Well I agree with you on the specs but the 3Gs is still being supported. Although it probably will not receive the iOS7 upgrade coming this fall, the 4 most surely will.
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's Lower-Cost iPhone As a 'Mid-End' Device
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well I agree with you on the specs but the 3Gs is still being supported. Although it probably will not receive the iOS7 upgrade coming this fall, the 4 most surely will.
3GS is already too old model, even if one can find a brand new one.
400 euro for 4/4S is fine, but still expensive.
Think of non-contract 299 euro (probable European price) for a brand new shining iPhone, much faster than 3GS or 4/4S.That would be cheaper than 349 euro I paid few years ago in Italy for Sony Ericsson K700i, a flagship model with a whopping 41 mb of memory and VGA camera, best in its class at that time.
For me 1080P didn't matter, just a bigger easy to read screen. I found an amazing deal locally on a NIB SII and even though it's screen is only a little bigger than my 5th gen ipod it replaced, it's a helluva lot easier to read.
Smart move
Apple should release a device with similar internals to the iPhone 4S/iPod Touch 5 - give it the A5 CPU at 1Ghz and bump it up to 1 GB of RAM. They should give it the iPhone 4/iPod Touch 5 camera and a polycarbonate shell to help with cost. It should also have a 4 inch screen with the same resolution as the iPhone 5/iPod Touch 5. It could sell for $399 16 GB unlocked for a pentaband compatible HSPA+/LTE device through the Apple Store. They could sell a CDMA version to Sprint, Verizon, and US Cellular subsidized for free and for sale on Virgin Mobile/Boost Mobile/Cricket for $299 (they both offer a very small subsidy).
Apple would still make a small profit from these phones at this price and many people would buy this brand new phone over a used iPhone 4 or 4S on Craigslist.
Apple should release a device with similar internals to the iPhone 4S/iPod Touch 5 - give it the A5 CPU at 1Ghz and bump it up to 1 GB of RAM. They should give it the iPhone 4/iPod Touch 5 camera and a polycarbonate shell to help with cost. It should also have a 4 inch screen with the same resolution as the iPhone 5/iPod Touch 5. It could sell for $399 16 GB unlocked for a pentaband compatible HSPA+/LTE device through the Apple Store. They could sell a CDMA version to Sprint, Verizon, and US Cellular subsidized for free and for sale on Virgin Mobile/Boost Mobile/Cricket for $299 (they both offer a very small subsidy).
Apple would still make a small profit from these phones at this price and many people would buy this brand new phone over a used iPhone 4 or 4S on Craigslist.
That's the Nexus business model. There's no reason for Apple to copy it; they're a luxury brand.
I wondered this myself. I always considered last years phone the cheaper alternative. It will be interesting to see how this phone sells and what impact it will have on the sales of the regular iPhone.
There is very good reason for Apple (contrary to many other luxury brands):
It's called the network effect: The more people use an iPhone, the more valuable their iOS platform becomes.
FaceTime, iMessage and Photostream sharing are rather pointless, if others aren't on iOS. A higher number of iPhone users attracts 3rd party developers and means a bigger, more competitive market (ultimately providing better products), ultimately leading to better pro. Also, modern smartphones are a somewhat complex devices - many people will be shying away from buying into one platform if they are few users in their peer group or amongst their relatives.
Just look at Microsoft: I think that with WP8 they have a very attractive and promising platform on their hands: elegant modern looks, easy to use, social network integration, good if not great hardware options at attractive prices. In many aspects I'd consider more appealing than Android. In some more than iOS (at least for personal use, hardly for business use). Yet their market share (and mind share) is minuscule compared to Android's.
But a lot of people are already using the iPhone, Apple has no reason to take a loss on hardware sales. Apple is primarily a hardware company and they just will not do it.
The reason Nokia sells so many cheap Lumia phones is because no one wants them quite frankly. They are not desirable products so they have to undercut their competitors on price, and yet they still have a minuscule marketshare even after years on the market. Apple is not in that position.
The reason Google sells Nexus devices so cheap is they make their money back on advertising and content sales. Amazon is the same - they sell Kindle Fires so cheap because they make money on content. While Apple has those too, hardware is still their main business, they make very little profit on iTunes compared to hardware. Google and Amazon sell content as their main business and hardware merely supplements that, whereas for Apple the reverse is true. It's an entirely different business model. They won't sacrifice their main source of profit when their product is already popular, it just wouldn't make any sense.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulting the competition, I actually like WP8 and Android, in fact I dislike iOS these days, but the market is what it is. iPhones are very popular already and Apple does not need to resort to making zero margins on hardware to get them out there.
...in America.
Or Japan.
The picture looks a bit different beyond those countries. In much of Europe, iOS marketshare is 20% max. (and declining). In most developing countries, it's in the single digits, often declining.
They soon might be... sort of. For instance, it looks like Windows Phone might soon command a bigger share of the market in Europe than iOS in the big developing markets (China, India, Latin America). If it doesn't already, that is.
Last edited:
I'm not in America, I live in the UK. Very few people use Nokias anymore but iPhones are everywhere.
Maybe Apple sees a future without only subsidized phones, more the TMob thing. Cost may become more relevant in any market.
Apple can then sell us new phones every year, rather than every two years! Seems like common sense to me.
I like the plastic 3gs. Nice to hold and use, looks great.
Apple can then sell us new phones every year, rather than every two years! Seems like common sense to me.
I like the plastic 3gs. Nice to hold and use, looks great.
And if Apple comes out with a plastic iPhone everyone will be raving over how good it is, of course. But when Samsung make plastic phones it's crap...
Asha 501...
Another thorn in Apples side.
Step it up, your competitions turning up the heat.
----------
Yup... Only Apple has "Magic Plastic" LOL
Another thorn in Apples side.
Step it up, your competitions turning up the heat.
----------
And if Apple comes out with a plastic iPhone everyone will be raving over how good it is, of course. But when Samsung make plastic phones it's crap...
Yup... Only Apple has "Magic Plastic" LOL
I do think this is a perfect part of the market to target. Why? A family member just bought an unlocked $350 Samsung that does 80% of what the S4 does. Plug in the contract-less T-Mobile SIM and it just works. Monthly charge 1/2 what most carriers get on contract. And, for $350, many people can just buy it and forget about the contract deal. I prefer the iPhone, but, they don't have an affordable unlocked option.
I know the $349 is perfect, because, that is in fact what the Samsung cost. Plus sales tax of course. (For non-U.S. readers.)
$350 is not "low cost" to me. It is moderate cost. Samsung has a couple of mid-range Galaxies (everything is a "Galaxy" now) in just this price range. It is perfect for the "unlocked" market. It isn't an iPhone 5 or Galaxy 4S, but, it is functional. The GSM phone works on T-Mobile. The GPS+Google Maps works. Camera is OK but not marvelous. (Better than the iPhone 4S was, though.) Screen good enough to read email. No need to watch HD movies on a cell phone or use the phone as an Apple TV/Roku, or, computer substitute.
If Apple asked me, I would say start with the mid-Range Samsung, make the (GSM version) phone more "international". Put in a better camera. Keep the cost < $350.