Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

Once you go retina, I think it would be hard to go back. But then again, the people that would buy the low cost iPhone, probably never had a smartphone with a retina or retina-like display

----------
iGrip said:
The new App Store policy makes it seem unlikely that they will release a non-retina version.
Click to expand...

But apps optimized for retina can still work on non-retina devices.
 
It definitely won't have a retina screen! I can't believe no one has said this...

1. It will have the same resolution as the 4" iphone 5, but it will have a BIGGER screen with less pixel density. That way, the moment it is released you can run all apps on it. Pretty smart.

2. Also Apple needs to make sure all you a$$holes won't buy it. Apple is going to take a hit on margins for the sake of market share. This is for poor people.
 
jeffmetanna said:
If true, it means more work for us developers. Yet another artwork file to create...

For example, to create a device specific image for an app, you name your files to:

background.png (iPhone 3GS and below)
background@2x.png (iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S)
background-568h@2x.png (iPhone 5)
background~ipad.png (iPad 1 and iPad 2)
background@2x~ipad.png (iPad 3 and iPad 4)

Now you need yet another file for 4-inch non-retina screens:

background-568h.png
Click to expand...

Well... you want your apps to look as good as possible on every Apple device... don't you?

At least Apple is giving you the exact dimensions to make your artwork. It's all spelled out for you.

But hey... who said software development is easy? iOS may be a pain to developer for... but it's clear developers still prefer iOS.

Or... you can develop for Android... in which there are even more resolutions and aspect ratios to deal with if you want your apps to look pixel-perfect.

In terms of background images... you'd need many images to cover the variety of resolutions. The most common Android resolutions are 800x480, 960x540, 1280x720, and 1920x1080.

But then there are some oddball resolutions too. For instance... the Nexus 4 is 1280x768 which is a 15:9 aspect ratio instead of the more common 16:9

That would require a new piece of artwork altogether (otherwise you let your apps stretch the image to fit that shape... yuck)
 
Apple needs to make a cheaper iPhone for the frugal folks like me who would much rather go with a cheap Android device on a prepaid plan then shell out $650 for an iPhone or enter into a $70 a month contract which is even a worse economic proposition.

For $329 they should be able to sell something respectable that is significantly better then let's say the Samsung Exhibit 2 which can be had for $200 and $150 if you figure in a store rebate. The only glaring deficiencies with the Exhibit 2 are probably glare in the sun and very mediocre battery life. And the Android OS on that phone is antiquated compared to the new Android phones.

While I can certainly afford an iPhone, I don't want to be worried about being robbed or losing it and being out $650 plus tax.

Something in between the Samsung Exhibit 2 and iPhone 5 would sell like hotcakes in the prepaid market in the US and most other countries as well.

The truth is no matter what Apple does, their margins on iPhones are going to compress very significantly over the next 3 years since the incentive for anyone to upgrade after they have a 4G phone will be minimized and competition is getting much tougher. I am an Apple shareholder and owning the stock has rewarded me but I sold half of my shares at $675 since I realize this. I did sell a put option recently a few months ago so I'm also betting the stock stays above $400 until next year. So I am not of the mindset, Apple is doomed but 3 years from now, very few mainstream people will be buying even premium phones for more then $500.

The key to having a low cost iPhone that works is just to make sure it doesn't have a glaring deficiency. Good camera plus good battery life and good screen plus 4G for $329 = winning combination. Apple should be able to do that on a device with at least 16 GB of Ram.
 
ade2bee said:
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
Click to expand...

400$ iPhone isn't exactly "budget iPhone". It is just a less expensive iPhone.
Android craphones are 150$ for example ...
 
The Usual Suspects

1) Steal underpants
2) Posted unfounded rumors to generate interest and web hits
3) Watch trolls and fan boys bash each other
4) Make Money !
 
Compile 'em all said:
True but almost everyone now is designing for retina first. And now that Apple has set this new requirement, they are basically saying "this is now the standard".
Click to expand...

All they are saying is that "you can no longer be lazy and not properly support our latest phone."

----------
transpo1 said:
How could they market an iphone with a non-retina display? That would really take some marketing spin, I think.
Click to expand...

$300 unlocked, off contract.
 
Apple wants to get the price down to around $299-$349 without contract in order to slow down some of Androids advances in that price range. Despite what many here may think, it's the low end cheaper Android devices that make up the majority of their market share and not those high end ones that are similarly priced to the iPhone.

Apple probably believes that a non-retina iPhone can be priced that low and still maintain their margins. People in the target countries and even here in the US would buy it just because its and iPhone and because its cheap. People are still paying over $1000 for iPhones in some countries so Apple would be in position to make a killing here if the margins are high enough.

Also remember that even here in the USA the prepaid market is exploding in growth every quarter. There will lots of people willing to pay $299 for an iphone out of contract and have a low monthly bill. Carriers like Boost, Cricket, Virgin, and Tmobile prepaid would sell tons of these. They wouldn't care about the screen as long as its an iPhone and can run all the apps.
 
Astroexe said:
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.
Click to expand...


Because Apple has no innovation left. Do you have a better reason?
 
An iPhone 4 with plastic casing to rid of antenna problem, and LTE connection? This possibly means the lineup in USA starts with 4S, 5, and the new 5S? This may work well if AAPL finds a cheaper way to replace the 4's screen.
They better price this new lower-cost phone carefully, for the Nexus 4 is a potent one at $300. If the Apple phone has LTE connectivity at the same price point, it will be a winner regards of processor choice.
Samsung S4 already beats iPhone5 hands down. Let the battle begin at 5", which IMO is a silly idea, for it offers minimal gain but takes away the small form factor. People are already overwhelmed with 7'and 8" tablets!
 
sorry this is not a rumour.

Considering apple is only allowing retina apps. This rumour is defunct.

I don't think we will see a budget iphone this time round, maybe later in the year?

The new 5S will be an update but nothing major to change.

6 will come with twosizes for sure, maybe the cheaper iphone will come first but it'll have the same retina screen and size for sure, with the full on 6 having a larger screen i think. Makes sense and would finally give the choice most people feel is now needed not because the user want two sized phones but it makes sense from offering two products that are for different types of users.

Same way the larger ipad is a laptop replacement for some and the ipad mini is a more on the go handbag kind of deal that makes real sense.

A small screen 4 inch iphone for those who don't want to use it for web and video and all the things that are currently a little cramped on the iphone 5. Then a larger 5 inch beast that while needs two hands to use has the flexibility to be useable as a more of a tablet.

Honestly when you put them all in a row you get a perfect line of sizes from iphone to ipad that way too!

Hell we have 4inch iphone, 7inch mini, 10 inch ipad, 11 and 13 inch airs, 13 and 15 inch macs (17 now defunct but it was the next up) 24, 27 inch imacs.

I see that gap in there between 4 and 7 inch as a massive one that not only needs to be filled but will categorically have to be filled to have a full line of products needed in their road map to succeed.
 
Bunch of jokers

These so called "Analysts" are a bunch of "Jokers". They say whatever they feel like and expect us to believe it.

If Apple goes from 300+ ppi to 100+ pip, and Samsung goes from 300+ to 400+ Apple is going to be a laughing stock.

I'm no Analyst, but it seems to be very clear with the recent Retina Only statement from Apple, that every phone from here onwards will sport Retina.
 
I couldn't see it happening although I guess it is tempting to push up volume which will allow Apple to place themselves in a stronger negotiating position when it comes to getting suppliers to give them better prices.
 
There are more reasons why the lower cost iPhone 5 will have a retina display

i would argue even the lower cost model will have the same screen as the iPhone 5 and iPod touch 5th generation, and screen resolution will not be the differentiator in the fifth generation (maybe 6th gen) range.

for those who are interested, I wrote a blog entry. IMHO, it contains some interesting ideas.

http://unidentifiedsoftwareevents.w...-iphone-5-incorporating-a-non-retina-display/
 
Compile 'em all said:
And now that Apple has set this new requirement, they are basically saying "this is now the standard".
Click to expand...

It may be a "requirement" in your mind, but plenty of buyers don't give a damn :)

Price sells, that's been proven over and over in the open market. It's the only reason so many iPhones have been sold... subsidies.

And if price was not a issue, believe me, Apple is far too smart... than to have gone this far with the "cheap plasticky phone" to borrow a phrase from Android haters.
 
When will the rumor of this stupid "Low Cost" iPhone die ? !

I have been hearing this crap for 3 years. And its come in many different but equally stupid variations. From iPhone Mini to "Celular only iPhone" and a bunch of other stupid things like using the 3G casing or "WiFi only iPhone" ....


Get over it people !


This is a load of horse- poop
 
ArtOfWarfare said:
They didn't actually say what "non-retina" means. Having 652 PPI (double retina) might qualify as something other than retina.
Click to expand...

Highly doubt that they would put better resolution in the "budget" iPhone. I'm pretty certain "non-retina" means less.

----------
LorPGDL said:
so long, Apple brand= quality product.
Click to expand...

Next thing you know they will be selling Apple products at Walmart LOL...err... wait....
 
tdtran1025 said:
An iPhone 4 with plastic casing to rid of antenna problem, and LTE connection? This possibly means the lineup in USA starts with 4S, 5, and the new 5S? This may work well if AAPL finds a cheaper way to replace the 4's screen.
They better price this new lower-cost phone carefully, for the Nexus 4 is a potent one at $300. If the Apple phone has LTE connectivity at the same price point, it will be a winner regards of processor choice.
Samsung S4 already beats iPhone5 hands down. Let the battle begin at 5", which IMO is a silly idea, for it offers minimal gain but takes away the small form factor. People are already overwhelmed with 7'and 8" tablets!
Click to expand...

the low cost Iphone will not be based on Iphone 4. Iphone 4 is 3 years old technology by 3Q13 and not the most cost effective way to build a smartphone now (why use the 3 years old wifi component if the current one with better spec is priced about the same or lower? remember it is electronic. Every generation is cheaper and more powerful than the older generation). The most cost effective way to build a smartphone now is a 1 to 1 1/2 years old technology (technology between 4S and 5). So the most likely path is for Apple to design a smartphone focus on cost and easy to manufacture and service (to cut down the manufacturing cost and warranty cost). The spec will be middle of the road but it will be fun to see how it compete with 4S since Apple will most likely keep 5 and 4S around at $550 unlocked and $420 unlocked price point. A 320ish low cost Iphone will fill the price range nicely. The problem is going to be getting enough CPU and LCD screen given that Apple may be looking at 20-25M unit kind of demand.
 
I still stick by this.

What we want to do is deliver an increasing level of value to these customers, but there are some customers which we choose not to serve. We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk; our DNA will not let us do that. We've seen great success by focusing on certain segments of the market and not trying to be everything to everybody, and you can expect us to stick with that winning strategy.

Steve Jobs
Click to expand...
 
Here in China you get plenty Androids for $150~$200 with ~4" 800x480 + ~1GHz single core A8 or A9 and just above $200 you're into ~4.5" 960x540 + ~1.2GHz dual core A9.

There is no way Apple can release a new phone in 2013 with 4" 568x320 and not be a flop, let alone a laughing stock.

Producing a Retina resolution screen is cheap enough these days - cheap enough to sell one in iPod touch and still make solid margins.

The cheaper iPhone will, despite not using the absolute best components, still look and feel miles ahead of the legions of mid-tier Android offerings. In fact I expect the look & feel to be pretty close to the regular iPhone. Plastic MacBooks were still ways ahead of plastic Acers and Asuses of it's time, right? Same story here. iOS is the major draw as is the half-bitten fruit at the back.

Apple will of course have to differentiate and make you want the expensive one. That's fairly simple - the plastic body that's coming in (childish) colors vs. the classy aluminum + glass in black & white. The A7 processor vs. whichever one they see fit for the cheaper one - guessing 32nm A5 but could be anything lesser than the classic iPhone. Storage may be limited to 8/16GB only, no expansion option. RAM may be limited to 512MB. Camera can be the 5Mpx piece they shove into iPhone 4 and iPads. All in all there should be absolutely no problem with differentiation.

Priced at $300~$350 to be relevant - must be noticeably bellow iPhone 4/4S is selling now.
 
wcinvest said:
Apple needs to make a cheaper iPhone for the frugal folks like me who would much rather go with a cheap Android device on a prepaid plan then shell out $650 for an iPhone or enter into a $70 a month contract which is even a worse economic proposition.

For $329 they should be able to sell something respectable that is significantly better then let's say the Samsung Exhibit 2 which can be had for $200 and $150 if you figure in a store rebate. The only glaring deficiencies with the Exhibit 2 are probably glare in the sun and very mediocre battery life. And the Android OS on that phone is antiquated compared to the new Android phones.

While I can certainly afford an iPhone, I don't want to be worried about being robbed or losing it and being out $650 plus tax.

Something in between the Samsung Exhibit 2 and iPhone 5 would sell like hotcakes in the prepaid market in the US and most other countries as well.

The truth is no matter what Apple does, their margins on iPhones are going to compress very significantly over the next 3 years since the incentive for anyone to upgrade after they have a 4G phone will be minimized and competition is getting much tougher. I am an Apple shareholder and owning the stock has rewarded me but I sold half of my shares at $675 since I realize this. I did sell a put option recently a few months ago so I'm also betting the stock stays above $400 until next year. So I am not of the mindset, Apple is doomed but 3 years from now, very few mainstream people will be buying even premium phones for more then $500.

The key to having a low cost iPhone that works is just to make sure it doesn't have a glaring deficiency. Good camera plus good battery life and good screen plus 4G for $329 = winning combination. Apple should be able to do that on a device with at least 16 GB of Ram.
Click to expand...

You mean like the cheap Mac people kept thinking would always happen despite Steve Jobs saying Apple couldn't make a decent computer at those insanely low price points?
 
I really doubt that the new "budget" iPhone will have non retina display (and I hope that there will be no budget version at all). If they want to lower the cost they can simply use the display from iPod Touch, which is cheaper and have lower quality than iPhone display, but is still retina.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back