Reuters Pulls Story on Phil Schiller's iPhone Comments Following 'Substantial Changes' to Source Article [Updated]

[DCBass]

Somehow, there always seems to be some juicy Apple rumor the week of CES.

Funny that.

[AZREOSpecialist]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

Yes, but only if the Mini were actually sold at a lower price point. Selling it at $329 when your competitors have comparable products at $199 means that Apple is sacrificing quality at higher price points. That is a bad combination.

[JHankwitz]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

Still, the retraction by Reuters casts significant uncertainty on the original report and raises questions about whether Schiller's comments were mistranslated or misinterpreted.

100% of everyone’s comments are misinterpreted by the media. How else could they possibly manage to sensationalize enough to get readership?

----------

Originally Posted by JaySoul

Honestly think now is the time for Apple to put out 3 iPhones:
1) A 'budget' 3.5" one for emerging markets
2) The 4" iPhone
3) A new 5-5.5" iPhone

That's it, just 3 options. Sink or swim.

Right, let's go back to the late '80s/early '90's business model that worked so well for Apple.

[DisMyMac]

The average person has no idea how many news stories are fabricated... Not biased or shoddy, but outright invented to keep agents employed and sway public opinion.

[topmounter]

Great job AP, until now I thought it was only NK and PRC news agencies that could get duped by using "The Onion" as a source

[JHankwitz]

Originally Posted by DisMyMac

The average person has no idea how many news stories are fabricated... Not biased or shoddy, but outright invented to keep agents employed and sway public opinion.

"How many" would be about 100%. A fundamental fact of life is that everyone is in it for the money, including you and me. Without money, I wouldn't be able to have the computer I'm using or a connection to the internet to post this message.

[croooow]

Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist

Yes, but only if the Mini were actually sold at a lower price point. Selling it at $329 when your competitors have comparable products at $199 means that Apple is sacrificing quality at higher price points. That is a bad combination.

Have you actually looked at an iPad mini? I have one and it is built really well. Do not take my word for it, read the reviews.

Apple has made a number of products without a retina display even after they introduced it with iPhone 4. The iPad 2 (132 ppi) came out after iPhone 4 (326 ppi), no one complained about sacrificing quality, some just wanted higher resolution as many wanted with the iPad mini (163 ppi) There is a big difference between reduced quality and not including a retina display.

[JaySoul]

Originally Posted by JHankwitz

100% of everyone’s comments are misinterpreted by the media. How else could they possibly manage to sensationalize enough to get readership?

----------



Right, let's go back to the late '80s/early '90's business model that worked so well for Apple.

There are 2 sizes of iMac.

There are 2 sizes of MacBook Air.

There are 2 sizes of MacBook Pro.

There are 2 sizes of iPad.

There are 3 sizes of iPod.

See a theme?

[phr0ze]

Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist

Yes, but only if the Mini were actually sold at a lower price point. Selling it at $329 when your competitors have comparable products at $199 means that Apple is sacrificing quality at higher price points. That is a bad combination.

The mini is far from a scarifice in quality. Its a different device than the full ipad. It has different specs. That's <> sacrifice in quality. I think the build of the mini is better than the full ipad. And I bet the next ipad will move toward the mini design.

Thats as bad as saying the ipod touch is a sacrifice in quality because it doesn't have LTE built in. Or the iphone 5 is a sacrifice in quality because it does not have a 9.7" screen that the ipad has.

[croooow]

Originally Posted by DisMyMac

The average person has no idea how many news stories are fabricated... Not biased or shoddy, but outright invented to keep agents employed and sway public opinion.

Originally Posted by JHankwitz

"How many" would be about 100%. A fundamental fact of life is that everyone is in it for the money, including you and me. Without money, I wouldn't be able to have the computer I'm using or a connection to the internet to post this message.

Wait, are you saying ALL (100%) news stories are fabricated? I am not saying we should believe the news media, but I do not think it is all false.

[carlgo]

Originally Posted by DisMyMac

The average person has no idea how many news stories are fabricated... Not biased or shoddy, but outright invented to keep agents employed and sway public opinion.

I want to be an agent, like in the tune "Secret Agent Man...". Not only do I want to sway the opinions of ignorant average people, but evidently there is a secret agent union that makes sure they stay employed. Sounds good to me.

Well, at least we can be thankful there are those of superior knowledge who can tell us what is up.

[DisMyMac]

Originally Posted by JHankwitz

"How many" would be about 100%.

That many people know there isn't a real dictator in the world right now? I doubt there would be any conservative blowhards or liberal wingnuts if everyone knew the truth about things. There would be a lot more equality and moderation. The wealthy have an advantage because they mostly know all these secrets. Everyone else is left fearful and ignorant by what they read in the news. Nobody taps us on the shoulder and says to calm down about wars or social change.

Whatevs. I'll try not care.

[croooow]

Originally Posted by JaySoul

There are 2 sizes of iMac.

There are 2 sizes of MacBook Air.

There are 2 sizes of MacBook Pro.

There are 2 sizes of iPad.

There are 3 sizes of iPod.

See a theme?

Well, there are 2 sizes of iPhone right now!

On more than one occasion I have walking into an Apple store to see someone purchasing an iPhone 4 or 4s. I know these are considered "old models" but they are sold as current products at Apple's retail stores.

Apple already has "cheaper iPhones" sold at $99 or $0

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist

Yes, but only if the Mini were actually sold at a lower price point. Selling it at $329 when your competitors have comparable products at $199 means that Apple is sacrificing quality at higher price points. That is a bad combination.

So quality can't mean anything other than retina display? Do you have any evidence that Apple could have released a retina mini with the same form factor, weight, battery life but purposely chose not to (for whatever nefarious reason)?

----------

Originally Posted by croooow

Apple already has "cheaper iPhones" sold at $99 or $0

I think people are referring to the unlocked price which is not $0 or $99. I'm assuming if you're in India you're not getting an iPhone 4S for whatever the equivalent of $99 is.

[jent]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

That can be argued, but I see it as Apple holding off on adding a new resolution to its iDevices (the iPad mini has the same resolution as the original iPad and iPad 2). When the mini gets Retina treatment, it will be another resolution programmers have to design their UI for, which is one of the arguments against Android and its hardware and software fragmentation.

[firewood]

Originally Posted by KdParker

I would rather they move to a new form factor instead of continuing the 3.5 size.

There are a lot of people who think 3.5 is too big and thus buy smaller cheaper android phones. So yes, a new size slightly smaller than the 3GS might be a good market for Apple to go after.

[CalgaryTechGuy]

Originally Posted by JHankwitz

"How many" would be about 100%. A fundamental fact of life is that everyone is in it for the money, including you and me. Without money, I wouldn't be able to have the computer I'm using or a connection to the internet to post this message.

Wow, you have a very sad opinion. Not "everyone is in it for the money". You may be, but don't push your character flaws on to me. I've quit well paying jobs and refused contracts because my morals were in conflict with the employer or client. Perhaps a little more thought should go into your posts.

[JAT]

Originally Posted by Yvan256

Budget = 3.5", 320x480 non-retina display (like the first versions of iPhones)
Regular = 4.0", 640x1136 retina display (iPhone 5 and up)

No fragmentation, no headaches for developers.

They already have this, right now. Except the cheaper one has a retina display.

Sometimes I wonder if this place is just filled with people taking a break from debate class. So little reality.

[ULFoaf]

Originally Posted by Allenbf

Does anyone have an educated guess - would liquid metal be a cheaper manufacture process than say, the current iPhone 5 (milled aluminum) or even the glass front/back of the iP4/4s?

----------



No to mention, yields on retina displays. Apple's suppliers have only recently caught up with demands.

btw, hello from across the Bay. :-)

Liquid Metal seems to be an unproven technology at this point. It is essentially a very precise casting. Castings are in general less expensive than machining. Aluminum is one of the easier metals to machine in that machining speeds are much faster than more exotic, stronger metals. As I understand it, the promise is to give the accuracy and precision of machined part. That said, the environment to get that precision may make it a slow or cumbersome process that doesn't lend itself to high volume production.

I am not sure anyone has really said what the actual metal is. There was talk of ceramic salt bath type coatings like QPQ on phone cases, but these leave parts with a "greasy" feeling and dull black-gray finish. Apple had a patent for applying a clear one.

These don't seem to be practical technologies at the moment. Patents no longer have anything to do with what a company produces. It is about stopping the other guy.

[lozpop]

Originally Posted by jent

When the mini gets Retina treatment, it will be another resolution programmers have to design their UI for, which is one of the arguments against Android and its hardware and software fragmentation.

Considering that the current iPad mini has the same resolution of the iPad 2, I think it's possible that the next iPad mini will spot the same resolution of the current iPad retina. Or not?

[petsounds]

Originally Posted by Chupa Chupa

This is why I laugh when I read quotes from "old media" journalists at established news organizations whining that bloggers and online news isn't true journalism. I can't tell the difference. In both instances it seems to be publish first, fact check later. Simple case of pot calling kettle black.

There's a big difference between a freelance Reuters reporter and a staff writer for the New York Times. The former is not much different than a blogger, you're right. But the latter is held to a much higher standard of journalistic ethics than a blogger. Most bloggers don't even know what journalist ethics are.

[jent]

Originally Posted by lozpop

Considering that the current iPad mini has the same resolution of the iPad 2, I think it's possible that the next iPad mini will spot the same resolution of the current iPad retina. Or not?

Same resolution as the Retina iPad would mean an extremely high level of pixels per inch because the device is so much smaller than the 9.7" screen of the iPad.

[SockRolid]

What Phil said: "Despite the popularity of cheap smartphones, this will never be the future of Apple’s products ..."

What Phil didn't say: " ... outside the People's Republic of China."

What he meant: "We might need to make a cheaper iPhone specifically for China Mobile, that only runs on their proprietary 3G-variant network, in order to get them to sign a deal. Don't get your hopes up, Western cheapskates. It will only run on China Mobile's network."

What I say: "And it would be worth it. Vastly increased China market share, hundreds of millions more iOS / iCloud users. Zero gray market cannibalization of the 'expensive' iPhone models."

[BRLawyer]

Originally Posted by iAco

Why are people still talking about this?

No plastic. No more market share. That's it!

Let's just hope he was NOT mistranslated - Apple should continue building the best devices and NOTHING else.

As far as Apple is concerned, the definition of a product through price is the fastest way to hell and, if true, further confirmation that the perfectionist paradigms previously set by SJ are in the dustbin of history - let's just hope that Phil has really meant it.

[firewood]

Originally Posted by JAT

They already have this, right now. Except the cheaper one has a retina display.

If you look at the tear-downs, the BOM of the iP4 isn't that much cheaper than the 5. They could make something much cheaper if they wanted to keep up their margins at a much lower unsubsidized/unlocked price point.

For subsidized, something cheaper than the iP4 and thus below $0, such as $150 cash-back with a 2-year contract woud be more suitable for the budget market.