New 4" iPhone With 12MP Camera Said to Cost $400-$500, iPhone 5s to Receive 50% Price Cut

[Max(IT)]

Move on indeed. How about move on down the page where you got the above battery test results. You know, past the results cited for battery life while only Web Browsing on Wifi (i.e., substantially limited-use case) to, say, the very next test - Web Browsing on 4G.

A little worse, certainly for the 6 and 6S (compared to the short list of other phones Anandtech uses here.) Or maybe just a wee bit further down past that, to the Basemark/GFX sustained load test, arguably more similar to actual real-world usage.

Now the 6 and 6s (which comprise about 80%-85% of that generation's phone sales, depending on whose numbers you believe) are looking markedly worse. Perhaps this is closer to the performance in the "parallel dimension" Nvizz22 and others are talking about, especially those who think 8 is far from the "perfect number" of hours that a modern smartphone should last on one charge. Those bothersome objective pragmatists!

Start including other phones and more real-world (dimension?) use cases, and the results are less rosy (rosy-gold?)

http://www.gsmarena.com/battery-test.php3
http://bgr.com/2014/09/22/iphone-6-vs-iphone-6-plus-battery-life/
http://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/smartphones-with-the-best-battery-life/
http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/7200-smartphones-best-battery-life.html
(just a few examples - different and more detailed sources can be found, if you look past what you want the results to be.)

In the parallel dimension I live in, for example, the battery life of that $749 iPhone was so disappointing that I returned it to T-Mobile after 2 weeks of use, at a monetary penalty to me, and bought a outdated, easily pocketable $249 LG G2 so that I wouldn't have to charge the battery more than once a day. And that is exactly what I had to do with the iPhone 6.

And I wanted to keep it.

I'm really, really hoping this SE phone is going to show better battery performance than the 6 and other "regular sized" iPhones, and I'm not going to be pessimistic, but based on the rumor of the 1642mAh battery, I'll still keep my fingers crossed... but I won't be holding my breath.

You can post all the chart you want, I'm still seeing the iPhone 6S performing comparably or better than Galaxy S6, LG G4, one plus one, Nexus 6 or Note 5, depending on the test.
And the iPhone 5S isn't so far...

 

[trifid]

Yes, I suppose there are some specialized vertical applications (like your car example... but even then, would it be hard to plug in a cable?).

What do you mean? Whatever pad you had you'd setup once (route cables or whatever), once that's done you don't have to deal with cables ever again.

 

[ValO]

Stop about these android phones. They are nice, and i like the look of the s7(except for the branding/sensors.)
But the specs? octacores, 8gb of ram, 20 mp, etc.
This is just spec, not user experience, and apple has the resources to advance in technology this in the next year or so, with the release of the iphone 7 and 7s.
Apple already caught up with the socs, they have a solid lead. Next stop: camera and water resistance .
They will also have an updated display and will up the res. Oled will probably still take the lead, but iphone 7+7s will get closer. In 2017/2018 apple will be in the lead due to microled tech.
Wireless charging? in 2017 apple will have " true" wireless charging. instead of a mat with a cable.

Apple had always been in the lead with IOS, safety and ecosystem, design and materials. Android phones have caught up, are not quite there yet though. Android phones compensated that with paper specs, or far more powerful hw to drive android at the same smoothness as IOS.
Apple is playing catch up in the specs and screen tech. But the problem is that only a few android players can compete(samsung, and a small chance for LG) with apple on that front in the future. If apple has caught up with better screen tech, wireless charging, camera, etc, a lot of the android phone manufacturers will only be a good option for budget phones, and won' t be high end anymore, they don' t have the same massive financial resources apple has. In the future perhaps only samsung or huaweij will be able too keep up, because they have decent margins and their own production/R&D departments. But that is it. It will be samsung or Apple in the high end(just like it is now), and the rest will be budget and pricefighters, get very low margins, perhaps won' t even make a profit.

In short:
The cheaper android have some things for them going now over the iphone, but in a few years that is finished.
They won' t be able too keep up with the more advanced technology, and they will have to reduce prices even further to compensate for that.They will need to lower their margins even further, and R&D expenses will be cut.

It will only be samsung and apple if you want real high-end phones in the future.
And we know which brand sells more high end/expensive phones now....

 

[SteveW928]

According to who? Leather seats and all that jazz. As long as there's enough space for the operating system, everything is fine.

You want apps? You want to take pictures or videos? Pay extra. Simple.

Umm.... doesn't that kind of miss the point of a smart phone? If I don't want apps, or to take pictures or videos, there are WAY cheaper options!!!

I think *most* people buying an iPhone would expect to be able to a) run upgrades (partly fixed by Apple now), b) install some apps, and c) take some pictures and video. Our point is that 16GB is pretty tight for this... too tight for an already quite expensive luxury product.

AND, a lot of people DO buy those entry level models who never thought of paying extra, as they figured even the base model should be reasonably good. Then, they are disappointed, which hurts the Apple brand.

So, to save a couple of cents.... or, run the up-sell game... Apple's damaging their long-term value. Real smart, huh?

 

[EightyTwenty]

Umm.... doesn't that kind of miss the point of a smart phone? If I don't want apps, or to take pictures of videos, there are WAY cheaper options!!!

I think *most* people buying an iPhone would expect to be able to a) run upgrades (partly fixed by Apple now), b) install some apps, and c) take some pictures and video. Our point is that 16GB is pretty tight for this... too tight for an already quite expensive luxury product.

AND, a lot of people DO buy those entry level models who never thought of paying extra, as they figured even the base model should be reasonably good. Then, they are disappointed, which hurts the Apple brand.

So, to save a couple of cents.... or, run the up-sell game... Apple's damaging their long-term value. Real smart, huh?

I agree. I'm just being a sarcastic prick.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Some people don't want leather seats in their car, or the biggest engine, or the fancy wheels. Those that do want the upgrades have to pay extra for those things.

I have 128GB ipad, and I have filled it up, but I have never run out of space on my phone. Why should anyone pay extra for space they don't need? If you need more space, buy more space.

Come on now. The same exact rationale can be used to say Apple should start making dumb flip phones, or 8GB iPhones. After all, some people don't need a retina display, or even a camera for that matter. Would you be happy if Apple started charging $100 extra for things that should really just already be there...?

Seriously, there's no excuse for a 16GB phone in the year 2016. On a phone with a 4K camera, you can fill up 16GB in literally a matter of minutes. That's unbelievable when all the other manufacturers are moving even their cheaper phones to 32GB.

It's always funny to me when people use that excuse, when the fact is that Apple could easily move it to 32GB for literally a matter of pennies. 16GB was fine....in the year 2011, but in the year 2016, there's simply no excuse for a $650 device to come with a ridiculous 16GB of storage.

It's simply a fact that if the situations were reversed, if Apple was the one selling 32GB base models and Samsung had been stuck on 16GB for FIVE years, most people on this forum would scream bloody murder about how awful Samsung is. But some people seem to think that no matter what Apple does they are awesome, even if it's actually just a bunch of clueless MBA school drones trying to increase margins for their Wall Street shareholders by robbing the Apple Koolaid drinkers blind. All this love for Apple really is becoming more of a religion than anything based in the reality of their products.

 

[nviz22]

It's clunky, vulnerable, poor-UI, etc. Kind of like Windows vs Mac from years ago. So, in terms of user-experience, it matters little to me what the hardware is. It could be 10x Apple's and cook breakfast for all I care and I'm still on iOS (for now). I also haven't paid serious attention to an Android device for a couple of years now, so like I said, I should try one again soon (but, I think just given my reading, my opinion isn't too far off).

That said, Apple has been making some hardware blunders lately, which I agree aren't acceptable. The low base model storage is bad marketing strategy (though easily solved with a bit of cash). The RAM, however, is a big problem. It's solved with brand-new models, finally, but has been an issue for anything not current since iOS 8 (and even a problem on some current models). That just wasn't the case prior to iOS 8, where Apple's devices performed as well or better with less RAM than the competition.

re: speakers - Yea, I just don't really use mine much, I guess. I've done audio work in the past, and have played in bands and such... I can't handle that poor of audio quality for more than a few minutes anyway. (Dual 'speaker' or not!)

Wireless charging is kind of like 3D TVs, a marketing gimmick. I charge my device once per day while I sleep. Plugging it in isn't hard at all. Unless this were some kind of Tesla-like charge it from *many* feet away kind of stuff, it's silly. And, if it were, I'd *NOT* want that in my house anyway!

Your perception is not the reality of Pure Android. Like I said, you might have experienced stuff like LG or Samsung. Those aren't known to be clean, lean, and efficient.
[doublepost=1456621763][/doublepost]

Better ... in your opinion.
I wouldn't use a Nexus 5X even for free, since it runs android and not iOS.


The discussion was about iPhone 5S battery life, so a chart from one year ago is reasonable. Btw that chart contain smartphones still quite popular like the M8, S5 or G3....

For $270 you can do more than you can do for $500 or more. That's more bang for your buck. There is no arguing that.

 

[SteveW928]

Your perception is not the reality of Pure Android. Like I said, you might have experienced stuff like LG or Samsung. Those aren't known to be clean, lean, and efficient.
[doublepost=1456621763][/doublepost]

For $270 you can do more than you can do for $500 or more. That's more bang for your buck. There is no arguing that.

I think it might have been Samsung. So, you're saying a Nexus? I could see how that might fix stuff like smoothness or bloatware... but the core OS, UI, etc. and such will still be the same. That said, Apple is quickly trying to ruin the UI, so the difference is probably becoming less and less as time goes on.

 

[trifid]

Some people don't want leather seats in their car, or the biggest engine, or the fancy wheels. Those that do want the upgrades have to pay extra for those things.

I have 128GB ipad, and I have filled it up, but I have never run out of space on my phone. Why should anyone pay extra for space they don't need? If you need more space, buy more space.

Leather seats sound costly yea...

16GB sounds costly... in 2007

9 years later? it costs pennies.

Horrible comparison.

Oh by the way, lets bring back 64GB Macbooks, you know, so Apple can profit more by forcing people to pay for 128GB.

Please.

 

[nviz22]

I think it might have been Samsung. So, you're saying a Nexus? I could see how that might fix stuff like smoothness or bloatware... but the core OS, UI, etc. and such will still be the same. That said, Apple is quickly trying to ruin the UI, so the difference is probably becoming less and less as time goes on.

Yeah, the Nexus has the quickest updates and the least hassle. With 2GB of RAM and a Snapdragon 808, the Nexus 5X provides a smooth experience. The OS itself isn't buggy at all. The UI looks great with material design from Lollipop, and it gives some features you don't have on iOS.

 

[Max(IT)]

Android goes for more than just specs. Dual speakers, water resistance, quick charge, wireless charging, etc are features that would serve the iPhone very well.

They can add all the gimmicks they like ... it still runs android and not iOS. Useless for me.

I think Microsoft did design a good mobile operating system but they were too late to the party and didn't get any developer support. IMO, it was a nice alternative to iOS and Android.

When Windows Phone 7 started, android wasn't so good. Android improved over the time, Windows lagged behind...
I don't trust them anymore.
I bought a Lumia 800, 520, 620, 925 and my current 1520.
No more...

Your perception is not the reality of Pure Android. Like I said, you might have experienced stuff like LG or Samsung. Those aren't known to be clean, lean, and efficient.
[doublepost=1456621763][/doublepost]

For $270 you can do more than you can do for $500 or more. That's more bang for your buck. There is no arguing that.

With a nexus 5X I would actually do LESS than on any iPhone , so there is a lot of arguing.

 

[trifid]

They can add all the gimmicks they like ... it still runs android and not iOS. Useless for me.

The point is at least hardware-wise, it proves it's possible to put such an impressive package together, and in a way it puts pressure on Apple to compete. This is a win/win for everyone.

 

[AppleScruff1]

When Windows Phone 7 started, android wasn't so good. Android improved over the time, Windows lagged behind...
I don't trust them anymore.
I bought a Lumia 800, 520, 620, 925 and my current 1520.
No more...

I don't trust them either, they could pull the plug on Windows mobile at anytime, and as sales have dwindled to nothing, I won't be surprised if it happens soon. I think they were on the right track to make a viable third mobile system. The lack of support by developers was a crushing blow too. There are so many common apps missing.

 

[Sea Bass]

A $225 iPhone 5s would be a steal. The 5s is still very fast and really only lacks NFC.

I'd considering buying a 64GB SE for $500-$600.

 

[KPandian1]

Or how about Apple rewarding loyal customers with a gift of 32 GB, and eat the difference with good will gravy? Yes, I know that's crazy talk, but it's something a company would do for it's "valuable" customers.

You want apps? You want to take pictures or videos? Pay extra. Simple.

The iOS itself consumes most of the 8GB space in models ear-marked so. Trying to run it on 4GB is pointless.

Apple is a profit making company that knows its run of profiting from the storage jump will come to end soon enough - another 3 or 5 years. The people who need the extra GB to carry around music, photo and video mega-files just pay and whine a bit - but they are already paying for the Apple experience, like all Apple product owners do. The others use the phones as just phones or trust their ability to have cloud access most of the time, which also costs money.

I am not holding my breath that Apple will offer removable storage like Androids are starting to do now.

 

[Abazigal]

What's stopping people from pretending the 16 gb model doesn't exist, and treating the 64 gb version as the entry level flagship at $399 on contract?

I did, and it means my 6S is priced at the same tier as a 32 gb 5s (and I went with the 64 gb model). It's still excellent value however I look at it.

 

[I7guy]

I think so. I think they did that more because a watch is a hard thing to elegantly build a port into. I don't think an iPhone will ever have zero ports (or at least I hope not). Yes, I suppose there are some specialized vertical applications (like your car example... but even then, would it be hard to plug in a cable?).



If you're coming from Windows without a point of reference, I'm sure you'll be quite happy with it for now. But, when you've come from where it once was, you'll start to see how it's slipping.



Why would you have to pay extra? As someone said before, the difference between 16GB and 32GB is cents for Apple. Just bump up the price by $5 if they have to keep the margins, and done.

The problem is that the *average* buyer *does* need more than 16GB. A better car analogy might be offering a model with hard plastic seats, an engine only capable of getting the car to 45 MPH, and doughnut-spare tires, and then charging $10k for the next model with cloth seats, an engine that can do 80 MPH, and real tires. And, if this were already seen as a luxury car, such an entry model would seem even more ridiculous.

The point isn't whether some can 'get by' or what the profit margin is, etc. The point is, what does the average buyer of a premium product need for a good user-experience?

Do you think IOS slipping? I came from IOS 4 and like the latest iteration very much.

 

[Keirasplace]

Move on indeed. How about move on down the page where you got the above battery test results. You know, past the results cited for battery life while only Web Browsing on Wifi (i.e., substantially limited-use case) to, say, the very next test - Web Browsing on 4G.

A little worse, certainly for the 6 and 6S (compared to the short list of other phones Anandtech uses here.) Or maybe just a wee bit further down past that, to the Basemark/GFX sustained load test, arguably more similar to actual real-world usage.

Now the 6 and 6s (which comprise about 80%-85% of that generation's phone sales, depending on whose numbers you believe) are looking markedly worse. Perhaps this is closer to the performance in the "parallel dimension" Nvizz22 and others are talking about, especially those who think 8 is far from the "perfect number" of hours that a modern smartphone should last on one charge. Those bothersome objective pragmatists!

Start including other phones and more real-world (dimension?) use cases, and the results are less rosy (rosy-gold?)

http://www.gsmarena.com/battery-test.php3
http://bgr.com/2014/09/22/iphone-6-vs-iphone-6-plus-battery-life/
http://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/smartphones-with-the-best-battery-life/
http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/7200-smartphones-best-battery-life.html
(just a few examples - different and more detailed sources can be found, if you look past what you want the results to be.)

In the parallel dimension I live in, for example, the battery life of that $749 iPhone was so disappointing that I returned it to T-Mobile after 2 weeks of use, at a monetary penalty to me, and bought a outdated, easily pocketable $249 LG G2 so that I wouldn't have to charge the battery more than once a day. And that is exactly what I had to do with the iPhone 6.

And I wanted to keep it.

I'm really, really hoping this SE phone is going to show better battery performance than the 6 and other "regular sized" iPhones, and I'm not going to be pessimistic, but based on the rumor of the 1642mAh battery, I'll still keep my fingers crossed... but I won't be holding my breath.

MAn, you should at least known what the hell you talk about, the reason the Iphone goes down fast in graphics test is BECAUSE IT DOESN"T THROTTLE. GOT THAT BUD. Look at the FPs those phones finish at and you'll get your clue.

 

[furi0usbee]

If you want to be able to have the "Apple experience" and use a product the way Tim wants you to use it, you need at least 2 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. I think that is the bottom end of today's (and beyond) smartphone. Enough profit is never enough however and they are holding on to 16 GB of storage as long as they can. I'd like to know the actual cost difference (for them) for 16 vs 32. Hell, I'd be ok to up the phone the cost of the storage, but don't gimp my device with 16 GB of storage.

 

[ValO]

Do you think IOS slipping? I came from IOS 4 and like the latest iteration very much.

There are Apple fans/users that just can' t handle change.
They want everything to stay the same.
Same look of the staled old iOS with green felt, old fashioned 2d look, less possibilities, still love the iPhone 4 design that is dated , think even 4 inch is too big, hate the iPhone 5 design, etc, etc.

They are even more conservative than the management of Apple .

I like the new look and the new possibilities that came with iOS 7,8 and 9 over iOS 6. What was better with iOS 6?

 

[Q-Dog]

What's stopping people from pretending the 16 gb model doesn't exist, and treating the 64 gb version as the entry level flagship at $399 on contract?

I did, and it means my 6S is priced at the same tier as a 32 gb 5s (and I went with the 64 gb model). It's still excellent value however I look at it.

Nothing is stopping them, except the desire to complain about not getting something for nothing.

 

[oldmacs]

e is. You can get yourself some 2012 technology at 2019 prices! After tax, it goes for $1,524.37

I paid $1200AUD in 2012 for the mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13, last year when Apple replaced that under AppleCare with a retina pro, I sold that and bought another classic mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13, and the baseline started at $1600, up $400 due to the exchange rate.

Crazy how 2012 tech sells for that much. Given that the 13 inch classic pro has sold so bloody well for nearly 4 years, I'm sure the profit margin continues to go up - I'm sure apple could have put a more recent processor in with all the cash made from selling outdated tech.
[doublepost=1456625893][/doublepost]

There are Apple fans/users that just can' t handle change.
They want everything to stay the same.
Same look of the staled old iOS with green felt, old fashioned 2d look, less possibilities, still love the iPhone 4 design that is dated , think even 4 inch is too big, hate the iPhone 5 design, etc, etc.

You assume that bigger screens are automatically better which is wrong. Different sized screens suit different people. I find anything over 4 inches too big. Some people find 4.7 too small - it's a subjective thing, not resistance to change.

Are people who like the iPad Air size over the iPad pro just people who can't "handle change"?
[doublepost=1456626056][/doublepost]

Nothing is stopping them, except the desire to complain about not getting something for nothing

There is a point where all tech gets outdated and things fall behind. 16Gb of storage is in that category. A 32 GB baseline iPhone would not make the experience any worse for anyone, yet would improve many people's experiences.

The thing is that not all of us can afford higher storage capacities. 16 GB has been standard for years, and it should no longer be.

 

[Q-Dog]

If you want to be able to have the "Apple experience" and use a product the way Tim wants you to use it, you need at least 2 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. I think that is the bottom end of today's (and beyond) smartphone. Enough profit is never enough however and they are holding on to 16 GB of storage as long as they can. I'd like to know the actual cost difference (for them) for 16 vs 32. Hell, I'd be ok to up the phone the cost of the storage, but don't gimp my device with 16 GB of storage.

You are welcome to purchase a device with more storage if you need it. My 5s with 16GB is working fine for my purposes today, which obviously disproves your opinion that all iphones need 32GB and 2GB of ram today.

This is exactly the same kind of crap that happened with the PC/Mac spec wars way before iphones were even invented. And Apple proved over and over that higher specs with a crap operating system meant nothing in every day use.

 

[ValO]

If you want to be able to have the "Apple experience" and use a product the way Tim wants you to use it, you need at least 2 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. I think that is the bottom end of today's (and beyond) smartphone. Enough profit is never enough however and they are holding on to 16 GB of storage as long as they can. I'd like to know the actual cost difference (for them) for 16 vs 32. Hell, I'd be ok to up the phone the cost of the storage, but don't gimp my device with 16 GB of storage.

Stop whining please, just get the 64 gb then.
You act like you don' t have a choice.
You do... Get the 64gb or get the cheaper 16gb or the generation before with more gb. Or...
It has always been this way with Apple .
The last 2 years, it even became a better deal. Instead of asking a 100 , for a 16gb increase, they ask a 100 for a 48gb increase.

iPhone 7 won' t change this.
Perhaps the iPhone 7 pro will start with 32gb.

 

[oldmacs]

What was better with iOS 6?

That it didn't stutter on new hardware. While I love the new design and features in iOS 7,8 and 9, I've found especially 8 and 9 don't graphically run completely smoothly even on new hardware.
[doublepost=1456626446][/doublepost]

What was better with iOS 6?

That it didn't stutter on new hardware. While I love the new design and features in iOS 7,8 and 9, I've found especially 8 and 9 don't graphically run completely smoothly even on new hardware.