iPhone Nano Rumors Revived in Otherwise Quiet Lead-in to Macworld

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/15/iphone-nano-rumors-revived-in-otherwise-quiet-lead-in-to-macworld/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article/2008/12/15/061816-iPhone-9_425.jpg

Questionably reliable iDealsChina (http://www.idealschina.com/Insider/NewsDetail.aspx?ArticleID=32) publishes information and renderings of what it claims to be an "iPhone nano". It is the same height as the just release Nano but wider and thicker and with the same iPhone 3G contours.iPhone "nano" rumors have persisted for some time with speculation that Apple could introduce a smaller/cheaper version of the iPhone. The site claims the product will be announced at Macworld San Francisco 2009. iDealsChina, however, has a very mixed track record. In August, it passed off (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/08/24/ipod-nano-case-leaks-ipod-touch-to-have-gps/) renderings of knock-off iPod clones as the real thing and also claimed that the new iPod Touch would have GPS (it did not). The site, however, did previously (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/05/28/more-confirmation-of-3g-iphone-case-design/) have access to Griffin case moldings that appeared to be real. The sizes could correlate with smaller touch screen photographs (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/backstage/comments/is-this-the-new-iphones-touchscreen) that iLounge published in June.

If Apple were to introduce a smaller sized iPhone, it would not likely be compatible with any of the App Store apps due to difference in screen size and resolution. This fact has led many to doubt that Apple would make such a move.

Otherwise, the rumor mill has been uncharacteristically quiet in the lead in to Macworld San Francisco which kicks off on January 5th, 2009. Also unusual is that at this late date, IDG has not yet announced (http://blogs.oreilly.com/digitalmedia/2008/12/no-jobs-at-macworld.html) that Steve Jobs will be hosting the expo's keynote speech.

Article Link: iPhone Nano Rumors Revived in Otherwise Quiet Lead-in to Macworld (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/15/iphone-nano-rumors-revived-in-otherwise-quiet-lead-in-to-macworld/)

[Tallest Skil]

Oh... no... now everyone who thinks its real won't shut up for the rest of the month...

[Bonte]

The screen looks only a bit smaller, maybe this is the new model iPhone. Companioned with a nice tablet iPod would make it perfect. :)

[xparaparafreakx]

Even if the nano is not the same resolution, that may not stop apple from making one. The might update xcode to prep two version of an app. One at reguar resolution and one at nano resolution. Some apps might "one click" prep to the nano resolution but other might take a little longer.

Or they could make it the same resolution somehow.

[nos]

Or they could make it the same resolution somehow.

I fail to see why not.

Steve likes to say how thin and small things are, so it could be true. :D

[CrackedButter]

The current line up is small enough, why do smaller. I hope this rumour isn't true.

[Bonte]

I would guess this is a leak from accessory makers but they don't get to see the new products, only updated existing models. Seems to me this would be an update for the basic iPhone, not a nano. Especially if it has the same resolution.

[ruku]

many screens of equal size to the iphone have a much denser pixel ratio. its totally possible to match the pixels of the iphone in a smaller screen as long as screens of that size are produced somewhere.

[talkingfuture]

I'd love it to be true but I'm not convinced.

Its strange how quiet the rumour mill has been. Either leaks have been plugged or there isn't anything :eek:

[Martin C]

Eh, maybe if they sell it for $99.

[labrats5]

I don't believe this for a second. Half the apps in the store would be rendered unusable due to the smaller screen. This is the sort of thing that gives developers nightmares. The App store has emerged as the iphone's #1 killer feature. Breaking thousands of apps, causing endless customer confusion and pissing off their developers (just as serious alternate platforms are emerging) is the absolute last thing Apple would want to do.

C'mon, everyone loves a good rumor, but we are better than this.

[Bonte]

I don't believe this for a second. Half the apps in the store would be rendered unusable due to the smaller screen. This is the sort of thing that gives developers nightmares. The App store has emerged as the iphone's #1 killer feature. Breaking thousands of apps, causing endless customer confusion and pissing off their developers (just as serious alternate platforms are emerging) is the absolute last thing Apple would want to do.

What would be the problem if it has the same speed and screen resolution?

[samh004]

I don't see why a smaller screen couldn't have the same resolution as the old larger screen. After all, it's been a couple years.

This could perhaps be a new iPod nano, following the touch, though they were just updated to it does seem a little premature.

The spot at the bottom for the presumably home button, looks too small.

[Dont Hurt Me]

This would be cool as long as its not crippled in some way, a lot of folks could really care a less about gaming features on a 2" screen.

[fastbite]

It makes total sense to expand the range.

[fastbite]

I don't see why a smaller screen couldn't have the same resolution as the old larger screen. After all, it's been a couple years.

This could perhaps be a new iPod nano, following the touch, though they were just updated to it does seem a little premature.

The spot at the bottom for the presumably home button, looks too small.

It couldn't be the iPod nano because of the upper cut for the speaker (if real anyway)

[Tres]

I doubt this is true but if it is I really hope they don't change the screen resolution or reduce the performance, it's just going to be more of a pain in the ass for consumers if they do.

Personally I wouldn't want a much smaller screen than I have on my iPhone now, even if the resolution was the same.

[jackjason]

http://infinitech.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/iphone-secondary-backlight/

they claim to have new spy photo, on the new iphone ,but not the nano one

[Small White Car]

No. It ain't gonna happen.

Anyone who cares can search my history for the many, many times I've explained why.

The short version: There doesn't seem to be any advantage for APPLE in this idea. Anything that doesn't pass that simple test ain't gonna get far.

[djdjek]

Yeah, right. :)

[alexbates]

My next phone...if I can get service for less than $50.

[Santa Rosa]

Can't see it either. The iPhone at the moment is just the right size, anything smaller with the same interface would be awkward to use with your fingers, and there is no way Steve would allow an Apple product to ship with a stylus nowadays.

[fendol]

Not unlikely?

Well we're on rumors forum, who knows what the future will hold, we can speculate about it though. Looking at the pic, while the iPhone is bigger, the screen on the Nano is just a tad smaller :):apple:http://seoagora.com/img/1261/v08t1201sxfb/cheers.gifhttp://seoagora.com/img/589/d08l1104oulu/smiley2.gifhttp://seoagora.com/img/308/s08e1024rvou/champagne.gif

[o0samotech0o]

Yeah. And my name is Bob Marly.

This would be so unlike apple i think. They've just released a new ipod touch, why would they release another, and in that sort space of time too...

Plus all the apps are rendered for the current iphone and touches screen...
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
MEH!

-Sam:apple::apple:

[Roller]

http://infinitech.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/iphone-secondary-backlight/

they claim to have new spy photo, on the new iphone ,but not the nano one

I've read rumors of a status display that's visible on the unlock screen, though this is the first I've read about a secondary backlight.

But it seems odd that Apple would be releasing anything other than a relatively minor update to the iPhone (32GB, maybe) at Macworld.

[Abstract]

It wouldn't hurt if the iPhone is smaller, but Apple only cares about making thin products, not products that have too short a length and width to be useful. The iPhone isn't a bad size, so I don't see why such an awkward, tiny device is needed. I don't even know what you'd do with it. It looks like it's half the size (surface area) of the current iPhone, and around 33% shorter in length. It would be another one of those tiny phones made 7 years ago that never caught on. If smaller is what most people wanted from their phone, then mobile phones would be smaller today.

....and there is no way Steve would allow an Apple product to ship with a stylus nowadays.

My new Nokia 5800 came with a stylus, and it's incredibly useful at times. If I don't want to use it, I don't take it out of its slot.

The handwriting system is also VERY good on my phone, which is great if you aren't using the Romanized alphabet.

[MacSA]

Oh great more iPhone c**p, How about some decent desktop hardware updates?

[Tastannin]

I don't think Apple will mess with what is a successful formula. Remember the iPod Mini/Nano basically was Apple's reach out into flash based devices, and now is becoming the path for its future devices. I don't see what a iPhone Nano would bring to the table. The iPhone, because it's a touch device, needs the screen to be the size it is. The iPhone Nano screen, be it the same DPI or a higher DPI to keep the same resolution, will be effectively harder to use as a touch device.

I also looked at the secondary backlight link, and that looks terrible. How many people will say this means my screen is breaking, etc. ??? Ugh. That does not look like the typical Apple execution and attention to detail. (I know it's a mockup/prototype, but still.)

Like others say, I'll bet on a 32GB iPhone at MWSF over a iPhone Nano. I still hope they won't come out with the 32GB one anyways since that'd mean my 16GB's status is downgraded. LOL

[deannnnn]

Well, if the "iPhone nano" is smaller and cheaper than maybe it won't have access to the App Store at all. Just a basic, phone/texting/safari kind of device.

[Compile 'em all]

I've read rumors of a status display that's visible on the unlock screen, though this is the first I've read about a secondary backlight.

But it seems odd that Apple would be releasing anything other than a relatively minor update to the iPhone (32GB, maybe) at Macworld.

this is not a rumor. An Apple patent does show such functionality and it will make its way into a future iPhone revision.

[jackjason]

yeah, I guess we won't see anything big until summer / xmas 09
as iphone is selling good right now
aapl can keep sellin gthem for another yaer or so.

[Roller]

this is not a rumor. An Apple patent does show such functionality and it will make its way into a future iPhone revision.

I think it will too, but not every Apple patent finds its way into a shipping product, so it's still technically a rumor. But my main point was that it would be odd for Apple to release an iPhone with any major improvements this soon.

[Bryanj026]

yeah yeah yeah..... where is ten dot five dot six!

[winterspan]

It makes total sense to expand the range.

Usually that is the case with successful products like the iPhone, but I'm not convinced. I don't see any major advantages to the idea considering the iPhone will be $99 after christmas... It is still the data plan that keeps it out of many people's hands, and I can't see that requirement being lifted for a new model.

Can't see it either. The iPhone at the moment is just the right size, anything smaller with the same interface would be awkward to use with your fingers, and there is no way Steve would allow an Apple product to ship with a stylus nowadays.

I agree. If the display was the same resolution as the larger iPhone, most of the onscreen buttons would be much too small to be able to press. How in the world would you have a QWERTY on such a small screen??? In my opinion, The iPhone's display is just about the bare minimum size necessary for a comfortable user experience. I know many (older) people who love the device but think it is too small to see and manipulate adequately. On the other hand, I can see the desire for a smaller device from a certain demo, and I'm sure Apple could pull off a decent compromise for the interface.

I don't see why a smaller screen couldn't have the same resolution as the old larger screen. After all, it's been a couple years.

Technology was not the limiting factor for resolution in the first iphone from 18 months ago. 480x320 in a 2.5-3.0" panel is nothing.... They've had 640x480 and 800x480 panels under three inches for years now. Thankfully we are starting to see these displays in new smartphones in the West; Japan's phones have had extremely high density screens for a long time.

[DipDog3]

Don't Believe this! It's all FAKE!

[Tallest Skil]

yeah yeah yeah..... where is ten dot five dot six!

Why do you need it? What's wrong with 10.5.5?

[7egend]

I think that this could be true, probably wouldn't be revealed in Jan. But I can see a release around WWDC time in 2009 or atleast an anouncement of it and a new iPhone based on LTE.

I think the form factor would be good for those who don't like the "bulky" iPhone currently, so people just want a smaller phone, but with the same functionality, and I see this phone offering just that. Plus this "might" be able to get us to $99 price points, especially if it comes equiped with 4GB of memory, and have a $199 8GB model, or make it $149. With nice aggressive pricing like that Apple would surely dominate the market with it.

It would also create the form factor for the "iPod Touch Nano", cause I don't see the click wheel staying around for much longer. People want larger screens on smaller devices and the only way to do this is to turn the entire gadget into a screen. So I say bring it, leave the iPhone in the size it's in and introduce a iPhone Nano, and you will see tons of new sells due to the size and pricing alone.

Hope it's real, but I am not betting on it. :(

[alexbates]

Why do you need it? What's wrong with 10.5.5?

...Airport Connection!

Check out post #21 on this forum on all of the problems that are going to be fixed in 10.5.6 http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=615275

[Tallest Skil]

I think that this could be true, probably wouldn't be revealed in Jan. But I can see a release around WWDC time in 2009 or atleast an anouncement of it and a new iPhone based on LTE.

LTE iPhone? This year? I don't think so.

[ob81]

I thought the rumors were a little too quiet as well. I figured that the Dynasty was over. Steve can't oversee every project anymore.

They probably won't release anything and down play the event. This is why big participants at MacWorld won't be showing up. You think that they didn't get the memo? Well they did.

[137489]

:( ah, sigh.

Here we go again. More iphone stuff.... I guess unless they release a mac tablet or something mac worthy, we should just rename it from macworld to iphone-world. And here could be the intro music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5C6X9vOEkU&feature=related

I mean seriously it is not macworld anymore. Also, the size of the ipod nano, I would say too small, but my Palm Centro has a 2 1/2 inch screen and a keyboard below it. yes, the screen is small and you have to use a stylus - but a phone that small with no keyboard and no stylus would just be too small and arkwark to use.

[Dagless]

I hope this is real.

A friend of mine just got some LG Renoir or something, it's small and whilst the menu and everything about it is rubbish - the size is brilliant. I'd get one. I don't give a flying hoot about games on it (I already own every major handheld console ever made), and the smaller screen would mean iPhoto pics would take up less room, it's 6gb on my iPod 5.5G and about 9gb on my iPod Touch.

[DogcowUK]

I'm leaning towards real:

1. We all know Steve has an obsession with making things smaller.
2. We've seen prototype smaller screens in leaked images.
3. The iPhone's PPI is not the highest on the market, I'm sure the same screen res could be squeezed into a smaller package.
4. OLED screens are approaching this kind of size (maybe a possibility to save power)

I'd worry about the usability of the keyboard on a smaller screen, maybe they'd tweak it somehow, would they be tempted by T9, unlikely I'd reckon.

If the manufacturing costs of an iPhone Nano were significantly lower than the full iPhone I'm sure they'd jump at the chance to satisfy those who want a smaller or cheaper device. This together with whatever they have planned for the "Netbook" segment could be a big win during these difficult economic times for consumers.

[ashjamben]

i'm not denying there could be a iphone nano, or a new ipod touch nano, or anything like that. but...

does no one else think that those 'leaked' pictures could be some 12 year old kid playing on MS paint? :p

[pilotError]

Could this be why Big Steve was asking the developers to get ready for Resolution independence about... oh... 2 years ago?

[air-ick]

Maybe this is for ipod touch nano. I would think that they would have a hard time cramming all the phone and gps hardware in that little case.

That's it!! ipod touch nano!

Eric

[iOrlando]

anyone have the date that steve jobs was announced to be the keynote speaker last year?

was thinking about the same thing concerning lack of rumors about macworld..if something major was going to happen..i would have guessed it would have been leaked somewhat by now...i mean a major release is usally told to more people than just steve and his closest allies.

Maybe nothing to special to occur due to economy? more focus on something over summer? just thoughts

[johnmcboston]

Why do they keep talking phone cost? It's the monthly plan that's the killer, not the cost of the phone....

[alexbates]

......Maybe nothing to special to occur due to economy? more focus on something over summer? just thoughts

I think that no matter what conditions the economy are in, Apple is going to have something good planned for MacWorld. If they didn't, they would definitely experience economic difficulties that many companies are seeing now.

[caspian]

I've seen it, touched it and it's fake. How? I was in Kuala Lumpur during a PC sales Con and one of the booth was selling it. Ya definately China made, thicker and 100% windows mobile masquerading as an iPhone phony!

I got the pictures to prove it tooo!

End of Story!

[Tallest Skil]

I think that no matter what conditions the economy are in, Apple is going to have something good planned for MacWorld. If they didn't, they would definitely experience economic difficulties that many companies are seeing now.

And yet whatever gets released will be hyped out of control, Apple's stock will tank right after the keynote, and everyone will herald the end of Apple Inc.

Just like every single event.

[.:R2theT]

I think the form factor would be good for those who don't like the "bulky" iPhone currently, so people just want a smaller phone, but with the same functionality, and I see this phone offering just that. Plus this "might" be able to get us to $99 price points, especially if it comes equiped with 4GB of memory, and have a $199 8GB model, or make it $149. With nice aggressive pricing like that Apple would surely dominate the market with it.

It seems unlikely that Apple would be able to make this device this small with the same level of functionality and hit any meaningful reduction in price point without giving up a lot of gross profit.

This rumor seems like BS to me. I think I would believe Apple would bring back a 4 GB version of the current model or just plain lower prices to gain more market share. I don't see this thing working to expand Apple's phone line without muddying the water. It just doesn't make sense.

[dougelo7]

Okay, I haven't read all the comments, but I've skimmed the first page and it appears that I'm the ONLY one to notice this.

Why does the pictured iPhone have the old Calculator icon, but the new App Store and iTunes icons? Obviously a poor computer render.

[kdarling]

And yet whatever gets released will be hyped out of control, Apple's stock will tank right after the keynote, and everyone will herald the end of Apple Inc. Just like every single event.

For those who haven't read it yet:

The Apple Product Cycle (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/)

[odedia]

they can keep the screen resolution at a smaller screen (like the did with the iPod nano). that way, all App store apps will work.

[Tallest Skil]

For those who haven't read it yet:

The Apple Product Cycle (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/)

Oh, yes, that thing. I love it. :D

[iTattoo]

My prediction for the $99 iPhone:

iPhone 8GB - $99 announced at Macworld, available immediately
iPhone 16GB - $199 announced at Macworld,available immediately
iPhone 32GB - $299 announced at Macworld, available "in a month or two"

Similarly, iPod Touch will be upped to 64GB at the top end, with the 8GB version being EOL'd, and each model will slide one spot down the price spectrum, ie, 16GB will be the same price as the old 8GB and so on. This new product announcement will come at the same time as the the availability of the 32GB iPhone, so likely no mention at Macworld of this.

The iPod nano, is in its last year with a click wheel, and will become some sort of iPod Touch Nano, but likely not until the September refresh, and similarly with a 64GB flash based iPod Touch, the Classic's days are numbered.

[neilw]

In addition to the major screw-job this would do to app developers (and confusion in the app store no doubt), to me the big issue is how Apple is actually going to make this so much cheaper than the iPhone. Other than a slightly smaller screen (which wouldn't save that much), where else will the money be saved? I don't think that many iPhone features could be left out without seriously compromising it.

Now, if a new iPhone were to come out with some significant enhancements, and then the "nano" were to inherit the feature set of the old iPhone, and perhaps be cheaper, then *maybe*. But I don't see it, at least not yet.

If it's not significantly cheaper, I'm not sure there'd be any reason to do it.

[Santa Rosa]

...and there is no way Steve would allow an Apple product to ship with a stylus nowadays.

My new Nokia 5800 came with a stylus, and it's incredibly useful at times. If I don't want to use it, I don't take it out of its slot.

The handwriting system is also VERY good on my phone, which is great if you aren't using the Romanized alphabet.

Is Steve the head of Nokia, um... no. Just because Nokia is doing it, certainly doesn't mean Apple will.

[franzmueller]

Makes sense ... an entry level iphone for kids without internet but big enough for SMS , just a plain phone .... when they get older they are used to touch screens and will upgrade to the iphone .

Have fun

Saludos

[Tallest Skil]

My new Nokia 5800 came with a stylus, and it's incredibly useful at times. If I don't want to use it, I don't take it out of its slot.

Who wants a stylus?! You have to get 'em, and put 'em away, and you lose 'em... Yuck!

Stylus? I don't think so. This is the only problem I have with the ModBook; you can't use your hands. A MacTablet would have an iPhonesque screen, which would rock.

[tobefirst]

I would love an iPhone nano. My plan is/was to get rid of my iPhone (which I've owned since day one) sometime in the next month or so in favor of a regular old cell phone, most likely from Sony Ericsson.

As a person or two has mentioned, it is the cost of the plan for me that is the reason for me planning to move to another phone, and the reason why many, I would think, are unwilling to grab the iPhone. Might Apple want a bit of this market?

I don't *need* the internet on my phone (although, I'll admit that it is very, very nice). And, obviously, if I'm considering another phone, I don't feel the need for a bunch of games or other apps on there either. What I want, ideally, is simply a phone that syncs beautifully with my Mac and looks good. The SEs usually fulfill the latter requirement (in my eyes) and do an alright job with the former. I would just like to see a bit more integration.

I would buy an iPhone nano.

[Santa Rosa]

I would love an iPhone nano. My plan is/was to get rid of my iPhone (which I've owned since day one) sometime in the next month or so in favor of a regular old cell phone, most likely from Sony Ericsson.

As a person or two has mentioned, it is the cost of the plan for me that is the reason for me planning to move to another phone, and the reason why many, I would think, are unwilling to grab the iPhone. Might Apple want a bit of this market?

I don't *need* the internet on my phone (although, I'll admit that it is very, very nice). And, obviously, if I'm considering another phone, I don't feel the need for a bunch of games or other apps on there either. What I want, ideally, is simply a phone that syncs beautifully with my Mac and looks good. The SEs usually fulfill the latter requirement (in my eyes) and do an alright job with the former. I would just like to see a bit more integration.

I would buy an iPhone nano.

I would just get an iPhone EDGE and unlock it if it was me. Then you can still use an iPhone, with any plan you want, and since you dont need the internet having an EDGE iPhone wouldn't be a problem.

[BlueRevolution]

Could this be why Big Steve was asking the developers to get ready for Resolution independence about... oh... 2 years ago?

Yeah, what's up with that? I was hoping I'd be able to zoom the Leopard UI as much as I wanted without any pixelation or loss of quality. :( Hell, they gave Delicious Library a design award for going entirely vector...

Anyway, I don't want the iPhone to get smaller, I want the iPhone bill to get smaller. I could actually afford it if it were, say, $30/mo including Canada's ************ $6 "access fee". I feel so cheated. As Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation famously said (about something else altogether), Rogers "couldn't have missed the point more if they'd fired in the wrong direction and the point was in another country altogether".

I hate wireless in Canada. We're talking burning passion here. I thought the iPhone was supposed to revolutionize the industry. As it stands now, the iPhone just made it more pretentious.

[Tallest Skil]

Anyway, I don't want the iPhone to get smaller, I want the iPhone bill to get smaller.

Not Apple's problem, though.

[franzmueller]

As a person or two has mentioned, it is the cost of the plan for me that is the reason for me planning to move to another phone, and the reason why many, I would think, are unwilling to grab the iPhone. Might Apple want a bit of this market?

I don't *need* the internet on my phone (although, I'll admit that it is very, very nice). And, obviously, if I'm considering another phone, I don't feel the need for a bunch of games or other apps on there either. What I want, ideally, is simply a phone that syncs beautifully with my Mac and looks good. The SEs usually fulfill the latter requirement (in my eyes) and do an alright job with the former. I would just like to see a bit more integration.

I would buy an iPhone nano.

I agree 100% with you .. a simple phone ; camera , SMS and ipod with a nice & clean interface ( smart & easy to use ), no monthly data plan , no GPS or games ( get an ipod touch ) and if you can watch a vid on a Nano it will work also on that phone too.

My guess : it will sell like hot potatoes


I would get it for my wife and for me as a second phone right away

Saludos

[Kwill]

The distance from my ear to my mouth has not shrank that much. Perhaps this smaller model is for children. :o

[Small White Car]

Makes sense ... an entry level iphone for kids without internet but big enough for SMS , just a plain phone .... when they get older they are used to touch screens and will upgrade to the iphone .

Have fun

Saludos

Except that the smart-phone market is growing while the regular-phone market is dying as the only models that sell must be free or close to it.

So no, I don't think it makes sense that Apple would try to enter a dying, over-saturated market where making money is very difficult.

[Santa Rosa]

The distance from my ear to my mouth has not shrank that much. Perhaps this smaller model is for children. :o

iChildPhone - Cant see it catching on, then again...

I'm going to start a rumor that Apple are going to release a phone watch at Macworld 09. That would be more interesting than iPhone Nano... :rolleyes:

[Kwill]

Oh great more iPhone c**p, How about some decent desktop hardware updates?

It's just a third-party case drawing. How do you know it's not for a new Mac mini? :D

[alphaod]

I'm being totally original. Multitouch trackpad accessory for computer. Computers have hidden feature: boot into mini screen without loading full OS to check emails, weather, calender. :rolleyes:

[cleanup]

I don't see why Apple couldn't release a basic touchscreen phone that's not a smartphone, ie. doesn't have access to all the applications on the App Store, maybe it doesn't have 3G. It's just a little iPod touch-like device with a phone in it. Maybe this is where the "mini/nano" line is going.

[Small White Car]

I don't see why Apple couldn't release a basic touchscreen phone that's not a smartphone

Because although the growth of the smartphone market is slowing (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20081206142744_Smartphone_Sales_Demonstrate_Lowest_Growth_Rate_Nokia_Maintains_Lead.html), it's still growing.


On the other hand, the regular cell-phone market is shrinking. (http://infotech.indiatimes.com/News/Nokia_Mobile_market_to_shrink_in_2009/articleshow/3716210.cms)

It seems like everyone on this board would just love for Apple to leave a growing market with phones selling for hundreds of dollars and money is being made to enter a shrinking one where prices are falling.

It's not going to happen.

[cleanup]

Because although the growth of the smartphone market is slowing (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20081206142744_Smartphone_Sales_Demonstrate_Lowest_Growth_Rate_Nokia_Maintains_Lead.html), it's still growing.


On the other hand, the regular cell-phone market is shrinking. (http://infotech.indiatimes.com/News/Nokia_Mobile_market_to_shrink_in_2009/articleshow/3716210.cms)

It seems like everyone on this board would just love for Apple to leave a growing market with phones selling for hundreds of dollars and money is being made to enter a shrinking one where prices are falling.

It's not going to happen.

That second article says that the mobile handset market as a whole is shrinking. That includes smartphones. Apple either needs to lower prices (which I'm sure they'll do on their standard iPhone) or introduce more affordable alternatives that will be more attractive to the penny-pinching, not-so-concerned-with-features-anymore consumer who's probably already in debt as it is. Not everyone can afford a $200 smartphone plus a $60+ phone bill. The iPhone costs you nearly $2000 to own over your two-year-contract, even subsidized as it is. That's tough. On the other hand, I could get a $50 handset on a $30 or $40 bill and spend about $1000 over two years, which is still expensive, but at the very least affordable. And then there's PAYG, where I could be spending as little as $700-800, even if my phone costs $300-400. iPhone power users typically demand the sort of service that requires a high cost of owning their phone, but a lot of people I know are starting to reduce their data usage on their Blackberries and iPhones because it's so ridiculously unaffordable. Releasing a phone without these capabilities, but still with the wow-factor and appeal of the iPhone, wouldn't be a terrible move.

[sangosimo]

I think the size of the current iphone is perfect. making a smaller device would detract from it's usability imo

[Small White Car]

On the other hand, I could get a $50 handset on a $30 or $40 bill and spend about $1000 over two years, which is still expensive, but at the very least affordable.

This is 100% correct. This type of phone will continue to exist.

But you still haven't answered this question: What's in it for Apple? Why should THEY make this phone?

Why would they want to start making devices with a razor-thin profit margin when every other part of their business is based around items with fairly large profit margins?

[crass]

Well, I also can not comment on the validity of the rumor itself, but I agree with the other guys that find it a great product.

To those we (rightfully) said that the smartphone market is growing, contrary to the regular cell phone market, I have to say this:

Don't you think that the mp3 player market is also "jeopardized" by the ability of even the cheapest "dumbphone" to play music?

Probably in the near future, many people will not be willing to invest 150-250 dollars just for an mp3 player, like the Nano, if they can use a regular cellphone with 4-8 GB storage.

Just like the PDA is dying, since people either:
a) find almost all of its basic functionality in every dumbphone (calendar, tasks, contacts, memos),
or
b) prefer a smartphone in order to free themselves from the burden to carry two devices.

I think the era of the standalone mp3 player is coming to an end.

Additionally, there is a huge market imo out there, who is not tech savvy. Who simply want an elegant basic phone, with PIM capabilities, the ability to purchase music from iTunes and do not care about gaming or thousands of apps.

To me it sounds a very reasonable move from Apple.
They can capture a vast segment of the mobile phone market, while at the same time they will increase their potential iTunes clientele, which is a significant source of revenue fom Apple.

I used to own an iPhone. And while it was a great device, I got tired very quickly by its volume.
While I have been a smartphone & PDA user for a decade, I have finally settled for a slick and light Nokia E51 & an ipod Nano.

If Apple can merge the two, I 'd buy it immediately. And I am sure that millions of others would too.

[trip1ex]

I don't see why it couldn't happen.

Certainly many can't afford the iPhone's monthly fee. And have no need for all its extra features.

So I could see Apple combining a Nano with a phone for the lower end of the market ie,... The folks that don't want to pay for a data plan, just want a cellphone and would love to carry one device instead of 2.

In such a device there would be no wi-fi or data plan and so no internet or app store etc.

But if they could get that to $99 subsidized by AT&T with a standard ~$40 monthly fee for cellphone service then it would be a big hit. Possibly their contract with ATT doesn't preclude Apple from shopping a nano phone to other carriers as well while keeping the iPhone exclusive to AT&T.

After all the Nano is the most popular product in the iPod lineup. I don't see why a similar strategy wouldn't work with in their Ipod+Phone lineup.

[dizzy13]

If the screen is the same proportion as the iPhone why couldn't it just sampled down? You can always make an image smaller, but not bigger.

[rugbyboy]

Anyone who thinks Apple would bring out a device without the cash cow that is the App Store is a crazy fool.

I don't think a iPhone nano is inconceivable - Apple are good at unbiggening things.

And, please, enough talk of Tablet. It wont happen. iPhone IS a tablet computer running OS X.

I think we might see iWork - with the ability to open and edit Office docs - on the iPhone at MacWorld.

I'd love to see the Mac Home Server I keep going on about produced. It would make such sense to fit into their product line + DRM nastiness.

[iParis]

This is still going on?!
There have been rumors about this since day one of the iPhone.
I may buy it, depending on the UI and the price.
This may be connecting to the $99 iPhone at Walmart rumors.
May people are already complaining that the screen on the current iPhone is too small.
If the "iPhone Nano" had a touch screen too, people would just complain even more.
Now this would be pretty sweet if it was pay as you on on AT&T.

[Small White Car]

But if they could get that to $99 subsidized by AT&T with a standard ~$40 monthly fee for cellphone service then it would be a big hit.

Yes yes, IF this happend it would be a big hit. And if the iMac cost $200 it would be a big hit too.

Here's the deal: A simpler cell phone done to Apple's standards is not going to be all that much cheaper to make. A little bit, sure. But not a whole lot.

Now, take away that big AT&T subsidy. They pay for iPhones because they know they'll get it back from users paying data plans. You've just described a situation where AT&T is making much less money off these users. So are they going to subsidize? Maybe a little, but not nearly as much.

So add that together, and what do you get? A smaller phone that does less and costs about the same as the regular iPhone.

Yeah, SOME people will buy it, but enough to make it worth Apple's time? I don't see it.

[trip1ex]

This is 100% correct. This type of phone will continue to exist.

But you still haven't answered this question: What's in it for Apple? Why should THEY make this phone?

Why would they want to start making devices with a razor-thin profit margin when every other part of their business is based around items with fairly large profit margins?

Who says the profit margin would be razor thin? Unlike the free phones offered by carriers this one would sell for ~$99 still. The rest of the cost would be subsidized the carriers just like they subsidize the free phones and iPhone.

Apple sells Nanos for $150 so I don't see why this pricepoint would be unreasonable.

The Nano is Apple's best selling iPod and I imagine a Nano phone would be their best selling phone. It wouldn't have a data plan. It would be pretty much a standard phone combined with the Nano's music/video capabilities.

The only knock on such a device that I can see is battery life being a problem because it's your phone and your mp3/video player. I don't hear many complain about the iPhone though so ..

[cleanup]

Yeah, SOME people will buy it, but enough to make it worth Apple's time? I don't see it.

The iPhone is already a household name. But a relatively small amount of people can afford it. Sure it's the hottest selling smartphone out there, and recently surpassed the Razr as the best selling phone, but think about how long Razr held its reign for. 12 quarters. That's 3 years that a small, affordable fashion phone was the top-selling phone. It was sexy, it was sleek, and it was cheap. A large part of the iPhone 3G rising to the top was just because of its much-hyped launch and the popularity surrounding it. I imagine in 2009 its popularity will wane. If Apple manages to make a new hot-selling fashion phone that's affordable to the masses like the Razr is, then the mobile companies have loads to gain.

[olternaut]

I'd love it to be true but I'm not convinced.

Its strange how quiet the rumour mill has been. Either leaks have been plugged or there isn't anything :eek:

I really hope its the case that most of the leaks have been plugged. It wold be HIGHLY dissapointing if the case was that there isn't anything exciting at the upcoming Macworld. :(

[trip1ex]

Yes yes, IF this happend it would be a big hit. And if the iMac cost $200 it would be a big hit too.

Here's the deal: A simpler cell phone done to Apple's standards is not going to be all that much cheaper to make. A little bit, sure. But not a whole lot.

Now, take away that big AT&T subsidy. They pay for iPhones because they know they'll get it back from users paying data plans. You've just described a situation where AT&T is making much less money off these users. So are they going to subsidize? Maybe a little, but not nearly as much.

So add that together, and what do you get? A smaller phone that does less and costs about the same as the regular iPhone.

Yeah, SOME people will buy it, but enough to make it worth Apple's time? I don't see it.

Apple sells the low-end Nano for $150, which is the best selling iPod and carriers subsidize basic phones for no cost to the consumer so I don't see why a Nano phone for $99 is such an outrageous proposition that you have to say something like, 'if the $1200 iMac was $200 it would be a big hit too.'

[aarond12]

I think we're looking at this the wrong way. Take the previous iPhone nano rumors and add in the recent patents on the virtual controller.

We're all assuming you'll be able to run all the apps from the iPhone app store on this new device. Take that assumption out and you've got the possibility for a nice device.

For the phone functionality, the size of the screen is still okay for a touch-style keypad.

For iPod functionality, use the "virtual controller" patents and it works.

[twoodcc]

i'll believe this when i see it. but i sure hope that they announce that Steve is doing the keynote soon though

[dwsolberg]

1. The on-screen keyboard would be too small to use.
2. One assumes the current iphone is as small/thin as Steve could get it. That was only five months ago.
3. The current iPod Touch is half the thickness of the iPhone, meaning that about half the thickness is related to phone functions.
4. Apple revealed its hand in how it plans to improve its devices: the user interface stays the same, but the item gets thinner.
5. No rumblings from the FCC on a new device.
6. Making a smaller phone would be MORE expensive, not less expensive. Has the MacBook Air taught us nothing?
7. There are so many fake iPhones in China that this picture could probably have been taken by thousands of people.

[IndyJonez]

http://infinitech.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/iphone-secondary-backlight/

they claim to have new spy photo, on the new iphone ,but not the nano one

Hahaha, anyone read the bottom?

"We will be back with more news on the prototype as soon as we get them. Our source has given us word that he will be messing around with the VIDEO CHAT application on his next correspondense."

[Small White Car]

Who says the profit margin would be razor thin? Unlike the free phones offered by carriers this one would sell for ~$99 still. The rest of the cost would be subsidized the carriers just like they subsidize the free phones and iPhone.

And why would the carriers do that? They're making less money back from these users.

Obviously there's no way to know, but I think this "nano iPhone" would still cost between $150 - $200, and at that price Apple would STILL be making less money per unit than they do with their current model.

[Hawkeye411]

Went to the mall and pre-ordered one for my wife. Looks pretty cool to me. ;)

[dr_lha]

Hahaha, anyone read the bottom?

"We will be back with more news on the prototype as soon as we get them. Our source has given us word that he will be messing around with the VIDEO CHAT application on his next correspondense."
Why is that funny? Phones in Europe have had forward facing cameras and video chat on them for a few years. Even if it's WiFi only, I don't see why the iPhone couldn't have this feature in the future.

[Rocketman]

ASSUMING it is true. Apple could have a different OS for the smaller device with rows of only 2-3 icons and a more limited range of things it can do. It could have a special SDK for it and its new display method.

It could simply be a higher resolution screen and everything is just smaller. That would lower the age demographic to people with good vision.

ASSUMING.

Rocketman

[iMacmatician]

The iPhone nano rumor is just like the tablet and mini-tablet rumors. Multiple rumors over time with no product in sight. (I would prefer a mini-tablet or even a tablet over an iPhone nano, though.)

Seems to me this would be an update for the basic iPhone, not a nano. Especially if it has the same resolution.Interesting idea there. Would this hint at a "pro" iPhone or mini-tablet with a larger display at MWSF?

many screens of equal size to the iphone have a much denser pixel ratio. its totally possible to match the pixels of the iphone in a smaller screen as long as screens of that size are produced somewhere.The resolution isn't as much a problem as the problem of the fixed finger size. At least with the mini-tablet, the apps can always be in windows.

Its strange how quiet the rumour mill has been. Either leaks have been plugged or there isn't anything :eek:Let's hope it's the former. :) But it looks like it may be the latter (with no announcement of Jobs keynote, etc.). :(

[talkingfuture]

Surely an iPhone nano will have the internet and the app store or else it isn't an iPhone, its just a good looking phone. That won't get me people buying it in huge numbers.

[yegon]

I call bs.

I really struggle to see the point of a smaller iPhone, the same res on a smaller screen would be fine for watching videos (for some, not me) but browsing? Forget the apps, the browsing experience is what separates the iPhone from the competition. Good luck trying to activate a link on a same res smaller screen without having to pinch zoom first.

Which leaves you with a mp3/mp4 playing phone, of which there are already countless on the market that perform that task well enough.

[puffnstuff]

Also unusual is that at this late date, IDG has not yet announced (http://blogs.oreilly.com/digitalmedia/2008/12/no-jobs-at-macworld.html) that Steve Jobs will be hosting the expo's keynote speech.
]


Pretty sure he is dead

[MikeDTyke]

I call bs.

I really struggle to see the point of a smaller iPhone, the same res on a smaller screen would be fine for watching videos (for some, not me) but browsing? Forget the apps, the browsing experience is what separates the iPhone from the competition. Good luck trying to activate a link on a same res smaller screen without having to pinch zoom first.

Which leaves you with a mp3/mp4 playing phone, of which there are already countless on the market that perform that task well enough.

Steve jobs said 'Why would we want to compete with cut down flash mp3 players that people just shove in the drawer?" Within a year they'd launched the shuffle.

It's not about whether there's countless models on the market that can do the job, it's because you can come into this market it and dominate it, make the rest look like a joke and laugh all the way to the bank.

Jobs may not say this on stage, but he's sure as hell thinking it. ;-)

[BlueRevolution]

Not Apple's problem, though.

Of course it bloody well is! They're the ones that negotiated the exclusivity contracts with the various carriers. You're trying to tell me they had no control whatsoever over what rates the carrier charges?

[G4R2]

Judging from the history of accurate and inaccurate rumors, and the various arguments and rationales for and against, that have circulated in the past there's an even chance that this could be true.

For instance, there were numerous naysayers who denounced the rumors of the original iPod Nano, the pictures of the iPod Nano fatty, and the whispers of a one button touchscreen phone that Apple was developing. All these rumors turned out to be true despite the skeptics.

Similarly, there were numerous rumors that proved false, most infamously for this website the iWalk.

Bottom line is that there's no proof for or against such a device. What is known is that there is pressure on Apple to produce a lower cost variant of the iPhone. What form such a device would take, whether it's a nano form factor or a lower capacity version of the iPhone, is known only to Apple.

We can only speculate that nano version of the iPhone would retain the pixel resolution of the current model if a smaller screen is indeed part of the mix in order to retain compatibility with current applications. Other than that liklihood it would be anyone's guess what other features such a form factor loaded with the current UI would possess.

[RTiii320]

I really hope not, why would you need an iPhone Nano? They iphone as it is, is just slightly larger than your palm. Is it really needed to make it even smaller?

[yegon]

Steve jobs said 'Why would we want to compete with cut down flash mp3 players that people just shove in the drawer?" Within a year they'd launched the shuffle.

It's not about whether there's countless models on the market that can do the job, it's because you can come into this market it and dominate it, make the rest look like a joke and laugh all the way to the bank.

Jobs may not say this on stage, but he's sure as hell thinking it. ;-)

While I partially agree, and would never rule out Apple or indeed any other company releasing a product that could potentially sell like hotcakes, it'd surely have to be filthy cheap to distinguish it from the iPhone. In which case, what's the point?

Like I say, I do kind of agree with you, a u-turn isn't exactly unprecedented but I'd still be surprised if this ever saw the light of day.

[GSMiller]

Unless the Nano supports CDMA, I don't care.

[JesterJJZ]

Crap...I was hoping for something smaller and more traditional with a numberpad. Crap! :mad:

[Ropedartman]

Companies like Apple survive difficult times because of their loyal, long-term customers. An economic recession is not the time to introduce flashy new items of questionable appeal. It's bad business sense and it's certainly not Apple's style. MW in January will be a toned-down effort geared towards the customer's they already have and want to keep up-to-date. IMHO, I'm guessing the focus will be on SnowLeopard and software, talk of the App store's success and...one more thing...a 32gb iPhone, because a lot of folks with 4 or 8 gb's just can't justify the jump to a whoppin' 16 (I certainly can't). But a 32 gb will keep just enough phones moving to keep :apple: in the positive until things pick up economically again.

The App store IS the money-maker for iPhone (for :apple:)and, I believe, another phone that does not utilize this feature, is simply not going to happen. For the moment, iPhone development is in the hands of App developers.

[fierywater]

I feel that there's enough evidence gathered to at least give this rumor a shot at being true.

That said, Apple would definitely have to cut some features to avoid cannibalizing the iPhone's market. First off, keep the same processor and OS; the platform itself isn't where Jobs would be likely to make feature cuts.

1) No 3G. Restricting this model to EDGE data would not only help differentiate it from the iPhone but also allow the possibility of a lower monthly fee. Not to mention the fact that it would lessen the strain on AT&T.

2) No GPS. Obviously.

3) Possibly no WiFi. I don't feel as strongly about this one as I do about #1 & #2, but it would definitely cut costs. It would have the side effect of making the phone painful to browse the internet with in almost all circumstances, though.

4) Less memory. I'm not convinced that a 4GB model makes sense, seeing as Apple doesn't use 4GB chips in any current iPod. I think Apple would be more likely to bump the iPhone capacities up to 16GB/32GB and make the iPhone Nano (for lack of a better name) be an 8GB model.

I disagree with those who feel that lowering the resolution would be a developer nightmare. It would certainly be an inconvenience, but Apple would most likely build a simple way to update apps into Xcode. Granted, developers would have to rework their interfaces for a lower resolution, but we're still a far cry from what Palm OS developers have had to do every single time Palm's released a new device. For those not in the know, Palm had a habit of tweaking OS5 every time they released a device that would break compatibility with a good number of applications.

That said, I still don't see why keeping the same resolution would be out of the question, either. It's not as if a screen of that size and resolution has never been done before. Sure, the keyboard would be a little harder to use, but I can't imagine that stopping Apple.

I feel that the feature cuts I listed above would help differentiate the theoretical iPhone Nano from the current iPhone while still keeping the base level of functionality that Jobs values so highly. My guess at a price point? I don't know if the mythical $99 price point would be possible, but $150 doesn't seem out of the question, especially if it's paired with a slightly cheaper data plan. We'll see.

Man, thinking like Jobs is tough. I did my best.

[Vanyasteen]

Why is everyone ass-u-ming this case is for an Apple product? It's probably for the craptacular new Zune Phone.

[scootaru]

I can see an iphone nano with no data plan and app store capability being sold for $99. Atleast give it wifi. The profit margin may not be as much, but they will make up for it in volume.

Apple will sell millions and it won't be long before those who bought the nano realize what they're missing, all the features of the normal iphone. I think many will eventually upgrade to the normal iphone.

The iphone nano would satisfy the low cost market while also being used as a stepping stone to many for the more expensive iphone model.

Edit: Removed gps capability due to no data plan...would be useless.

[firewood]

They're the ones that negotiated the exclusivity contracts with the various carriers.

Maybe you forgot that other carriers turned down the iPhone. At some point you've got to take the deal left on the table.

.

[firewood]

I've seen it, touched it and it's fake. How? I was in Kuala Lumpur during a PC sales Con and one of the booth was selling it. Ya definately China made, thicker and 100% windows mobile masquerading as an iPhone phony!

This makes a lot of sense. There are a lot of look-alike devices made that will never see the light of day in the U.S. or E.U. due to trademark, copyright and maybe patent violations.

.

[firewood]

they can keep the screen resolution at a smaller screen

For a touch screen device, they could only sell this to creatures with smaller fingers (some species of monkey?). Real people would hate a device that was always deleting stuff because the "OK" and "Cancel" buttons were way closer together than the size of their finger tip. Some iPhone apps already have this problem even at the current screen size and resolution.

Palm and Abacus tried making a watch-sized pen computer. You needed a pin point and a magnifier to operate lots of the apps. Never sold well at all.

.

[firewood]

The current line up is small enough, why do smaller.

It wasn't too long ago that tinier phones were considered more fashionable by some percentage of the market (the upper end usually), even at the expense of usability and battery life.

A tiny Nano-sized phone where one had to dial and SMS using just the scroll wheel might be interesting to people who like to carry their iTunes purchases, but don't want to carry two devices or pay for a monthly data plan.

Where would the earpiece speaker go?

.

[B. Hunter]

Yeah. And my name is Bob Marly.

This would be so unlike apple i think. They've just released a new ipod touch, why would they release another, and in that sort space of time too...

Plus all the apps are rendered for the current iphone and touches screen...
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
MEH!

-Sam:apple::apple:

Agreed. Too soon to change the Nano.

Hey, am I the only person excited about the potential for a new Apple Store in Tacoma, WA! :)

Apple Store in Tacoma? We're checking...
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/business/2008/12/09/apple_store_in_tacoma_we_re_checking

[Manderby]

Assuming this would be true, it would not be called "iPhone Nano" but "iPhone ugly dwarf". :)


But nontheless, what scares me is that it may actually be possible that there will be some kind of iPhone news at Macworld ("We hit 10000 Apps in December, so we want to make the iPhone even more accessible/affordable/blablah to people and so we give you the iPhone IippeeIaIeah"). And this would mean that this will be the third boring not-very-mac-related Macworld in a row. MACworld. MAAAAC!

[freddiecable]

iPod nano - has more dense pixel ratio.

This is inevitable - differentiation. I for one - can handle a iphone nano. small fingers on me :)

many screens of equal size to the iphone have a much denser pixel ratio. its totally possible to match the pixels of the iphone in a smaller screen as long as screens of that size are produced somewhere.

[crudsponge]

not saying that either of this two are actually 'real' quote-un-quote 'iPhone Nano pieces that are floating around... but it's interesting to note when you line them both up together. Completely different. Match the Screens up the same... the physical body is totally different.

just kinda interesting. Take these 'images' with a grain of salt.

[IndyJonez]

Why is that funny? Phones in Europe have had forward facing cameras and video chat on them for a few years. Even if it's WiFi only, I don't see why the iPhone couldn't have this feature in the future.

Its funny because of how hyped up this feature got last wwdc. Remember all the threads and 'leaked photos' of the iphones with front facing cameras?

I, for one would absolutely love this feature! I'm not laughing at the fact that its impossible but I think its very possible and hope it happens!

[wizard]

I have no idea if this specific rumor is true. It doesn't matter though because any reasonable person would realize that Apple can't play in the cell phone market with just one device.

Personally I'm in the market for a larger screen iPhone so I can look at the idea if Nano from the perspective of some one not in the market for it. Notably though there is a huge market for a larger device but even a larger market for a smaller iPhone. From Apples standpoint they need to offer as many products as is reasonable to serve their varied customer needs.

In any event IPhone Nano is very possible as explained below:

1.
Mobile chip technology has not stood still there have been a number of very recent chip introductions that could go to making the IPhone Nano (IN) a reality. Making a smaller iPhone is not a technical problem.

2.
Item 1 above covers commercial chips that aren't covered under NDA's. No one knows what Apple is up to with PA Semi but the likely hood is that a much high integration SoC has been implemented. I'm any event it is not unreasonable to expect that a IN might have more features than the current iPhone.

3.
Contrary to opinions expressed here smaller is cheaper. If Apple wants to continue to lower the price of iPhone it needs to shrink the device.

4.
I don't see Apple abandoning the app store with this phone no matter what it's size and screen resolution is. First; the SDK is designed such that many well written apps won't care. Second; who cares if XYZ app is tied to one screen size or iPhone. It is no different than a Mac Pro running apps the iMac can't.

5.
What is suitable screen size wise for one person might simply be too huge for another. As already noted I'd prefer a bigger device but I'm a large person. I have friends a good two feet shorter than myself that like much smaller devices. Ergonomics is a funny thing what is right for one can be really bad for another this we have things like adjustable chairs and monitors. A smaller IPhone is just rational marketing to bring in customers with different needs. It is not a one size fits all world.

6.
I'm not sure where all the mid information about GPS comes from but it's usefulness has nothing to do with having a data connection. That is pretty clear to see right now apps that are already on app store. I'm not willing to say if the new IN will have GPS as it is a feature of mixed value.

7.
Which brings us to data connections, IN will support data connections. 3G will be there and very likely we will still have WiFi. E-Mail is the big reason from Apples end as it is a significant part of Mobile Me and is a big sales driver. Many of us handle a good portion of our mail on iPhone already as it is a significant reason to get a smart phone in the first place. App store is also becoming more important two. The other reality is that many people might find iPhone useful that have no need or desire for a computer to go along with it. Smart phone and data go together like peanut butter and jelly.



So in a nut shell I don't see an IN as being impossible, in fact insuspect it is very likely. It is not the device I'm in the market for but that won't stop huge sales. I'd be more concerned if this rumored device was a replacement for the current iPhone but that could just mean a larger unit is also on the way ;).

In any event I'm still shocked that some here think that Apple will not come out with more IPhone products. It is a given, what is interesting isn't that new ones are coming but what features they will have.

Dave

[macworkerbee]

That's an interesting point about the screen size and resolution being different for applications. This problem is handled in the full scale version of OSX, I wonder why it would become an issue on the iPhone version of the same software. Possibly something solved with a software update?

[137489]

Some of this stretches staying on topic, but with the arguments I have seen this morning about the iphone being a tablet, not a tablet, and the fact there was another mention about netbooks.......

I say enough with the talk of the ipod touch or iphone being a tablet computer. It is not! The closest thing that it is too is a netbook without a keyboard (even at that it is lacking ports, keyboard, and functionality of a netbook).

Until the iphone/ipod touch can function like a real computer and have ports (USB, DVI [oops make that mini-display since that is what Apple is moving too], etc) a capable hard drive, and a way for me to load my own OS X apps, without having to buy some stripped down app on the app store; all it will be good enough for is web-based applications or games. It does not have the same abilities as something small that you can stick a thumb drive into for transferring data, does not have the capability for external monitors or projectors, so far apps to do any real work on is lacking (office, iwork).

to me the iphone is just and will always be a smart phone with a little more capabilities and more applications/games than say a Palm, blackberry, etc. It is not a true computer (yet).

Also, someone posted on this thread about netbooks again. Here is an article from CNN's technology page. While apple does not see the need for this, appearantly the consumer and economy does. Like we said before, Apple needs to jump into this market. Netbooks are one of the gadgets for tech consumers to watch for 2009:

Spiraling netbooks
The computer industry now ships more portable computers such as laptops than desktops, and an increasingly important part of the mix will be mini-notebook computers, known as netbooks. Industry sources say computer makers will sell more than 11 million netbooks worldwide in 2008, up from just around a million in 2007, and netbook sales could easily double in the new year.

The appeal of these stripped-down portables (no DVD drive, a lot less processing power) clearly is their equally stripped-down price. Market leaders ASUS and Acer, both based in Taiwan, offer sub-$300 netbooks, and U.S. manufacturers Dell (DELL, Fortune 500) and HP (HPQ, Fortune 500) have netbook offerings of their own.

The affordability of netbooks makes them an ideal solution in emerging markets, but analysts think the minis will also appeal to cost-conscious consumers in the United States.

Netbooks "are something to watch in a downturn," said Phil Asmundson, national managing partner of Deloitte's technology, media and telecom practice. "A lot of functionality of a computer goes unused, and netbooks are a good alternative."


So see.. If Apple made one for about $500 to $600, it would sell like hotcakes and be a big huge market. So either they need to make the ipod touch and iphone like a true tablet computer/netbook or come out with a netbook.

I would love to own something similar like the below:



http://www.dynamism.com/#Product=gigabyte_m912

http://www.pandas.co.il/images/categories/ci2947.jpg

[1ncr3du10u5]

...what Crass said, especially "I think the era of the standalone mp3 player is coming to an end.".

It's getting increasingly hard to justify the Nano and the appalling earphones that come with it in the face of some good Sony/Ericsson walkman phones these days, that cost less money.

[labrats5]

Alright, I still can't believe people are still buying this. It is clearly fake. For one thing, if you look closely the aspect ratio is 4x3, not 3x2. Next, the inevitably unusable portrait keyboard would force every single developer who made a keyboard driven app in portrait mode to rework it for landscape mode. And this isn't even touching on the fact that the already poor battery life in the current iphone would have to be worse, since it would be using the same basic components but in a far smaller package.

I don't know if this was a lazy photoshop or just someone's idea of a fun troll, but please stop embarrassing this site by buying into this crap.

[gkarris]

The New Touchscreen Classic... :eek:


'Nuf said... :)

[manu chao]

The current line up is small enough, why do smaller.
Because people (a) would like to have a cheaper iPhone and (b) think Apple needs a cheaper iPhone (or more generally multiple models) to stay successful in the phone market.
And what has this to do with a smaller iPhone? Most people apparently can think only of way to make the iPhone cheaper: make it smaller (and more generally, the only way to introduce multiple models is apparently to add a cheaper model).

But it might be better to think of how Apple could offer a cheaper iPhone and how it could add different models.

[137489]

Hey, am I the only person excited about the potential for a new Apple Store in Tacoma, WA! :)

Apple Store in Tacoma? We're checking...
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/business/2008/12/09/apple_store_in_tacoma_we_re_checking

Don't get your hopes up. Since CompUSA closed, they were going to put an Apple Store in Greensboro, NC for us people that would normally have to drive an hour to Durham or 3 hrs to South Charlotte. Greensboro made sense for people living in Greensboro, Winston-Salem and surrounding Area. It has been 2+ years since the announcement, and still no store yet. I keep calling apple and they say they have no listing for the Greensboro store being opened.

Dang. I still say, just take over the old CompUsa building (at 4-seasons town center) and put a huge store there. It is in the mall complex, but separate from the mall, so parking is not an issue. the mall has its own exit off Business 85 / 40 westbound. More conveinant location than the Friendly Shopping center. and heck, it may just pull General Growth Properties (GCP) out of bankrupcy, they own the building and the property it sits on - but with it being vacant, they are losing out on the rent.

Oh and for those people who say GPC bankrupcy maybe an issue? GCP owns Streets at Southpoint in Durham, where there is an Apple Store. Why they have Apple Stores (3) in Raleigh, 1 in Durham; that are within a 15-20 minute drive of each other, yet none for us who are over an hour away beats me. CompUsa was Greensboro's apple store - but now they are gone. A lot of people complainted about the tiny "Authorized Apple reseller" signs and Apple being in the back of the store to which CompUsa Employees would try to stare you away from.

[TurboSC]

I don't blame them, there's nothing else to talk about in the rumor mill, might as well dig up some dirt and churn away.

[manu chao]

Apple can't play in the cell phone market with just one device.
Maybe they are not in the cell phone market but in the ultra mobile computing market. Apple has a lot less laptop models than Lenovo, HP or Dell, but it is still successful. (But I agree, it has about four notebook models, AIR, 13"MB, 15"MBP and 17"MBP.)

1.
Mobile chip technology has not stood still there have been a number of very recent chip introductions that could go to making the IPhone Nano (IN) a reality. Making a smaller iPhone is not a technical problem.

Looking into the future, yes. But funnily, all so-called iPhone competitors are noticeably thicker.

3.
Contrary to opinions expressed here smaller is cheaper. If Apple wants to continue to lower the price of iPhone it needs to shrink the device.

The only component that would get significantly cheaper would be the screen. The case would hardly be cheaper and even tinier internals would be more expensive. Again, the screen price decrease might be enough and technological advances could keep the internals at the same price while being smaller.

It is no different than a Mac Pro running apps the iMac can't.

There is hardly an app that a Mac Pro can run but an iMac not apart from those requiring certain interfaces (PCI-cards).

I'm not sure where all the mid information about GPS comes from but it's usefulness has nothing to do with having a data connection.

It very much does, standalone GPS devices require noticeably longer to receive the accurate position since they have to receive the current position of the satellites they have contact with via a very slow GPS connection (in the order of 5000 bauds) and require multiple GB of storage space for maps on the devices.
[/QUOTE]

[manu chao]

3. The current iPod Touch is half the thickness of the iPhone, meaning that about half the thickness is related to phone functions.

And the Touch even has two memory chips instead of two (but possibly a smaller battery due to not having to support a cell phone radio).

[ivladster]

Umm how are we gonna type on that thing?

[hansinderen]

i actualy think this is a good idea, why?
cause you also have a macbook and a macbook pro, an imac and a macpro
you see? when i read this thread, i finaly know what i what, this thing, because i think the iphone is just a little to big, and i also dont need al the special stuff thats in the iphone now, i just want to call, message, take some pictures, view some pictures. i dont need gps apps, games and stuff. so this would be perfect!:)

[wingnut8]

featuring nano priced rate plans?

[cptdavep]

Step back for a second...

Here's a couple of the bigger reasons Apple built the iphone:
a, all existing mobiles were crap and they knew they could do better.
b, the ipod was rapidly reaching saturation and with phones increasingly containing improving media players the days of the standalone music player were clearly numbered. To grow as a company they needed to turn the ipod into a phone.

In the long term I don't think apple sees the iphone staying as a niche product i.e. a smartphone, rather they want to do to mobile phones what the ipod did to the walkman and make it THE consumer product to own.

But how many 12 year old ipod owners can afford to replace their mobile with an iphone? Not many. So apple needs to make iphones which are cheaper and smaller, and expand the range.

And as for the complaint about screen resolution, it's going to change sooner or later forcing apps to be more flexable, might as well make it sooner.

Doesn't mean I think it will happen in January, but if Apple has any sense it'll happen before Christmas '09.

[wizard]

Maybe they are not in the cell phone market but in the ultra mobile computing market. Apple has a lot less laptop models than Lenovo, HP or Dell, but it is still successful. (But I agree, it has about four notebook models, AIR, 13"MB, 15"MBP and 17"MBP.)

I wish this was the case but the restrictions they have on software really puts iPhone into the smart phone category. The reality is that I use my iPhone as an ultra mobile computing platform more than I do a cell phone but as such it is far more restricted than I'd like.


Looking into the future, yes. But funnily, all so-called iPhone competitors are noticeably thicker.

Most of those competitors have more in the way of keyboards which directly impact thickness. Even so iPod Touch is thinner again, thinner isn't a problem as long as more integrated electronics keep coming and antenna design continues to advance.


The only component that would get significantly cheaper would be the screen. The case would hardly be cheaper and even tinier internals would be more expensive. Again, the screen price decrease might be enough and technological advances could keep the internals at the same price while being smaller.

Well I have to disagree, higher integration devices are cheaper. Further the tighter integration can lead to smaller PC boards, the area of the PC boards directly affect the cost of the device.


There is hardly an app that a Mac Pro can run but an iMac not apart from those requiring certain interfaces (PCI-cards).

The point remains that one can do things the other can't. Likewise it really doesn't matter if one phone has capabilities another doesn't. It is all about choice.


It very much does, standalone GPS devices require noticeably longer to receive the accurate position since they have to receive the current position of the satellites they have contact with via a very slow GPS connection (in the order of 5000 bauds) and require multiple GB of storage space for maps on the devices.


But again it doesn't and you have as much as said so above!!!!! I see this all the time when discussing GPS, the contradiction is amazing. GPS works fine without a network connection and always has. Now you may have problems with certain apps that "USE" GPS but that is not the same thing as saying GPS doesn't work, it does and this isn't something that can be argued about.

Dave

[freeny]

All I have to say is that case is U-G-L-Y!

[trip1ex]

And why would the carriers do that? They're making less money back from these users.

Obviously there's no way to know, but I think this "nano iPhone" would still cost between $150 - $200, and at that price Apple would STILL be making less money per unit than they do with their current model.

Do what? Subsidize an Ipod Nano? They'd do it for the same reason they subsidize any phone. To get people onto their networks and get them into 2 year service contracts.

$99 or $150? Now we're pretty close on the pricepoints now that you've dropped the $1200 iMac for $200 thang. ;)

Apple makes less money per unit on a Mac Mini than on a Mac Pro. Not unprecedented there. ;) IT's about the margins. I'm sure the margins would be in the ballpark they like to do business in.

[trip1ex]

I think for this rumor to be true or have a chance in the future the NPhone would just be a phone plus a Nano.

Just like the iPhone is basically a Phone plus the Touch.

[k2spitfire88]

I don't have time to read all 6 pages, or whatever this is at now, but, has anyone suspected at all that this could be the rumored $99 iPhone that Wal-Mart was supposed to sell? I don't think so at all, as i think both of these rumors are total bull, but, you could (strong emphasis on the word could) be combined together to make a semi-believable rumor. That would also explain the 4 GB size rumor. Don't think it is realistic, but thought it would be worth mentioning.

[HowEver]

No, no, no.

The next iPhone will be the "iPhone Pro."

[Donz0r]

No, no, no.

The next iPhone will be the "iPhone Pro."

:rolleyes:
And what exactly would be 'Pro' about it?

If they expand the product line, they will make iPhone nano. Just like with the iPod. I think this story is believable.

[IndyJonez]

No, no, no.

The next iPhone will be the "iPhone Pro."

+1

I wanna see "up"grades, not "down"grades.

Or why not both? A cheaper smaller model and then a revamped super model.:D

[rstansby]

i also dont need al the special stuff thats in the iphone now, i just want to call, message, take some pictures, view some pictures.

There are plenty of phones that can do those things perfectly well. Why should apple bother to make a phone that can only do those things.

That's like saying Ferrari should start making economy cars, because some people don't need to drive really fast, they just need to get to work.

[ericjohnson1981]

Wouldn't be suprising, I think we all saw this coming http://saucekitpro.info/img/1606/i08d1211uavx/counter.jpg

[rstansby]

But how many 12 year old ipod owners can afford to replace their mobile with an iphone? Not many. So apple needs to make iphones which are cheaper and smaller, and expand the range.


If a 12 year old has an ipod and a mobile phone (with $20 per month bill minimum), then there parents can probably afford to buy them whatever they want. Do 12 year olds have cell phones these days?

[k2spitfire88]

If a 12 year old has an ipod and a mobile phone (with $20 per month bill minimum), then there parents can probably afford to buy them whatever they want. Do 12 year olds have cell phones these days?

Unfortunately yes. However (and this is coming from a 20 year old, who didnt get his first cell phone or ipod till the end of his senior year, not some older person) many kids are spoiled brats whose parents buy them anything.

[gram]

its a optional product to use as a mouse pad on the new apple netbooks. giving the netbook 3G, but can be used as a phone as is but has very little memory and slower pros. or its fake one or the other....

[SFStateStudent]

Gawd, the iPod Nano; the iPhone Nano; the MBA Nano; the Mini Nano; the Mac Pro Nano etc. When will it stop???:eek:

[gram]

Gawd, the iPod Nano; the iPhone Nano; the MBA Nano; the Mini Nano; the Mac Pro Nano etc. When will it stop???:eek:

the Nano Nano??

[Donz0r]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Why not extend the wonderful iPhone UI to a less high-end phone? It will broaden the iPhone's marketshare and rake in more consumers.

Quit comparing the iPhone to a Mac - it's in the same class as an iPod. And the iPod is marketed to the masses just as the iPhone is. There will be no iPhone pro, that's ridiculous. the iPhone IS pro. An iPhone nano makes sense. No GPS or 3G, smaller screen, cheaper. But most importantly - Cheaper cell phone plans because you don't need to pay $30 for the Data. A lot of people still don't have smartphones and this will bring the wonderful iPhone UI to a less-than-smartphone. If you don't want one then don't buy one.

And yes, it's unbelievable the number of 12 year olds that have cell phones now a days. It seems from 7th grade on up that it's weird not to have a cell phone.

[MacFly123]

The COST of the iPhone that prevents people who want one from getting one is NOT the cost of the phone but the cost of the MONTHLY BILL!!!!!!!!!!

That is pretty much a blanket statement that I am willing to make because it is vastly true. For crying out loud the iPhone is cheaper than iPods and can do sooo much more. The only reason that smart phones are not inundating the planet yet is because of the cost of the bills with data plans. I could name 30 people right now that I personally know that are dying for an iPhone and could buy one for $199 in a heartbeat if only they could afford the expensive monthly bill that is attached to it!

Therefore, I'm not saying it is improbable or unwise for Apple to make an iPhone nano (slightly smaller but same screen resolution), BUT if they want mass adoption they need to be looking at what DATA FEATURES they would include on it and the bill that would accompany an iPhone Nano and NOT the cost of the device itself.

Enjoy! :D

P.S. If they do make an iPhone nano, they better finally freaking implement global landscape keyboard for crying out loud!

[johnmcboston]

With all the talk of the iphone wish list - how many unhappy people would there be if they came out with a 'better' iphone at McWorld 2 weeks after you jus tgot an 'old' iphone for Christmas???

[crudsponge]

Probably a lot of mad customers. that's technology though. But, Apple has been doing MacWorld in January for a long time.

I don't think Apple is going to focus on iPhones or even touch the iPhone during January MacWorld. Apple will touch 5 topics during the keynote:
#1 will be all about Demoing Snow Leopard (April release?)
#2 New displays
#3 MacPro update
#4 iMac update? / Mini Update?
#5 ?

It all has to coincide and sync with one another. iPhones in June Folks. If Apple touches the iPhone in January, it will be a 32GB iPhone. They'll save any major iPhone announcements for June. Plus, they only have an hour and a half to demo stuff... it can't be all over the map.

my thoughts :)

[juststranded]

Could this be why Big Steve was asking the developers to get ready for Resolution independence about... oh... 2 years ago?

Hahahah. That is EXACTLY what I was thinking as soon as I saw the picture with the smaller screen.

Resolution independence will probably make it into the iPhone right around when Snow Leopard comes out, which could also bring an iPhone nano then or a few months later. I say this won't happen until WWDC or November-ish '09, but I'd like to put in my bid that it's going to have a lot to do with resolution independence.

[Littlewizkid]

I found this on the link here Image is at bottom of link provided
http://www.engadget.com/page/20/
Keepin' it real fake, part CLXXI: iFone 3G is more than phonetically inaccurate
by Darren Murph, posted Dec 6th 2008 at 11:11AM

Here is the story that was with the photo.
Not even 24 hours after discovering the completely befuddling iFone x1 comes this, something entirely more recognizable, yet just as wrong. The iFone 3G is -- so far as we can tell -- the first mass produced KIRF of the iPhone 3G, and if history has anything to prove, it'll be just the first in a long, long linage. The best part? The whole "3G" thing in the model name is not representative of actual data band support, so the best you'll do on this heap of festering rubbish is EDGE. At the $5 to $10 range, we could definitely see picking one up for kicks and giggles, but at $178? Psssh... no thanks, poser.

It's probably for this device
(sorry i thought the idea was pretty cool too):(

[DRWAMBO]

I hope this is not true. I just upgraded my wife's phone and she would have been interested in a smaller iPhone. My 3G is much bigger than her RAZR and the new phone is an LG Shine, which is similar in size. I guess with internet [3G or EDGE] the phone could appeal to those that want an iPhone but not the internet fee, if they don't use it. There could be a market for such a phone.

Jingle bells dude!:eek: