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.
More Hints of an 'iPhone Nano' from Case Manufacturers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why would anyone be interested in an iPhone Nano? Who are they trying to reach with this rumored device?
Ok, here´s the deal
My wife loves my iphone , its interface , easy to use and found it very easy to type and send SMS .
She doesn't need Internet , or in that matter mail , just the basics , and more important , no monthly bill for something she doesn't really need .
A smaller iphone good enough to use it as an ipod , phone and SMS ?
yes bring it on.
I know tons of people who will buy it.
Saludos
My wife loves my iphone , its interface , easy to use and found it very easy to type and send SMS .
She doesn't need Internet , or in that matter mail , just the basics , and more important , no monthly bill for something she doesn't really need .
A smaller iphone good enough to use it as an ipod , phone and SMS ?
yes bring it on.
I know tons of people who will buy it.
Saludos
yeah what ^^^^^ they said.
Its a phone if you feel it will devalue your iphone may I suggest investing in something like gold or real estate instead.
Ok just look at that picture, imagine the iPhone nano in your hand and then imagine trying to do pinch in and pinch out. It just seems unrealistic. I think this one isn't coming to fruition sorry guys.
everyone who does not want to pay a couple of grands over 2 years. they should just sell this unlocked, as a basic gsm phone.
wonder how many of you will eat your words though
I think smaller is better, but it has to be just as functional and run the same programs. Maybe it will flip open and the screen actually end up larger than the original iphone. some good speech recognition software would make things run smoothly too. Can't wait to see it.
Completely agree. Especially with development, how would apps work on this little piece of sh*t? Seriously folks, put this rumor to bed... now!
I hope it is a flip phone with two screens that allows the two screens to work as one in vertical or horizontal mode.
Business wise it does make sense. As a product expands in marketshare it seems only right to make cheaper models with less features and more expensive models with more - just look at the iPod.
I think another model of the iPhone may come in time, but probably not in a "nano" format, and there probably won't be profound differences.
Are you smoking or snorting some type of drug right now? Seriously? Please read what you just wrote and think about the unlikelihood of this product ever coming out.
Good luck with that, never gonna see this product... at least in this form factor.
What if Apple simply managed to get a high density screen that has the same number of pixels as the current iPhone/iPod touch in just a smaller area?
What if some of the other internal components got a smaller too, and they were able to cram them into a smaller form factor?
Why can't this just be the next gen iPhone? Why does it need to be a new product altogether?
What if some of the other internal components got a smaller too, and they were able to cram them into a smaller form factor?
Why can't this just be the next gen iPhone? Why does it need to be a new product altogether?
Most of the people who are against the concept of an iPhone Nano are actually against a miniaturized iPhone that attempts to do all the same things as the existing 3G. They see this as a road to failure.
It's like a company that sells a luxury SUV, who announces a low-end hatchback. Can you imagine all the people jumping around saying, but, you can't fit as much people and stuff in there! We'll all be squished!
Well, if you need an SUV, buy an SUV, and if you need a hatchback, buy a hatchback, but don't sneer at the other group for their choice, and don't sneer at the very concept because you believe that it won't fit YOUR needs.
How about people who want a basic flip or candy-bar style phone that syncs contacts and calendar items very well, are willing to leave the apps for their iPod Touch, don't want huge monthly bills, and want to be able to put their phone either on a PAYG or on a basic monthly plan.
I'd call that a BIG market.
I just bought a cdn$70 basic flip phone for a PAYG plan. I would have been willing to drop $90 for a really good basic phone with good synching.
People who want a basic phone that doesn't suck. That's who would be interested.
Two months and I still haven't finished copying all my contacts over, manually, one-by-one, to my new phone.
It's like a company that sells a luxury SUV, who announces a low-end hatchback. Can you imagine all the people jumping around saying, but, you can't fit as much people and stuff in there! We'll all be squished!
Well, if you need an SUV, buy an SUV, and if you need a hatchback, buy a hatchback, but don't sneer at the other group for their choice, and don't sneer at the very concept because you believe that it won't fit YOUR needs.
How about people who want a basic flip or candy-bar style phone that syncs contacts and calendar items very well, are willing to leave the apps for their iPod Touch, don't want huge monthly bills, and want to be able to put their phone either on a PAYG or on a basic monthly plan.
I'd call that a BIG market.
I just bought a cdn$70 basic flip phone for a PAYG plan. I would have been willing to drop $90 for a really good basic phone with good synching.
People who want a basic phone that doesn't suck. That's who would be interested.
Two months and I still haven't finished copying all my contacts over, manually, one-by-one, to my new phone.
Well i don't know if this is coming out nor does anyone, but i might be in the minority when i say that $70 a month is a lot to pay for an iphone bill. The cost of the phone isn't a big deal but when you add $70 onto a bill that is already $170, that gets really expensive. I just wish they could release something, whether is be smaller or something different, that could have wifi+ipod+phone, without a huge monthly fee, maybe something like they charge for blackberry fees ($30/Month).
Something like that would be much more appealing to someone like me, who really just can't afford the monthly bill.
Something like that would be much more appealing to someone like me, who really just can't afford the monthly bill.
I'd take anything from Apple that would work on Sprint. I'm actually sort of hoping this is something more like the nano and less liek the iPhone. A 2.5" screen with some sort of basic keypad below it where the touch wheel is now. I was actually thinking they could do something very innovative with the keypad by basing it on the multitouch system in the MacBooks. Basically, I'm thinking have a regular iPod LCD screen on top, covered with a piece of glass like the iPhjone/Macbook touchpad all the way to the bottom of the screen and underneath it, below the 2.5" screen, have a little e-paper type display that changed based on the mode the phone was in. Scroll wheel when it was in iPod mode, a phone keypad in phone mode, a hybrid keypad/keyboard when in text message mode, etc.
Sell them unlocked, with a version for both ATT/TMobile and Verizon/Sprint for $149-249 depending on memory and exact feature set and they'd be golden. I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
It's not the device price. The iPhone doesn't really cost $199. It's more like $400 or $500, when you factor in the chunk ATT is paying to Apple for locking the device to their network. The point of a more limited iPhone nano would be to open the iPod market up to people who either don't need a smartphone, or don't need a data plan, or have a carrier/contract they are happy with. The point would be to build a phone that was cheap enough to sell at the ~$200 point without carrier subsidies.
They won't, it 1) wouldn't look as good, and 2) wouldn't be as functional
Ummmm, battery life would be less than half a day and the phone would be of less quality. No, this isn't happening! Put it to bed, please!
When the iPhone was just a twinkle in the rumour mill's eye, all the photoshoppers were churning out mockups that were basically responses to the question "What would an iPod look like if it had a phone in it?"
They were creative, yes, but essentially shortsighted. Nobody seemed to comprehend the possibility that it might be very different from an iPod. That maybe it was not an iPod with a phone in it, but rather a SMARTphone with an iPod in it.
Now, you say "iPhone Nano", and all the shortsighted pundits say, "It's like an iPhone, but smaller! That won't work at all!"
Stop trying to miniaturize the existing device, and think about what mobile market segments need to be filled, and how Apple might fill them. Then we can probably discuss this without freaking out about how a miniature iPhone won't work.
They were creative, yes, but essentially shortsighted. Nobody seemed to comprehend the possibility that it might be very different from an iPod. That maybe it was not an iPod with a phone in it, but rather a SMARTphone with an iPod in it.
Now, you say "iPhone Nano", and all the shortsighted pundits say, "It's like an iPhone, but smaller! That won't work at all!"
Stop trying to miniaturize the existing device, and think about what mobile market segments need to be filled, and how Apple might fill them. Then we can probably discuss this without freaking out about how a miniature iPhone won't work.