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

Kuo: Apple to Further Separate Devices in iPhone 15 Lineup With Different Features

TheYayAreaLiving 🎗 said:
As expected, Hopefully, iPhone Pro Max's next step is the Ultra Model. Apple, please introduce iPhone Pro Max Ultra featuring.. Titanium Frame Chassis.
Click to expand...
I honestly expect that, if Apple introduces a titanium body, it does it for all the Pro lineup, not for a giant Ultra model. The base 6.1” iPhone Pro is already too heavy to hold.
 
I wonder if there isn't a conspiracy with the MacRumors staff to make people who haven't even gotten their iPhone 14 in their hands yet feel like its already outdated.
 
Honestly the periscope lens is the long awaited feature but I will not buy iPhone Max even if it will be exclusive for. It’s just way to big for me. But as soon as any regular iPhone Pro gets it I will get it too.
 
Alpha Centauri said:
I agree partially but also, the overpriced Mini started being sold in Europe an entire month after the regular 12s become available. There was no actual information even on features at the time. Most had by then already ordered an iPhone.

Those who hadn't, well, there was the: And one more thing, for an extra €100 you get the ....

Well played on raising prices on the iPhone 12 there Apple. The 12, 13, now 14 and that's all past history anyhoo.
Click to expand...
The mini was $100 cheaper than the regular 12 and 13.

I haven’t heard a peep from anybody about the regular 12 or 13 being overpriced, so I’m not sure why everybody seems to think that a device with the exact same hardware for $100 less is somehow “too expensive.”
 
t0rqx said:
Yep. iPhone 15 is where it is at (the least). They will definitely stick with 2 year enhanced (*cough*old*cough*) silicons to the regular devices to upsell you to Pro with the newer silicons. Camera differentiation will be back. Colours exclusive for the Pro models. Do I dare to say that regulars will see smaller sizes and Pro max have bigger sizes. This 14-PLUS model will give people a taste of long battery life people hunger for in the near future, so they will use that for the Pro models.

Also the Pro's will get the new cooling engineering it now needs.

Back to the iPhone 7 strategy.
Click to expand...
The two year old cough processors are more than the vast majority of iPhone users will ever need even if they keep the device for 3 or 4 years.
 
CJM said:
This is just Apple trying to capture everyone's level of max spend.
Click to expand...
I really don’t think they’re doing a good job of it.

I spent $700 each on a pair of 13 minis last year for the size. I wanted the telephoto lens and ProMotion display, and would’ve gladly paid the 13 Pro Max price for it, and would have upgraded again this year to a new mini if there was one.

But they didn’t offer the 13 Pro in a reasonable size or a 14 mini, so Apple lost out on a consumer who would’ve easily spent an extra $1200 on better phones — if they offered them. People who want a cheap phone can buy the SE. They still haven’t made a reasonably sized flagship phone since the iPhone 7.

So instead of spending more money with Apple every year, I’ll be sitting on these 13 minis for years and Apple can miss the boat on consumers who’d be happy to part with their money if they offered an actual flagship mobile phone again.
 
xpxp2002 said:
I really don’t think they’re doing a good job of it.

I spent $700 each on a pair of 13 minis last year for the size. I wanted the telephoto lens and ProMotion display, and would’ve gladly paid the 13 Pro Max price for it, and would have upgraded again this year to a new mini if there was one.

But they didn’t offer the 13 Pro in a reasonable size or a 14 mini, so Apple lost out on a consumer who would’ve easily spent an extra $1200 on better phones — if they offered them. People who want a cheap phone can buy the SE. They still haven’t made a reasonably sized flagship phone since the iPhone 7.

So instead of spending more money with Apple every year, I’ll be sitting on these 13 minis for years and Apple can miss the boat on consumers who’d be happy to part with their money if they offered an actual flagship mobile phone again.
Click to expand...
Spot on. And once again expecting members here to chime in that just not enough people bought the Mini to justify its existence. It's funny though as everyone is paying $100 more since the iPhone 12, because of the Mini's existence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xpxp2002
xpxp2002 said:
I really don’t think they’re doing a good job of it.

I spent $700 each on a pair of 13 minis last year for the size. I wanted the telephoto lens and ProMotion display, and would’ve gladly paid the 13 Pro Max price for it, and would have upgraded again this year to a new mini if there was one.

But they didn’t offer the 13 Pro in a reasonable size or a 14 mini, so Apple lost out on a consumer who would’ve easily spent an extra $1200 on better phones — if they offered them. People who want a cheap phone can buy the SE. They still haven’t made a reasonably sized flagship phone since the iPhone 7.

So instead of spending more money with Apple every year, I’ll be sitting on these 13 minis for years and Apple can miss the boat on consumers who’d be happy to part with their money if they offered an actual flagship mobile phone again.
Click to expand...

Given how disappointing mini sales apparently turned out to be, most probably wouldn't have been willing to pay up like you.

Another way to look at is if they had offered a Pro version of the mini, they may have lost out on the added revenue from people who ended up paying the higher price for the larger phones to get the Pro features.
 
webkit said:
Given how disappointing mini sales apparently turned out to be, most probably wouldn't been willing to pay up like you would've.

Another way to look at is if they had offered a Pro version of the mini, they may have lost out on the added revenue from people who ended up paying the higher price for the larger phones to get the Pro features.
Click to expand...
Mini sales were disappointing because people had to choose between the size they wanted and the features they wanted, and most apparently ended up choosing the features by getting a Pro.

Nobody wants a compromise device. Had they offered a mini Pro at the same price point as the regular Pro, a lot more people would’ve opted for it.
 
xpxp2002 said:
I really don’t think they’re doing a good job of it.

I spent $700 each on a pair of 13 minis last year for the size. I wanted the telephoto lens and ProMotion display, and would’ve gladly paid the 13 Pro Max price for it, and would have upgraded again this year to a new mini if there was one.

But they didn’t offer the 13 Pro in a reasonable size or a 14 mini, so Apple lost out on a consumer who would’ve easily spent an extra $1200 on better phones — if they offered them. People who want a cheap phone can buy the SE. They still haven’t made a reasonably sized flagship phone since the iPhone 7.

So instead of spending more money with Apple every year, I’ll be sitting on these 13 minis for years and Apple can miss the boat on consumers who’d be happy to part with their money if they offered an actual flagship mobile phone again.
Click to expand...
You can probably imagine how incredibly small the market would be for a tiny device with pro features sticking out the back of it. Even if they charged full Pro Max prices they would probably lose money on the device.
 
MTD's Mac said:
So... periscope camera a 15 Pro Max exclusive?

Too bad, I don't think I can ever abide a phone that big...
Click to expand...
Well, then the only choice is to wait a year for the 16 Pro. TBH, going from 3x optical to 5x optical is not much of an incentive for me personally to wait until next year or 2024 for a periscope lens. USB-C is something I’m looking forward to more. I would rather get the 14 Pro and wait until the 16 Pro or 17 Pro to upgrade again.
 
planteater said:
You can probably imagine how incredibly small the market would be for a tiny device with pro features sticking out the back of it. Even if they charged full Pro Max prices they would probably lose money on the device.
Click to expand...
I’d have to disagree. The market for a non-pro mini is small because most people want a device with the best camera, best display, and full feature set. Not a compromise, gimped device with the good features omitted to keep the price low. That’s what the SE is, and its sales are always lower than the mainstream models.

The 6.1” regular and 6.1” Pro are a perfect case study of this. Two devices with different feature sets, but the same size. It’s pretty clear from third parties who study the sales of these devices that there’s a larger demand for the Pro devices over the the non-Pro models.

Apple screwed up by assuming the prospective mini customer wouldn’t be dissuaded by the mini lacking the newest features being put into the Pro models, and others have conflated that to mean that consumers don’t want a reasonably sized phone. They do — they just don’t want to compromise on features to get it.
 
xpxp2002 said:
Mini sales were disappointing because people had to choose between the size they wanted and the features they wanted, and most apparently ended up choosing the features by getting a Pro.

Nobody wants a compromise device. Had they offered a mini Pro at the same price point as the regular Pro, a lot more people would’ve opted for it.
Click to expand...

Given that many more people chose the regular size 12 and 13 over the mini sizes, it doesn't seem likely that too many would've preferred a mini Pro over the regular Pro but I guess we'll never know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: d686546s
xpxp2002 said:
The mini was $100 cheaper than the regular 12 and 13.

I haven’t heard a peep from anybody about the regular 12 or 13 being overpriced, so I’m not sure why everybody seems to think that a device with the exact same hardware for $100 less is somehow “too expensive.”
Click to expand...
There were many posts about the high cost of the Mini in the last two years. Actually they're ongoing as members hoped the price could be reduced with the iPhone14.

One can say the 12 Mini was $100 cheaper or the iPhone 12 only $100 dearer. I get that pricing was further differentiated not to damage SE sales. I did look it up once but I think since the first iPhone, there had only been one other time prices were raised by a whopping $100, instead of the usual $50.

I guess I'm also coming from the ludecrous EU pricing difference.
 
Alpha Centauri said:
There were many posts about the high cost of the Mini in the last two years.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what I’m referring to.

Everybody complained that the minis were “too expensive,” but nobody seemed to think that the 6.1” iPhone 12 or 13 was too expensive even though it was $100 more expensive and had the same hardware inside.

It doesn’t make sense that the less expensive device “costs too much” when nobody seems to think that the more expensive device with the same stuff inside costs too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back