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

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
51,390
19,458
That's not an issue as there are options. 32GB and 64GB are currently available.

----------



So pretty much you are asking for a price drop?
For the most part that's really what most of this comes down it it would seem. 32 GB is available for anyone that wants it, getting rid of 16 GB will just take away an available choice for consumers. It seems like the hope for those that really want this to happen is that 32 GB would simply be cheaper, not that they really care what actually happens to 16 GB.

----------

Which is sad, because on other platforms you can buy a 3rd party SD card and add the storage you want, even if the phone has 8GB. Not on the iPhone. As an iPhone user, I wish Apple would get on with the program and start at 32GB (or at least make the price jumps between the capacities smaller).
It actually seems like more of the newer (flagship) phones are coming out without SD support these days, no matter what the platform.
 

NovemberWhiskey

macrumors 68040
May 18, 2009
3,022
1,272
Do you think iPhone 6 will start at 32GB?
I think the days of 16GB are gone and I'll be very disappointed if Apple doesn't start at 32GB.

No. Why would they? They make nearly $80 profit per phone on that 16-->32 upgrade. Over $150 on the 16-->64GB upgrade.
 

Technarchy

macrumors 604
May 21, 2012
6,753
4,927
With 4G, cloud computing etc, is there not an argument for needing less internal memory anyway?


HD movies, 4K, apps with higher res textures and complexity...

Memory will fill fast and transferring big files from the cloud is not feasible given the way data plans are structured.
 

617aircav

Suspended
Jul 2, 2012
3,975
818
HD movies, 4K, apps with higher res textures and complexity...

Memory will fill fast and transferring big files from the cloud is not feasible given the way data plans are structured.

And that is why there are 16, 32 and 64gb options.
 

Steve121178

macrumors 603
Apr 13, 2010
6,403
6,961
Bedfordshire, UK
HD movies, 4K, apps with higher res textures and complexity...

Memory will fill fast and transferring big files from the cloud is not feasible given the way data plans are structured.

For most people 16GB is more than enough for a bunch of apps, games & photo library consisting of several thousand annoying selfies.
 

priyamsingh

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 19, 2013
78
0
For most people 16GB is more than enough for a bunch of apps, games & photo library consisting of several thousand annoying selfies.

16GB is enough for a reasonable number of apps and a lot of pictures. But that's it. Forget about having any music or podcasts or videos on your phone.
 

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,316
1,312
Answer is NO.

While it might be logical to start with 32, there is money to be made if a smaller number is associated with their base model. After all they jack the price up about 100 dollars per "next size up" as part of their high margin profit model.
 

Twixt

macrumors 6502
May 30, 2012
471
11
You're free to buy a 32GB+ variant, so what difference does the base storage make to you? Is it that you want the next iPhone to be as expensive as possible in order to maximise your personal feelings of exclusivity and status?

AAPL keeps a 3 variant line so a start at 32 GB implies a 128 GB model, a poor 16GB first means 64 GB as flagship...
 

Saint.Icon

macrumors regular
May 11, 2014
188
0
Lol why would Apple give you more for less? 16GB sells like hot cakes so why get rid of it.? Makes no sense since 16GB seems to be the industry standard. 16GB is adequate for most users.

This.

The majority is who Apple markets to, and the majority buys 16GB iPhones, and never fills them up.

While the power users will piss and moan about how they can't get 128GB and a microSD slot for the base price, most users will get the 16GB. The others will pay for more storage.

To answer the question, 16GB is here to stay for a significant while.
 

bigjnyc

macrumors 604
Apr 10, 2008
7,856
6,766
Surely Apple has to be paying alot less today for 16GB flash drives, then they were in 2008-2009... It's just a matter of whether they want to pass that savings down to their customers or continue to grow that massive cash reserve.
 

617aircav

Suspended
Jul 2, 2012
3,975
818
Surely Apple has to be paying alot less today for 16GB flash drives, then they were in 2008-2009... It's just a matter of whether they want to pass that savings down to their customers or continue to grow that massive cash reserve.

I'm pretty sure they will choose to grow their cash. I would.
 

boomhower

macrumors 68000
Oct 21, 2011
1,570
56
Nope, Apple is way to money hungry for that. Why start at 32GB when you can get a ton of people to pay $100 for a $10(possibly less at this point) memory chip. Every year it irritates me more and more. With many games hitting 1GB it doesn't much these days to max out a 16GB pretty darn quick. I guess it can help them push Beats streaming music lol.
 

HarryWild

macrumors 68020
Oct 27, 2012
2,043
710
16GB will still be the bottom! That way Apple almost automatically get a $100 with no resentment or backlash.
 

mangomind

macrumors 6502a
Mar 15, 2012
542
5
Surely Apple has to be paying alot less today for 16GB flash drives, then they were in 2008-2009... It's just a matter of whether they want to pass that savings down to their customers or continue to grow that massive cash reserve.

You are correct. Today, Apple's 32/64/128 flash storages cost less than Apple's 16/32/64 lineup did in 2011. Cost wise, Apple could have made 32GB the base storage last year because it would have been cheaper than the 16GB base storage in 2011. But 16GB is enough for the majority of Apple customers, so Apple will stick with 16GB as the base storage for the foreseeable future. 16GB base storage is the industry standard right now.

However, cost wise, Apple could easily change the $100 doubled storage increments to $50 increments, and the cost to manufacture the flash storage would be the same as the $100 storage increments were in 2011. Right now, Apple's competition is charging $40-50 for these storage increments. Apple will lower the price of storage increments when the competition forces them to. Apple will do it to catch up to the competition, just like it will do with larger screened phones.
 
Last edited:

617aircav

Suspended
Jul 2, 2012
3,975
818
You are correct. Today, Apple's 32/64/128 flash storages cost less than Apple's 16/32/64 lineup did in 2011. Cost wise, Apple could have made 32GB the base storage last year because it would have been cheaper than the 16GB base storage in 2011. But 16GB is enough for the majority of Apple customers, so Apple will stick with 16GB as the base storage for the foreseeable future. 16GB base storage is the industry standard right now.

However, cost wise, Apple could easily change the $100 doubled storage increments to $50 increments, and the cost to manufacture the flash storage would be the same as the $100 storage increments were in 2011. Right now, Apple's competition is charging $40-50 for these storage increments. Apple will lower the price of storage increments when the competition forces them to. Apple will do it to catch up to the competition, just like it will do with larger screened phones.

And that's the bottom line.
 

Camoxide

macrumors regular
Oct 6, 2013
119
24
England
I hope so. I feel like i'm at the breaking point.

I want to get the most out of my phone but my memory is constantly full now.
I'd buy more apps if I had the space for it.

Tempted to switch to the One M8 or it's successor for my next phone because I feel like i'm being forced to spend an extra £80 on the already expensive phone.


Also they need to bring out an 128GB model. If they bring out an 128GB model that would mean there would be 12 SKUs for a flagship phone which is a bit silly.

Also one of the main arguments for Android phones is the expandable storage which wouldn't be as necessary if 32GB was the base model.

32GB base just makes sense. It will only add like $2 onto the BOM.

Also it allows them to do:
16GB 5C. $0
16GB 5S: $100
32GB 6: $200

They don't actually want you to buy the old phones they're priced closely to the flagship so you'll go "oh I might as well spend the extra $100 to get the latest and greatest". With 32GB being the base on the flagship I think the majority of people who were thinking of getting the $100 5S would think they might as well spend the extra to get double the storage and a newer phone.
 

617aircav

Suspended
Jul 2, 2012
3,975
818
I hope so. I feel like i'm at the breaking point.

I want to get the most out of my phone but my memory is constantly full now.
I'd buy more apps if I had the space for it.

Tempted to switch to the One M8 or it's successor for my next phone because I feel like i'm being forced to spend an extra £80 on the already expensive phone.


Also they need to bring out an 128GB model. If they bring out an 128GB model that would mean there would be 12 SKUs for a flagship phone which is a bit silly.

Also one of the main arguments for Android phones is the expandable storage which wouldn't be as necessary if 32GB was the base model.

32GB base just makes sense. It will only add like $2 onto the BOM.

Also it allows them to do:
16GB 5C. $0
16GB 5S: $100
32GB 6: $200

They don't actually want you to buy the old phones they're priced closely to the flagship so you'll go "oh I might as well spend the extra $100 to get the latest and greatest". With 32GB being the base on the flagship I think the majority of people who were thinking of getting the $100 5S would think they might as well spend the extra to get double the storage and a newer phone.

Actually it doesn't make sense, for Apple. Why get rid of 16GB when its the capacity they sell the most?
 

The-Pro

macrumors 65816
Dec 2, 2010
1,453
40
Germany
I think it will start at 16GB again.
Reason being the majority of people I know who buy and iPhone buy the 16GB version and never fill it up. They use the iphone for telephone, texting, browsing etc. Not for installing several GB's worth of apps, music and Movies.

16GB is still enough for a lot of people and thats how apple sees it. They sell more 16GB models then 32 and 64, so clearly its the most popular. Why give away more for free when the "few" people who need more could just buy it and apple gets another 100 revenue.
When 16GB becomes too little for the majority then they will up it to 32.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.