Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Executives Discuss Targeting Low-End Smartphone, High-Growth Tablet Markets
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The only way it'll fly around here in the US is if they sell one unlocked that doesn't REQUIRE a data contract.
There's enough Wi-Fi around to not need data and you can purchase a nav app that has all the maps internal to the device.
There's enough Wi-Fi around to not need data and you can purchase a nav app that has all the maps internal to the device.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I think Apple would love to sell a prepaid phone, but the carriers are preventing them from doing so. And when they eventually start, they'll sell the minutes on iTunes.
I think Apple would love to sell a prepaid phone, but the carriers are preventing them from doing so. And when they eventually start, they'll sell the minutes on iTunes.
Apple understood what happened in the 80's and 90's.. PC makers were able to beat them on cost. Apple this time around understands the iPad is basically the "future" and are currently winning the tablet price war.
Macs seem to be remaining the "premium" computer but remember that iPods have always had options for people who could never afford a mac.
Going forward they see the iPhone as the device that will bring in future growth to the mac and iPad sales.
Macs seem to be remaining the "premium" computer but remember that iPods have always had options for people who could never afford a mac.
Going forward they see the iPhone as the device that will bring in future growth to the mac and iPad sales.
I won't claim to be the only one who has thought of this, but it seems like I'm the only one on this comment thread.
iPhone nano will be the size of the iPod nano and will run on the same operating system - ie no apps. Also no camera, so pictures will be kept to a minimum. Relatively small flash storage is only needed for music. The reason they are working on better voice recognition is so that people can dictate short emails/sms with a fair degree of accuracy. It can be worn as a wristwatch or in a pocket. Blue tooth headphones (+mic) will come standard. This would herald in the era of truly wearable electronics.
Apple's the only one who could pull it off, and I'd seriously consider getting one if they made it. I wear hearing aids (which cost $1500 a piece) - so I'm yearning for the day when they can make tiny earbuds and keep the electronics elsewhere (ie on your wrist or in the pocket).
EDIT: when I say no apps I mean no third-party apps.
iPhone nano will be the size of the iPod nano and will run on the same operating system - ie no apps. Also no camera, so pictures will be kept to a minimum. Relatively small flash storage is only needed for music. The reason they are working on better voice recognition is so that people can dictate short emails/sms with a fair degree of accuracy. It can be worn as a wristwatch or in a pocket. Blue tooth headphones (+mic) will come standard. This would herald in the era of truly wearable electronics.
Apple's the only one who could pull it off, and I'd seriously consider getting one if they made it. I wear hearing aids (which cost $1500 a piece) - so I'm yearning for the day when they can make tiny earbuds and keep the electronics elsewhere (ie on your wrist or in the pocket).
EDIT: when I say no apps I mean no third-party apps.
People still have this perception that prepaid is for poor people with bad credit scores. Prepaid's not like how it was 3 years ago...it honestly feels like the biggest secret in the cell phone world. I have an unlimited data plan, I'm using an Android smartphone comparable to a 3GS, yet I pay half the price of someone using a dumb phone stuck in a 2 year contract with no data.
If Apple is able to tap into this market (AKA if the carriers let them), they could kill off dumb phones entirely, which really needs to die. It makes me sad that carriers can trap people into paying $50/month for a dumb phone in this day and age.
If Apple is able to tap into this market (AKA if the carriers let them), they could kill off dumb phones entirely, which really needs to die. It makes me sad that carriers can trap people into paying $50/month for a dumb phone in this day and age.
Last edited:
Windows pundit Paul Thurrott was recently surmising that if Apple and Microsoft were to enter into a partnership to create a brand new cellular and data network in the US, the cost of ownership for a smartphone would be dramatically reduced, since neither company would have to deal with the massive infrastructure that AT&T, Verizon, etc. have to maintain. They'd be starting fresh, and the arrangement wouldn't alter their competitive relationship.
I bring this up because I'm sure Apple could go it alone, still offering the iPhone on the other carriers, who would have to reduce their data plans if they want a piece of the massive Apple pie. Maybe Tim Cook is alluding to something like this coming in a few years?
I bring this up because I'm sure Apple could go it alone, still offering the iPhone on the other carriers, who would have to reduce their data plans if they want a piece of the massive Apple pie. Maybe Tim Cook is alluding to something like this coming in a few years?
In China (India will be similar), an iPhone is 5000 RMB ($750-$800) NO CONTRACT. That's about 1 month salary for a professional or factory worker (hard, dangerous work), 2 moths for a teacher, or 4 months of a waiter / retail worker.
A low-end Nokia is 3000RMB. A feature-phone is 1000. That's the competition.
If people buy low-end Nokia, they will end up locked into Microsoft Mobile. Microsoft already dominates the developing world (in computers), if Apple wants to get a foothold, they need to use the iPhone. Everybody likes iPhones (more than Windows Mobile, or Android), but they are too expensive in places where you don't buy on contracts (i.e. places where Apple NEEDS to break into the market).
Apple needs to cut the price in half. 2500 RMB is a good price point.
To keep the same margins, they need a phone that costs $100 to make. Half the memory, half the screen resolution (so apps are still compatible - a small, high-res screen is out of the question as it would probably increase costs!), half the build quality (reduce the amount of glass), half the cameras, half the processor speed, half the RAM.
They need a back-to-basics iPhone - an old 3GS, taking advantage of lower priced components.
Sources:
A low-end Nokia is 3000RMB. A feature-phone is 1000. That's the competition.
If people buy low-end Nokia, they will end up locked into Microsoft Mobile. Microsoft already dominates the developing world (in computers), if Apple wants to get a foothold, they need to use the iPhone. Everybody likes iPhones (more than Windows Mobile, or Android), but they are too expensive in places where you don't buy on contracts (i.e. places where Apple NEEDS to break into the market).
Apple needs to cut the price in half. 2500 RMB is a good price point.
To keep the same margins, they need a phone that costs $100 to make. Half the memory, half the screen resolution (so apps are still compatible - a small, high-res screen is out of the question as it would probably increase costs!), half the build quality (reduce the amount of glass), half the cameras, half the processor speed, half the RAM.
They need a back-to-basics iPhone - an old 3GS, taking advantage of lower priced components.
Sources:
The future isn't about making from selling hardware, the future is about selling ads, apps and services.
And to be able to compete, Apple needs to make cheaper phones.
Not having any cheaper phones will mean that Apple's share and their lead will dwindle down. And developers will head for Android instead.
If they don't compete then this will be worse than mid 90's Apple. Imagine if Micro$soft and the PC manufacturers also had made money from everything installed and bought...
And to be able to compete, Apple needs to make cheaper phones.
Not having any cheaper phones will mean that Apple's share and their lead will dwindle down. And developers will head for Android instead.
If they don't compete then this will be worse than mid 90's Apple. Imagine if Micro$soft and the PC manufacturers also had made money from everything installed and bought...
It seems that the rhetoric has changed, and Cook is basically in charge now. Apple never has in the past decade or so, he said, "We want our products are only for the rich." They have always been marketed as a "mark of quality." I wonder where they go from here.
If I'm not mistaken Apple have never been active in 'budget' desktops or laptops, so right there you have two markets that they have ceded.
by budget desktops orlaptops do you mean cheap ones or expensive ones? I don't understand
But I guess you mean cheap, cause all of apple's PCs are expensive anyway. So that's why I'm hoping for a cheaper white macbook, and I think the low-end 11" mba should be cheaper too.
You are under the assumption that if Apple makes something less expensive then it is less quality. Apple can release a less expensive iPhone while keeping the same high build quality. How? Less features. Example? An 8GB iPhone.
What if Apple creates a smaller 3.1" iPhone mini for such people? I am more than sure that there's a huge market for such a phone.
One must also understand that a person who buys such a phone is not interested in purchasing content/apps in high volume. So, taking that into account Apple could always ship a phone without the App store.
But looking at the current scenario, the iPhone is all about the App Store; thats where Apple gets paid alot; thats where Apple advertises it; thats where the iPhone sells.
So the point is, would an App Store make a lot of sense on such a device?
Are people interested in buying tonnes of Apps?
Then again there's a class of people who would buy apps; I would gift one to my mother and send her apps occasionally or she might download them herself; she doesn't need an iPhone 4. All she needs is an easy to use phone with a decent functionality.
So I guess this is a debatable contest whether Apps are supposed to run on that phone or not. For the majority - I guess YES.
The next question is: App quality control.
Are we going to run the same apps on the phone?
Is apple going to provide an SDK for smaller app-style.
Am I going to pay $2.00 again for the same app on my iPhone/iPad?
A ton of questions for a smaller iPhone. Only if Apple could package the same 3.5" phone in an inexpensive solution, it would be great otherwise there's a lot of debate as to how things are going to proceed.
Taking into all of the above arguments into account, I believe Apple is going to release an inexpensive iPhone with the same size as the iPhone 4; will have less features; a lesser configuration spec; a decent display. Retina Apps on the iPhone 4 are going to act as Retina Apps on this iPhone-Basic and Apple is going to take iOS to a different level.
- All apps run
- Decent features otherwise
- Great build; better than Nokia
- Great Apple support
So my guess is that its going to be similar to a 13" macbook Vs 13" macbook pro. In simple terms:
13" Macbook : 13" Macbook Pro :: iPhone Vs iPhone Pro
Another take is that Apple earns a lot from the phone itself; we have seen that iPhone 4 costs around $170 including other costs. If Apple could cut down on certain hardware and produce the phone is large quantities, Apple could easily lower the cost of the iPhone to around $110-$120. $85-$90 on millions on iPhones is going to have a huge impact. iOS prospers and phones sell. Hmm...
One must also understand that a person who buys such a phone is not interested in purchasing content/apps in high volume. So, taking that into account Apple could always ship a phone without the App store.
But looking at the current scenario, the iPhone is all about the App Store; thats where Apple gets paid alot; thats where Apple advertises it; thats where the iPhone sells.
So the point is, would an App Store make a lot of sense on such a device?
Are people interested in buying tonnes of Apps?
Then again there's a class of people who would buy apps; I would gift one to my mother and send her apps occasionally or she might download them herself; she doesn't need an iPhone 4. All she needs is an easy to use phone with a decent functionality.
So I guess this is a debatable contest whether Apps are supposed to run on that phone or not. For the majority - I guess YES.
The next question is: App quality control.
Are we going to run the same apps on the phone?
Is apple going to provide an SDK for smaller app-style.
Am I going to pay $2.00 again for the same app on my iPhone/iPad?
A ton of questions for a smaller iPhone. Only if Apple could package the same 3.5" phone in an inexpensive solution, it would be great otherwise there's a lot of debate as to how things are going to proceed.
Taking into all of the above arguments into account, I believe Apple is going to release an inexpensive iPhone with the same size as the iPhone 4; will have less features; a lesser configuration spec; a decent display. Retina Apps on the iPhone 4 are going to act as Retina Apps on this iPhone-Basic and Apple is going to take iOS to a different level.
- All apps run
- Decent features otherwise
- Great build; better than Nokia
- Great Apple support
So my guess is that its going to be similar to a 13" macbook Vs 13" macbook pro. In simple terms:
13" Macbook : 13" Macbook Pro :: iPhone Vs iPhone Pro
Another take is that Apple earns a lot from the phone itself; we have seen that iPhone 4 costs around $170 including other costs. If Apple could cut down on certain hardware and produce the phone is large quantities, Apple could easily lower the cost of the iPhone to around $110-$120. $85-$90 on millions on iPhones is going to have a huge impact. iOS prospers and phones sell. Hmm...
Last edited:
I just wonder if tomorrow is pretty much all iPad (with a little OS preview), or if there will be any other "surprises".
So it would power a cellular radio, Bluetooth and phone OS from a battery the size of a dime?
I don't understand. They would need to build out their own infrastructure and this would result in lower costs?
I don't understand. They would need to build out their own infrastructure and this would result in lower costs?[/QUOTE]
Supposedly, Apple and/or M$ wouldn't have to deal with maintaining so much older equipment that dates back to the 80's. They could then charge less for data plans and contracts. It'll probably never happen anyway, but it's an interesting idea.
Supposedly, Apple and/or M$ wouldn't have to deal with maintaining so much older equipment that dates back to the 80's. They could then charge less for data plans and contracts. It'll probably never happen anyway, but it's an interesting idea.
What about those rumors concerning the slide-out keyboard? If they decide to build an iPhone with a smaller display, there will be the need of being able to type properly on it. I can either imagine (like someone has already written in this thread) an iPhone 3G (s) with the a4 processor and more RAM or a smaller plastic iPhone (smaller display) with a slide-out hardware keyboard.
Apple won't release an iPhone that cannot run all the apps from their App Store (at least in my opinion).
Apple won't release an iPhone that cannot run all the apps from their App Store (at least in my opinion).
Supposedly, Apple and/or M$ wouldn't have to deal with maintaining so much older equipment that dates back to the 80's. They could then charge less for data plans and contracts. It'll probably never happen anyway, but it's an interesting idea.[/QUOTE]
they would have to buy the licenses for the airwaves and those cost a lot these days.
as far as old equipment, it's the carriers' fault. they were allowing edge and older phones on their networks until a year ago or so