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
I can actually see this happening. With the potential for up to 3 iPhone models running concurrently (nano, iPhone, and tablet) alongside the iPod Touch, hardware differences necessitate the need for software differences in order to cover its bases.The iPod Touch is already being marketed as a gaming device, the iPhone as a PDA/Smartphone. It is not difficult to see a mildly crippled iPhone nano aimed at those who want a simpler yet elegant phone that does not much more than play music and act as a phone but is easy to use, good looking and affordable. Not everyone wants to be able to take the kitchen sink with them in their phone; just look at the success of the Shuffle. Similarly the Tablet would be loaded with professional software (handwriting recognition, word processor etc) that would be superfluous on the iPhone. Too many people are confused by numbers ("3 megapixel better than a 5MP because of the lens??Eh?"), so clarifying it through software changes made evident in their ads seems sensible. The trick is not to make it seem you are being a cheapskate a la Windows Home, Premium etc - it must be directed to look like a positive choice of a software option tailored to a person's need rather than the negative "I can't afford better" attitude.
Driven by software.
I think were missing the point, it can't be different models based on crippled software. More like extra hardware models to accommodate the software innovation that is moving forward rapidly, bigger screen being the obvious choice.
I think were missing the point, it can't be different models based on crippled software. More like extra hardware models to accommodate the software innovation that is moving forward rapidly, bigger screen being the obvious choice.
I agree. Total hogwash. Start focusing on software? Oh sure ... about time. I suppose next we're going see an Apple "Insider" opine on the merits of releasing OS X to other hardware manufacturers - you know, since the emphasis is on software.
Absolutly not. I tend to only upgrade my OS if I buy new hardware or there is a pressing demand. However, the thought of asking for XP on a powerful machine purchased in late 2007 strikes me as crazy so I went with Vista.
The same goes with Snow Leopard - I have absolutely no intention of upgrading my Macbook from Leopard unless there is a really compelling reason to do so. I just don't see the point.
Anyway, on topic, I don't see the problem with Apple releasing a mass market dumbphone and calling it the iPhone Nano. It's just product differentitation after all.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11a Safari/525.20)
I guess if these rumors are true, the iPhone dev team's next task will be to allow the full iPhone OS to be installed on the iPhone lite or whatever.
I guess if these rumors are true, the iPhone dev team's next task will be to allow the full iPhone OS to be installed on the iPhone lite or whatever.
Increase market share??
I can tell Apple how to increase market share. UNBIND IT FROM AT&T!!!!!! There are many, many people around the country and perhaps in other countries as well, that would love to have an iPhone (yes, I am one of them) but AT&T service is not available in their area. Lots of Blackberries and other smart phones around me but not one iPhone because of the AT&T ties. Why not make it available to other carriers as well?? They are losing massive sales because of this.
I can tell Apple how to increase market share. UNBIND IT FROM AT&T!!!!!! There are many, many people around the country and perhaps in other countries as well, that would love to have an iPhone (yes, I am one of them) but AT&T service is not available in their area. Lots of Blackberries and other smart phones around me but not one iPhone because of the AT&T ties. Why not make it available to other carriers as well?? They are losing massive sales because of this.
Stupid Idea
I agree with what everybody's saying about the Microsoft thing. That was the fist thing I thought upon reading this was the way Microsoft sells Vista. I sure hope Apple doesn't do something stupid like this. They really ought to keep their product lines simple and clean. That's what separates them from the average PC.
I agree with what everybody's saying about the Microsoft thing. That was the fist thing I thought upon reading this was the way Microsoft sells Vista. I sure hope Apple doesn't do something stupid like this. They really ought to keep their product lines simple and clean. That's what separates them from the average PC.
I fully agree with this. The way I see it, most people aren't buying iPhones not because the phone itself is too expensive, but because the plan is. My area gets AT&T service, alright, but it's freakin' expensive. Apple can lower the price of the iPhone all they want, but I can't afford one until it can use different carriers.
I actually use Vista Ultimate on a specced out MBP and have had it since release. I know a thing or two about computers and that OS is a stinking pile of crap no matter how much sugar coating you put on it.
Vista is a turd in semi transparent clothing. There is no point defending the fact. Even Microsoft themselves have fessed up to it. What makes yours any different?
I triple this comment. AT&T is not only very expensive (the iPhone plans included) in New England but the cell service is bad...like VERY bad. I've been on Verizon for 4+ years with maybe 4-5 dropped calls in all 4 years. No exaggeration. And I use about 900 mins a month in talk time. ATT days I was dropping about 30-50% of my calls every single day no matter what State I was in (RI, CT, NH, MA, NY). That's outrageous and hence why I switched.
I simply am not even thinking about an iPhone until it gets off ATT. I would love for it to be on Verizon since I know the phone service will rock.
There are very few people I know in New England that are on ATT (used to be Cingular but that was a cluster merger). Verizon owns all of New England.
But hey...by the time the iPhone gets on Verizon, maybe it will be the 4th or 5th generation.
And I'll enjoy all the benefits of not having to overspend with the first few generations (phones as well as plan prices).-Eric
Suddenly Apple is going to intentionally, selectively hobble features of its iPhone OS just so it can artificially create various lower-end versions of the iPhone?
Of course NO.
Does no one pay attention to what Apple does and how they run things? APPLE DOES NOT DO THINGS THE WAY OTHER COMPANIES DO.
Apple does the same thing every company does, they just put a satin sheet over it.
*Shrugs*
Whatever. It works very well for me and several hundred million others apparently. Perhaps if you detail the issues as to why you think it's a stinking pile of crap we could discuss them.
Probably my regular use of it. Like I said YMMV.
Hmmm... GARBAGE ARTICLE.
What I see happening is this... no iPhone nano, no software distinction. There already is a hardware distinction. It's called the iPod touch. It's easy to see how their linup is.
iPod Touch
8GB
16GB
32GB
And then when the next revision of the iPod touch comes along (after the new iPhones have been released) it will be 64GB.
iPhone
Current 8GB (I almost expect them to keep this model at a cheaper pricepoint if the physical size specs are the same as the new ones)
16GB (new hardware such as processor, camera etc. that seperates itself from the 8GB)
32GB (the same new hardware as the 16GB that seperates itself from the 8GB)
And a year from now they will drop the 8GB model and the 16GB will be the new 8GB and they will add a 64GB to catch up with the iPod Touch, and then after that they will release a new iPod touch that is up to 128GB and the iPhone will again catch up upon it's next release.
This way all the iPhone owners can still complain that the iPod touch has more storage...
I used to be one of those people until I actually took time to sync my iPhone with what I actually DO watch or listen to.
What I see happening is this... no iPhone nano, no software distinction. There already is a hardware distinction. It's called the iPod touch. It's easy to see how their linup is.
iPod Touch
8GB
16GB
32GB
And then when the next revision of the iPod touch comes along (after the new iPhones have been released) it will be 64GB.
iPhone
Current 8GB (I almost expect them to keep this model at a cheaper pricepoint if the physical size specs are the same as the new ones)
16GB (new hardware such as processor, camera etc. that seperates itself from the 8GB)
32GB (the same new hardware as the 16GB that seperates itself from the 8GB)
And a year from now they will drop the 8GB model and the 16GB will be the new 8GB and they will add a 64GB to catch up with the iPod Touch, and then after that they will release a new iPod touch that is up to 128GB and the iPhone will again catch up upon it's next release.
This way all the iPhone owners can still complain that the iPod touch has more storage...
I used to be one of those people until I actually took time to sync my iPhone with what I actually DO watch or listen to.
Yeah OK Apple. The solution will be to hack your identical hardware device and enable everything via 3rd party software. Screw Apple for thinking of new ways to try and screw the consumer with money-sucking ideas. They cannot be making the money off the hardware if it costs the same, but just trying to vacuum suck as much money out of the consumer as he/she will put up with. Pay to playback video? Give me a freaking break.
Want to give some evidence to back up that claim.
Guess because it works so well thats why its dominating the netbook market, isnt making OEM's offer XP downgrades and didn't spur growth in the second hand PC market for people trying to get an XP license.
Go figure.
Transcript of secret negotiations between AT&T and Apple with relation to MMS feature:
~ CB