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

What is your most favourite iPhone design?

  • iPhone (Original)

    Votes: 11 6.1%
  • iPhone 3G/3GS

    Votes: 8 4.4%
  • iPhone 4/4S

    Votes: 65 35.9%
  • iPhone 5/5S/5SE

    Votes: 72 39.8%
  • iPhone 6/6S

    Votes: 32 17.7%
  • iPhone 6 Plus/6S Plus

    Votes: 15 8.3%
  • iPhone 5SE (not 5/5S)

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • iPhone 5C

    Votes: 6 3.3%

  • Total voters
    181

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
Let's talk Apple and the future design language of iPhone starting with some useful ideas for Apple to try and prototype if they haven't already!

Other phone manufacturers have their niche in repulsive protruding cameras, unsightly antenna bands and numerous holes cut out in odd and uneven places for sensors and cameras. Apple though has traditionally, forgetting the aberration that was iPhone 6/6s, produced clean lines and neatly resolved designs.

So what could be in store in design for the next major model?

I'll start:

The next iPhone design will be...

- all glass, including a single flat glass front and a single uni glass back (flat glass back with curved glass edges that meet the glass front).
- antenna bands will run inside the glass and be hidden from view
- a dual camera will be hidden inside and not protruding, it will be able to be used underwater.
- the front glass will use a semi mirror finish to obscure and neaten up front facing camera and sensor holes.
- the uni glass back will be coloured inside in one of six colours; black, white, silver, gold, rose gold and deep ocean blue.
- the home button will be removed and instead Touch ID will be incorporated into the entire front glass as will 3d touch which brings users back to home with a deep press.
- the volume control buttons will be combined into the ringer/silent switch.
- the internal will be enclosed in water resistant packaging.

Anyone able to render this?

Now, your suggestions. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
New technical specification strategy for iPhone

Item 1

Apple should remove multiple storage options for iPhone and proceed with a single storage capacity for each model (6s/6/5SE), set at a minimum of at least 128GB, but available at the typical 16GB price. A real "shake up".

For example:
  • iPhone 6s - 128GB
  • iPhone 6 - 128GB
  • iPhone SE - 64GB

Reason for change:
  • Storage cost is incredibly inexpensive today and the real cost difference between 16GB, 64GB, 128GB is insignificant.
  • It has become unnecessary to quote GB storage figures. It's just like quoting CPU speeds. Pointless, complex to explain and a carry over from decades past.
  • Users don't care about storage capacity figures, they only wish to take video, photos, download apps etc and avoid the "storage full" errors.
  • Devices with low storage capacity (i.e. 16GB) require users to think more about maintaining their device storage (by deleting photos etc) instead of just using their device without complication (i.e. the Apple way).
 
Last edited:

iOrbit

macrumors 6502a
Mar 8, 2012
569
30
its hard to say, i really appreciate all of them since the 4s. never liked the original designs.

4 deserves praise because that was the first iPhone that made me want a phone just because of how good it looked compared to the competition.

i think it effected the industry the same way and more competitive designs (some copying) have come along.

the 6 is the nicest to use.

the 5 was the prettiest (yet it meant compromising some of those looks for functionally with those bands on the back - the 4 was also, but I'm a fan of aluminium and the unibody philosophy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smacrumon

the_art

macrumors member
Apr 1, 2016
33
15
United Kingdom
its hard to say, i really appreciate all of them since the 4s. never liked the original designs.

4 deserves praise because that was the first iPhone that made me want a phone just because of how good it looked compared to the competition.

i think it effected the industry the same way and more competitive designs (some copying) have come along.

the 6 is the nicest to use.

the 5 was the prettiest (yet it meant compromising some of those looks for functionally with those bands on the back - the 4 was also, but I'm a fan of aluminium and the unibody philosophy.

As much as I like your idea for storage strategies, I feel it's very unlikely to happen for one simple reason. Profit.

It seems like app sizes and the amount people want to store on their phones is forever increasing. Therefore by keeping the 16GB base model Apple can persuade more people to pay to upgrade and with the cost of more storage to manufacture getting cheaper their profit margins keep getting higher. I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the 16GB base model for the iPhone 7, although I hate to say it. And by getting rid of the 32GB model, they make people think they are getting more for their money by paying extra, even though it costs Apple less.
 

MacBH928

macrumors G3
May 17, 2008
8,364
3,740
I like the 6 , but the size of the iphone 5, but the 5's display is too small to use with modern apps. You have to compromise..

screen area or convenience
 

timsutcliffe

macrumors 6502
Jun 18, 2007
351
85
Difficult one this.

The original was an incredible change from what was around at the time. I really like the rounded back on the 3G/3Gs in terms of how it felt to hold. The plastic helped there too.

I really like the current generation but I couldn't vote for them from a design point of view because of the the camera bump.

So I went for the 5/5s/SE. Still looks pretty good, even now.
 

dk001

macrumors demi-god
Oct 3, 2014
10,793
15,128
Sage, Lightning, and Mountains
Was never a fan of any of the designs. 4/5/6 all okay but not really a knock out.
I dislike cases but have added a Vaja leather backspin for grip. That is the biggest fail I see in any of these designs.
I almost went with the 6S if it was't for the battery life.

Need to add a "Didn't really care for any of them." poll option. ;)
 

chasonstone

macrumors 6502
Dec 24, 2010
269
287
Kentucky
New technical specification strategy for iPhone

Item 1

Apple should remove multiple storage options for iPhone and proceed with a single storage capacity for each model (6s/6/5SE), set at a minimum of at least 128GB, but available at the typical 16GB price. A real "shake up".

For example:
  • iPhone 6s - 128GB
  • iPhone 6 - 128GB
  • iPhone SE - 64GB

Reason for change:
  • Storage cost is incredibly inexpensive today and the real cost difference between 16GB, 64GB, 128GB is insignificant.
  • It has become unnecessary to quote GB storage figures. It's just like quoting CPU speeds. Pointless, complex to explain and a carry over from decades past.
  • Users don't care about storage capacity figures, they only wish to take video, photos, download apps etc and avoid the "storage full" errors.
  • Devices with low storage capacity (i.e. 16GB) require users to think more about maintaining their device storage (by deleting photos etc) instead of just using their device without complication (i.e. the Apple way).

I think a move away from storage capacity as a differentiation would be a really good idea. They could just use size as the new $100 up-step's. Maybe: iPhone Mini (4) - $549, iPhone (4.7) - $649, and iPhone Pro (5.5) - $749 all at 128GB. It could be sort of compared to how the Apple Watch is sold, there's no focus on internal storage and the step up is for size alone.
 

dk001

macrumors demi-god
Oct 3, 2014
10,793
15,128
Sage, Lightning, and Mountains
I think a move away from storage capacity as a differentiation would be a really good idea. They could just use size as the new $100 up-step's. Maybe: iPhone Mini (4) - $549, iPhone (4.7) - $649, and iPhone Pro (5.5) - $749 all at 128GB. It could be sort of compared to how the Apple Watch is sold, there's no focus on internal storage and the step up is for size alone.

They need to fix the iCloud first. Or allow the option of using an alternative cloud system .... :eek:
 

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
its hard to say, i really appreciate all of them since the 4s. never liked the original designs.

4 deserves praise because that was the first iPhone that made me want a phone just because of how good it looked compared to the competition.

i think it effected the industry the same way and more competitive designs (some copying) have come along.

the 6 is the nicest to use.

the 5 was the prettiest (yet it meant compromising some of those looks for functionally with those bands on the back - the 4 was also, but I'm a fan of aluminium and the unibody philosophy.
Yes, I agree, 4 was a design with great impact with the ability to really captivate an audience.
[doublepost=1462090805][/doublepost]
As much as I like your idea for storage strategies, I feel it's very unlikely to happen for one simple reason. Profit.

It seems like app sizes and the amount people want to store on their phones is forever increasing. Therefore by keeping the 16GB base model Apple can persuade more people to pay to upgrade and with the cost of more storage to manufacture getting cheaper their profit margins keep getting higher. I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the 16GB base model for the iPhone 7, although I hate to say it. And by getting rid of the 32GB model, they make people think they are getting more for their money by paying extra, even though it costs Apple less.
Yes, the only reason today to keep multiple storage sizes is short term profits. However, storage full errors frustrate users. The Camera/Photo app and iMessages seem to be the culprits here, silently using up storage. New customers that come to Apple with the expectation of a seamless brilliant experience develop negative views of the Apple brand if they are required to maintain the contents of their storage. Long term profits for Apple will be about truly exceeding customer expectations, and that in my opinion starts with a single storage size at 128GB at entry level pricing.
[doublepost=1462092574][/doublepost]
I like the 6 , but the size of the iphone 5, but the 5's display is too small to use with modern apps. You have to compromise..

screen area or convenience
Maybe this comes down to how well the app itself is designed? A well written app should be just as useful on a 4 inch screen as on a slightly larger 4.7 inch sized screen.
[doublepost=1462092722][/doublepost]
4S for me. The glass back made it grip well, the size was perfect for me, and I liked the PSP-inspired look.
Yes, glass back on 4 actually increases the grip. The metal back of 6 is actually rather slippery!
[doublepost=1462093142][/doublepost]
Was never a fan of any of the designs. 4/5/6 all okay but not really a knock out.
I dislike cases but have added a Vaja leather backspin for grip. That is the biggest fail I see in any of these designs.
I almost went with the 6S if it was't for the battery life.

Need to add a "Didn't really care for any of them." poll option. ;)
I'm interested to hear what your ideal design might be if none of the designs are knockouts. PS I've updated the poll to include "none of the above".
[doublepost=1462093351][/doublepost]
I think a move away from storage capacity as a differentiation would be a really good idea. They could just use size as the new $100 up-step's. Maybe: iPhone Mini (4) - $549, iPhone (4.7) - $649, and iPhone Pro (5.5) - $749 all at 128GB. It could be sort of compared to how the Apple Watch is sold, there's no focus on internal storage and the step up is for size alone.
Good point, it's one size fits all approach for Apple Watch.
I think a starting price of $399 might reinvigorate a new round of upgrades.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

T'hain Esh Kelch

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2001
6,353
7,229
Denmark
5/5s beats 4/4s for me by a hairs breath. I love the alternative design of the sides of the 4/4s, but the back of the 5/5S and its sides, together beats the former model.

I like the curved screen of the 6/6s, but the back is not very pretty and quite boring, and I am not too fond of the round candybar-like sides.
 

navaira

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2015
3,914
5,138
Amsterdam, Netherlands
I'm probably alone in this but last time I really, really loved how iPhone looked was this: (colour included)

green-iphone5c.jpg


Look ma, no antenna bands or protruding cameras!
 

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
5/5s beats 4/4s for me by a hairs breath. I love the alternative design of the sides of the 4/4s, but the back of the 5/5S and its sides, together beats the former model.

I like the curved screen of the 6/6s, but the back is not very pretty and quite boring, and I am not too fond of the round candybar-like sides.
Interesting view. I just can't reconcile the glass cut out windows on the 5/5s. I subscribe to the view that it's either got to be all glass or all metal.
[doublepost=1462095052][/doublepost]
I'm probably alone in this but last time I really, really loved how iPhone looked was this: (colour included)

green-iphone5c.jpg


Look ma, no antenna bands or protruding cameras!
No, you aren't alone. I really liked 5c on launch. Black screen, colored back. The only thing I didn't like is that plastic would eventually scratch. My ideal option would be 5c, but instead of a curved plastic back, a curved glass back would be used. Then you could hide the antenna bands, plus colour the inside with a rainbow of colours including traditional black, white, silver etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

dk001

macrumors demi-god
Oct 3, 2014
10,793
15,128
Sage, Lightning, and Mountains
...

I'm interested to hear what your ideal design might be if none of the designs are knockouts. PS I've updated the poll to include "none of the above"....

Thanks for the add :)

For me, I like a case or other add on that enhances the use / feel of the device. I bought the iPhone 6S+ because I liked the look and feel in hand. I did find it slippery so I looked for the minimalist case I could find that improved my grip. Everything I tried made the device larger, more intrusive, and hid the look of the device. If I wanted to hide the look, Apple may as well make it out of plastic.
I tried a leather case and like the feel. When looking for minimalist leather cases, I ran across a back skin of high quality leather. Tried it (not cheap) but it fulfilled all of my requirements.
leather-back-iphone-6-leather-cover.jpg leather-back-leather-iphone-6-covers.jpg

For me, it is the minimal amount I can add that gives me what I want. At this time, it is just a quality back skin. Adding just what I need and not covering up a great looking device.

ps: I wish Apple would bring back the all black model. The 5 in black was awesome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,574
2,908
I'm probably alone in this but last time I really, really loved how iPhone looked was this: (colour included)

green-iphone5c.jpg


Look ma, no antenna bands or protruding cameras!
No no, I like the 5C too. I didn't like how the material felt a little bendy. I think if that look with a different material, maybe some colour gradient options too and I'd be all over that for a budget iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

navaira

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2015
3,914
5,138
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Since that time the only smartphone colour I tend to like is black. (Or as close to it as possible.) Which is weird as those phones fit with Ive's software aesthetics perfectly.
 

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
No no, I like the 5C too. I didn't like how the material felt a little bendy. I think if that look with a different material, maybe some colour gradient options too and I'd be all over that for a budget iPhone.
A different material such as curved glass back, colored with the most appealing colors seen to humans?
 

bodonnell202

macrumors 68030
Jan 5, 2016
2,524
3,306
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I'm probably alone in this but last time I really, really loved how iPhone looked was this: (colour included)

green-iphone5c.jpg


Look ma, no antenna bands or protruding cameras!
You aren't alone. I actually had that exact phone (32 GB) in that exact color (loved the green!) I picked it at the time as the 5c design seemed more durable than the 5s and in handling both the 5c was actually more comfortable with it's great in hand feel. I upgraded to the 6s when it came out only for the features (and not the design, which is ok but nothing special), but still sometimes miss my green 5c (which I sold on eBay). If they had released an updated 5c with an A9, upgraded camera and touch ID I probably would have jumped at it. Sadly I doubt that would be a big enough seller to be worth Apple's time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

driceman

macrumors 6502
Mar 13, 2012
313
185
The iPhone 5/5s/SE was the best design to me. I like having a bigger display, but I'm not a fan of the protruding camera or slippery edges of the 6's. I thought the glass pieces on the back were a distinctive way to deal with the antenna, and I like the sharp edges better than curved ones. It wasn't as breakable as the 4's, and I had too much experience reseating iPhone 5c displays when they popped out of place at Simply Mac to have any interest in its design.

I'd like to see a design with no antenna bands, no gaps on the sides of the phone, and no protruding camera. I like my 6s Plus, but I think I may switch to a 4.7" phone next time. 4" is too small, 5.5" is a bit unwieldy to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost

Tech198

Cancelled
Mar 21, 2011
15,915
2,151
New technical specification strategy for iPhone

Item 1

Apple should remove multiple storage options for iPhone and proceed with a single storage capacity for each model (6s/6/5SE), set at a minimum of at least 128GB, but available at the typical 16GB price. A real "shake up".

For example:
  • iPhone 6s - 128GB
  • iPhone 6 - 128GB
  • iPhone SE - 64GB

Reason for change:
  • Storage cost is incredibly inexpensive today and the real cost difference between 16GB, 64GB, 128GB is insignificant.
  • It has become unnecessary to quote GB storage figures. It's just like quoting CPU speeds. Pointless, complex to explain and a carry over from decades past.
  • Users don't care about storage capacity figures, they only wish to take video, photos, download apps etc and avoid the "storage full" errors.
  • Devices with low storage capacity (i.e. 16GB) require users to think more about maintaining their device storage (by deleting photos etc) instead of just using their device without complication (i.e. the Apple way).


And what is u don't "need" that storage... No one pays for stuff we don't need today do we unless its your only option..

ie... the only reason i won't go for 16Gig Apple TV is because Apple doesn't make one, but if it was available i would if i would never use more than a few limited apps only......

The future is expansion always,,, u'll never foll it up, so get as much storage as you can, BUT it still comes/ always has, come down to price...

If Apple makes the price low enough, then maybe... and since Apple is obsoleting 16Gig versions in time,,, so should they give the same price do the next highest.

If u only have one phone at a set size in each category, how much good would hat do ? your forced even more to get that storage, weather u like it or not.. At least now, we have options.. I thought that was always the way.
 

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 15, 2016
2,683
4,011
And what is u don't "need" that storage... No one pays for stuff we don't need today do we unless its your only option..

ie... the only reason i won't go for 16Gig Apple TV is because Apple doesn't make one, but if it was available i would if i would never use more than a few limited apps only......

The future is expansion always,,, u'll never foll it up, so get as much storage as you can, BUT it still comes/ always has, come down to price...

If Apple makes the price low enough, then maybe... and since Apple is obsoleting 16Gig versions in time,,, so should they give the same price do the next highest.

If u only have one phone at a set size in each category, how much good would hat do ? your forced even more to get that storage, weather u like it or not.. At least now, we have options.. I thought that was always the way.
We don't need to think about storage anymore from a design perspective and customer perspective.

It's simple. You do away with silly small storages like 16GB, 32GB, 64GB that only serve to frustrate customers when using the product. Instead we just build in 128GB across the board and priced at the 16GB price. Then the following model, storage is upped to 256GB across the board for example.

iPhone 7 mini = 128GB = $349
iPhone 7 = 128GB = $449
iPhone 7 plus = 128GB = $549

Simple. Clear.
Progressive.
 

dk001

macrumors demi-god
Oct 3, 2014
10,793
15,128
Sage, Lightning, and Mountains
And what is u don't "need" that storage... No one pays for stuff we don't need today do we unless its your only option..

ie... the only reason i won't go for 16Gig Apple TV is because Apple doesn't make one, but if it was available i would if i would never use more than a few limited apps only......

The future is expansion always,,, u'll never foll it up, so get as much storage as you can, BUT it still comes/ always has, come down to price...

If Apple makes the price low enough, then maybe... and since Apple is obsoleting 16Gig versions in time,,, so should they give the same price do the next highest.

If u only have one phone at a set size in each category, how much good would hat do ? your forced even more to get that storage, weather u like it or not.. At least now, we have options.. I thought that was always the way.

It is unless the vendor artificially inflates the upgrade cost and deliberately pushes the customer toward the higher cost or a just/more expensive option. This is exactly what Apple has done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.