For Pete's sake. Just keep it at one iPhone... I don't need to spend time trying to figure out which one suits my current needs only to find that it doesn't suit my needs in 1 year. I already do that with my comps...
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.
Differentiation of Future iPhone Models to be Driven by Software?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
IIRC Apple has said it will not repackage a previous model with a lower price simply to reach a lower price point. So I don't see why Apple would sell crippled models to reach a lower price point either. Isn't that essentially the same as selling last year's model for cheap?
Also is makes zero sense to sell the same form factor phone w/ different features. iPhones are pretty cheap right now. You can get a refurb for $99. What is turning some consumers off is a) they don't want the data package and 2) they want a smaller phone. Not a thinner phone, a smaller one. I think Apple knows that and the story is misreported.
I have no doubt that a smaller phone will be unable to use certain iPhone s/w same as a 2G iPhone can't use 3G s/w that requires GPS. I think that is what Apple was saying and someone didn't fully understand when they relayed the discussion.
Also is makes zero sense to sell the same form factor phone w/ different features. iPhones are pretty cheap right now. You can get a refurb for $99. What is turning some consumers off is a) they don't want the data package and 2) they want a smaller phone. Not a thinner phone, a smaller one. I think Apple knows that and the story is misreported.
I have no doubt that a smaller phone will be unable to use certain iPhone s/w same as a 2G iPhone can't use 3G s/w that requires GPS. I think that is what Apple was saying and someone didn't fully understand when they relayed the discussion.
Too right, I still don't know what version I'm using, I think I'm using extra frustration version but it might be throw out window Windows Vista non ultimate. It asked me to cancel or allow on what version but I don't remember what it asked.
It could make sense in theory. It could be a convenience for some consumer groups (mid-teens, college students, professionals, digital lifestyle families, etc.) to be able to buy prepackaged "solutions" that suited each of them perfectly. Remember that a lot of consumers aren't very sophisticated about using the iTunes Store to pick their own apps, especially when they first get their phone.
But... I just don't think it's Apple's styles to sell this way.
From a marketing viewpoint they would be better off having three prices. One outrageously overpriced, one with poor specs and one in the middle that's just right. Many studies have shown that people are happy to pay more for the same product if it is contrasted by a higher priced alternative.
If there are only software differences between phones how long before someone hacks that and let's you upgrade to the better version for free?
If they will make a cheaper phone then something has to be left out, like the GPS chip or the camera.
I could not agree with you more! I am so annoyed with these rumours - they simply have to release a smaller footprint iphone. there is no reason why not to release a 3" iphone. yes - it is small for big fingers (then buy 3.5"). but it works for people with small fingers. and - the same resolution and software. so - bring it on.
definitely going to have to disagree with selling software crippled iphones. in terms of software, the only thing apple needs to do for improvement is a)continue working on the laundry list of features people have been whining about... and b) improve the hardware to be able to run said features efficiently. and that's it. not really going to care for a cheaper iphone at the expense of quality.
although, if they did want to expand the market, i'd be pretty curious to see what they could do with a flip phone.
although, if they did want to expand the market, i'd be pretty curious to see what they could do with a flip phone.
Really? I must be using the 'Vista works as well on my Quad Core as OS X does on my Macbook version'.
I think that's the one most people who actually use it regularly have.
Consumers will not latch onto a device that is differentiated by software alone. What a horrible feeling it would be to know that your hardware is the same as the guy's next to you, but hobbled by lower priced, feature stripped software.
Think about it. Your friends can all record video with their new "full featured" iPhones and one asks you to capture something funny. You reply, "I only paid for the stripped down version, so my camera doesn't work." I don't know about you, but that would not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Yuck.
Think about it. Your friends can all record video with their new "full featured" iPhones and one asks you to capture something funny. You reply, "I only paid for the stripped down version, so my camera doesn't work." I don't know about you, but that would not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Yuck.
I thought it would be the other way around, same/similar software, different hardware.
I agree with this comment:
(joking)
I agree with this comment:
So Vista requires twice the cores to work as well as Mac OS X?
(joking)
But I don't want to be limited to a specific package. If the did do this, I would hope there would be a version that includes everything.
Where have I heard of this same strategy....?
Whatever I'm sure they'll be called the following:
iPhone basic
iPhone home edition
iPhone home premium
iPhone business
iPhone business premium
iPhone Ultimate
I just can't recall where I've heard this before...
Whatever I'm sure they'll be called the following:
iPhone basic
iPhone home edition
iPhone home premium
iPhone business
iPhone business premium
iPhone Ultimate
I just can't recall where I've heard this before...
A different way to look at this
Let's face it, the iPod classic has about 16 months left to go before it's likely put to pasture (assuming iPT goes to 64GB this fall and 128GB next fall). This leaves only the nano with the click wheel. Why not make the iPN a smaller version of the iPT? Like the iPT is very similar in form factor to the iPhone, the iPN would be very similar in form factor to the iPhono Nano or what ever they call it. From a forward looking product point of view I could easily see an iPhone "nano" that will foreshadow this fall's newest, hottest iPod must have.
Let's face it, the iPod classic has about 16 months left to go before it's likely put to pasture (assuming iPT goes to 64GB this fall and 128GB next fall). This leaves only the nano with the click wheel. Why not make the iPN a smaller version of the iPT? Like the iPT is very similar in form factor to the iPhone, the iPN would be very similar in form factor to the iPhono Nano or what ever they call it. From a forward looking product point of view I could easily see an iPhone "nano" that will foreshadow this fall's newest, hottest iPod must have.
i don't know about this. i mean, i guess apple could pull this off. we'll see. i'll believe it when i see it though
This story should be 2nd page, definitely. The ROOT is based in fact (that iPhone will differentiate itself as a software-based device), but examples like removing "YouTube" or "AppStore" are the stupidest, most idiotic garbage to spread in the blogosphere. Worse, that anyone would comment on that ridiculous direction.Loads of crap in that story...I beat they deliberately misled this poor fellow. "Go on Johnny, spread our mis-information wildly!"
Apple doesn't even have a mid-tower Mac...now they're gonna have 2 or 3 or 4 different iPhones?!
Anyone giving this enough thought, might at least stir controversy in a more likely fashion (however dubious)... for instance, all the iPod Touch 2G buyers that never realized their device had a Bluetooth radio built into it. As Apple adds more and more transparent technology, like magnetometers, GPS, FM radios, etc... they could easily withhold not only the applications related to these functions, but the drivers that inform other applications that would sense, and make use of these features.
I'd always heard Register was a pack of Mac-baiters (when they're not infrequently making valid observations). 2nd page story? They really have little useful commentary on this valid topic. Given the range of off-beat comments in this thread, I think the writer of that piece is patting himself on the back. I'm suprised Slashdot hasn't bitten.
The AppleInsider story was much more insightful:
In this case, "differentiating by software" is meant to mean that it will use advanced software features to further appeal to customers (in competing with rivals). Out of the three methods of increasing marketshare (noted by Reiner: "providing more functionality; lowering prices; growing geographically; or segmenting the market with different models"), segmenting the market with different models has to my knowledge mostly been something Apple has done through hardware (like the two models of MacBook... I got the more expensive one, in order to have a backlit keyboard). Apple has often added features to "similar" hardware devices, as long as the development doesn't add considerable expense (for instance, new multitouch features to older laptops OR allowing time machine to work on network attached drives).
Right now, iPhone 1G users are being tweaked by feeling Apple isn't putting the effort into MMS support on their device. A story like this fits a pattern, but only for the irritated. I remember being highly annoyed that Apple didn't offer Leopard support for Macs that were below a certain megahertz, and past decisions like this were written into the software installers as a limitation. People have found ways to hack around these limits... but they always seem to be more representative of what Apple wants to support... and NOT really representative of simply wanting to deprive users of features arbitrarily.
That's just my thoughts.
~ CB
This is MS-thinking
As others may have written before, I didn't read the thread completely, this approach would be very untypical for Apple. They have as well one OS X version for consumer and typically have an easily understandable product palette, which doesn't confuse through minor differences between models.
However this would be the Microsoft way with five different variations of the same OS.
As others may have written before, I didn't read the thread completely, this approach would be very untypical for Apple. They have as well one OS X version for consumer and typically have an easily understandable product palette, which doesn't confuse through minor differences between models.
However this would be the Microsoft way with five different variations of the same OS.
No, they would never have different hardware to differentiate models would they, I mean they never did that with iPods when they all ran the same software did they?
oh, wait.
But they never did that with their computers than all ran the same software, did they?
oh, wait.
What nonsense.
oh, wait.
But they never did that with their computers than all ran the same software, did they?
oh, wait.
What nonsense.