Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

No 32GB iPhone 6s

pokerplayer73 said:
Actually, last time they bumped the base storage capacity was with "S" update - 3GS. It was with 3GS that the base capacity was set to 16 GB. Before that 3G was released with 8GB base capacity.
Click to expand...
Ah, I wasn't aware of that, thanks for letting me know. The 3GS was the one I skipped over and stayed with my 3G until the 4. I still think Apple is happy with the 16GB base model as it has larger profit margins than the 32GB as a base model would. Also with rumors of a possible 2GB ram, I would think Apple would attempt to cut corners somewhere and I could see that by keeping the same storage capacity options.
 
I am still planning on going 64, but I told myself that if Apple made a 32 GB 6s I might consider that over 64. Oh well, 64 it is again.
 
noles1983 said:
or we realize its 2015 and 16gb is pathetic for a $700 phone when Apple is recording record profits year after year?
Click to expand...
The unfortunately reality is that it's not all that pathetic for many of the typical iOS users who don't really use their devices for that much as far as storing something on them or installing many apps (especially larger sized ones). It's certainly becoming less and less so, but still likely enough out there.
 
After about 28 months I have 4GB out of 16GB left, but I don't take many photos. Music and Tapatalk cache seem to be the big space consumers, followed by 25-30 apps which have gotten steadily more bloated with time.

If Apple can reduce the iOS footprint and App thinning really reduces needed space, 16GB might be enough.

With the current iOS 8 space requirements and bloated apps, 16GB on a new phone now is a joke.
 
Apple has no incentive to offer larger than 16 GB - they want you locked into subscriptions for Match, iCould and Radio
 
I think Apple will keep the current iPhone price tiers but alter their pricing plan for iCloud storage to stay competitive in that market. If you are able to get more iCloud storage for less per month, you may not need more than a 16GB phone.
 
Shanghaichica said:
People who complain are those that want more than 16GB of space but are too stingy to pay the extra. So they moan because they want 32GB for the price of 16GB.
Click to expand...

Those people are paying $650 (plus tax) for a mobile phone. A mobile phone, which has several cheaper alternatives for similar features. If you're buying a flagship Apple product, I don't think you fall into the "stingy" category. Call it moaning, but I say they have every right to.

All about voting will the wallet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pokerplayer73, ABC5S and perkedel
Hexiii said:
That's exactly why people get mad, they have to spend $100 more for their phone to be usable for a while. Including me; if the base option was 32GB, I'd go for that, but there's no way I'll get by with 16GB, therefore I "have to" buy 64GB.
Click to expand...

I was thinking there was going to be a 32GB 6s as the base but I do not understand why people are pissed at this. With the 5s you would have spent $750 for 32GB when the phone was new, but for that same price that you would have paid anyway back then, you are now getting double the storage.

Either which way I would have bought a 32GB 6 Plus had they sold it last year at $850, but I like the 64GB now because it does give me more room for TV shows which is nice and I spent the same amount as I was planning to anyway. The only people who are pissed are the ones who don't want to pay the extra $100 for a storage bump that they would have paid for anyway 2 years ago, or the ones that paid the extra $100 but felt ripped off because they paid the same amount they would have anyway for 32GB. The argument makes no sense.

TLDR: People would have paid the additional $100 for 32GB 2 years ago, only difference now is you get double the storage in the middle tier for the same price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wmdunn
iamMacPerson said:
I was thinking there was going to be a 32GB 6s as the base but I do not understand why people are pissed at this. With the 5s you would have spent $750 for 32GB when the phone was new, but for that same price that you would have paid anyway back then, you are now getting double the storage.

Either which way I would have bought a 32GB 6 Plus had they sold it last year at $850, but I like the 64GB now because it does give me more room for TV shows which is nice and I spent the same amount as I was planning to anyway. The only people who are pissed are the ones who don't want to pay the extra $100 for a storage bump that they would have paid for anyway 2 years ago, or the ones that paid the extra $100 but felt ripped off because they paid the same amount they would have anyway for 32GB. The argument makes no sense.

TLDR: People would have paid the additional $100 for 32GB 2 years ago, only difference now is you get double the storage in the middle tier for the same price.
Click to expand...

I think your reasoning is exactly why people get pissed though. When technology advances, previous tech becomes cheaper, obviously.

That's why, like you said, 32GB was doubled to 64GB for the same price. 64GB was doubled to 128GB for the same price. So following that logic, why can't 16GB be doubled to 32GB for the same price? The answer is that it can, but Apple knows that the iPhone will sell just as well whether it does or not.

I personally think it's just plain silly that a flagship, $650 device has such a low amount of storage, and are the last flagship smartphone maker to still hang on to that low amount. True, not everyone needs a ton of storage, but why design "the most advanced smartphone in the world" around those who aren't going to use it's features that much?

I know I'm beating a dead horse here and again, it's about voting with our wallets, but it's just my 2 cents on the matter. If you buy Apple, you're already paying a premium. I don't think you should have to pay an ADDITIONAL premium just to get storage specs up to date.
 
JohnApples said:
I think your reasoning is exactly why people get pissed though. When technology advances, previous tech becomes cheaper, obviously.

That's why, like you said, 32GB was doubled to 64GB for the same price. 64GB was doubled to 128GB for the same price. So following that logic, why can't 16GB be doubled to 32GB for the same price? The answer is that it can, but Apple knows that the iPhone will sell just as well whether it does or not.

I personally think it's just plain silly that a flagship, $650 device has such a low amount of storage, and are the last flagship smartphone maker to still hang on to that low amount. True, not everyone needs a ton of storage, but why design "the most advanced smartphone in the world" around those who aren't going to use it's features that much?

I know I'm beating a dead horse here and again, it's about voting with our wallets, but it's just my 2 cents on the matter.
Click to expand...

I totally agree 16GB is not enough, but instead of people beating the old dead-horse of "Its a rip-off" because the 32GB model doubled to 64GB, they should be talking about how 16GB is not enough, especially if the rumors are true and this phone is going to record in 4k.
 
ACG12 said:
It's like buying a car, you can get a base model or step up to a higher trim if you need more features.
Click to expand...
But you don't get more features, just more storage.
Shanghaichica said:
People who complain are those that want more than 16GB of space but are too stingy to pay the extra. So they moan because they want 32GB for the price of 16GB.
Click to expand...
More and more people realize that storage is getting cheaper every year and they ask themselves, if the current price structure represents that.
And since Apple broke with doubling storage people might be wondering, if the price for 16GB increased compared to prices for 64GB and 128GB.

I'm still undecided about the 6S, but with every new leak it looks more and more unlikely for me to buy one at launch.
 
iamMacPerson said:
I totally agree 16GB is not enough, but instead of people beating the old dead-horse of "Its a rip-off" because the 32GB model doubled to 64GB, they should be talking about how 16GB is not enough, especially if the rumors are true and this phone is going to record in 4k.
Click to expand...
Its obvious one of the pieces of info is wrong. Maybe the iPhone won't record in 4K or maybe 32 GB is the base model not 16GB. Unless Apple is going to use this technique of forcing people into the higher GB model because of the 4K recording. Doesn't sound right.
 
noles1983 said:
or we realize its 2015 and 16gb is pathetic for a $700 phone when Apple is recording record profits year after year?
Click to expand...
Or that that there is a market of people out there who actually treat their iPhone as a phone and not a multifunctional media device (podcast, music, photos etc etc).

Not that I am one of those people but I am saying that there are people out there who actually use a phone as a phone for calling and texting and don't bother using it for anything else and they are happy with a 16gig base model phone. Apple wouldn't be doing that if there wasn't a market base otherwise the 16 gig would have been dropped last year when the 6 and 6 plus came out.
 
The 16GB iPhone has a market, because there is no useful alternative. If Apple would offer the iPhone with 16GB/32GB/64GB/128GB and all just $50-60 apart I doubt that the 16GB would be the bestseller.
 
MagicHAM said:
Or that that there is a market of people out there who actually treat their iPhone as a phone and not a multifunctional media device (podcast, music, photos etc etc).

Not that I am one of those people but I am saying that there are people out there who actually use a phone as a phone for calling and texting and don't bother using it for anything else and they are happy with a 16gig base model phone. Apple wouldn't be doing that if there wasn't a market base otherwise the 16 gig would have been dropped last year when the 6 and 6 plus came out.
Click to expand...

I don't really like that reasoning because it implies that the 16GB is the most popular option because that's all most people need. The 16GB is the most popular because it is the cheapest.

I realize there are people who won't fill up 16GB on their iPhones even in a 2-3 year span, but still, why design the "most advanced smartphone in the world" around the most basic smartphone users? It's like they're designing the base model around the people who won't use the features of the phone in the first place.

Could you imagine if TV manufacturers still designed their top-of-the-line, 60 inch TVs with a max resolution of 720p because "some people can't tell the difference/don't care" so that model is perfect for the them? Then, if you DID want a 1080p model with the same exact features, you had to pay an additional premium price to upgrade it to today's standards? It's just not how technology advancement is supposed to work, but Apple can get away with it.

Besides, if someone who only texts/calls wanted an iPhone, wouldn't a previous year model be better for them? Why pay to have the latest features you won't even use? Besides, giving them more storage than they'll ever use isn't going to hurt them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demo Kit
adamhenry said:
The basic model is made for the people who only use the basic functionality?
Click to expand...

If that were true, then why does the "basic" model still come with all the same exact features and improvements as the "upper" models? This isn't an "iPhone Lite" or C we're talking about. This is the flagship iPhone. The most advanced, most expensive smartphone.

Again, no customer would suffer from an increase in base storage. Worst case scenario, you'll have more storage than you'll ever need, which is a pretty darn good "worst case".
 
Martin81 said:
The 16GB iPhone has a market, because there is no useful alternative. If Apple would offer the iPhone with 16GB/32GB/64GB/128GB and all just $50-60 apart I doubt that the 16GB would be the bestseller.
Click to expand...
It likely would still be as it would still be the cheaper one.
 
JohnApples said:
Again, no customer would suffer from an increase in base storage. Worst case scenario, you'll have more storage than you'll ever need, which is a pretty darn good "worst case".
Click to expand...

Make them all 128G and charge everyone for 128G. Worst case scenario, you'll have more storage than you'll ever need, which is a pretty darn good "worst case". ?????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back