Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think Apple is really straying from the formula that made them successful, if these reports are accurate (a big "If"). I agree with a previous comment that they would be better served with a 4" model with specs in line with more recent releases. The bigger issue I see is they are slowly expanding the product line to be confusing and complicated; the simplicity of their product mix was a key to their success and reputation for quality products.

Most people don't pay attention to differences in model specs. If they sell a bunch of 4" phones that have 2014 specifications in 2016, the general public will view the iPhone as inferior and outdated. That in turn will eventually hurt the overall brand. I bet there's a huge pool of potential customers for a 4" iPhone, but why does that have to be outdated technology?

Why not release a 4" phone that's simply 6 month's behind the flagship models? So the 2016 4" model (call it the 6C-s) would have similar specs as the 2015 6S. You can shave some cost with the smaller display, and perhaps keep the RAM and storage options to the low end if needed.

I would think the real profit for Apple will eventually come from ApplePay, Apple Music and other services related to IOS. As such getting a newer iPhone in the hands of people who do not want a larger phone is key.
 
I think this rumor leaked to take the focus away from the negative publicity the headphone-less iPhone 7 has received. This iPhone 5e or whatever they call it, can't possibly have these specs, unless the "e" stands for emerging markets. In which case Apple wants to get into India & China badly. That's not thinking different, that's "thinking like every other manufacturer".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Another vote here for the 4" phone as "normal" -- for people who prefer 4" phones! I'm keeping my 5c until I see this thing hit the marketplace and then I'll probably go for it. I've handled the 6s and its Plus version and I don't like one-handing the 6s and I dislike the heft of the larger one since I don't get having a "phone" that's practically a tablet when I already have an iPad and an iPad mini. Apple would not be putting this updated 4" phone out there unless there was a market for it. I'm part of that market and happy to realize that we've been heard by Apple's designers.
 
I guess the more the merrier, when it comes to form factors.

Will have to see how this plays out and see how big the market really is for a smaller phone.

That should be "Will have to see how this plays out and see how big the market really is for a smaller phone with borked specs".
 
"4 Inch Fanboys" I think you should be banned from the internet for using the term "fanboy" to describe anyone that likes something you don't unless you're under the age of 15.

Just a bit of banter, calm down. Besides I don't see why everyone is complaining, it was never going to be a flagship device. Why not buy the 6s, we are literally talking about a .7 inch difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LiveM and SirCheese
It will very likely perform as fast as the iPhone 6s due to it having to push fewer pixels.

The iPod Touch 6 outperformed the iPhone 6 despite having a 1.1GHz A8 vs the iPhone 6's 1.4GHz A8. If the iPhone 5e has a 1.4GHz A8 it will be around the same perceived speed as the 6s.

Skip to the 4 minute mark.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat and vmistery
Mainly because they haven't got the engineering ability to fit everything they do in the massive handset into a smaller frame. You'd think this is where Apple, with its wizardry, years of making powerful 4" flagship phones and money could succeed. Seems they just don't want or need to though.

It's really just the camera that I wish were at least as good as the 6S. They don't need to perform any wizardry to fit the camera in.

But considering we still have 16GB default iPhones this shouldn't come as any surprise.
 
Why is it so hard for you to understand that Apple doesn't do that in any of their products. Apple always equates a larger screen with higher end specs. They do it with the iMac, with the Macbook Pro, with the iPad, with the iPod, and with the iPhone. I can't think of a single instance in the last 20 years of Apple ever giving a smaller screened device equivalent specs to a larger one. Maybe the 12/14" iBook? I'm not saying it's right; I'm saying it's the way they do things, and they aren't likely to change.

Except it hasn't got anything to do with screen size and everything to do with product size. Engineering the same power on a smaller scale is a lot more difficult and expensive.

Apple COULD make an 4" iPhone with the same specs as the 6s, but they'd have to charge a lot more than the 6s costs to do it. And then this forum would all be going "OMG YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR A SMALLER SCREEN" not understanding just how much more difficult the internal industrial design would need to be to get the same things in a small device.

The fact that everyone, including you, seems to measure a device's value based on screen size alone just proves Apple will never ever do this as no one will get it.
 
When there is so much hate, it is clear most people do not like this development.

Apple must not sell this phone. They just want to sell off their unused iPhone 6 inventory in guise of a new phone.

It better have 2 GB RAM or it would be DOA just like Apple Watch. Only extreme die hard fans or collectors would buy it.

It will compete poorly with Samsung Galaxy S7
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
This is one area where they copy Android phones and shouldn't. Why do all manufacturers insist on using low end specs for small phones?

Because that is what smaller screened phones are today... Low end phones.

The phone needs a smaller battery to fit in the smaller body. They'll have a lower number of pixels because they don't need as many on the screen, and you can only put so many specs in for a lower price point.

Just face the facts, the smaller screen phones aren't in high demand as much as the small phone lovers think they are.
 
It's really just the camera that I wish were at least as good as the 6S. They don't need to perform any wizardry to fit the camera in.

But considering we still have 16GB default iPhones this shouldn't come as any surprise.

Incorrect, part of the good camera specs are down the software processing which takes a step up each year with the least "A" chip that can do more. To match the 6s it would likely need a 6s chip or get terrible performance. Everything has a knock on effect in industrial engineering, its not just a case of "all they need to do is plug this part in here"
 
  • Like
Reactions: LiveM and nordique
Why is it so hard for you to understand that Apple doesn't do that in any of their products. Apple always equates a larger screen with higher end specs. They do it with the iMac, with the Macbook Pro, with the iPad, with the iPod, and with the iPhone. I can't think of a single instance in the last 20 years of Apple ever giving a smaller screened device equivalent specs to a larger one. Maybe the 12/14" iBook? I'm not saying it's right; I'm saying it's the way they do things, and they aren't likely to change.
The iPad mini 2 had the same specs as the iPad Air, and its smaller screen size meant the iPad mini 2 actually had a higher ppi.

It was only recently that Apple seems to be positioning the smaller-screened devices as he budget option, or there to upsell the larger, more expensive alternatives.

I can understand only the 15" MBP sporting a dedicated graphics card due to space constraints. I can understand a larger iPhone having more space for a larger battery. What I don't understand is why a smaller iPhone can't have the same 2 gb of ram and A9 processor. Charge the same price as the iPhone 6S. I am sure there is no shortage of people willing to pay for one, and it would prove no less profitable.

As it is, I am not convinced iOS 9 can run all that well on 1 gb of ram, so this phone is basically relegated to the same fate as the iPhone 6.

Heck, at least give it 2 gb of ram like they did with the iPad mini 4?
 
I just want a iPhone 6 in the 5S size with a better battery. I'm just fine with the 5S case. Also add the better LTE bands so T Mobile extended range works.

... And how do you purpose Apple does that? Making a smaller overall device with better battery life?
 
  • Like
Reactions: acidsoul
A normal sized device is subjective... But the norm for phones is over 4" so this wouldn't be a normal sized device because it seems that devices this size are not popular any longer
 
16GB...

I hope the iPhone 7 starts with 32GB at least.
That will never happen... That would cannibalize the rest of the lineup. Tell the MILLIONS of people to stop purchasing the 16GB and you'd have something. But the one percent of one percent who complain here on MacRumours will not change Apple's business model,,, especially when it costs them a quarter to raise the storage from 16 to 64. Say it all you want...
 
Just face the facts, the smaller screen phones aren't in high demand as much as the small phone lovers think they are.

Incorrect, the demand is there, the profit margins aren't - the engineering is more difficult and Apple would have to charge MORE for a 4" phone with the same specs as the 6s where its much easy to put all that stuff.

Larger phones are much easier to make, which is the primary reason Samsung started getting bigger and then passed it off as "offering larger screen sizes for the customer" its just lazy engineering - but everyone is blinded by screen sizes so its irrelevant really.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.