memory & color that critics use to deride Apple Hardware.
The problem with this logic is that not all tech advances are dependent on a new CPU. For example, there can be advances to services, software, displays, radios, storage, batteries, user-interaction hardware, etc. that do not [necessarily] depend on a new CPU.
Apple well may choose a 3-phone naming scheme as you suggest -- but I doubt it.
I suspect that Apple will release new iPhones (iDevices) as compelling new tech becomes available rather than on a regular, predictable cycle.
Everyone will move to longer hardware cycle for major design changes. Intel moved from tick-toke to whatever schedule the market determines. .Now, this does not mean not adding few smaller enhancements every year like processor speed. Most yearly changes will be on software side.
tick-toke? No wonder it takes Intel so long to release a new product ... They seem to enjoy themselves, though ...
Not from a monetary standpoint. Apple stands to lose billions of $ a year from lost upgrades from users who want the latest and greatest iPhone.
Exactly, I am saving $850+tax this year by missing a 2-year upgrade cycle for the first time. Hopefully not for long until OLED and edge-to-edge screen rumors are materialized.
How exactly are you saving $850? I buy a new iPhone every year, and when I subtract what I sell my old one for I'm usually only out $250 or so. Whether I keep my phone for 3 years or buy every year, the cost to me is similar. $250-300 per year or $800-900 every 3 years.
One benefit of 3-year HW refresh cycle = shifting customer focus to services. i.e., lose your fixation on the annual hardware gadgetry and focus on the new value-add services that are available for your "Apple Services" subscriptions. (This is pure speculation, of course!)
To make this work, the compellingnew value-add servicesmust be best exploited by new hardware -- to the extent that most will want the latest/greatest iPhone to get the most from the service.
An simple example could be a compelling new Siri (using VocalIQ) to do voice recognition, retain context and perform services [mostly] on the device -- rather than having to go to Apple's servers to do the heavy lifting. This could be exploited on the latest hardware by faster CPU, more storage, more efficient radios (when Siri does need to go to Apple's servers).
Look at it this way: The center of your universe is wherever you are at the moment with your iDevice personal accessory!
Going to a 3 year cycle isn't really that different. The original iPhone, the 3G and the 3GS was a 3 cycle release. The 5, 5s/5c and now the 5se.... 3 cycles. If the 7 doesn't change that much (especially screen / body size) that will be 3 iterations again. Really, the only 2 year cycle was the 4 / 4s.
People that want the latest phone will buy one regardless. In the meantime, it's nice not having to buy all new accessories every time you get a new phone.
Say what? The 6S is, by far, the biggest upgrade in any iPhone cycle.
- A9 processor, which was a huge jump from the A8. Also allows always-on Siri without having to be plugged in. - 2GB RAM from 1GB (this is a huge deal). - NVMe storage controller (worlds first and is why the iPhone 6S has the fastest storage system around). - 12MP 4K camera which also adds 1080P at 120 FPS (the only smartphone in the world fast enough to do this). - 3D Touch. - New, smoking fast Touch ID. - New 5MP front facing camera. - Retina Flash that not only overdrives the screen for more light, but even color matches the light. - Bluetooth 4.2.
Some of those are really, really reaching. Also, that wasn't the first NVMe storage controller, the Retina MacBook had one.
For me, I had a 6, and now a 6s. Just like the 5 and the 5s, it is a night and day difference. YMMV
In a tech industry that is lightning fast moving and highly competitive.. Good luck with that 3 year cycle Apple.. Hope you survive it.
RU•MOR /ˈro͞omər: a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth: "This iPhone story is based on a rumor."
Do you people ever get it?
Um... before you go postal, is it possible he's responding fully in the context of, and understanding the fact that it is, indeed, a rumor? In other words, the "If this rumor is true..." is perhaps implied?
Moving to a 3 yr cycle will significantly reduce the incentive to upgrade and average lifespan for an iPhone will increase. So, from that standpoint, it's hard to see how Apple would move to that knowing it might impact sales.
A company of Apple' resources doesn't face an either/or choice when it comes to hardware or services. Apple user base will ensure a level of success regardless but Apple's cloud services lag far behind that of the competition and to address that Apple requires expertise and a culture shift.
It's not a TRUE 3 year cycle, where they only update the iPhone every 3 years, just major upgrades, the report just said there will be, for instance an 8, 8s, 8z, then 9, 9s, 9z, for example. With a 128GB, for me I am like what else could you want. When I get all my music tagged the way I want, I suppose a 256GB would be the end. It's still an iPod to me...
The speaker and cameras floating in the screen is bad design. If they do move to a full device display, i hope they move the speaker to the very top to allow for that screen real-estate to be reclaimed.
The speaker and cameras floating in the screen is bad design. If they do move to a full device display, i hope they move the speaker to the very top to allow for that screen real-estate to be reclaimed.
A camera would probably be much harder to move to an edge than a speaker. So in-screen design makes sense.
If we’re moving to a three year cycle, doesn’t it need a third name? iPhone 6X or something?
They ought to just call it “iPhone 6” for the rest of the product’s lifespan.
It's a good point to bring up. Nomenclature would surely change, you'd think. Everyone keeps mentioning iPhone 7. That would imply a new series. Why would the 3rd phone in a series jump a whole number? As to which name Apple would bestow their newly rumored 3rd iPhone in the 6 series...your guest seems valid to me! The third iPhone in the series could be the new penultimate, usurping the "s" moniker. Keeping a similar chassis design but graduating to 7 series nomenclature confuses me, to be honest.
They really should just drop the numbering and use years. Then changing the case design doesn't dictate a better product cycle over technology upgrades.
Introducing the iPhone 2017 next years phone in September. Also iPhone Plus 2017 and iPhone minus 2017.
Comments
And yes, I am doing this again.
They ought to just call it “iPhone 6” for the rest of the product’s lifespan.
---
Just to understand your reasoning on the Steve Jobs comment. You're saying that all the other companies out there, with their 20 or 30x multiples. Those companies, which NEVER EVEN HAD Steve Jobs. Those companies will be fine and deserve their higher multiples. But Steve Jobs was so great that without him, the only company that ever ACTUALLY HAD HIM is doomed, even though it's the only technology company that was actually shaped by him. Is that your reasoning? Because it's nonsense.
The problem with this logic is that not all tech advances are dependent on a new CPU. For example, there can be advances to services, software, displays, radios, storage, batteries, user-interaction hardware, etc. that do not [necessarily] depend on a new CPU.
Apple well may choose a 3-phone naming scheme as you suggest -- but I doubt it.
I suspect that Apple will release new iPhones (iDevices) as compelling new tech becomes available rather than on a regular, predictable cycle.
tick-toke? No wonder it takes Intel so long to release a new product ... They seem to enjoy themselves, though ...
How exactly are you saving $850? I buy a new iPhone every year, and when I subtract what I sell my old one for I'm usually only out $250 or so. Whether I keep my phone for 3 years or buy every year, the cost to me is similar. $250-300 per year or $800-900 every 3 years.
To make this work, the compelling new value-add services must be best exploited by new hardware -- to the extent that most will want the latest/greatest iPhone to get the most from the service.
An simple example could be a compelling new Siri (using VocalIQ) to do voice recognition, retain context and perform services [mostly] on the device -- rather than having to go to Apple's servers to do the heavy lifting. This could be exploited on the latest hardware by faster CPU, more storage, more efficient radios (when Siri does need to go to Apple's servers).
Look at it this way: The center of your universe is wherever you are at the moment with your iDevice personal accessory!
The original iPhone, the 3G and the 3GS was a 3 cycle release.
The 5, 5s/5c and now the 5se.... 3 cycles.
If the 7 doesn't change that much (especially screen / body size) that will be 3 iterations again.
Really, the only 2 year cycle was the 4 / 4s.
People that want the latest phone will buy one regardless. In the meantime, it's nice not having to buy all new accessories every time you get a new phone.
A company of Apple' resources doesn't face an either/or choice when it comes to hardware or services. Apple user base will ensure a level of success regardless but Apple's cloud services lag far behind that of the competition and to address that Apple requires expertise and a culture shift.
Introducing the iPhone 2017 next years phone in September. Also iPhone Plus 2017 and iPhone minus 2017.
Here's a logical approach to naming the iPhones Models:
iPhone | Display-Size / Year (last 2 digits) | Early/Mid/Late (only necessary if more than 1 release of a model per year
This would yield something like this:
- iPhone 4.0"/100mm S | 2016 | E == iP S /16
- iPhone 4.7"/120mm M | 2015 | L == iP M/15
- iPhone 5.5"/140mm L | 2015 | L == iP L /15
This would allow consistent, specific meaningful naming -- and the flexibility to introduce new iPhones as the tech becomes widely available.Or, they could go with: