Very disappointing (if these photos are legit) that Apple is going to equate the 4" size with "old cheap" model. Apple has become so concerned with attracting Android users that it has abandoned its own design rationale. As they've said themselves in the past, the 3.5"-4" phone width is the perfect size for one-handed use.
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.
Leaked Images Provide First Look at Purported Rear Shell of 'iPhone 6c'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe because it was either the second or third best seller at all of the major US carriers? Look it up.
Maybe because people actually like the 5c? My wife has a blue 5c and she won't get rid of it because she loves it so much. I kind of agree in way - as nice feeling as the aluminum of the 6/6+ is, that plastic had a kind of warmth and softness that is really attractive. It's also really durable - my wife has dropped hers a number of times over the past 2.5 years but it basically looks pretty close to new. I dropped my 6+ one time and it got a little dent in the bottom edge. If there had been a plastic variant of the 6/6+, I would have bought it in a heartbeat.
It will be interesting if Apple does in fact release this with a 2 generation old spec and lesser storage to then state that it's aimed at women as mentioned in a prior MacRumors post on it. I'm not exactly sure if Apple wants to say that women aren't deserving of a current spec or 128GB storage.
Maybe they can rename the iphone line to be consistent with the mac line and ipad line
iphone mini = 4" display
iphone air = 4.7" display
iphone pro = 5.5" display
Let's get rid of the numbers already. Like the mac just label them as the early/mid/late year edition.
I like the flattened naming approach.
iphone mini = 4" display
iphone air = 4.7" display
iphone pro = 5.5" display
Let's get rid of the numbers already. Like the mac just label them as the early/mid/late year edition.
I like the flattened naming approach.
it failed miserably the first time so why do they think the same won't happen again?
instead they should make the 4 inch model the s. not really looking forward to having a 4.7 inch phone
instead they should make the 4 inch model the s. not really looking forward to having a 4.7 inch phone
I suspect they would. After all, they did improve the radio in the iPhone 5C (it supported more LTE bands than the 5), so there is precedent for making other changes. That way, any new iPhone purchased after September 2015 would support Apple Pay, just in time for when many retailers in the US will be rolling out new card readers.
I think they should get rid of the 4" version. the small screen size hinders OS development, more screen estate means more place for experiments and innovation.
I'm most curious if this will have NFC and, if so, does that also mean it will have Touch ID. Is it more important to use those features as differentiators between the C line and the more premium phones or do they want the masses using ApplePay and the potential revenue that would generate?
Um, let's see:
- Still on contract and can't upgrade right now?
- Prefer the design/appearance of the 6C?
- Probable lower price point on the 6C?
Your opinion is not grounded by facts. If it didn't sell well, Apple would not be making it again. Clearly there is a market for it and this will be released annually on the S cycle. Get use to it.
If the internals are going to be exactly the same as the 5S then I agree, there's no point to making this phone. I have to imagine there's going to be something more, perhaps the 6's internals, to make this viable.
Where I disagree with you is the comment: "They're both 4 inch phones but one uses quality materials like aluminum. So silly". When did aluminum become such a "premium" material? Sure it's light but there are definitive advantages to using a quality plastic or polycarbonate material.
For one, it absorbs shocks better than aluminum and, when dropped, less of the kinetic energy is transferred to the glass.
Secondly, it doesn't need antenna bands; the signal can pass through any part of the housing.
Thirdly, it won't scratch or show wear as badly (in most circumstances). Let's remember how poorly the 5 held up to basic wear and tear.
Lastly, most iPhone users I see have their device - their aluminum (premium) device , in a plastic case. The irony is befitting.
Aluminum is a fine material. It doesn't, however, fit my definition of premium.
Just my $0.02 - to each their own.
That's really hurting the iPhone. They could do the antenna bands but it must be that plastic is cheaper.