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.
[Merged] "iPhone nano" Launched for Christmas 2008 Season?
- Thread starter bensparrow
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed. Although I would buy a well designed apple phone with similar features and dimensions as the Sony W890i. Maybe a simpler UI similar to iPod classic style, i wouldnt even mind a physical keypad for that, infact id prefer a physical keypad anyway personally. Have the iPhone as the "flagship" and a more "normal iPhone"... its late, so sorry if that didnt make much sense!
or bundled with 1GB flash memory (for OS) and one slot for microSD cards (for Apps)
This rumor kinda makes sense in this reguard:
Apple is aggressively targeting businesses as 3G customers.
The 3G is due for a mid-cycle RAM bump in Jan.
So...
Come out with a smaller phone, free w/ new line of service or contract, and w/o the data services capability other than the iTMS store (but not the app store). It would just a traditional phone (voice, text, iPod, iCal) w/ a regular voice only plan. Call it the iPhone nano. Make a pink version. The chicks will dig it.
Then in Jan launch a 32GB iPhone 3G and rename it the iPhone Pro 3G or just the iPhone Pro.
Now you have a clear product delineation, one with "pro" features, one with basic consumer features and price points to suit everyone.
Apple is aggressively targeting businesses as 3G customers.
The 3G is due for a mid-cycle RAM bump in Jan.
So...
Come out with a smaller phone, free w/ new line of service or contract, and w/o the data services capability other than the iTMS store (but not the app store). It would just a traditional phone (voice, text, iPod, iCal) w/ a regular voice only plan. Call it the iPhone nano. Make a pink version. The chicks will dig it.
Then in Jan launch a 32GB iPhone 3G and rename it the iPhone Pro 3G or just the iPhone Pro.
Now you have a clear product delineation, one with "pro" features, one with basic consumer features and price points to suit everyone.
I think an iPhone nano is inevitable.
PowerMac > iMac
PowerBook > iBook
iPod > iPod mini
iPhone > iPhone nano
It's how Apple always does things. Create a premium product in a new market, and when it starts to get really popular, release a cheaper, smaller version, and watch profits soar.
I expect an iPhone nano would come in 4/8GB sizes, costing £149/$279 and £179/$349 on Pay As You Go or free with a Contract. In terms of features, it will basically be a touch screen nano with a built in phone. But no Wi-Fi.
PowerMac > iMac
PowerBook > iBook
iPod > iPod mini
iPhone > iPhone nano
It's how Apple always does things. Create a premium product in a new market, and when it starts to get really popular, release a cheaper, smaller version, and watch profits soar.
I expect an iPhone nano would come in 4/8GB sizes, costing £149/$279 and £179/$349 on Pay As You Go or free with a Contract. In terms of features, it will basically be a touch screen nano with a built in phone. But no Wi-Fi.
I think I can say with 100% certainty that it will not resemble any model Audi or any other make for that matter in form or function.
why would they do this? the iphone is already priced cheap at 199 and 299 (plans are different story)...the nano iphone can't be better than the iphone itself, so your going to pay what 100, for an iphone with half the features...what's the point?
and I will flip if they do this and it has video conferencing!!!
and I will flip if they do this and it has video conferencing!!!
why would they do this? the iphone is already priced cheap at 199 and 299 (plans are different story)...the nano iphone can't be better than the iphone itself, so your going to pay what 100, for an iphone with half the features...what's the point?
and I will flip if they do this and it has video conferencing!!!
Why? Because not everyone cares about the data features, they just want a good, cool phone. For some (believe it or not) the iPhone is overkill and the rate plans make it unaffordable.
A nano that is free w/ contract and only $40 a month for voice might interest people (chicks, for example) who have zero interest in the full fledged iPhone but would love a phone w/ iPod, iCal, camera, and txt. Apple has already blown up the smartphone category. Time to go after the regular cellphones.
I don't know about "nano" but I think this will definitely happen in some form or another, as Apple could make a killing with an abbreviated iphone.
I know lots of people, including myself, that want an iphone but don't need many of its features, like the internet everywhere they go (especially at the outrageous costs).
These people are looking for a quality phone that doesn't require every feature.
I know lots of people, including myself, that want an iphone but don't need many of its features, like the internet everywhere they go (especially at the outrageous costs).
These people are looking for a quality phone that doesn't require every feature.
I just can't wrap my mind around having a smaller screen.
So much functionality would be lost.
The beauty of the iPhone is that you can do so much with such a small device.
So much functionality would be lost.
The beauty of the iPhone is that you can do so much with such a small device.
I think everyone forgets that the original iPhone done with motorola was a flop.
Why would they want round 2 of that crap. I seriously doubt they will kill their flagship product now with a stripped down version, but I have been wrong before....
What makes the iphone great is its mobile safaripad like qualities not that it can play music. I do not even bother to load much music onto the iphone anymore... just stream it.
Its great that so many users are showing enthusiasm for this thread but as a request from everybody.... please do not disrupt the thread's mood by using super sized fonts and emboldening them!
Thanks
Apple Ink
P.S.: It would be highly appreciated if users would themselves edit their posts to reflect this!
Thanks
Apple Ink
P.S.: It would be highly appreciated if users would themselves edit their posts to reflect this!
I think everyone forgets that the original iPhone done with motorola was a flop.
I seriously doubt they will kill their flagship product now with a stripped down version, but I have been wrong before....
What makes the iphone great is its mobile safaripad like qualities not that it can play music. I do not even bother to load much music onto the iphone anymore... just stream it.
again, not everyone needs internet everywhere they go
disable the feature and the data plan requirement and they'll sell even more because for a lot of people features aren't as important as quality
THEN REMOVE THE OPTION.
Give us technology at our use and we'll use it. If you or the sight don't want it used then REMOVE IT. Don't blame the User for the forums oversight.
Looks exactly the same as AppleInsider. Remove it there if you don't want it used
Sorry forgot the smiley face to make everything all right with Apple putting out Crap with 2.0, Mobile Me and advertising Push everthing when it has an unstable Mobile Phone release and even worse "Apple Cloud" that charges $99.00 a year for what Google supplies for FREE.
IS THIS SIGHT DOUBLE DIPPING WITH AD CLICKS? SAME CHAT FORUM SAME ARTICLES. SEEMS A BIT ODD.
IF I ADVERTISED HERE OR ON MACRUMORS I'D WANT ANSWERS OR IS THE APPLEINSIDER, I GET CONFUSED.
CLICK, CLICK, CLICK, CLICK. Same story as Apple, get Rich and forget the users.
Why would anyone want a version of the iPhone that has less functionality? If you just want it for a calendar, an MP3 player, and a phone, and don't care about the app store or Safari, I don't see the point of getting it. Sure it looks nice, but the large screen even by itself is what MAKES the iPhone. A smaller version that lacked support of these keystone features would be crippled in the worst sense of the word.
However, if it had the same functionality as it's big brother but used a pay-as-you-go plan, I could actually afford it. $70 a month for phone and internet is the going price for most carriers, and it's just not worth it for me.
However, if it had the same functionality as it's big brother but used a pay-as-you-go plan, I could actually afford it. $70 a month for phone and internet is the going price for most carriers, and it's just not worth it for me.
Could anyone else see the iPod touch merged in and become something else? I would expect an iPhone nano would cannibalize the touch sales a bit...
Don't forget the rumored Mac nano.
How about a cheap iPhone nano with a cheaper contract (≈ $1000)?
Haven't you seen the rumors on the front page? A flood of stuff involving Macs, iPods, and this mystery product transition that seems to involve the Mac.
I really don't see the point of having a smaller iPod. What would it accomplish?I really dont see the point of having a smaller iphone. What would it accomplish?
I'm going to blame McDonalds because I ate their cheeseburgers and that made me fat.
But seriously, is there a good reason to have large font sizes on these forums?
exactly. 70 bucks a month is absurd. I would gladly pay for a well designed phone with intuitive features that didn't lock me into a plan that would take the possibility of my kids going to college away.
I'll point out the very obvious fact you're missing here. They could send them home to activate via iTunes AT HOME because there was not requirement in the iPhone hardware to activate the phones in the store. The only reason why it was "required" was because it was a way to keep people in the store to make sure they sign their contract before leaving with the phone. If you got outta the store with a sealed iPhone you could activate it at home with no problems, you just needed a sim card, which I believe every iPhone came with, if not, you could use your existing sim card.
As a PC user I don't see the need for Macs...why do they need to exist? Oh that's right...because my opinion is not the only one that matters.
Just because you don't see the need for one doesn't mean there isn't a market for one. Some people like small phones...the smaller the better. I'm not one of them...my old phone is about as small as I'd ever want to get...the iPhone is just about perfect, but I do know that others are happy with smaller phones.
Not true. What makes the iPhone is its ease of use and simple syncing with our computers in applications we already use.
I want to be able to plug in my phone for charging, and while I do so, I want it to copy in all of the new changes I've made to my iCal. I want to be able to easily take notes in my phone. My current phone HAS a calendar, and HAS a place to take notes, but it isn't nearly as beautiful as the iPhone, nor does it sync with iCal.
You are SERIOUSLY parochial if you think the only reason people are interested in the iPhone is its safari features.
For the third and last time:
A phone's quality, not features, is important to many buyers.
And I agree concerning the smaller screen.