Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 8, 2013, 10:56 AM   #76
yinz
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
I think the larger cheaper iPhone would be awesome for people who care less about resolution and more about how much space on their screen they have. It will cater to older phone buyers as well as budget conscious buyers. I don't think it'll ruin Apples name at all. I think it'll only spread it. It really doesn't matter what Apple makes the product out of as long as they package it like a premium device.

I mean, look at iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS. That's made of plastic and doesn't have the best resolution but people bought that anyway. As long as they provide the service, the experience and the Apple logo, it'll sell like hot cakes..

Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneJack View Post
The Apple strategy for penetrating new, fast developing markets, which resulted in a great success for ipod line, always was "start from high end".

As you can see on ipod line, it started from most expensive ever iPods, then gradually cheaper models like iPod mini and iPod nano and iPod shuffle were introduced. At final stage, iPod touch (actually a brand new device with a brand new iOS, not iPod OS) was introduced, a new premium model. All segments of the market were covered as a result, competition was beaten, Apple triumphed. It took approximately 3-5 years to introduce cheaper iPod models to cover fully the low end segments (which means it took 3-5 years to saturate high end market).

Image

For iPads, the high end saturation period came last November or roughly 2.5 years after introduction of the first iPad. At this stage, mini came and began to successfully cover low-end segment with its smaller screen and slower processor (but extremely well designed and built).

For iPhones, it seems that saturation period took same duration as for iPods: approximately 4-5 years and we are close to witnessing first low end iPhone, similar to iPad to cover the missing segment. Historically that role was given to previous generation models such as iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4/4S when newer models were introduced. However, that iPhone strategy no longer works because for iPhone 5, new size 4 inch was chosen.

If iPhone 5S or 6 comes with similar size, it means that it can't be really a distinguishing feature, because 5S or 6 with 4 inch itself is becoming relatively small sized among 4.8-5 inched models. Therefore, the 4 inch model must become the new cheaper model, while we will see introduction of new 4.8-5 inch models as real premium models. I don't think that resolution will change; it will stay as Retina for 5, but just physically the very small pixels will be slightly enlarged still having one of highest resolutions on market. So for games, there is no difference but for web browsing an obvious advantage of a larger screen.

Therefore, I think we going to have

4.8-5 inch model
4 inch
3.5 inch

4 inch being budget model.
Great detective work. This is very interesting! Although, has Apple ever made their old flagship device into an entry level device? I know the MacBook Pro used to be more of a premium product and now the 13" is more like an entry level product, but the MacBook Pro 15" was the flagship product and not the 13". This makes me question whether Apple will really make the iPhone 5S the lower budget model.

It stems to reason that (as a quote below said) larger components would be cheaper to acquire and fit into a larger device....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jman13 View Post
Apple has a chance to do something in the smartphone industry that no one else has done:

Make two versions of the same flagship phone, but in different sizes. Samsung raised hopes of this with the GSIII Mini, which turned out to be a piece of crap in a smaller package, not a smaller GSIII.

If Apple makes the 5S or 6 in a 4" form factor, then uses the SAME internal hardware, but makes a 4.8" version, so the ONLY difference between them is the screen, it would make a LOT of people happy. Those of us who don't want a giant phone would be happy because we could still get a compact smartphone that has all the features and speed and high end build that a flagship device deserves (Android has exactly ZERO phones that fit this right now), while offering that same high end flagship experience with a high end 4.8" display for those who want a bigger phone.

If Apple moves their flagship device to 4.8 or 5, while keeping the 4" size as a lower cost alternative, it'll make me rather upset, as I have no interest in anything larger than about 4.2" in a phone, but I still want speed, build quality and high end features. If they make a big phone and make it 'cheap' like the article implies, it'll upset people the other way.
I highly doubt this would happen as people with the larger iPhone will certainly complain about why Apple held the device back to accommodate the same specs as the smaller iPhone.

Apple, can't satisfy everyone. Although I am a fan of the 4" display as that iPhone can easily fit into my pocket, I don't think Apple will make two sized iPhones with the same specs. Not even the Macs and iPads have this option. The larger unit will certainly be different specced..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufuss Sewell View Post
Most of these responses epitomise why Steve Jobs was able to invent products people didn't know they wanted. You guys wont know why it's good until they market it to you. It's that simple.

Look... it is CHEAPER to make the device larger. Are you guys serious? It's the SMALL components that are expensive.

GAW!

And? Most people prefer phones that are bigger than the iPhone. I'm sorry but it is clear. If you can't see that you are simply blind. I know the demographic of this site prefers what we have. That's not what the rest of the world likes. Clearly.

Now, so many people quote past marketing spiels. Fragmentation blah blah. The thumb can't reach blah blah.

Apple intends to sell people the best product they can. That product is a bigger iPhone. It's cheaper and more desirable.
I agree with you that the larger phone can house larger and cheaper components. However, I don't think you are correct to say that the majority of people prefer larger phones. I mean, the majority of people don't come on MacRumor. It's difficult to draw this conclusion based on what you've read on the internet...
yinz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 10:57 AM   #77
Jaro65
macrumors 68040
 
Jaro65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Send a message via Skype™ to Jaro65
Apple used to define new product categories. Now it seems to be forced into product categories defined by others. Case in point: smaller iPad, large and cheap iPhone.
__________________
rMBP | MBA | ACD | iPad | iPhone | ATV | iPods | Senn HD 650
Jaro65 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 10:58 AM   #78
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRCL View Post
Make cheap phone with a huge display, to appeal to lower class people. Sounds like Android in USA!
I'm not sure whats more pathetic. Your post or the fact that 16 people agreed with it.
rmwebs is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:01 AM   #79
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
I'm so confused.

Steve said that 3.5" was the perfect screen size. And everyone agreed because let's face it - the human hand can only control that amount of surface area on a phone.

Then Apple released a 4" phone and that was perfect. It wasn't a "phablet" and people's fingers magically adjusted for the new screen size.

Now they think people will be able to control their phones if they go larger.

Insanity!
samcraig is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:07 AM   #80
JHankwitz
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Send a message via AIM to JHankwitz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe-Diver View Post
Not gonna happen. An iPhone is an iPhone. Period.

The only way we'd see this.....Apple licenses IOS for use in other devices. Then, and only then, would we see "various" iPhones.

And that's NOT gonna happen.
Correct! Apple tried that in the late 80's and early 90's and almost went out of business. Too many models causes a loss of identity. If you start building a cheep model, the entire image turns to crap.
JHankwitz is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:07 AM   #81
nick_elt
macrumors 68000
 
nick_elt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmwebs View Post
Some people need to research before making such stupid posts. The S3 (with its larger screen) is not a low cost phone, and does a pretty damn good job on Android.
I never said it was, im talking about cheaper androids. For someone talking about research maybe you can see on my signature that i have a note 2. All i was implying was it would be stupid to take android on in the cheap market.
__________________
White Macbook, 2012 Macbook air 13", titanium grey galaxy note 2, ipad 3rd gen, apple tv 3
nick_elt is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:07 AM   #82
sdilley14
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
There is no way they would alienate their U.S. customer base by offering a larger and lower cost iPhone outside of the country. This would also be a major pain for developers to try and quickly adapt to. I just cannot see this happening by any stretch of the imagination.
sdilley14 is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:07 AM   #83
supermarino
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jman13 View Post
Apple has a chance to do something in the smartphone industry that no one else has done:

Make two versions of the same flagship phone, but in different sizes. Samsung raised hopes of this with the GSIII Mini, which turned out to be a piece of crap in a smaller package, not a smaller GSIII.

If Apple makes the 5S or 6 in a 4" form factor, then uses the SAME internal hardware, but makes a 4.8" version, so the ONLY difference between them is the screen, it would make a LOT of people happy. Those of us who don't want a giant phone would be happy because we could still get a compact smartphone that has all the features and speed and high end build that a flagship device deserves (Android has exactly ZERO phones that fit this right now), while offering that same high end flagship experience with a high end 4.8" display for those who want a bigger phone.
While being Verizon only, the Droid Razr M is a higher end phone with a 4" screen. You are mostly right though, there needs to be a high end small iPhone and a high end large iPhone. I know I was sad by the low-end Galaxy S3 Mini, because that would have been what my wife would want, if the phone wasn't low budget. She can't use the normal one because she claims it is too big for her hands. Funny enough, she bought the iPhone 5 (a phone she claimed she'd never own), because it was the only powerful device in that small size category she could get.

Samsung Galaxy S3 and Galaxy Note 2 cover the high end big and bigger categories, but they flounder in the smaller land. Apple reigns supreme in that category and can only claim more if they go bigger, just don't forget the smaller phone!
supermarino is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:08 AM   #84
carlgo
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Apple should make a bigger phone, and also a smaller one. Why only one size phone when it makes different sizes of everything else?
carlgo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:09 AM   #85
hipnetic
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
I'm obviously in the minority here, but this actually makes sense to me. Clearly Jobs (and possibly others at Apple) thought/think that the current form factor was/is the ideal form factor, so that's where they'll put their focus. The high quality metal body and smaller size make it feel more like a fine watch.

But there's clearly a market for larger-screen iPhones. If they make it bigger but keep the resolution the same, they won't cause any pain to developers. Sure, it won't be retina anymore, but the current iPhone's resolution is already awfully good, IMO. One of my complaints has been that the pixels are so tiny that when viewing a desktop-optimized website, I have to pinch-to-zoom just to be able to read the tiny fonts. The pixels are there such that the fonts are *technically* legible, but you (I) have to squint to read them, which is uncomfortable.

By keeping the resolution as-is, they won't be able to market the screen as a retina screen, so it will be a bit of a downgrade from the current retina iPhones, so it then makes sense for them to downgrade a couple other things and then continue to treat the iPhone 5 as the top-of-the-line model. Just as with luxury cars, smaller sportscars are often priced more expensively than larger 4-door models in the same company's lineup.

So what could/should they downgrade? Well, they can change the case to plastic. That should save cost, but also possibly some weight, which will be important as increasing the overall size of the device would otherwise increase weight. Plus, they'll probably need to put in a *larger* battery to accommodate the larger display, and that will add some weight. So, again, the iPhone 5 would still be the top-of-the-line model, as it will be thinner/smaller/lighter (or, at least, one or two of those three).

What else? Well if consider that this device might be marketed more towards the younger demographic who doesn't mind having a bigger phone, but appreciates the larger display for playing games or watching movies on-the-go, maybe stop bundling the headphones, since most of that demographic might prefer to bring their own preferred headphones, anyway. That won't really save Apple much money, but it's another dot-point they could use to justify the iPhone 5's higher price tag.

What else? Maybe they not only don't do retina, but they go back down to the pre-iPhone 5's aspect ratio? That might make sense for games, but could cause game developers angst. Plus the iPhone 5's 16:9 screen makes better sense for TV and movies which this target demographic would want their device to be optimized for. So I'm thinking that the 16:9 format should stay.

Using a lesser CPU/GPU also doesn't make much sense if this is going to be targeted to gamers.

So really, it's more about keeping the current screen res (thus "losing" the retina dot-point on the list of features) and using a cheaper looking/feeling body.
hipnetic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:12 AM   #86
nick_elt
macrumors 68000
 
nick_elt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlgo View Post
Apple should make a bigger phone, and also a smaller one. Why only one size phone when it makes different sizes of everything else?
its holding them back, I agree.
__________________
White Macbook, 2012 Macbook air 13", titanium grey galaxy note 2, ipad 3rd gen, apple tv 3
nick_elt is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:13 AM   #87
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 68040
 
Mad Mac Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A little bit of here and a little bit of there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by garybUK View Post
Probably iPhone Retina resoltuion but not pixel doubled so fit into a larger screen without a new resolution and no work for the dev's ?
This is like option 3 that I described here a while back. Assuming Apple only goes to 4.5" it would require a 580 PPI pixel density, which is basically impossible right now.

Now sure maybe Apple could create a galaxy note type device that's like a 5.5" screen which probably would yeild a feasible PPI... but a) that's a HUGE jump for Apple and b) that would likely just enlarge all of the existing UI elements which would be nuts. Eventually apps could be optimized to use the extra screen... if it's worth it for them.
__________________
Now I have a Signature!
iPod owner since 2006 | Mac owner since 2007
iPhone owner since 2008 | iPad owner since 2011
Apple TV owner since 2012 | Apple Watch owner since 2016 (anticipated)
Mad Mac Maniac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:15 AM   #88
Leonard1818
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
I believed this article till I remembered a small marketing concept called BRANDING and BRAND IMAGE.

Wouldn't something like this TOTALLY contradict the established iPhone brand image?

Not that it couldn't happen... just that it seems a bit "off" considering the brand that has been built for iPhone.

Let's see what happens...
Leonard1818 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:17 AM   #89
xgman
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
The minute that Apple makes a 5" phone, all the fanboys who currently poopoo such a thing, will stand in line to get one.
__________________
{2014 27" r-imac-4.0i7-295x-32gb ram-1TBSSD+External TB enclosure>Samsung840evo ssd + Segate Enterprise 5TB-UAD Apollo/Marantz/Amphion/Bowers&Wilkins Sound-Nektar P1 61}
{ipads}{iphones}{LG G3}
xgman is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:17 AM   #90
blackcrayon
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macdude2010 View Post
Nope, too much pain for the developers
Nope. 5", 16:9, 960 x 640 screen

Lower PPI, all apps run the same, stuff is just bigger.

Same reason developers don't have to do anything (for most apps) for the iPad Mini.

Not that I think it's a strong possibility, but this could work especially if it's for a "low cost" market (cheaper display, probably A5 Soc, etc).
blackcrayon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:20 AM   #91
navigator man
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
I'm goin' to puke all over the place !!
navigator man is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:20 AM   #92
krravi
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
I am afraid of two things.

1) These unlocked phones from abroad will find a way to the US
2) Fragmentation of iPhone has started. App developers are going to have a headache trying to write their apps for so many different phones.
__________________
Lots of Apple,Sony and other gadgets.
krravi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:20 AM   #93
SAIRUS
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
I don't like the idea of Apple destroying their own image of a premiere company. Yeah Maps and Siri are already 2 blunders that are hurting their "it just works" mantra.

That said, the cheaper bigger device should be the iPhone 5 when the iPhone 5S releases.

If Apple releases a bigger screen, then keep it at 16:9 and go 5" and increase the price. As a developer, Apple's new relative positioning system sucks.


Now the smart move would be able to bounce calls and messages to an iPad or iWatch. I'd love to keep my iPhone in my pocket and answer a call on my iPad using it's speakerphone.
__________________
You're ugly...
...only if you think you are.
15" Retina Macbook Pro, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S, iPa-okay okay I have a ton of Apple stuff and 200 characters is not enough.
SAIRUS is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:21 AM   #94
Macclone
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushido View Post
lol at u people thinking an iPhone is still something thats only for the "rich spoilt brads" and "privileged" people

that may have been the case in 2007 but that has changed years ago. now everyone has an iPhone and some of those "cheap plastic" androids are just as pricey if not more expensive (u can get the iPhone 5 for 1€ on a 29€ plan here)

anyway, why invest into RaD if u could just sell the iPhone 4 for like 199€ without a plan
(would make the iPod Touch even more useless tho)
I don't have an iPhone, so I guess you are wrong.
Macclone is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:22 AM   #95
likemyorbs
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Send a message via AIM to likemyorbs
Yeah, right....
Who comes up with this nonsense? I never doubted the iPad, I never doubted the iPad mini, I never doubted anything that everyone else said was never going to happen. But I'm not buying this, it's VERY hard to swallow and seems very out of character for apple.
likemyorbs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:23 AM   #96
charlituna
macrumors G3
 
charlituna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worksafe View Post
Apple has to do something drastic if it wants to counter Samsung’s grip it has on sales in North America of smartphones, never mind the emerging markets since if they don’t they will continue to lose market share
You assume they give a horse's poop about marketshare. They don't. They care about the cash. At the end of the day their 'shrinking' marketshare (which is due to an increase in the overall market total not a decrease in their sales) is bringing in vaults worth of cash. They can pull a Scrooge McDuck with the company's daily sales. And that's all they care about.

Not the zero sum of marketshare. As Apple says 'us winning doesn't have to mean everyone else loses'
charlituna is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:24 AM   #97
CausticPuppy
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macdude2010 View Post
Nope, too much pain for the developers
Unless it's the same resolution as an iPhone5, just at a lower DPI. Maybe not-quite-retina.
__________________
2011 Mac Mini Server, 16 GB RAM, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD, 500GB HDD + 3TB NAS
Haswell rMBP 13" - i7/512GB
Mac Mini 1.83GHz Core2Duo, 3GB RAM, 60GB SSD
iPad Air/iPhone5S
CausticPuppy is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:26 AM   #98
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Cellphones are not really that expensive. You can just get away with charging +$599 for a flagship with no real reason but the fact your competitors are doing the same thing.

The only smartphone I ever look at is the Nexus line since you can get that for $299 without a contract. We have all seen the BoM for an iPhone and plenty of others and cry how marketing or R&D increases that base cost but to $700? I do not believe it.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:27 AM   #99
charlituna
macrumors G3
 
charlituna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by apfeljonas View Post
LOL Digitimes...will never happen! Apple doesn't dilute their brand.
Well ya know, they kept saying their would be a fall iPad release (that was a new model) and that happened.

So they figure if they kept repeating about he real TV and the cheap phone . . .
charlituna is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 11:30 AM   #100
KdParker
macrumors 68040
 
KdParker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
I really don't see a new/larger 'low cost' iPhone.

That sounds crazy to me.
__________________
64g iPhone6+Space Grey; 16g iPhone6 Silver;16g iPhone5s Space Grey;
15" retina - MBP 2.6 GHZ 16 RAM;
iPad4 retina
KdParker is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Reportedly Launching Larger iPad in October 2014, Larger iPhone in May 2014 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 310 Feb 10, 2014 12:59 AM
Analyst Claims Apple Launching 55- and 65-Inch 4K Televisions Late Next Year MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 212 Nov 5, 2013 11:03 AM
Low cost iPod touch signaling low cost iPhone? chanman iPod touch 6 Jun 3, 2013 11:53 AM
Apple to Target Emerging Markets with Low-Cost Phone to Launch in September at $199? MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 50 Feb 26, 2013 11:06 PM
Apple to Use Qualcomm Processors for Low-Cost iPhone for Emerging Markets? MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 14 Jan 28, 2013 08:15 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC