Differentiation of Future iPhone Models to be Driven by Software?

[ChrisA]

Have you ever looked inside consummer entertainment electronics, like VCRs and DVD players? Typically a company will make a line of units with various price points and feature sets. but when you open up the low-end unit you see the same exact printed circuit board inside except on the low price unit they have removed some switches or jacks. Many times the difference between the $200 and $300 player is a hand full of 5 cent parts.

Apple could do the same thing. Maybe sell a cheaper iPhone for $50 less that comes with black paint over the camera lens.

Or more likely there would be a fuse programmable memory in the phone. At the factory the fuses (un-like flash ram) are set and can't ever be changed. then the software looks at the fuses and decides based in the setting what functions it is willing to do. This way you have just one set of software but the level of functionality is set at the factory.

 

[t0mat0]

Considering this is more or less a "he said she said" quote, it would make the most sense that what this really means is there will be a single core cpu version of the basic/cheap model that can run only one app at a time and multiple core versions in the higher end models. This could be misconstrued as a difference in "software".

OS X.V iPhone and OS X.VI iPhone ?
One needs OpenCL, one doesn't. Interesting angle on it.

 

[Xavier]

That marketing plan might actually work, but I do not see Apple producing a few different iPhones which specialize in different areas and contain different features.

And I also don't see an iPhone Nano.

 

[aftk2]

No one is saying Apple makes the !@#!@ handsets themselves in Cupertino.

Yes, Apple writes software. Some of it, like Final Cut Pro, Logic, etc... it even sells. But when people say Apple is a hardware company, they mean that the software, in all its elegance, exists to drive the sales of specific hardware.

Arguing this point in an iPhone thread is even more ridiculous. Let's break down the difference between Microsoft and Apple in these areas.

Apple -> creates iPhone version of OS X -> can only be run on iPhones
MS -> creates mobile version of Windows -> can be run on many smartphones, all of which are non-Microsoft.

Microsoft sells the software to hardware manufacturers. Apple is providing the software to SELL THE IPHONE !

 

[9822679]

I just read it closer

Reiner told Register Hardware today that – when he pressed the firm for further details – the staffers said: “Segmentation would focus on software.”

Apple’s executives were understandably tight-lipped about the details of such segmentation, but it's not hard to imagine the creation of a series of iPhones each running the same core iPhone OS but bundled with different apps and utilities.

The register is taking a single vague line, and running with it...wow talk about journalistic integrity

 

[thedarkhorse]

I think the whole idea is irrelevant with the app store, the iphone is a glorified computer and any missing functionality can be bought/downloaded for free. And they don't sell macs with the iMovie/youtube focused osx or the iWork focused version. They just give the same starting point to everyone and let them choose how they want their computer/device to end up. Going the vista route would just be a headache and a half.

 

[BB1970]

Business version vs. consumer version

It's funny, I actually thought this was a good way for Apple to go. A business orientated version with much tighter integration with business apps, perhaps bundled as part of the deal. They could conceivably sell a bulk load to large corporations. The education market doesn't require every imac to have every bell and whistle and they are still selling. Why not do the same thing for the business world.
That said, splitting into categories the consumer segment would just be dumb.

 

[W1LLk]

This is all such a bad idea, and particularly far-fetched, I propose we discuss something else?

Mechagodzilla vs Megatron? (Gizmodo)

The death of the Sarah Connor Chronicles?

An iPhone with a camera on the front and back, with a slide out keyboard? (If you want to get really crazy).

 

[johndoh]

derrr

shocker - software being used to differentiate products

 

[haravikk]

I think if Apple did produce an iPhone Nano, that it would odd to have it not support the app-store. More likely is that it would have it's own app-store, as apps would need to be optimised for the different hardware/screen-size etc.

 

[Demosthenes X]

Selling models differentiated by hardware seems unlikely. Different iPhones with very different physical specs could have far-reaching implications for Apple's production methods, volumes and costs.

Selling models differentiated by hardware seems unlikely. Different computers with very different physical specs could have far-reaching implications for Apple's production methods, volumes and costs.

Idiotic claim. Apple sells different versions of similar hardware to appeal to different price points and needs. They do not sell a bunch of slightly different versions of OSX*. Add the App Store into the mix, and an iPhone line differentiated by software is very, very unlikely. iPhones differentiated by hardware, such as the nano rumour, make far more logical sense.

* They do offer a server version of OSX. But OSX and OSX Server meet very different needs.

 

[shawnce]

you are an idiot...apple is not a hardware company its mainly a software centric company just like microsoft...apple does not manufacture the hardware component that are used in their devices

1) Don't be a jerk. No need to call anyone an idiot, etc.
2) You are wrong.

Sure Apple doesn't manufacture the components [1] they use in the hardware they sell but that doesn't matter at ALL (news flash neither does Dell... so are they software company?).

Apple designs and sells hardware. Hardware is the leader in unit volumes and revenue. Apple, out side of a few specific segments, uses software to sell hardware. ...given this Apple can easily and accurately be called a hardware company. This is different then Microsoft business model which you can easily call a software company.

With that said... in reality Apple isn't a software or hardware company in the traditional sense. They are a "solutions" company selling a unified product that is made of hardware, software and more recently "cloud" services (an ecosystem of hardware devices, software and online services actually).

[1] Apple appears to be moving some what more back towards custom hardware components given the PA-RISC purchase and related hiring.

 

[breeze]

Bs

bs - It'll never happen

 

[lookmark]

I think MR article should be more clear that the various scenarios are those of the Register's fevered imagination.

All Apple said "segmentation would focus on software." That's not a lot to go on... and not too surprising either, because any HW features that are left out of a low-end or "nano"-class models would result in Apple playing up the HW-SW abilities of higher-priced models. e.g. iPhones with improved cameras that are able (and have the SW) to do video capture, vs low-end models that are not.

 

[Le Big Mac]

this runs contrary to Apple's software business plan. They claim there is no difference in their OS's. I highly doubt they'd make multiple versions for different hardware models. Do these people even pay attention to the way Apple works?

Indeed. It sounds like some outside consultant (or AT&T) trying to come up with "revenue enhancer" ideas for Apple. Hey, instead of hardware differences, how about software differences! That's outside the box!

 

[Roessnakhan]

This is doubtful. The iPhone was originally created as an all-in-one device. To restrict it to certain applications would be a gigantic step back.

 

[Jayomat]

i cannot believe it. not only is the appstore one of the biggest selling points, but it would also be a bad signal for developerts, as 1 sold iphone would not include 1 new potential customer anymore...

 

[PodPacker]

LTE not "Lite" or Light version

Has anyone considered that the original reporter who "quoted" the idiot at Verizon simple misunderstood what was meant by iPhone LTE (Long Term Evolution – The future of 3G)?
Probably not.
The idea of software-based iPhones is stupid, especially after what the hacking community has proven they can do to iPhones.
The fact that cameras are coming to iPods is probably true. Microsoft is playing catch up on all fronts and is rumored to be delivering a Zune like the current iPod touch. Of course the cloners at Redmond did just that, they created what existed and didn't even think about the future. So when Apple releases new iPods with cameras, the lame Zune will simply fall by the wayside. AGAIN.
Apple is well aware that users want to share everything on sites such as Facebook and MySpace, so they are gearing their new lineup to do just that. The iPhone will finally be "The Device" this June. Palm better be prepared to ante up. It's going to be one crazy summer.

 

[guzhogi]

so basically an iPhone nano?

I think Apple would be better focusing on 199 or lowering the price to 99, with the current device. Normal phones are nice, but I tend to believe smartphones are the futures for the majority of people

I agree, Apple & AT&T should focus on lowering prices rather than differentiating through software. Not really lowering the initial iPhone price, but rather the voice & data plans. I know smartphone plans are expensive regardless of phone & carrier, but having to pay over $100/month to get all the bells and whistles gets really expensive really fast, especially in this economic situation.

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

Never going to happen. That's not how Apple does business. They'll differentiate them the same way they do computers, a pro line and a consumer line.

 

[Santa Rosa]

Very very much doubt this. Apple will be looking at ways to expand the reach of the iPhone but not like this.

If they start segmenting the device they will just be in the same pickle all the other mobile manufacturers are in.

 

[zelet]

Yeah, there is no way Apple is as stupid as Microsoft.
Flavors of Vista:
Vista Useless - $50
Vista Marginally Better - $75
Vista Basic Features - $150
Vista Expected Bundle - $200
Vista We Don't Know What's Added - $500
Vista MacClone - $1000 (Unknown release date)

 

[dwsolberg]

This rumor is bizarre. It's as if RIM decided to make a cheaper Blackberry by cutting out email from their phones.

Here's a business-wise logical way to make it cheaper: Use the current 3G phone's technology and maybe form factor, but cripple it to 2G-like speeds (either by only using a 2G chip or employing software limits on 3G speed). That way, people can still have an all-in-one device with a GPS that's perfectly useable for a large chunk of the more frugal population; ATT's network capacity issues are somewhat ameliorated; and Apple has a compelling $99 (or $49 or maybe even free with subsidy) iPhone solution with an equally compelling upgrade path for those who want more. This would also provide for cheaper monthly network contracts, which would also bring in more of the lower end of the market. Meanwhile, people like me can buy the newer, faster processor iPhone with better camera, more memory (both hard drive and RAM), faster internet, and video recording.

 

[KindredMAC]

How about selling iPhones for different prices based on the color of the Apple logo? MAKE NEW FREKAING HARDWARE. How can a computational device like this have the same chipset it debuted with 3 years ago.

That's exactly what I've been saying this year... except for the "3 year" thing.... I know it feels like 3 years but it has in fact only been 2.5 since they unveiled it at MacWorld 2007 but didn't put it into consumer hands until June/July 2007.

 

[ITMoron]

This is stupid. Apple has always marketed their hardware and only "one" version of their software. Look at ipod, they didn't make one version with different software, there are MULTIPLE hardware versions. If Apple ever decides to branch out with the iphone, this is likely the model they will follow.

What idiot wrote this? Do they own anything apple?