Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,621
16,768



iphone6s-scene2-250x367.jpeg
Following a recent report claiming the iPhone 7 will ship with at least 32GB base storage, with Apple dropping the infamous 16GB model, research firm TrendForce adds that the mid-tier 64GB storage option may be replaced with 128GB alongside a new 256GB version at the high end of the lineup.
Apple is likely to make changes to the storage options for iPhone 7. The 64GB version, which has been the most popular option in previous generations, may be discontinued and replaced by the 128GB version, though this decision has yet to be finalized. On the other hand, Apple is certain to raise the maximum storage option to 256GB so that iPhone 7 will have the highest NAND Flash density of the entire series.
The new storage options would henceforth be 32GB, 128GB, and 256GB, although the report does not make it entirely clear if the 256GB version will be exclusive to the 5.5-inch iPhone 7 Plus or also available for the 4.7-inch model. The current storage options for both the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus include 16GB, 64GB, and 128GB.

Earlier this year, Chinese website MyDrivers said the iPhone 7 Plus may exclusively feature 256GB storage and a 12.7 percent larger 3,100 mAh battery. In terms of credibility, the website did accurately report on the iPhone SE's 1,624 mAh battery and 2GB of RAM before Apple launched the 4-inch smartphone.

The remainder of the report corroborates other well-known rumors, including a dual-lens camera and 3GB of LPDDR4 RAM being exclusive to the 5.5-inch model. The 4.7-inch model is expected to retain a single-lens camera and 2GB of RAM. No major display upgrades are expected until Apple switches to OLED in 2017.

Recent rumors suggest the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus will share a design similar to the iPhone 6s series, sans a 3.5mm headphone jack, with more significant changes coming to the 2017 iPhone. This year's new features could include a faster A10 chip, waterproofing, repositioned antenna bands, faster LTE and Wi-Fi chips, and more.

Update: TrendForce has clarified for MacRumors that the 256 GB high-end capacity is only confirmed for the iPhone 7 Plus model. The storage capacity for the smaller iPhone 7 is yet to be determined.

Article Link: iPhone 7 Series Said to Have 32GB, 128GB, and 256GB Storage Options
 
  • Like
Reactions: scapegoat81

DakotaGuy

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,127
3,527
South Dakota, USA
This is the right decision for consumers, however I'm not sure if it is when it comes to Apple's bottom line. The 16 GB version pretty much forces people to move up to the 64 GB. A 32 GB would work just fine for a lot of people. Now the question remains will the starting price be the same or is that additional 16 GB going to cost people $100?

The way Apple marks up the price of memory you'd swear it was 1999.
 

cmichaelb

macrumors 68020
Aug 6, 2008
2,265
728
Italy
And a $50-100 price increase.

See iPad Pro.

I doubt it. They have kept iPhone pricing steady for years.
[doublepost=1464792453][/doublepost]
Barely scratched the surface of my 64 GB 6s. What Apple needs to do is give me some more iCloud storage for free. I only have 2 GBs remaining.

For those of us who travel a lot, Cloud storage is nice but not the best solution for our use case.
 

2457282

Suspended
Dec 6, 2012
3,327
3,014
As I said in yesterday's thread, for all I care they can sell an 8 gig phone - if people buy it, then great for them and for Apple. the real issue for me is the price. $100 jump for each tier of memory is a bit much even when accounting for the margins that Apple like to keep. I think they could something like

iPhone with 16gig $600
iPhone with 32gig $650
iPhone with 64gig $700
iPhone with 128gig $750
 

Porco

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2005
3,200
6,383
It would be a little ironic if more people can finally store their entire iTunes music library locally on their iPhone, only to find they can't use their existing headphones to listen to any of it.
 

Glassed Silver

macrumors 68020
Mar 10, 2007
2,096
2,564
Kassel, Germany
This is the right decision for consumers, however I'm not sure if it is when it comes to Apple's bottom line. The 16 GB version pretty much forces people to move up to the 64 GB. A 32 GB would work just fine for a lot of people. Now the question remains will the starting price be the same or is that additional 16 GB going to cost people $100?

The way Apple marks up the price of memory you'd swear it was 1999.
I guess it'll be better for their bottom line, too.

“If you keep your eye on the profit, you’re going to skimp on the product. But if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow.”
-Steve Jobs

Glassed Silver:mac
 

Tech198

macrumors P6
Mar 21, 2011
15,916
2,148
Australia, Perth
It would be a little ironic if more people can finally store their entire iTunes music library locally on their iPhone, only to find they can't use their existing headphones to listen to any of it.


Yes... when u loose u'r phone there'd be pandemonium ... I can almost image that too, since people never keep backup's..

I'm happy with 16Gig for as long as Apple keeps selling the iPhone 6
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mactendo

pgiguere1

macrumors 68020
May 28, 2009
2,161
1,127
Montreal, Canada
Does anyone even get close to using up 256 GB's on a phone...? (4K recording aside obviously)

I have a 128GB iPhone 6. It's nearly full and most of my music is not stored locally.

If I had 256GB, I'd download my entire Apple Music library for offline playback. I have a small data plan so as it is, I disabled cellular playback for Apple Music which means 3/4 of my music isn't available when I'm not on Wi-Fi.

Of course it's nothing dramatic but I'd definitely consider the option, as it'd probably be cheaper in the long run than having to upgrade my data plan.

Also, Apple probably doesn't really care if the 256GB model doesn't sell that much. Part of why it's offered is due to the anchoring effect, a consumer psychology trick aiming to make the 128GB model look cheaper in comparison.
 

Mr. Dee

macrumors 68040
Dec 4, 2003
3,291
5,334
Jamaica
I have a 32 GB iPod Touch since 2009 and I have about 10 GBs of space remaining. Since I bought my 6s 64 GB, I haven't even bothered to sync my iTunes library to it. Partly because I already have the Touch and I mostly find and listen to music on Facebook. Can't use any of the streaming services out here because of my limited expensive data plans.

If Apple originally had a 32 GB model, that's what I would have bought, the 64 GB is overkill, but he 16 GB is just beyond ridiculous. Sucks that the iPhone 7 will finally have it, but maybe its for the best, since it might incur a price increase to justify the 32 GB increase. We don't know what the other trade offs might be.

At the end of the day, Tim is still head bean counter.
 

John Mcgregor

Suspended
Aug 21, 2015
1,257
1,485
Newport
If Apple raise BOTH base storage AND price, then it's time to say good bye to Apple hardware.
Time to end such insane profit margin.
We need to do more with less.
Indeed. It's just a phone at the end of the day and it seems they don't give two ***** about user experience, only like to talk about it in theory, but not act on it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.