Wow!! Apple is SO cheap that they went from 4 GB of RAM back to 1 GB of RAM!!! And somehow it uses 42 GB of RAM while at rest!!! Simply amazing.
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.
Phil Schiller Talks 16 GB iPhones and Thinness vs Battery Life Tradeoffs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow!! Apple is SO cheap that they went from 4 GB of RAM back to 1 GB of RAM!!! And somehow it uses 42 GB of RAM while at rest!!! Simply amazing.
So, the problem isn't 16 gig phones, it's people who are too impatient to wait for the one they wanted and wound up with one they have trouble using.
Last edited:
You love the Moto G? Then buy one if you haven't already then you won't have to worry yourself about iPhone specs.
16GB is enough for some people. My mum bought the 32GB iPhone 4 because that was the phone I was using at the time. She should have bought the 16GB because she's only used about 8GB. She doesn't store music. All she does is go on Facebook, check her emails and play candy crush. I think there are a lot of people like my mum who can get by perfectly fine with 16GB. I also think that the 16GB variant is their biggest selling model. The carriers sell more 16GB models because they are usually free or have a very small upfront fee. I've always gone for the highest capacity available and I'm willing to pay for more storage.
As long as Apple offer more storage then I don't see the problem. 16GB is nowhere near enough for me but I was able to get 128GB so I'm happy.
As for only having one port. I believe that there are people out there who can survive with only one port. I myself have limited computing needs. I think I could probably get by with my iPad but I bought my MBA just in case. I don't use it often but it's a comfort to know that it's there if I need it. The new MacBook doesn't make sense to me because it's too expensive. As I only have limited needs I don't see the logic in spending that much on a machine and if I were wiling to spend that much I'd rather get a MacBook Pro. To me the MBA is the better option. It's light, powerful enough and has more ports. I don't do photo editing or graphics work so I don't need a retina display.
As long as Apple offer more storage then I don't see the problem. 16GB is nowhere near enough for me but I was able to get 128GB so I'm happy.
As for only having one port. I believe that there are people out there who can survive with only one port. I myself have limited computing needs. I think I could probably get by with my iPad but I bought my MBA just in case. I don't use it often but it's a comfort to know that it's there if I need it. The new MacBook doesn't make sense to me because it's too expensive. As I only have limited needs I don't see the logic in spending that much on a machine and if I were wiling to spend that much I'd rather get a MacBook Pro. To me the MBA is the better option. It's light, powerful enough and has more ports. I don't do photo editing or graphics work so I don't need a retina display.
Yes it is those people's fault for not being patient. But at the same time apple knows they should upgrade the base storage but they just don't. Every other phone manufacturer had done it.
Apple discontinued 8gb models because they knew it wasn't enough. If they really are banking on cloud storage they would have kept or reintroduced the 8gb base model.
The same people defending iphones 16 gb model are the people who defended 3.5 inch screen and who defend 8mp camera.
Its a premium device that should have premium hardware.
It's funny how most popular culture and most on this board are usually anti-corporation. They vilify the telecoms, the cable companies, the banks, etc. for unfair business practices and being greedy.
But for some reason, the most profitable corporation of all time gets a pass on this behavior. Apple always seem to be altruistic even when they maintain a cash balance as much as most countries. Even though their profit margins are higher than any other hardware tech company.
But for some reason, the most profitable corporation of all time gets a pass on this behavior. Apple always seem to be altruistic even when they maintain a cash balance as much as most countries. Even though their profit margins are higher than any other hardware tech company.
Exactly! It's okay to charge more for more storage. But the current prizing does not represent the cost. The difference between 16GB and 32GB used to be under $10 (source) for the 5S. So with a basic 32GB iPhone 6 the margin would be $10 lower. Overall profit would have been marginally lower, but nearly everybody would have been satisfied.
Have you actually had a look through the replies in this thread? At least skimmed through? The vast majority of responses seem to be along the lines of "Its insane that Apple would still offer 16GB at such a price point when it simply isn't enough." That does not seem like Apple getting a pass on their behaviour.
Don't get me wrong - I think you have a point but it is one that you're grossly exaggerating the severity of.
Cancelled 8 gig models except the ones they've always kept around for carriers to use as the 'free' phone.
It's quite simple really. He concludes that Apple is only selling the 16GB to satisfy the needs of those that could not get the other versions. That would mean that as soon as the other sizes are in stock that all those people would not buy 16GB iphones anymore. It is ridiculous, but that is what he was saying.
I see the point that 16Gb is probably as outdated as 8 GB was 3 years ago, and have never disputed that here. But, IMHO Schiller is not completely talking nonsense here. As I wrote earlier, the price of a 200GB cloud storage package is equivalent to a 16GB upgrade to 32GB. Data is getting cheaper and cheaper and connections are becoming faster and faster. I have all my photos (about 70.000 and ~2000 videos) in the cloud and it works perfectly without any annoying lag.
My original point about the car analogy was that I think it is stupid to demand cheaper products from a company. There are few examples of that working. It is better to vote with your wallet and go elsewhere.
I think that Schiller *is* talking complete nonsense. Secretly, I believe Schiller would agree with me. I don't think he believed one word he spoke, and in this instance he's paid to lie, to put it bluntly. Apple wanted that extra $100 going to the 64 GB model so they purposely crippled the model below it. There is no other point to it. If you find a point in the nonsense Schiller spoke I'd argue you are very suggestible.
I responded something different here first. But if this is how you want to discuss opinions or assumptions than I guess there is no point as you have already indicated that you are here only to ventilate your opinion as fact.
Last edited:
ok.
yes cloud storage is getting immensely cheap and maybe even dropping faster than nand chips however obviously that is not the only variable. data coverage and data rates also come into play and some have it considerably worse than others. i for instance have been walking on average 1-2 hours per day and listening to music and just the music dl/streaming would cost quite a bit.
and yes cloud services under optimum conditions are becoming amazingly effective and you barely notice it.
schiller i feel (at best) is being extremely disingenuous. i mean what is the point of having an improving app store (with apps getting bigger) and improving the camera immensely if the storage dosent increase at the same rate?
apple being a seller of devices, cloud storage and music streaming obviously has a huge financial interest in keeping costs down and pointing you towards their cloud solutions. however i think that should be an addition to an already great package and not the only way to make it work. i dont think apple needs to shortchange people in this manner (over a ~$10 additional cost).
Closed minded as I may be about this particular issue, I'm opened to a convincing argument I haven't yet thought of. In the mean time any argument that says apple keeping the 16 gig model is a virtue and done on behalf of grandma who doesn't need a lot of space is somebody wearing rose colored glasses I want to buy.
Having a 16GB iPhone, I can definitely say the biggest problem I have with data on my phone is not photos and videos. It is now all this extravagant amount of data apps I use somehow take up on my phone.
I look at apps like Twitter, Tumblr, Google Maps and Facebook and see that they all are using 200 MBs of storage somehow. Also an app like Spotify takes up 436 MBs right now on my phone and I’m not even saving any music from it for offline use, it’s just confusing to me with all these apps as to why they are sucking up so much of my storage.
I look at apps like Twitter, Tumblr, Google Maps and Facebook and see that they all are using 200 MBs of storage somehow. Also an app like Spotify takes up 436 MBs right now on my phone and I’m not even saving any music from it for offline use, it’s just confusing to me with all these apps as to why they are sucking up so much of my storage.
Exactly. This was my issue when I had a 16gb iPad. I had maybe 10 photos on it and no music or videos. But apps are what took up my space.
Good interview, however a few points to note here.
1. While Apple limits the amount of info they ask from a user when filling in forms, only just enough to provide whatever service u are signing up for, compared to others who ask u everything, then probably share the other redundant info. Maybe the word need to be changed..
Phil was asked and response was Apple collections "non personal identifiable info", yet they need your Name, Address, Ph. No in some cases.. which ARE personal identifiable info... in order to provide such service(s).
Which is why i fake it.... I'm sure if Apple doesn't want know who you are, then it should be ok.
2. Regarding the above. Apple only get your trust because they lay it all out online exactly what they do with their Transparency reports.. This make a company more trustworthy, then others who only put a paragraph in their privacy polices.. However in either case, its all a face on the surface.... how do u know Apple is not sucking up to their users more with detailed explanations as what we use your data for and why, just to get u to trust them and hand over all your info, then share it behind out backs ?
3. Thinness of everything, has it consequences of users wanting something else. There seem to be some kind of a nitch in "trying" to see which works, and which doesn't..
Kind of like how Nokia went out their only on the Navigator 6110 to test the waters with Route 66 Maps local with voice guidance on phone, just to see how many users get on board.
I feel this the same with Apple and the 12" Macbook with USB-C port... just "testing the waters"
I could watch this interview time and time again
Purposely ? Cosair do the same thing by the way.... Do flash drive makers purposely cripple the 8 gig ? If u have all your data on a 32Gig iOS device, there more data to loose too. Sometimes it makes sense to limit yourself. Not saying people would always do that. but there is still a need for 16GB. Why pay for extra storage u will never need ? Now u don't really have that choice, but only because Apple stops making them... but i bet if the 16GIG still existed, users would buy.
1. While Apple limits the amount of info they ask from a user when filling in forms, only just enough to provide whatever service u are signing up for, compared to others who ask u everything, then probably share the other redundant info. Maybe the word need to be changed..
Phil was asked and response was Apple collections "non personal identifiable info", yet they need your Name, Address, Ph. No in some cases.. which ARE personal identifiable info... in order to provide such service(s).
Which is why i fake it.... I'm sure if Apple doesn't want know who you are, then it should be ok.
2. Regarding the above. Apple only get your trust because they lay it all out online exactly what they do with their Transparency reports.. This make a company more trustworthy, then others who only put a paragraph in their privacy polices.. However in either case, its all a face on the surface.... how do u know Apple is not sucking up to their users more with detailed explanations as what we use your data for and why, just to get u to trust them and hand over all your info, then share it behind out backs ?
3. Thinness of everything, has it consequences of users wanting something else. There seem to be some kind of a nitch in "trying" to see which works, and which doesn't..
Kind of like how Nokia went out their only on the Navigator 6110 to test the waters with Route 66 Maps local with voice guidance on phone, just to see how many users get on board.
I feel this the same with Apple and the 12" Macbook with USB-C port... just "testing the waters"
I could watch this interview time and time again
Purposely ? Cosair do the same thing by the way.... Do flash drive makers purposely cripple the 8 gig ? If u have all your data on a 32Gig iOS device, there more data to loose too. Sometimes it makes sense to limit yourself. Not saying people would always do that. but there is still a need for 16GB. Why pay for extra storage u will never need ? Now u don't really have that choice, but only because Apple stops making them... but i bet if the 16GIG still existed, users would buy.
Last edited:
Having choices are good. There is a segment of the market that uses very few apps and music and lots of memory simply isn't important to them. (My mother) The 16gb one is fine for them. Add to that, putting your music and photos on the cloud, using the Apple new music streaming service and App slimming where the apps downloaded are now up to 40% smaller due to Apple downloading the specific version of the app for your individual phone. This essentially expands the usability for for this select demographic.
After turning on the cloud for much of my music and all my photos along with Apple's new App slimming my 64Gb iPhone 5 gained an additional 16Gb of space allowing it to run more efficiently. I am not that 16Gb demographic as I am a collector of music and apps etc. So my last purchase was the 128Gb 6s+.
The perception I get from these unhappy replies is not that it's so bad that Apple is making a 16Gb base model, but that people are objecting to the price they are having to pay to get the amount of memory they want for themselves. Apple has always been expensive, they have made profit and growth a priority in an industry with very high R&D costs and low profit margins. They have made a huge success despite being surrounding by a sea of companies that have products that are often ½ the cost.
Is It really worth the additional cost involved to drive a BMW or Mercedes? Only the individual can make that decision. Acura makes a fine car, decent value and reliable, but they are not finished or drive like the premium brands. You also have to be prepared to pay a whole lot more for the premium brands significantly more expensive maintenance. Lots of people decide that they are willing to pay the difference to have the premium choice.
It's good to have choice. You can always choose to drive a flip phone, or an Android for less. Apple knows how to make a premium product and the consumer has the ability to vote with their dollars.
After turning on the cloud for much of my music and all my photos along with Apple's new App slimming my 64Gb iPhone 5 gained an additional 16Gb of space allowing it to run more efficiently. I am not that 16Gb demographic as I am a collector of music and apps etc. So my last purchase was the 128Gb 6s+.
The perception I get from these unhappy replies is not that it's so bad that Apple is making a 16Gb base model, but that people are objecting to the price they are having to pay to get the amount of memory they want for themselves. Apple has always been expensive, they have made profit and growth a priority in an industry with very high R&D costs and low profit margins. They have made a huge success despite being surrounding by a sea of companies that have products that are often ½ the cost.
Is It really worth the additional cost involved to drive a BMW or Mercedes? Only the individual can make that decision. Acura makes a fine car, decent value and reliable, but they are not finished or drive like the premium brands. You also have to be prepared to pay a whole lot more for the premium brands significantly more expensive maintenance. Lots of people decide that they are willing to pay the difference to have the premium choice.
It's good to have choice. You can always choose to drive a flip phone, or an Android for less. Apple knows how to make a premium product and the consumer has the ability to vote with their dollars.
Really? The flash memory is the same as any other manufacturer. Not some super special Apple creation. Why is it priced so differently?
Because they can, perhaps it's part of their strategy to be the most profitable company in the industry. I would guess they also pay much less for the 16Gb chips as no one else is wants to use them. (Surplus profits?). Don't get me wrong, I wish I could get the Apple products for significantly less and I'd love it if there were less software restrictions. That's not part of the Apple model of business. I still choose to pay $800 for a used MBP for my son then getting a brand new PC for $400. Because I don't want to have to maintain a Windoze PC. It's a choice for me and I am fortunate enough I can afford to make this choice without having to give up all that many other things.
Nope, it's that Apple products are high-end products, so no model in their lineup should be hobbled and potentially create a poor user experience. Can one *get by* with 16GB? Should Apple, to save literally a couple dollars and generate up-sells, take a chance on frustrated users who discover they can't hardly use their nifty new camera or have to uninstall stuff to run updates, etc.... no way in heck!
This isn't about me saving money, it's about Apple making smart decisions for the long-term benefit of the company!
Exactly. They're risking long-term customer satisfaction for short-term gain. When you take into account the fact that this is now the 7th year with 16GB as the launch time base storage and consider how much storage demand has gone up during that time, it's quite evident that Apple is not offering an optimal product here. Especially with the 4k camera in the latest generation.
EDIT: Oh, prices are one thing they haven't forgotten to raise. Especially here iPhones are now quite a lot more expensive than by the time 3GS (the first one with 16GB base storage) launched.
Oh, that's absolutely the reason... there is no other. They are putting their profit model above potential bad user experience. THAT is why I'm against it.
(Note: when I say potential... I just mean that maybe not ALL 16GB users have a bad experience. But, it's very actual, in that I've run across a number of iPhone users who I've heard complain about storage limits and problems. They, then, realize they should have spent the extra $100, but they are in a contract now... too late. The question is.. will they buy an iPhone next time?)
Over the last few months, I've had two family members that ran into that situation.
What they ended up doing was upgrading their iCloud storage to 20GB (for US$0.99/month) and enabling iCloud Photo Library, which freed up a significant chunk of space on their 16GB devices.
Now they're "amazed" that they can see/edit/organize all of their photos on a web browser on any computer via www.icloud.com that I doubt they'll upgrade to a 64GB iPhone next time around and will just keep with iCloud Photo Library instead.