Apple May Launch 5.8-Inch OLED iPhone With Curved Glass Casing and Screen in 2017

[FFR]

Please explain to me which numbers are fabricated, this information is from a Guardian analysis.

" In 2012 the average app size was 23MB. Since then Apps are higher resolution, more complex, do more and provide richer experiences. In 2015 Apple increased the largest app size to 4GB. Not every app is massive. Facebook weighs in at close to 100mb, Twitter 70MB, Snapchat 55MB, but that's the size of an unopened installed app, as soon as it starts doing something, such as caching images and data it needs to operate the app size ballons. The Twitter app alone for instance can easily get over 240MB for the average user.

Also, the iphone 5s had an 8 MP camera that took pics just over 3MB a piece in size, around 200 photos or so would be 600 megabytes. With a current 12 MP camera on the 6s, you have larger photos that take up more storage, Apple's Live photos take up even more space with added video/audio. Why even offer 4K video on a 16GB phone? it consumes 300 megabytes per minute and isn't practical with so little storage.

What about music? Average consumers aren't from the stone-age, they like their phone to have music. So 12 tracks stored from iTunes or Apple Music takes 90 megabytes. A 200-track plalist takes around 1.5 gigabytes or 12% of a 16GB iphone.

What about games? Most iphone users like to play games now and then. Increasingly graphic rich games such as Real Racing 3 takes 855MG of storage, the popular Hearthstone takes 868 megabytes, updating it with the latest content takes up 1.3GB.

The average user had 27 apps on their iphone at the end of 2013 according to data from Nielsen, which means with apps growing in size and photos, music and videos becoming more compelling that 12GB of space seemed small last year, let alone today.

Running out of storage makes the smartphone behave poorly and provides a very subpar user experience.

Furthermore, your claim that Apple would HAVE to jack the price way up for a 32GB phone is rubbish.


Analyst firm IHS estimated that storage cost Apple $0.42 per gigabytes of storage. Adding an extra 16GB of storage to bring it to 32GB would have cost Apple just $6.72 extra per smartphone.

"The iPhone 6S and 6S Plus are premium smartphones, which Apple claims are the “most advanced smartphones in the world”. Yet the rest of the industry, including Samsung, has woken up to the fact that 16GB is not enough storage these days and either allows users to add their own storage to top-end smartphones or provides at least 32GB of rated space for their base models." -Credit to the Guardian for providing this information""

Well all of it.

Does Apple offer a 64gb or 128gb iPhone?

 

[filmantopia]

Anyone else think it's odd they'd do a major design overhaul in time for the 7S, but not for the 7?

I know they might not have it 'ready' but come on, this is Apple. Reality Distortion Field represent 2016.

I'm thinking that Apple is breaking the tradition-- this model will not be called the '7S'.

 

[jujufreeze]

Please explain to me which numbers are fabricated, this information is from a Guardian analysis.

" In 2012 the average app size was 23MB. Since then Apps are higher resolution, more complex, do more and provide richer experiences. In 2015 Apple increased the largest app size to 4GB. Not every app is massive. Facebook weighs in at close to 100mb, Twitter 70MB, Snapchat 55MB, but that's the size of an unopened installed app, as soon as it starts doing something, such as caching images and data it needs to operate the app size ballons. The Twitter app alone for instance can easily get over 240MB for the average user.

Also, the iphone 5s had an 8 MP camera that took pics just over 3MB a piece in size, around 200 photos or so would be 600 megabytes. With a current 12 MP camera on the 6s, you have larger photos that take up more storage, Apple's Live photos take up even more space with added video/audio. Why even offer 4K video on a 16GB phone? it consumes 300 megabytes per minute and isn't practical with so little storage.

What about music? Average consumers aren't from the stone-age, they like their phone to have music. So 12 tracks stored from iTunes or Apple Music takes 90 megabytes. A 200-track plalist takes around 1.5 gigabytes or 12% of a 16GB iphone.

What about games? Most iphone users like to play games now and then. Increasingly graphic rich games such as Real Racing 3 takes 855MG of storage, the popular Hearthstone takes 868 megabytes, updating it with the latest content takes up 1.3GB.

The average user had 27 apps on their iphone at the end of 2013 according to data from Nielsen, which means with apps growing in size and photos, music and videos becoming more compelling that 12GB of space seemed small last year, let alone today.

Running out of storage makes the smartphone behave poorly and provides a very subpar user experience.

Furthermore, your claim that Apple would HAVE to jack the price way up for a 32GB phone is rubbish.


Analyst firm IHS estimated that storage cost Apple $0.42 per gigabytes of storage. Adding an extra 16GB of storage to bring it to 32GB would have cost Apple just $6.72 extra per smartphone.

"The iPhone 6S and 6S Plus are premium smartphones, which Apple claims are the “most advanced smartphones in the world”. Yet the rest of the industry, including Samsung, has woken up to the fact that 16GB is not enough storage these days and either allows users to add their own storage to top-end smartphones or provides at least 32GB of rated space for their base models." -Credit to the Guardian for providing this information""

Well all of it.

It is a very simple formal logical fallacy that has the following structure:

X is true.

In practice, arguments by assertion tend to take the "rinse and repeat" approach to logic:

1. X is true.
2. No really, X is true.
3. Actually, X is true.
4. But X is true.

 

[dampfnudel]

2017 2018 is too late. I refuse to believe Apple with its resources can't course correct and release a new model this year. If you need me, I'm ready to come aboard and plug the holes while steering the ship Apple!

They are releasing a new model. Some people may not consider it "new enough" and those people can wait for the tenth anniversary iPhone coming next year. I was thinking of a really good name for next year's Plus model: iPhone X Pro (X for the tenth generation iPhone). The 4.7-5.0" iPhone could be called the iPhone X Pro as well. At first I thought about calling it iPhone Air, but it looks like the 'Air' moniker is being phased out at Cupertino.

2017 releases:
iPhone SE 2 4.0" or iPhone X Pro 4.3" (A11)
iPhone X Pro 5.0" (A11)
iPhone X Pro 5.8" (A11)

[7.9" iPad model dropped?]
iPad Pro 2 9.7" (A10X or A11)
iPad Pro 2 12.9" (A10X or A11)

 

[FFR]

It is a very simple formal logical fallacy that has the following structure:

X is true.

In practice, arguments by assertion tend to take the "rinse and repeat" approach to logic:

1. X is true.
2. No really, X is true.
3. Actually, X is true.
4. But X is true.

Again I'm not following how this pertains to Apple offering you three iPhone variants.

You keep ignoring the 64gb and 128gb iPhones.

 

[jujufreeze]

Again I'm not following how this pertains to Apple offering you three iPhone variants.

You keep ignoring the 64gb and 128gb iPhones.

Please explain, point by point why you dispute the numbers I posted with evidence to the contrary. You made a blanket assertion. I'm not following why you think Apple is justified in offering a 16Gb phone variant in the year 2016.

 

[smacrumon]

Do you know the definitions for deceptive and dishonest?
If you honestly feel that way I don't know why you still elect to purchase thier products. I wouldn't.




Those customers don't. But they buy a 128gb iPhone and their happy. If you need more storage why don't you buy a larger variant?





They offer three sizes. Seriously How is it a marketing trick?




Ofcourse. Why not make it 128gb or better yet a free Ferrari from Apple with every iPhone purchase. Because you know how they owe you for buying their stuff.

Um, do you yourself there with your Apple lobbying effort know the definitions for deceptive and dishonest?
Apple is setting up customers for failure who buy a 16gb. Apple is being dishonest and deceptive, the iPhone 16gb product is not fit for its intended purpose and the 64gb should replace it at the 16gb price point. Making customers choose a storage limit these days is just like getting customers to choose between CPU speeds. It's nonsense ********.
The entry 16gb is designed to deceive, or give the impression to customers, that they have a phone within their price range, only to realise the total package means customers will exhaust the storage limit in very little time and be forced to look at at more expensive model. It's certainly not honourable for Apple to treat its customers like this.

 

[jimbobb24]

Now Apple is just copying every fool thing Samsung does?

 

[bdkennedy1]

2017 is the 10 year anniversary of the iPhone. Apple isn't going to ****ing redesign the iPhone twice in two years.

 

[FFR]

Um, do you yourself there with your Apple lobbying effort know the definitions for deceptive and dishonest?
Apple is setting up customers for failure who buy a 16gb. Apple is being dishonest and deceptive, the iPhone 16gb product is not fit for its intended purpose and the 64gb should replace it at the 16gb price point. Making customers choose a storage limit these days is just like getting customers to choose between CPU speeds. It's nonsense bull$£€¥.

The entry 16gb is designed to deceive, or give the impression to customers, that they have a phone within their price range, only to realise the total package means customers will exhaust the storage limit in very little time and be forced to look at at more expensive model.

It's certainly not honourable for Apple to treat its customers like this.

How is Apple deceiving the customer out of their "price range"?

Your making absolutely no sense.

You even admitted that the 16gb iPhone has a niche demographic that favors the cheapest option.
How is Apple being dishonest?

 

[smacrumon]

They are releasing a new model. Some people may not consider it "new enough" and those people can wait for the tenth anniversary iPhone coming next year. I was thinking of a really good name for next year's Plus model: iPhone X Pro (X for the tenth generation iPhone). The 4.7-5.0" iPhone could be called the iPhone X Pro as well. At first I thought about calling it iPhone Air, but it looks like the 'Air' moniker is being phased out at Cupertino.

2017 releases:
iPhone SE 2 4.0" or iPhone X Pro 4.3" (A11)
iPhone X Pro 5.0" (A11)
iPhone X Pro 5.8" (A11)

[7.9" iPad model dropped?]
iPad Pro 2 9.7" (A10X or A11)
iPad Pro 2 12.9" (A10X or A11)

Yes that's what I meant. A new-new model is required, not a new-enough model. The 10 year version should simply be called 'iPhone' bring it back to its essence. No, iPad mini is great, it must stay. So compact and competent.

 

[navaira]

I wonder if perhaps the fact that Apple stock has been hovering around $100 for a long time is that stockholders expect – like me – that some people will get burnt with the "best iPhone ever" with 16 GB, "fastest iMac yet" with a spinner drive, "iPad Pro: Super. Computer." with 2 GB RAM and simply move away from the Apple ecosystem when it's time to make a new purchase. I sold my iPhone 5 and iPad 3 and bought Xperia phone and tablet. Couldn't be happier, although I don't have 3D Touch and can't use a pencil.

I was looking at iMacs for my partner, who – if he went to the Apple Store on his own – would simply buy the cheapest 27" because hey, it's the latest iMac and screen is great, it has to be superfast, right? The config I would advice for his use case is over €2300. Which is why we hope his mid-2011 iMac with Thunderbolt SSD and maxed out RAM continues working for quite a while longer. If not, we'll probably move to Windows simply because we don't have €2300 to spend on a new computer. True, we'll have to live with Windows 10, but we'll also have €1000 left in our pockets. Similar with the iPhone – you buy the latest version and you expect greatness, then you install some apps, copy some music and discover you can film 1 minute of 4K video. Would this experience make you think "I have to buy another iPhone for €899 immediately while the one I bought is on two-year contract" or "this wasn't the best choice after all"? I bought a Samsung Galaxy S3 because it had great (paid for*) reviews, SD slot, removable battery and was cheaper than the iPhone. After this experience I will never buy anything from Samsung again but that doesn't mean my budget magically doubled and I can afford a 128 GB 6s+. Apple aren't exactly dishonest, they just fail to explain to a regular buyer (who is probably not a Macrumors member) what 16 GB means in everyday use. When you read the "cameras" page about 6s, it talks about how you can shoot and edit 4K video, but it doesn't actually say how long that video can be with 16 GB storage unless I missed something.

* I assume the reviews were paid for because one of the features they underlined was the amazing battery that I had to charge twice a day, and half a year later you could read articles complaining about the terrible battery life.

 

[Sandstorm]

Um, do you yourself there with your Apple lobbying effort know the definitions for deceptive and dishonest?
Apple is setting up customers for failure who buy a 16gb. Apple is being dishonest and deceptive, the iPhone 16gb product is not fit for its intended purpose and the 64gb should replace it at the 16gb price point. Making customers choose a storage limit these days is just like getting customers to choose between CPU speeds. It's nonsense ********.
The entry 16gb is designed to deceive, or give the impression to customers, that they have a phone within their price range, only to realise the total package means customers will exhaust the storage limit in very little time and be forced to look at at more expensive model. It's certainly not honourable for Apple to treat its customers like this.

Fully agree with You. And the upgrade princing so is extremely ridiculous. One of the reasons why tech is exciting, is that everything gets better and cheaper. Companies generally reflect this and either their prices go down or they offer you better specs for the same money. But not Apple. The upgrade prices for SSDs, RAM, iOS device memory are so insanely overpriced and out of touch with the rest of market, that it borders on spitting in customer faces. The Mac pro is 2 years old old, but costs the same. Mac mini is neglected. The Tunderbolt display is what, 5 years old? It was overpriced when they released it. Now its very outdated AND costs exactly the same! What was that joke about sad 5 year old PCs, Phil?...

 

[FFR]

Please explain, point by point why you dispute the numbers I posted with evidence to the contrary. You made a blanket assertion. I'm not following why you think Apple is justified in offering a 16Gb phone variant in the year 2016.

You just made up numbers?
And added a thank you to the guardian at the end of your gibberish rant.

What blanket assertion?
That Apple offers larger capacities than the 16gb variant. Damn straight. You seem to want to ignore that.

Because people will pay for it. Because customers obviously want it.

Not me, I bought a 128gb variant.
#happycamper

 

[Col4bin]

You don't realize how important thinness is until you look back. Who wants a 5 inch iPhone with the thickness of a 3GS? yikes.!

Sure, your argument stands up from the original iPhone all the way up to the 5 where each generation had marginal room for improvement of thickness. Since the 6 however, iPhone thinness has plateaued and is plenty thin already. To make matters worse, Apple insists on making it even thinner for aesthetical reasons at the expense of battery life.

 

[Sevendaymelee]

5.8 inches? Unless they're going to go without bezels I just don't see this happening. The 6s plus is only 5.5 and it's way too big for most people. At 5.8 it would just be unusable.

 

[jimbobb24]

I'm 90% sure I'm soon jumping ship. Fully. Switch back to a PC (like amazing Surface Pro 4) and get some awesome innovative Android phone (like the S7 edge). At this point I see Apple as greedy, slow and pathetic (especially, because its also extremely rich) company that has exchanged innovation for milking its customers to the max. Macs are hopelessly neglected and overpriced, phones are lagging behind with stale designs and specs. iOS has excellent 3rd party app ecosystem, but is too restrictive and also feels stale. WWDC will probably be the decision point for me. If the next iOS and Mac OS are not radically exciting again, and the new Macs will still feel like intentionally underpowered (removed ports, 5400rpm drives, small memory etc) overpriced fashion accessories, I'm done. I know I'm not the only one who feels this lately.

PS - I'm sure there are downsides on competing products/services, but at least there is vibrant choice, far better prices and constant innovation going on... I want to be excited about tech again (sorry if this sounded like Drumpf slogan, no releation).

I recently priced out a comparable PC to match an iMac and was pretty surprised the price diffence was minimal.

But I am thinking about switching because too much is changing to be too simple and useless. iPhoto was one the biggest problems. I have so much invested in Apple and they tend to move to new less useful products too often.

 

[Jax44]

Good effort still, gives us an idea!
[doublepost=1459101066][/doublepost]
I regret it was necessary to add so much ewaste to the planet year on year. Are upgrades really that necessary.

iPhones get sold, handed down or traded in and are used for years.

 

[jujufreeze]

You just made up numbers?
And added a thank you to the guardian at the end of your gibberish rant.

Here is the article titled "Why Apple shouldn't be selling a 16Gb phone iphone 6S or 6S plus."
http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-should-not-be-selling-16gb-iphone-6s-6s-plus

Feel free to use the meticulous research I know you have done to disprove the numbers I extracted from this article.

What blanket assertion?
That Apple offers larger capacities than the 16gb variant. Damn straight. You seem to want to ignore that.

I know Apple offers 64Gb and 128Gb variants. My question is, why do they offer a 16Gb variant?

Because people will pay for it. Because customers obviously want it.

In other words, Apple should allow its customers to have a subpar experience by default, because they can?

Not me, I bought a 128gb variant.
#happycamper

Congrats. I have the 64Gb variant. Doesn't change the fact that 16 Gigabytes isn't enough memory in a new iphone.

 

[kerrikins]

Reading this thread is reminding me why I stopped coming here so much. Seems like all some of the users here come to do is complain.

 

[smacrumon]

How is Apple deceiving the customer out of their "price range"?

Your making absolutely no sense.

You even admitted that the 16gb iPhone has a niche demographic that favors the cheapest option.
How is Apple being dishonest?

I'm making complete sense. Run out of real arguments and now stooping to personal criticisms? What a hostile world out here for us all to engage in some meaningful discussion.
Customers go in to an Apple Store to buy a 16gb to be told the device is crippled and they should get the more expensive model to address that issue. It's dishonest, it's descriptive marketing getting customers in the door to buy a product that is designed to fail within a short period of ownership. The tactics Apple is using here are on par and equal to the tactics by used car sales. Great way to improve your brand Apple.

 

[Sandstorm]

I recently priced out a comparable PC to match an iMac and was pretty surprised the price diffence was minimal.

But I am thinking about switching because too much is changing to be too simple and useless. iPhoto was one the biggest problems. I have so much invested in Apple and they tend to move to new less useful products too often.

I admit iMac is ok (esp. screen).

But when I was thinking about headless Mac, I stumbled upon this video, sums up everything nicely:

 

[crispApple]

I came across this one yesterday. It was actually a rendering for the iPhone 6 I thought it looked pretty good.

 

[navaira]

The nice thing about those renderings is that they don't have to take actual technology into consideration. Why stop at 4mm? A 0.2 mm iPhone with 96-hour battery is coming! (on renders at least)

 

[smacrumon]

Fully agree with You. And the upgrade princing so is extremely ridiculous. One of the reasons why tech is exciting, is that everything gets better and cheaper. Companies generally reflect this and either their prices go down or they offer you better specs for the same money. But not Apple. The upgrade prices for SSDs, RAM, iOS device memory are so insanely overpriced and out of touch with the rest of market, that it borders on spitting in customer faces. The Mac pro is 2 years old old, but costs the same. Mac mini is neglected. The Tunderbolt display is what, 5 years old? It was overpriced when they released it. Now its very outdated AND costs exactly the same! What was that joke about sad 5 year old PCs, Phil?...

Great thinking. Top point about the 5 year old PC remark. I didn't make the link between the display's age and that comment. Totally crass statement from a company that tries positioning itself as the best.