Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It's going to have a full screen display, OLED, 3D sensing front camera, 2-cell battery system, improved speakers, ProMotion, improved water resistance, wireless charging, and enhanced Siri... but its not enough for you, because clearly they're not working hard enough.
How do you know it's going to have improved speakers, improved water resistance and enhanced Siri? You don't, you just made it up. Does an OLED screen need Promotion?, there has never been an Promotion OLED screen. Wait until you know what features a device has before using fictitious features as an argument.
 
Just imagine the what the sales might have been had they left the thing with a phone jack. But yes, it has to be even thinner than my 6S+ and a bit faster.
 
Also 4k 60 FPS on front and rear cameras
+ the inevitable "World's Fastest Smartphone CPU/Graphics Chips."
[doublepost=1502969406][/doublepost]
Amazing! Not shocking cause of all the benefits the iP7 offers over iP6S.

Bout all dat, matte black, back baby!!



I believe you'll begin to see two major things with the iPhone SE: no 256GB option and slightly reduced prices, a slight body redesign to keep inline styling with the 6S/7 or maybe the late 2017 iPhone. The reduced pricing will allow for volume sales - reduced revenue and gross margins slightly but will allow Apple to boost its level/stagnant services revenues!

I really hope Apple shifts the naming scheme and just introduce the whole lineup without the numbers:

iPhone Mini
iPhone
iPhone Plus
iPhone Edition

...
 
My prediction for 2018 is that iPhone 7S is more popular than iPhone 8. Did I just beat Chi Jinping Kuo Xiao on this prediction. I should be popular by now.

Absolutely. By a significant amount. IMO, it's going to be iPhone 8, 8 Plus, and the OLED will be the 8 Pro. There is enough design change on the LCD phones for this IMO. While the 8 Pro will be the 'Big Dog' the 8+ will be the Bread and Butter device by a mile. 7 Plus sales have surpassed Apples expectations consistently for a long time now.

The OLED device obviously will be limited with a 40% pass rate on the OLED for quite some time. All the hype over the OLED phone has really snuffed out just how nice the new LCD devices will be as well. They are far from a 7 with an A11 inside. :apple:
 
Well I literally just ordered 250 of them (iPhone 7 32 GB) this month so I imagine that'll help Apple out this month too.

I'm a System Admin and we just replaced all our iPhone 5 for employees. In August 2019 I'll do this again lol.
 
It between the 7S and 8 for me! Not sure if I what to spent the extra $500 more on the 8 however! Only reason for the 8 is HD screen resolution while the 7S will still have the 720i screen resolution.
 
How do you know it's going to have improved speakers, improved water resistance and enhanced Siri? You don't, you just made it up. Does an OLED screen need Promotion?, there has never been an Promotion OLED screen. Wait until you know what features a device has before using fictitious features as an argument.

These are all rumored features. But thanks for playing!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.macrumors.com/2017/05/06/iphone-8-enhanced-receiver-jpmorgan/amp/

http://bgr.com/2017/01/24/iphone-8-enhanced-siri-upgrade/

http://9to5mac.com/2017/07/03/iphone-8-touch-id-3d-face-detection/
 
I just noticed Sammy's 8 and 8+ models. WTF? Really Samsung? You have no ***** shame in regards to swiping any and everything from Apple.
 
All good points, but why are the Android OEM's even in this game when they don't make any money? To sell an OS designed for Google to pull data and sell ad's from? I am surprised it's gone on this long. Apple makes the bulk of the money on phones.

Most of them actually do make money, just not as much as Apple.

Even my local FNAC sells it's own branded smartphones. There is even a small Android OEM in Spain (BQ) that sells devices there.

We tend to get out of focus when talking about Apple raking in all the profits but it's really a question of proportion.

Huawei has recently decided to phase out its low-end phones and concentrate on the middle and upper tiers. Not because it was losing money, it just wasn't making enough.

I don't know how that will impact the rest of Android OEMs. Perhaps there will be more pie to share around or perhaps people are buying more from the upper tiers.
 
Most of them actually do make money, just not as much as Apple.

Even my local FNAC sells it's own branded smartphones. There is even a small Android OEM in Spain (BQ) that sells devices there.

We tend to get out of focus when talking about Apple raking in all the profits but it's really a question of proportion.

Huawei has recently decided to phase out its low-end phones and concentrate on the middle and upper tiers. Not because it was losing money, it just wasn't making enough.

I don't know how that will impact the rest of Android OEMs. Perhaps there will be more pie to share around or perhaps people are buying more from the upper tiers.

I think that makes sense. I guess I just see a major lack of differentiation and wonder what the end goal is. I guess there will always be a need for cheap phones though.
 
Actually Apple sales are bad, for the work they have making them vs the units they sell

  • Making a complete CPU from the ISA
  • Making a complete OS, from the kernel to the last thing the user sees, including the browser engine that Samsung leeches
  • Making the developer infrastructure (languages, compiler, IDE, frameworks like ARKit, etc.)
  • Persuading developers to write for an OS with 15% marketshare
  • Paying Jony Ive and his boys, and not simply copying Huawei
Compare to Samsung:

  • Buy a CPU from Qualcomm or make a CPU out of ARM licensed cores
  • Use Android from Google
  • Leech Linux
  • Leech Java
  • Put a screen on it and that’s it

Apple is only lucrative because they have an excellent management of the parts in the middle (like stores, warranty, stock management, etc.)
This post gives me cancer.

Linux/unix is open source. You can develop on top of it, Samsung put in many useful features of their own (not just gimmicks like some might think).

And I wonder what MacOS is based on. And where Safari (Webkit) came from. Also the various components inside an iPhone that Samsung manufacturers. Apple A chips are also ARM-based. Exynos is a great chip, better performing and heat output compared to Qualcomm from what I experienced.
 
This post gives me cancer.

Linux/unix is open source. You can develop on top of it, Samsung put in many useful features of their own (not just gimmicks like some might think).

And I wonder what MacOS is based on. And where Safari (Webkit) came from. Also the various components inside an iPhone that Samsung manufacturers. Apple A chips are also ARM-based. Exynos is a great chip, better performing and heat output compared to Qualcomm from what I experienced.

This post gives me cancer.

macOS is based on macOS, no, it’s not Linux, look it up.

Safari was based on KHTML a long, long time ago, basically nothing is left of the original project.

Samsung manufactures and Apple pays for it. Exynos is irrelevant. The CPU cores are made by ARM Holdings.
 
I think you misattributed the quote. That was my statement, not @yanksfan114 .

Of course, you're also misquoting @yanksfan114 who said that Apple makes money from "software", not specifically iOS.

And you're intentionally distorting how to attribute value... Or maybe you don't understand your own question... Developers want to sell apps to iOS users, the way most of them do so is through the App Store, Apple sees a 30% cut on all sales through the App Store and apps aren't sold for any other platform through the App Store, therefore iOS is directly driving App Store revenue.

Maybe another question will help explain why you can't easily separate the variables here: please explain how Apple makes revenue directly from iPhone hardware without including iOS.
My fault, I did misattribute, sorry about that.

My point was very specific to the topic of this thread, sales of 'Apple iPhone', which primarily has the hardware and software components, and primarily the experience that the hardware and software provide. So, App store or iTunes store are ancillary to the sale of an iPhone, that's not saying that it's not a contributing factor in a purchase, but that would be straying too far from the topic of the thread.

And hence the question I asked pertaining to the topic of thread, how does Apple make revenue from the software component, which is iOS, and the response that I received was totally unrelated to this thread.
 
This post gives me cancer.

macOS is based on macOS, no, it’s not Linux, look it up.

Safari was based on KHTML a long, long time ago, basically nothing is left of the original project.

Samsung manufactures and Apple pays for it. Exynos is irrelevant. The CPU cores are made by ARM Holdings.

CPU cores, based off of or called "Arm" achitecture is designed & licensed by Arm Holdings: They don't make ANY such processor themselves (Arm that is).
 
Actually Apple sales are bad, for the work they have making them vs the units they sell

  • Making a complete CPU from the ISA
  • Making a complete OS, from the kernel to the last thing the user sees, including the browser engine that Samsung leeches
  • Making the developer infrastructure (languages, compiler, IDE, frameworks like ARKit, etc.)
  • Persuading developers to write for an OS with 15% marketshare
  • Paying Jony Ive and his boys, and not simply copying Huawei
Compare to Samsung:

  • Buy a CPU from Qualcomm or make a CPU out of ARM licensed cores
  • Use Android from Google
  • Leech Linux
  • Leech Java
  • Put a screen on it and that’s it

Apple is only lucrative because they have an excellent management of the parts in the middle (like stores, warranty, stock management, etc.)

LOL yeah sales are bad = biggest pile of cash in business history
 
This post gives me cancer.

Linux/unix is open source. You can develop on top of it, Samsung put in many useful features of their own (not just gimmicks like some might think).

And I wonder what MacOS is based on. And where Safari (Webkit) came from. Also the various components inside an iPhone that Samsung manufacturers. Apple A chips are also ARM-based. Exynos is a great chip, better performing and heat output compared to Qualcomm from what I experienced.

So much wrong.

MacOS is based on Unix not linux - there is a difference in very fundamental areas. File structure, how applications are managed, etc.

Apple has custom designed cores that comply with the ARM standard - they do not use ARM cores. That is why a dual core A9 outperforms a four core Qualcomm Snapdragon.

Apples processes are increasingly being made by TSMC -- Apple is now in sourcing GPU design -- to be made by TSMC.

The extra value engineered and designed into Apple's phones are reflected in sales and high profit margins.
 
Most of them actually do make money, just not as much as Apple.

Even my local FNAC sells it's own branded smartphones. There is even a small Android OEM in Spain (BQ) that sells devices there.

We tend to get out of focus when talking about Apple raking in all the profits but it's really a question of proportion.

Huawei has recently decided to phase out its low-end phones and concentrate on the middle and upper tiers. Not because it was losing money, it just wasn't making enough.

I don't know how that will impact the rest of Android OEMs. Perhaps there will be more pie to share around or perhaps people are buying more from the upper tiers.

indeed ... HTC began life like this ... as n OEM for Cingular, Vodafone UK/France, O2, another company that partnered eventually to become half of EE as well back in their Windows Mobile platform days. The Motorol MPx I think was built by them as well as the Sony Xperia X1 too.
[doublepost=1503008293][/doublepost]
Care to clarify your statement?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Holdings

CPU designs are based on RISC architecture .. you know the same architecture that Motorola and IBM Power based cpu's where prior to OSX Leopard ;)

Arm Holdings Inc does NOT build CPU's in anyway shape or form - not prior to recent ownership in early 2017.
Samsung,
Qualcomm,
Motorola - or whatever the CPU arm is nowadays,
etc
ALL license the architecture and re-design/augment to build their own CPU's. Arm does not.


Also Carnegie Mellon University (I think designed OSX's core BACH kernel which also uses BSD).
[doublepost=1503008724][/doublepost]
This post gives me cancer.

macOS is based on macOS, no, it’s not Linux, look it up.

Safari was based on KHTML a long, long time ago, basically nothing is left of the original project.

Samsung manufactures and Apple pays for it. Exynos is irrelevant. The CPU cores are made by ARM Holdings.

So much wrong.

MacOS is based on Unix not linux - there is a difference in very fundamental areas. File structure, how applications are managed, etc.

Apple has custom designed cores that comply with the ARM standard - they do not use ARM cores. That is why a dual core A9 outperforms a four core Qualcomm Snapdragon.

Apples processes are increasingly being made by TSMC -- Apple is now in sourcing GPU design -- to be made by TSMC.

The extra value engineered and designed into Apple's phones are reflected in sales and high profit margins.

Regarding OSX or now called MacOS (to honor the original PowerPC based RISC mac OS; not include that kernel) is based off of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS

Main article: History of macOS
The heritage of what would become macOS had originated at NeXT, a company founded by Steve Jobs following his departure from Apple in 1985. There, the Unix-likeNeXTSTEP operating system was developed, and then launched in 1989. The kernel of NeXTSTEP is based upon the Mach kernel, which was originally developed at Carnegie Mellon University, with additional kernel layers and low-level user space code derived from parts of BSD. Its graphical user interface was built on top of an object-oriented GUI toolkit using the Objective-C programming language.

Throughout the early 1990s, Apple had tried to create a "next-generation" OS to succeed its classic Mac OS through the Taligent, Copland and Gershwin projects, but all of them were eventually abandoned.[20] This led Apple to purchase NeXT in 1996, allowing NeXTSTEP, then called OPENSTEP, to serve as the basis for Apple's next generation operating system.[21] This purchase also led to Steve Jobs returning to Apple as an interim, and then the permanent CEO, shepherding the transformation of the programmer-friendly OPENSTEP into a system that would be adopted by Apple's primary market of home users and creative professionals. The project was first code named "Rhapsody" and then officially named Mac OS X.[22][23]

Architecture
Main article: Architecture of macOS
At macOS's core is a POSIX compliant operating system built on top of the XNU kernel, with standard Unix facilities available from the command line interface. Apple has released this family of software as a free and open source operating system named Darwin. On top of Darwin, Apple layered a number of components, including the Aqua interface and the Finder, to complete the GUI-based operating system which is macOS.[52]

With its original introduction as Mac OS X, the system brought a number of new capabilities to provide a more stable and reliable platform than its predecessor, the classic Mac OS. For example, pre-emptive multitasking and memory protection improved the system's ability to run multiple applications simultaneously without them interrupting or corrupting each other.[53] Many aspects of macOS's architecture are derived from OPENSTEP, which was designed to be portable, to ease the transition from one platform to another. For example, NeXTSTEP was ported from the original 68k-based NeXT workstations to x86 and other architectures before NeXT was purchased by Apple,[54] and OPENSTEP was later ported to the PowerPC architecture as part of the Rhapsody project.

The default macOS file system is HFS+, which it inherited from the classic Mac OS. Operating system designer Linus Torvalds has criticized HFS+, saying it is "probably the worst file system ever", whose design is "actively corrupting user data". He criticized the case insensitivity of file names, a design made worse when Apple extended the file system to support Unicode.[55][56] Initially, HFS+ was designed for classic Mac OS, which runs on big-endian 68K and PowerPC systems. When Apple switched Macintosh to little-endian Intel processors, it continued to use big-endian byte order on HFS+ file systems. As a result, macOS on current Macs must do byte swap when it reads file system data.[57][58] These concerns are being addressed with the new Apple File System, which will be included in a later update.

The Darwin subsystem in macOS is in charge of managing the file system, which includes the Unix permissions layer. In 2003 and 2005, two Macworld editors expressed criticism of the permission scheme; Ted Landau called misconfigured permissions "the most common frustration" in macOS, while Rob Griffiths suggested that some users may even have to reset permissions every day, a process which can take up to 15 minutes.[59] More recently, another Macworld editor, Dan Frakes, called the procedure of repairing permissions vastly overused.[60] He argues that macOS typically handles permissions properly without user interference, and resetting permissions should just be tried when problems emerge.[61]

The architecture of macOS incorporates a layered design:[62] the layered frameworks aid rapid development of applications by providing existing code for common tasks.[63] Apple provides its own software development tools, most prominently an integrated development environment called Xcode. Xcode provides interfaces to compilers that support several programming languages including C, C++, Objective-C, and Swift. For the Apple–Intel transition, it was modified so that developers could build their applications as a universal binary, which provides compatibility with both the Intel-based and PowerPC-based Macintosh lines.[64] First and third-party applications can be controlled programatically using the AppleScript framework,[65] retained from the classic Mac OS,[66] or using the newer Automator application that offers pre-written tasks that do not require programming knowledge.[67]


Mac OS X Introduction year 2000
^ please watch this.

how could anyone using a Mac since 2000 still get this wrong?
 
indeed ... HTC began life like this ... as n OEM for Cingular, Vodafone UK/France, O2, another company that partnered eventually to become half of EE as well back in their Windows Mobile platform days. The Motorol MPx I think was built by them as well as the Sony Xperia X1 too.
[doublepost=1503008293][/doublepost]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Holdings

CPU designs are based on RISC architecture .. you know the same architecture that Motorola and IBM Power based cpu's where prior to OSX Leopard ;)

Arm Holdings Inc does NOT build CPU's in anyway shape or form - not prior to recent ownership in early 2017.
Samsung,
Qualcomm,
Motorola - or whatever the CPU arm is nowadays,
etc
ALL license the architecture and re-design/augment to build their own CPU's. Arm does not.


Also Carnegie Mellon University (I think designed OSX's core BACH kernel which also uses BSD).
[doublepost=1503008724][/doublepost]



Regarding OSX or now called MacOS (to honor the original PowerPC based RISC mac OS; not include that kernel) is based off of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS




Mac OS X Introduction year 2000
^ please watch this.

how could anyone using a Mac since 2000 still get this wrong?

You really don't know what you are talking about, and it's not my job to teach you. Goodnight!
 
Chrome stopped using Webkit in 2013 and started using their own Blink rendering engine which is what many other browsers like Firefox, Opera, Samsung, etc. are based on now. Webkit is a buggy POS and scores the lowest on HTML5 validation test.

http://html5test.com/results/desktop.html
Firefox definitely doesn't use Blink. The others though, you are correct. Regardless, Blink is still WebKit-based, so I tend to consider the two related. It has diverged significantly though.

I know WebKit is pretty bad, but my point was that nobody stole anything. WebKit was forked to create Blink, and there's nothing wrong with that. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.