Apple's Lower-Cost iPhone to Lack Retina Display?

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
48,662
10,081



RBC Capital Markets analyst Amit Daryanani has released a new research report today citing supply chain checks as the basis for predicting a June or July launch for both the iPhone 5S and a lower-cost iPhone, in line with other recent reports. Daryanani says, however, that the lower-cost iPhone appears set to omit a Retina display.
Our supply-chain checks indicate that AAPL is working to launch multiple new phones in the June/July time-frame this year. Specifically, AAPL will launch the iPhone5s and a more affordable but lower-end iPhone at the same time, in either late CYQ2 or early Q3. The low-end iPhone will have the same 4" form factor as the iPhone5 but will have plastic casing and no retina display. With a lower price-point, AAPL will be able to target a growing and important part of the Smartphone market (sub-$400 price-band).
Daryanani's claim of no Retina display for the lower-cost iPhone conflicts with reports from reliable KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, who has claimed several times that the cheaper iPhone's 4-inch display will carry the same 326 pixels per inch seen on all Retina iPhone displays released to date.

Daryanani's claims also raises suspicion because Retina displays are a long-established feature of Apple's iPhone lineup, with all the iPhone models currently offered by Apple supporting the feature. This includes the iPhone 4, which is offered for free with a two-year contract in the United States, although this new low-cost iPhone is said to be seeking to bring prices even lower to attract customers in markets where carrier subsidies are uncommon.

Just yesterday, Apple announced to developers that all apps submitted to the App Store must support both Retina resolution and the larger 4-inch screen of the iPhone 5 and fifth-generation iPod touch as of May 1. Apps can, of course, also support devices such as the iPhone 3GS using non-Retina displays.

Article Link: Apple's Lower-Cost iPhone to Lack Retina Display?
 

Astroexe

macrumors member
Feb 19, 2012
57
0
Netherlands
Ridic, why would apple backtrack from their already established market of iPhone 4 displays? Sure they may not be the cheapest to manufacture but slap it inside of a 3G shell and that's a hefty price drop - right?

Just doesn't seem to make sense.
 

elvetio

macrumors member
May 29, 2012
84
0
.

For all of those saying that this phone does not make sense: in a lot of countries the subscription based model simply does not work. For instance, I pay only 5€ a month and I get free SMS and phone calls to all of those from my carrier. People don't want to spend 30 euros a month to get an iPhone. In the long run it is more expensive to do so than to pay full price. In Europe and other countries this is quite common
 

ade2bee

macrumors regular
Dec 13, 2009
168
0
123...

Back pedal!!!!

Mr Jobs at the launch of iPad 2 'We tested screens and the most optimum size was 10", let them make a 7", who wants that?'

.... Oooo iPad Mini has been launched!

Mr Jobs: Android too fragmented, budget phones pfft

... Budget iPhone!!!! (will someone tell me how they can run iOS6 on this if they can't run it on the iPad 1? ... And if they can't then isn't this fragmentation?)

Love someone who questions and has left the realm of the scammed

bye
 

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
8,697
4,304
They didn't actually say what "non-retina" means. Having 652 PPI (double retina) might qualify as something other than retina.


Budget iPhone!!!! (will someone tell me how they can run iOS6 on this if they can't run it on the iPad 1? ... And if they can't then isn't this fragmentation?
It doesn't run on the iPad 1 because its CPU or GPU or RAM is inadequate. The screen costs more than all of those components combined. Getting a cheaper display means you have more flexibility to get a better CPU, GPU, and RAM.

Also, the iPad 1 is now 3 generations old.

Also, it's always possible the system requirements for iOS 7 will be less than they were for iOS 6. Although that's not very likely.
 
Last edited:

Stuke00

macrumors 68000
Oct 11, 2011
1,674
74
Collinsville,IL
Considering they are not allowing Apps without retina support after May 1st, I highly doubt they will release a phone without a retina display.
 

ugahairydawgs

macrumors 68030
Jun 10, 2010
2,727
1,373
Logically....this makes zero sense. They just announced yesterday that starting 5/1 they aren't approving non-retina apps. To suggest they would make a device without the screen is just sloppy work by the analyst.
 

iGrip

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2010
1,626
0
The new App Store policy makes it seem unlikely that they will release a non-retina version.
 

trellus

macrumors regular
Jan 12, 2007
148
156
Plano, TX
Bull pucky

I don't buy it. I think it's much more likely they'll just put a lower quality TN (non-IPS) display with the same Retina resolution, a la the fourth-generation iPod Touch, than they'll put in a non-Retina resolution display. It makes sense that they'd want to cut corners, but I think they're less likely to go all the way to non-Retina than to just use a cheaper display technology with the same resolution.
 

MVallee

macrumors 6502a
Feb 8, 2007
807
182
Ontario, Canada
I think if Apple does release a low cost iPhone, it would have a 4 inch retina display. For now they still sell the 4 and 4S with the old screen size, but in a few years I'm sure those will be fazed out and everything will be moved to the new screen size, eliminating the fragmentation. This is probably why Apple is no longer accepting apps that don't support retina and the 4 inch screen.
 

iGrip

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2010
1,626
0
Back pedal!!!!

Mr Jobs at the launch of iPad 2 'We tested screens and the most optimum size was 10", let them make a 7", who wants that?'

.... Oooo iPad Mini has been launched!

Mr Jobs: Android too fragmented, budget phones pfft

... Budget iPhone!!!! (will someone tell me how they can run iOS6 on this if they can't run it on the iPad 1? ... And if they can't then isn't this fragmentation?)

Love someone who questions and has left the realm of the scammed

bye
Steve Jobs was a known liar. he said many things that later turned out to be untrue. He actually denied paternity of his child by claiming he was infertile.
 

animefx

macrumors regular
May 10, 2005
157
0
Illinois
This would be horrible. Apple doesn't need to cheapen it's brand this way. Steve never wanted a crap product and non retina display in 2013 is no longer acceptable.

The iPhone 4 is free now, how can you get cheaper than that unless you are talking about buying a phone off of a contract. In a situation like that someone still in a 2 year contract has at least an iPhone 4 with retina display, if you have a 3GS no are no longer in a contract (or soon won't be) a non-retina device will not be an upgrade for you. If you don't have an iPhone or a contract the 4S should be the phone that's going to be free on a 2 year contract soon.

The only way this makes sense is if Apple simply wants to sell a cheap phone for people who don't like contracts or wants to make a cheap 4" display phone so that 3.5" displays are completely phased out.
 

Rootus

macrumors 6502
Mar 22, 2008
376
24
Portland, OR
I would be really surprised. There are already phones sub-400 that have large high-resolution displays, so cheaping out on a critical interface component would seem to be counter-productive. Getting into a race-to-the-bottom with Google will be a loss for everybody, including the consumer.

The only way this makes sense is if Apple simply wants to sell a cheap phone for people who don't like contracts or wants to make a cheap 4" display phone so that 3.5" displays are completely phased out.
And then, they'd be going after a specific consumer that wants a no-contract cheap phone but has to have iOS and the Apple logo on the back. Going toe-to-toe with the $300 Nexus 4 using a low-resolution display is not going to work. If I were Apple, I'd avoid it altogether. There is no good that can come from it.
 

Northgrove

macrumors 65816
Aug 3, 2010
1,120
386
I'm perhaps a hopeless Apple fan but I like Apple as a premium brand. It's not really to just feel "special", but to know that I get a premium product when I order something from them. I don't want to have to learn "how much" or "how little" quality I can expect from something from them. I want to know. I want to assume with confidence. I want to place confidence in this brand.

I remember when I first started using Apple products. It was back in 2008 when I ordered a MacBook Pro, the first with Unibody design. I remember that it felt like nothing I had used before both in terms of hardware and software. There were no antivirus tools to configure, no firewalls yelling each time I launched a new application, and no registry hive of settings to micromanage if things went wrong. And the hardware was built to match this experience.

If Apple starts designing products using their operating systems but instead using plastics for cheap plastic iPhones or cheap plastic laptops, that'll feel as wrong as getting a premium PC laptop like the Samsung Series 9 but loading it with Windows XP or Vista rather than Windows 7. It'll just feel wrong. This example is the opposite scenario, but equally wrong.

Some software is simply engineered to be matched by equally impressive hardware, and I think that it's important today to find a niche and excel at it.

I think that Apple has in the past been quite unique in terms of not allowing themselves to be seduced by the temptation of higher margins from budget products where they can get away with them. Ironically, this very lack of hunt for higher profits by cutting corners has made them so profitable. I'm hoping there was a lesson taught by this, but if they start looking what there is to find in the budget area of business, I'm very worried that they'll discover something too tempting.

We've all seen what can happen with Apple's focus when they find something even more lucrative than before (severe iMac delays, the Missing Mac Pro, the controversial "X" series of Pro products, The Missing Aperture 4, and so on...).
 

HishamAkhtar

macrumors 6502a
Oct 22, 2011
510
1
This would be horrible. Apple doesn't need to cheapen it's brand this way. Steve never wanted a crap product and non retina display in 2013 is no longer acceptable.

The iPhone 4 is free now, how can you get cheaper than that unless you are talking about buying a phone off of a contract. In a situation like that someone still in a 2 year contract has at least an iPhone 4 with retina display, if you have a 3GS no are no longer in a contract (or soon won't be) a non-retina device will not be an upgrade for you. If you don't have an iPhone or a contract the 4S should be the phone that's going to be free on a 2 year contract soon.

The only way this makes sense is if Apple simply wants to sell a cheap phone for people who don't like contracts or wants to make a cheap 4" display phone so that 3.5" displays are completely phased out.
Omg the reasoning behind a cheaper iPhone has been explained a million times on these threads. Stop being so ignorant and read them once in a while.
 

roow110

macrumors regular
Jul 1, 2011
110
26
For a long time I was very skeptical of these rumors, however, I am beginning to believe them. I still have trouble grasping the fact that Apple is indeed making an inferior phone just to be cheap, however, as more information is released I can begin to picture this phone and the reasoning behind it, and it seems like a relatively good idea.

It will run the same OS as iPhone. It will have a plastic shell. It will have a 4inch non-retina display. It will use the die-shrunk A5 chip. This is beginning to sound like its not only possible, but actually, not a bad idea. It is making a great phone from older technologies. They aren't just throwing together a crap phone, but taking proven and now more affordable parts, and putting them into this now more affordable device.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.