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.
Four iPhone Models Ranging From 4 GB to 32 GB Coming?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is just so wrong. You are clueless on the facts of the average iPhone owner. I guarantee you that it's not only the wealthy buying the iPhone... I am not wealthy and I bought both the original and 3G the day the came out. In addition, I will be buying the high end next iPhone the day it's released.
It's not a high end luxury item anyways. It can be had for a lousy $99! People own phones and pay high monthly fees for contracts. The iPhone may be slightly more expensive than the average cell phone, but it's not a luxury item only meant for the wealthy or elite. It costs $199 brand new or $99 refurbished, are you joking dude???
That would be nice, but how would Apple get around their exclusive contract with ATT?
4GB, WTF?
I'd be willing to bet the 4GB is either the low end china model,
OR
is the "snag-the-low-end-market-and-
As for features, my hope is that across the 4,8,16,32 models all hardware would be identical (except for color?). Price only varying based upon capacity.
Then you choose what upgrades to the OS you want through purchasable via a firmware upgrade. (*AHEM* Wireless firmware upgrade. (The PSP can do it, why not the iPhone?)
This would be EXCELLENT as it could allow for the possibility for 1stGen iPhone users to keep their ATT accounts (edge data plan) and not upgrade the phone's OS to make use of the additional 3G radio (as, I do believe though may be mistaken, the edge radio is still present for when a 3G is unavailable).
It would also have you only paying for the software features you want.
IE, Don't use Maps? Don't pay for the feature & don't have the icon cluttering your homescreen.
(Also, Apple cutting down on the mandatory
apps would also be a smart way for them to make the phone appear to perform better with the addition of Push & background tasks. Especially since we've all seen the trend of the phone to become more and more sluggish/less snappy with each subsequent OS update (code bloat?))
wow, the iphone nano rumor is like the villain in some B horror movie - no matter how dead it looks, it never really is. But i have a hard time buying that they will go back to a 4 GB model.
But i have a hard time buying that they will go back to a 4 GB model.You do understand what the word "most" means, right? It doesn't mean that only the wealthy are buying iPhones.
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2008/10/study-iphone-us/
There. As I said, I'm not sure what the dividing line is, but as of November of last year, 43% of iPhone users earned more than 100K. So maybe 50% earn more than 90K.
Case closed. This is a known fact. Do some research before you start yelling.
It wouldn't matter. Apple could introduce it as a new product line because AT&T has a contract for the regular iPhone. I was listening to Macbreak Weekly and Scott Bourne spoke to a source deep at Verizon and he said emphatically, "We're getting an iPhone." Add that to the ton of rumors that were going on a month ago and it makes sense.
Though everyone says that the switch to LTE is when Verizon would get it, I disagree. Apple would not be dependent on Verizon to switch, but AT&T. AT&T won't be coming out with LTE until at least 2011 (after Verizon's Switch). AT&T could just slow the move to LTE even more if they knew that it was the reason Apple would be waiting to open it up for Verizon.
I also heard that Apple was PISSED that AT&T was charging unlock prices for customers who returned an iPhone because of water damage. No matter what Apple says in public, the relationship between them and AT&T has soured.
Yeah, because I'm sure ATT's lawyers are way too stupid to change "iPhone" to "iPhone or other Apple mobile telephony devices."
Yeah, because I'm sure ATT's lawyers are way too stupid to change "iPhone" to "iPhone or other Apple mobile telephony devices."
Yeah..umm that dosen't make any sense. When have you ever heard of any telco having the rights to every mobile handset device made by a manufacturer. No company would ever be that stupid. Companies don't change wording of contracts with manufacturers whenever they feel like it
An interesting question. I find it amazing how quickly people under the 100K have taken to the iphone as their all-around media device considering that they might have to switch carriers and incur greater fees.
From:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2008/10/Lower_Income_Mobile_Consumers_use_Iphone
This is not what the absolute figures are, but the overall adoption is pretty quick, I wonder how it compares with the speed of adoption of the ipod.
For the last freak'n time, I hope you people actually read this response....
Apple has said many times not to code apps for a SPECIFIC screen RESOLUTION. It's in the Dev docs on how to design your program so it scales very easy accross a wide range of screen resolutions.
If an app does not scale well, either the Dev was an idiot or lazy. Now I don't think we'll get a high res screen this time around; we will eventually.
No will you people who keep whinning about how apps won't work on different resolutions please SHUT UP, you clearly are talking out of your a$$!
Nanoo Nanoo
This Nano rumour certainly persists. One thing I have noticed, however, is that all the people I know personally with iPhones are male. Obviously the iPhone market isn't exclusively male, and not by a long shot (I guess). But all of my own female friends and acquaintances seem to prefer to use small phones, so a smaller iPhone would probably have a market in this realm. Also, when girls have used my iPhone they do seem to be much more nimble when using the portrait mode keyboard, whereas I am much clumsier and make frequent errors. A smaller iPhone might also be popular with children as a sort of step up from the smaller iPods, especially with FaceBook/Bebo/YouTube applications on board. And as for the Chinese market, well, who knows? Personally I find the possibility of a so-called iPhone Nano surprising but fairly reasonable.
This Nano rumour certainly persists. One thing I have noticed, however, is that all the people I know personally with iPhones are male. Obviously the iPhone market isn't exclusively male, and not by a long shot (I guess). But all of my own female friends and acquaintances seem to prefer to use small phones, so a smaller iPhone would probably have a market in this realm. Also, when girls have used my iPhone they do seem to be much more nimble when using the portrait mode keyboard, whereas I am much clumsier and make frequent errors. A smaller iPhone might also be popular with children as a sort of step up from the smaller iPods, especially with FaceBook/Bebo/YouTube applications on board. And as for the Chinese market, well, who knows? Personally I find the possibility of a so-called iPhone Nano surprising but fairly reasonable.
You know I have been thinking in my mind about the iPhone since Gruber posted the item regarding Verizon and iPhone. I agree with him that there might be a low and high-end version of the iPhone in terms of hardware. But I dont see it in terms of software. Quite simply because Apple is a hardware company, first and foremost, and that it is different from Microsoft.
Microsoft began to milk its software cow by coming out with different iterations of its software programs scattered for different users. Apple has been careful not to do that by having simple versions that cater to only the consumer segment. Microsoft has extended the milking to both the OS and Office and quite possibly will extend it to other things in the future as it should.
But Apple operates on a different level altogether. The iPod, when it was introduced, was not about achieving marketshare at all. It was about releasing the best MP3 player with the best overall experience and it proceeded to take the market because of it. It is the same scenario with the iPhone. The iPhone just happened to take top slots in the market due to its uniqueness. Remember Jobs's assertion that they want only 1% of the market.
Another thing to remember is the temporal differences between the 1980s and 2000s. Things have changed remarkably so much that software and hardware developments operate on different cycles. Dont get me wrong. The basics of the right hardware and software are necessary for the best experience. But the way it is being done has evolved considerably over the years with the reorganization of distribution channels. And Apple is a company that ALWAYS controls the distribution channels (iTunes whether it be the SDK/music/App Store and select partners for hardware) and now they are re-inventing the channel (OTA app and movie downloads). Their distribution channel is open yet closed. It is quite flexible and takes advantage of upcoming developments as they happen.
Thats why the proposed tablet/netbook/hybrid computing device from Apple will not run a more diluted or hybrid of the mobile and desktop OS. It will run Snow Leopard and Apple will not agree to software differentiation. (I also feel that this device will work with Apple TV and the iPhone/iPod Touch but that is an entirely different post) Remember it was Yair Reiner who claimed that Apple executives told him that. Nobody from Apple will corroborate this. I see Apple coming out with these devices to have footholds in markets like India and China, which have shown high expectations towards the iPhone. The iPhone failed in India simply because of the price point. Therefore, the low-end models are for geographic segmentation as revenues (India, China, other places) while the high-end models are catered towards marketshare as volumes (US predominantly). This way, Apple hits both ends of the global market in one shot.
This is something that MS and others cannot counter at all.
Microsoft began to milk its software cow by coming out with different iterations of its software programs scattered for different users. Apple has been careful not to do that by having simple versions that cater to only the consumer segment. Microsoft has extended the milking to both the OS and Office and quite possibly will extend it to other things in the future as it should.
But Apple operates on a different level altogether. The iPod, when it was introduced, was not about achieving marketshare at all. It was about releasing the best MP3 player with the best overall experience and it proceeded to take the market because of it. It is the same scenario with the iPhone. The iPhone just happened to take top slots in the market due to its uniqueness. Remember Jobs's assertion that they want only 1% of the market.
Another thing to remember is the temporal differences between the 1980s and 2000s. Things have changed remarkably so much that software and hardware developments operate on different cycles. Dont get me wrong. The basics of the right hardware and software are necessary for the best experience. But the way it is being done has evolved considerably over the years with the reorganization of distribution channels. And Apple is a company that ALWAYS controls the distribution channels (iTunes whether it be the SDK/music/App Store and select partners for hardware) and now they are re-inventing the channel (OTA app and movie downloads). Their distribution channel is open yet closed. It is quite flexible and takes advantage of upcoming developments as they happen.
Thats why the proposed tablet/netbook/hybrid computing device from Apple will not run a more diluted or hybrid of the mobile and desktop OS. It will run Snow Leopard and Apple will not agree to software differentiation. (I also feel that this device will work with Apple TV and the iPhone/iPod Touch but that is an entirely different post) Remember it was Yair Reiner who claimed that Apple executives told him that. Nobody from Apple will corroborate this. I see Apple coming out with these devices to have footholds in markets like India and China, which have shown high expectations towards the iPhone. The iPhone failed in India simply because of the price point. Therefore, the low-end models are for geographic segmentation as revenues (India, China, other places) while the high-end models are catered towards marketshare as volumes (US predominantly). This way, Apple hits both ends of the global market in one shot.
This is something that MS and others cannot counter at all.
I think something that the people who say "the 4GB iPhone failed and no one wanted it" forget is that the original 4GB was $500 plus tax. I remember waiting in line the day the original iPhone was released and everyone in line was asking each other what model they were getting. It was a unanimous "8GB" and most people's reasoning was "it's only $100 more, I'm already spending quite a bit, I'll be able to put more media on it, etc". Now that it's become a mainstream device, more people are wanting the experience but don't necessarily need the space.
It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they expanded the line like this.
It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they expanded the line like this.
Globally, the number of pre-paid/pay-as-you-go customers is huge. Apple will use a low-end iPhone to enter this market.
There is no 5MP camera? Do you mean in existence in mobile phones?
Not that it matters anyway if you go into image quality etc. If the existing iPhones have 2MP, surely a bump would satisfy ppl more.
I feel choice of phones will be good. I remember when the iPhone was released we heard of "numerous new models by Xmas." Of course we got 3G but nothing more. Different models with varying price points make sense now as everyone knows what an iPhone is and can judge what features they need.