Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Low-Cost iPhone to Use Plastic or Hybrid Plastic/Metal Design, Due in Late 2013
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry, iPhone sales still being record breaking say otherwise. This isn't about Apple trying to seduce buyers in existing markets, it's about opening new opportunities to grow for new markets/segments.
----------
Yeah, Steve would never have introduced things like an iPod Mini, a Mac Mini, an iPod Nano or an iPod Shuffle and especially not an Airport Express.
And he'd never have allowed anything to be made of plastic, not iMacs, not MacBooks, not Time Capsules, and especially in 2013, not Apple TVs, MacBook chargers/accessories.
I hate that my 2000$ Retina MacBook comes with a tacky, cheap 85w charger that feels like super crap. It should be made out of metal and glass and be elegant while it charges the device with class.
Wow, that's a great comment! 15 pages in and no one yet thought of this. Maybe it is a rumor about a low cost iPhone for the unsubsidized market like pre-paid or no contract subscriptions.
I can't believe winston1236 is the first guy to think about this, we should all be ashamed of ourselves.
I think you're far too engrossed in this rumour to the point where you have less to add to the conversation than every reply you are making just to tell everyone that they are wrong and you are right.
And because It's fun, I'll throw this in one more time. You can pick up previous gen iPhone's at $0 on a 3 year term.
Before you lose it, I understand where you are coming from in that Apple could make a boatload of money by creating an entry level iPhone for the masses. Also that a ton of their products, ie iPod Shuffle, and lower end MacBook Pro's are more geared toward the average consumer. But you need to stop and respect the opinions of others as well, especially when we are discussing a RUMOR and a rumor that an Apple Exec already went on the record stating that Apple would not be making sacrifices to create a lower end iPhone.
You're reading too much into my posts if you think that. I'm presenting arguments, based on facts and Apple's previous product lines and moves.
Just shows you don't even understand what the rumor is about.
It's not about Apple making a boatload of money. And I've already addressed how Phil Schiller didn't go on the record saying it won't come true. I've based this explanation in facts. Do you have something to add based on other facts or are you just going to dismiss everything I've typed ?
In the end, if you're not interested in participating in the discussion, why are you even reading the thread or the rumors ?
Then state your facts with some evidence of them. You keep saying you have all of these facts and that everything you say is true. This is a RUMOR site and unless you are one of the top Apple execs, then you have no facts or know what Apple actually intends on doing or why they intend to do it. And to state that you are basing this on Apple's previous product lines and moves further proves my point that you are merely speculating as opposed to presenting actual truth from Apple internal sources.
Not at all. I understand the rumour, I just wanted you to get all excited like you have been everytime anyone mentioned subsidized prices and contract terms.
Again with the "facts". At the end of the day, you don't know any more than anyone else on this website unless you work for the aforementioned company.
TBH I always did like the 3gs frame look. I can see them going with that early imac look and it being cool.
I have. Unless you mean to say that all my mentions of existing Apple products are pure figments of my imagination and that "iPod Nano" is just a rumor (even though I've owned several myself) ?
Address my actual arguments and we'll discuss, otherwise you're just producing noise here.
Preexisting products =/= Apple's internal business plan. Basing arguments on preexisting products is called speculation and educated guessing.
That is my point. You are no more right or wrong than any other person in this thread yet I've read most of your replies in this thread and in many cases you are only trying to point out how wrong a person is or that they didn't read the article.
How about letting other people put a simple comment in a thread about what their opinion/understanding of the article was before crapping all over it.
Exactly, I have made speculation and guesses based on existing product line-ups as backing (facts about Apple's past strategies). That's more to say than most people who have yet to even address my speculation, much less back theirs up with existing products/strategies/history.
Again, do you have anything to contribute before I move you to ignore here ? Other than you still don't get this isn't about a cheaper phone in the current subsidized market ?
iPhone 3Gs
I Love the iPhone 3Gs - I have version 5 but the form of the 3Gs is still the best imo!
I Love the iPhone 3Gs - I have version 5 but the form of the 3Gs is still the best imo!
I have a hard time buying this Selling old models cheaper is fine, but the tech is behind and on a ticking clock to get support dropped for new features.
A new cheap model more on par with the flagship current gen model could be attractive to some, but what would be missing? It just doesn't make any sense for Apple to do this.... unless.... they do what everyone else does.
You don't keep making your old model phone. YOu come out with flagship device (HTC One X, Galaxy S3), then release similar versions (One S, One H, S3 Mini, Galaxy something else etc) so that you're always putting out something new and fresh and staying current in the market.
Apple has always done this backwards of everyone else. It's great you can get a free iPhone 4, but I bet the new IOS' new feature set will barely support the 4.... the 3GS barely got an update this last round.
This is the only place I see a cheaper current gen phone making sense. Cheaper in build, display, but components that trump the old model enough to make it a viable purchase option. I don't see why you need the 4, 4S, 5, 5S when you end up with 4 devices that look like 2 different ones... blends into space... Really, apple needs to stop recycling a design on a phone for 2 years. It makes even a new device feel boring on it's second cycle, and an android phone look new and fun... which is why I bought one. I never felt like I had a new phone really.
I'm sorry, I was busy reading all of the other replies you've posted in this thread and how ridiculous they were. Back on page 2 or 3 another poster seemed to feel that you were trying to pick a fight. Then you started talking about your new red brick house and shiny new BMW.
Go ahead and ignore me, just get off your high horse and realize that you are on a rumours forum and everyone here is allowed to post in regards to what they read in an article and have the right to not be criticized by your end all be all correct answer.
Anywho, I'm done in this conversation in hopes that it took your focus away from other posters long enough to let them post replies without getting flack from you for being wrong.
Ok, since you feel my replies were ridiculous yet fail to say what was, why you think so, based on what history/current trends/facts, then I think we can't discuss anymore.
You just outright dismissed everything I said, without providing a counter point and you accuse me of posting and discussing essentially. You don't seem to have anything to contribute, aside from your misunderstanding you still can't admit so I'll simply ignore you and suggest others do the same.
Yes, just like Ford or Chevy do....
It's a shame they completely f* up the Ka design later on:
And then again:
And again:
It went from being a cool car from the future in the early 2000's to just another round shiny car with korean-style headlights.
Something tells me that people living in third world countries don't wake up in the morning thinking about how they are going to get an iPhone.
All those countries still have a middle and upper class, it's just a smaller proportion of the population.
Also, you don't think poorer people strive for status symbols?
Which third world countries are you referring to? Surely they aren't all the same...I mean which ones do you have direct experience with and have been to? My experience with South East Asian countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam etc does not line up with what you're saying.
I've met locals over there who barely have a pot to piss in, but who either have or want technology that they can't really afford.
----------
In my opinion the three pictures you posted look much better than the original.
----------
Says the person who hasn't really contributed anything to this thread.
All you've been doing is shooting people him but you haven't offered any reasoning behind your "opinion" nor have you offered any counter argument.
Your signature provides us with enough information as to why you wouldn't want Apple to target the third world though.
----------
Yea, god forbid Apple should want to target the more than 5 billion people that aren't Europe, North America, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Korea, Australia and New Zealand.
It may be plastic, but its a hell of a lot more durable for teens or people who have active jobs (construction, delivery, support) or just have butterfingers. The phone customer service people really don't seem to like the fancy "all glass" phones because they get a LOT more calls about them than the other phones. I think Apple has to cave and do a plastic chassis just to make the phone companies happy (the ones paying $300+ per phone)
I DON'T think it has to be lower spec. In fact I'd just put all the iPhone 5 (4S) pieces in a plastic chassis that protects the screen better and call it good.. Stuff like WiFi and cell Antennas would work BETTER in a plastic case too.
You are basically describing an old feature phone from circa 2000. Is Apple going to release a new portable audio cassette player next?
I'm not arguing that some people are perfectly happy with their clamshell phones, but it's a rapidly shrinking market and it's hard to imagine that an image-conscious company such as Apple would move into that market at this point.
It's called the iPhone 4
Already got one, and it's better than the 5 because you can jailbreak it.
Already got one, and it's better than the 5 because you can jailbreak it.
Thats some mighty presumtion. Microsofts only problem is not just a few fools at the top. But how Balmer even have a job there after making those hilarious iPhone predicitons back in the day is perplexing.
Not sure balmer is in charge of product design
Balmer runs the show so ultimately he must take responsibility for all that happens at MS; just as Jobs did. No, Balmer may not be the one not bringing stuff to the table, but again, he manages the company, all those employed therein and the future direction ... so how else will MS overtake Apple if he can't lead the business!
Cook isn't really a product guy, as Jobs is quoted as saying in his biography. I do have some concern that the supply chain mentality is not a great fit for the strategic vision. Jobs made people redo the circuit boards when they couldn't even be seen because it should be beautiful. He had walls of Pixar torn down because the brick pattern wasn't quite right. The how do we sell more for cheaper was Gil's style and standard business widget thinking it would seem. He saw cheap box, license models, and he didn't pursue it. His directive to his then COO aside, perhaps Tim Cook should ask "What would Steve do?".
Sure I did. But then again, the iPod Nano, their best selling iPod, is simply a PMP. And Apple sells it today in 2013. Again, just saying what could be a possibility.
----------
It's called the iPhone 4
The iPhone 4 is not low cost, it's over 450$.
Why don't they just bring back the 3G or 3Gs? Do some minor upgrades and you have a low-cost iPhone!