No More 64GB Storage - iPhones Now Start With 128GB

[bgillander]

So you disagree? With the advent of AI on phones, apps getting larger and larger, and storage being dirt cheap, why should the consumer be all smiles about 128GB phones?

I’d be quite happy to have 256GB for no price increase, but someone would still complain it should be 512GB.

Where are you finding storage for dirt cheap? I was pricing NVME SSDs at Newegg and they seem to have gone up again, so I would love a link to a quality dirt cheap drive.

 

[jblank]

Idk about “all smiles” but for the majority of people who just use social media and web browsing and regular phone functions 128 GB is fine.
More would obviously be better, but even with Apple Intelligence enabled iOS rarely uses more than 15 GB.
My phone has 256 and I’ve barely used 90.

Ok, fair enough, but there seems to be more and more makers starting their phones at 256GB and that's for a reason.

 

[jblank]

I’d be quite happy to have 256GB for no price increase, but someone would still complain it should be 512GB.

Where are you finding storage for dirt cheap? I was pricing NVME SSDs at Newegg and they seem to have gone up again, so I would love a link to a quality dirt cheap drive.

Apple buys in ludicrous volumes. They get excellent pricing and they could double starting storage to 256GB and make money on a modest price increase, if at all.

 

[bgillander]

Apple buys in ludicrous volumes. They get excellent pricing and they could double starting storage to 256GB and make money on a modest price increase, if at all.

So storage is just hypothetically dirt cheap? Darn.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

As cheap as storage is, every phone in the Apple ecosystem should have a minimum of 256GB.

I'd rather lower prices than higher storage.

IDK... how feasible would it be to just upgrade the storage aftermarket?

They've done away with the sim tray, haven't they? Could we replace that with space for a Micro SD Card?

 

[noanker]

Why would anyone buy this when the Google Pixel is $649 and comes with 7 years of updates and security, 120hz screen, 12gb of ram, and 24+ hours of battery life. For $50
More, it’s a MUCH better value. Apple and Tim Cook really blew it on the iPhone 16e. Truly a shame

As someone who was previously invested into the Google ecosystem, their lack of product support and deprecation of features in their Google Nest Hubs and other similar missteps has permanently alienated me as a customer of any of their products or services going forward.

Timmy failed to position the 16e as a loss leader—an enticing gateway into an ecosystem that he has managed to turn into a tollbooth.

 

[noanker]

I'd rather lower prices than higher storage.

IDK... how feasible would it be to just upgrade the storage aftermarket?

They've done away with the sim tray, haven't they? Could we replace that with space for a Micro SD Card?

I think many here would disagree with you regarding the lower prices for less storage position. Not knowing what Apple’s BOM is for the 16e, had they eaten the cost on the storage alone to help keep prices more palatable, I think they’d have been on the right track.

The 16e already has a gimped processor in terms of GPU cores, and other reduced or missing features. To offset those shortcomings, Apple truly missed the opportunity to keep prices more appealing to consumers.

But that’s just my point of view. However, I’m sure I’m not alone in that opinion.

 

[bgillander]

I think many here would disagree with you regarding the lower prices for less storage position. Not knowing what Apple’s BOM is for the 16e, had they eaten the cost on the storage alone to help keep prices more palatable, I think they’d have been on the right track.

The 16e already has a gimped processor in terms of GPU cores, and other reduced or missing features. To offset those shortcomings, Apple truly missed the opportunity to keep prices more appealing to consumers.

But that’s just my point of view. However, I’m sure I’m not alone in that opinion.

It looks like what you just said is that you would rather the 16e had a lower price rather than bumping it up further to 256GB, which could also be said as "I'd rather lower prices than higher storage", which makes me wonder why you gave him a thumbs down.

 

[delsoul]

As someone who was previously invested into the Google ecosystem, their lack of product support and deprecation of features in their Google Nest Hubs and other similar missteps has permanently alienated me as a customer of any of their products or services going forward.

Timmy failed to position the 16e as a loss leader—an enticing gateway into an ecosystem that he has managed to turn into a tollbooth.

Most I went into the Google system was a Pixel 3a, which would have been a long time ago by now. I know then that there were a lot of features that were on the iPhone that weren't on google phones, but I'm seeing now that there's a lot of the same features in some sort of way or another. Text messaging works the same, FaceTime capable, satellite emergency calls and texts, etc. Even the operating system looks similar to apple's iOS. One of the biggest things for me about Google is they're always talking out of both sides of their mouth and can't be trusted. They talk about security this, privacy that...but they've been caught time and again violating what it is they preach so much about. Which is a shame because they always do have some great features on their phones for the price sold.

 

[noanker]

It looks like what you just said is that you would rather the 16e had a lower price rather than bumping it up further to 256GB, which could also be said as "I'd rather lower prices than higher storage", which makes me wonder why you gave him a thumbs down.

Not what I said, that’s your interpretation.

 

[bgillander]

Not what I said, that’s your interpretation.

So you do want more than 128GB storage? You certainly did indicate you wanted a lower price than Apple gave.

 

[breenmask]

This applies to people who keep bashing Apple to double the base storage ram.

Are you happy now? reducing low cost tier choices is somehow good for the consumer? Pathetic.

 

[breenmask]

As cheap as storage is, every phone in the Apple ecosystem should have a minimum of 256GB.

then base price will simply be higher.

 

[racerhomie]

UFS 4, in use in the Samsung S24 and later, is faster than NVMe.

NVMe wins in random read and write, making it more reliable and faster compared to UFS. Plus NVMe supports more than 2TB, which UFS can’t match.

 

[svish]

Great to see an increase in base storage. Now would like to see the Pro model get an increase to 256GB. Both Pro and Pro Max should have similar storage options. But for that expecting the price to be increased by $100.

 

[noanker]

So you do want more than 128GB storage? You certainly did indicate you wanted a lower price than Apple gave.

I see that you’ve chosen to interpret my comment in a way that fits your own framing. That’s fine, but I have no interest in going in circles over this.

 

[noanker]

Most I went into the Google system was a Pixel 3a, which would have been a long time ago by now. I know then that there were a lot of features that were on the iPhone that weren't on google phones, but I'm seeing now that there's a lot of the same features in some sort of way or another. Text messaging works the same, FaceTime capable, satellite emergency calls and texts, etc. Even the operating system looks similar to apple's iOS. One of the biggest things for me about Google is they're always talking out of both sides of their mouth and can't be trusted. They talk about security this, privacy that...but they've been caught time and again violating what it is they preach so much about. Which is a shame because they always do have some great features on their phones for the price sold.

You bring up some solid points.

The issues you mention are clear in both Apple and Google, making it tough for folks who are really into either platform. The ongoing rivalry between these companies for the top spot will likely lead to similar features popping up in their products, though some features might not work well with each other, like messaging and universal access standards, and so on.

It seems like with Apple's recent RCS, consumers are finally being listened to, and there's definitely more compatibility in 2025 compared to 2020, but there’s still room to grow. The aim should be to adopt a standard that works across platforms, is secure, and has robust features. I think if the software becomes more uniform, the real way for these companies to stand out will be through their hardware design.

But that’s just my take on it.

 

[jblank]

So storage is just hypothetically dirt cheap? Darn.

It's not hypothetical, why would you say that? I just said that Apple buys in volumes and it's dirt cheap for them. That is a true statement.

 

[jblank]

then base price will simply be higher.

Not necessarily. It may cost them only a few dollars more per device and that may be offset in other ways. They doubled the RAM minimum in Macs with no cost increase.

 

[breenmask]

Not necessarily. It may cost them only a few dollars more per device and that may be offset in other ways. They doubled the RAM minimum in Macs with no cost increase.

The base price goes up or something that was originally planned is taken away. It's all based on a budget. You're not getting things for free.

 

[bgillander]

I see that you’ve chosen to interpret my comment in a way that fits your own framing. That’s fine, but I have no interest in going in circles over this.

There wasn't much to interpret, since words have actual definitions. Please proceed with your thumbs down.

 

[Falhófnir]

The base price goes up or something that was originally planned is taken away. It's all based on a budget. You're not getting things for free.

Haven't they explored moving to cheaper QLC NAND? If they go ahead with that they probably could offer higher storage tiers without a price bump or hit to their margins. Pretty sure NAND in general has resumed getting cheaper after ticking up a bit during the pandemic to boot.

 

[bgillander]

It's not hypothetical, why would you say that? I just said that Apple buys in volumes and it's dirt cheap for them. That is a true statement.

As I said, I was hoping you had a source of cheaper SSDs, as the prices seemed to be going up when I was looking.

I know Apple buys in a larger volume and gets parts cheaper than I do, as that is obvious, though even dirt is not cheap these days. And it is obvious they sell them for as much markup as they can get away with to maximize their profit. Most businesses sell things for as much profit as they can. I agree that Apple went too high this time, but the only way it will stop is if it is high enough to prevent a large percentage of their customers from buying. It has reached that point for me, as the 16e seems too close in price to the 16 to be worth it to me, but we will see how well it sells to everyone else.

 

[breenmask]

Haven't they explored moving to cheaper QLC NAND? If they go ahead with that they probably could offer higher storage tiers without a price bump or hit to their margins. Pretty sure NAND in general has resumed getting cheaper after ticking up a bit during the pandemic to boot.

Reports show they are currently exploring it.