Obviously you should have a phone with 32gb anyway because it meets his personal standard of "industry standard".
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.
'iPhone 6s' Logic Board Suggests 16GB Base Model and Updated NFC Hardware
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Obviously you should have a phone with 32gb anyway because it meets his personal standard of "industry standard".
I had a 32GB iPhone 5 and have a 64GB 6+.
However, surely there should come a time when something larger than 16GB is the base level offering? Other manufacturers have moved to 32GB now and with camera/video advancements it is only right and proper that Apple follow suit. Nobody should have to pay an additional $100 to 'upgrade' their 2015/2016 premium smartphone to basic 2015 specs. Nothing about Apple products is supposed to be 'basic' or 'insufficient for the job'. I'm still totally baffled as to why some of you guys defend Apple products no matter what.
That line pretty much sums up why some people defend Apple going with 16gb, because they don't see it as basic or insufficient for the job. Seriously, I erase pictures from my phone because ... they get uploaded to my unlimited storage on OneDrive and Google Photos. My biggest space user is podcasts, which get erased after use.
Will there come a time when Apple should stop making 16gb the base model? Yes, when 16gb is no longer sufficient.
Why do people constantly bring up year (2015) when talking about 16GB? This is what irks me most, when people say 16GB is ridiculous in 2015! The year has NOTHING to do with the storage. If iOS 25 still only needs 3GB and the apps are still small, than 16GB is still fine.
But like Michael said, 16GB is still sufficient for some users.
Who determines when 16GB is insufficient then? The people who finally outgrow 8GB, move onto 16GB and then when photos end up being so large that 16GB doesn't cut it for them in 2021, suddenly they'll call for 32GB??
Why have Samsung, HTC, Sony and LG etc moved over to a 32GB basic storage level? What were their reasons? As Apple continue with 16GB why then did they feel the need to increase storage levels on their devices? Is it because they move with the times and realise that 16GB is frankly insufficient these days with camera and video advancements, not to mention the app/music storage levels of most smartphone users in 2015? Or do you have a better explanation?
Yes it does. Camera and video advancements require larger storage facilities. Apple has had a 16GB basic storage level for years and yet the camera and video capabilities have grown massively. Please stop accepting and defending mediocrity!
Agreed on most of your points. And, while I've been a pretty big fan of Apple for over 25 years now, I've also been a pretty vocal critic many times over the years. But, I'm starting to question whether something fairly fundamental is starting to change at Apple... that is what is in question here (this being one small example) to me.
No, their products have never been perfect, but I haven't gotten the impression it was by design or due to incompetence as much in the past. (ex: keeping the base model at 16 GB seems to be a 'cost savings/profit maximizing' move, and probably not a mistake... and I'd *hope* there are smart enough people there to realize it will be at the cost of user-experience... and it's a tradeoff they are willing to make - which, if true, is scary).
Not quite that black and white, but yes, basically. While Jobs was the CEO of a massive corporation, just like Cook now is, I think Jobs demanded perfection on that product / user-experience factor, which might be slipping under Cook if he doesn't have that same priority.
A bit, but I think it still makes the point. Millions of purchases/users doesn't mean Apple is making the best decisions.
The 'market decides' is an capitalistic economics principal which only works in a 'free' market (just, with all things being equal, etc.), which the market is far from. Probably the biggest problem here is the 'informed consumer' aspect, as most of the people I've met with 16 GB iPhones didn't realize how limiting 16 GB was going to be, and went with the one being pushed by the carriers.
And then once they realize, the next time they buy the one they need. Or they take it back and get the one they want. Seriously, it's not rocket science.
Well, and the apps HAVE NOT stayed about the same size. Go back to around iOS 6 times and compare app sizes to current sizes. With the introduction of Retina, especially, App sizes have gone way up. Add camera and video to that, and bigger OS, etc. and much more storage is needed to do the same thing as a couple years ago.
Exactly. There are managing to trade on their name alone but that will only carry them along for so long. Sales don't necessarily equate to customer satisfaction. I bought a 6+ and I hate it. Many people have hated iOS8 (and iOS7 before it). How many more iPhones will people buy before they decide that actually, they aren't hitting the spot anymore? RAM peed me off this year, the base storage level will be frustrating everyone next year, and what if iOS9 is no real improvement on 7 & 8? Let's face it, Apple is being run by beancounters now and if they're not careful they could absolutely end up running the brand down.
Reading comprehension issues then?
I think we've all been spelling it out pretty clearly, but I'll give it another shot.
Apple used to have user-experience as one of their very top priorities. If other aspects, like profit-maximization, have taken over this priority, then that would be a *corruption* of Apple, in terms of being the company they used to be. The continued 16 GB base iPhone would be an example leading many of us to the above conclusion.
Simple enough?
Absolutely NOT! I'm complaining because of what a bad decision like this will do to Apple's long-term future.
I believe it's called bickering and it's against TOS.
Heh, if bickering goes away, the forums would be empty.
It's really not about price to me. I'm concerned about user-experience with the base-model (or any model) device. Make the base model 64 GB and charge $800 for it for all I care. My point is that 16 GB is too little on ANY iPhone at ANY price given storage requirements of any kind of reasonable use of such a device.
Or to put it more simply... there shouldn't be an iDevice with less than 32 GB available, AT ALL!
I'm all for more RAM, but I think the user-experience has been pretty good with 1 GB. It's the 512K devices (i.e.: iPad mini, which Apple has been selling until recently) that have been the problem. You certainly get a 'better' user-experience with more RAM, but I'm talking about an acceptable or good user-experience. I don't think 16 GB of storage provides that.
No, what I'm talking about is enough to meet reasonable user-expectations. 16 GB of storage is so limited that if the typical user actually uses their device, they will quickly be trying to find ways to delete stuff so they can actually do OS updates, etc. That's not a good user-experience.
I'm not saying Apple doesn't do a lot of good stuff. I'm saying that Apple historically would have said 'no' to products that don't meet some fairly high-bar.
re: MBA - I suppose the point could be made on the MBA in terms of SSD storage, but it's quite usable for typical use and they do provide a reasonable amount for what SSDs are and cost. And, yes, if they did offer a 32 GB or 64 GB MBA, I'd be complaining in a similar fashion. They did kind of make a mistake (IMO) with 2 GB RAM a few years back in the entry level laptop models... which I also wasn't a fan of... given they can't be upgraded.
Again, what gives you the right to judge what OTHER people need? People get by JUST FINE with 16GB. So why the hell are you complaining about user experience? You get the space you need.
Why is that such a horrible concept? You cannot make a decision yourself on how much space you need? Why do I, somebody that uses only 8GB, need to be upgraded to 32GB? I won't use all that extra space. And you guys are WAY overreacting. I do not need to constantly delete things to keep my space low.
I disagree on 16 GB vs 32 GB. Yes, they will have to learn that they can't just shoot HD video forever or stuff like that. And, they will have to manage their photo/music libraries. But, with 16 GB, they won't even be able to install a reasonable number of apps, and use their camera (managing storage), and still do things like update the OS. It's going to be full a few days out of the box and hard to keep clean enough for updates after that.
That's just not a user-experience the Apple I always knew would find acceptable, and certainly not worth $9 extra profit.
Nope, that will depend on how many buy the iPhone 7, 8, and 9... and all the other Apple products that are produced over the next decade or two.
Apple could $*#-up royally and will still have record sales for the next few years. Success is long-term.
As do most companies... and we can argue about whether that's actually smart or not (it isn't!). But, in the past, Apple had someone saying 'no' when such decisions by the bean-counters impacted user-experience too much.
And, no, they don't have to do any such thing because they are a business. Where did you get that from?
You're in the minority alongside grandmas and my father. The vast majority of people who purchase a 16GB iPhone would prefer more than 16GB but either can't afford to spend more, or refuse to spend more. They therefore have to constantly juggle storage and 'make do'. The arguments in favour of moving with the times and making 32GB the base level of storage are way more rational than the arguments against IMO.