Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
With regards to Apple's naming scheme, it is reasonable to assume that:

iPhone 5S (S for speed)
iPhone 5C (C for color)



Don't understand why some people are "baffled" with Apple's choice of model names.

The "S" moniker since the introduction of the iPhone 3GS stood for "Speed", it was an incremental upgrade.

No reason not to assume the "C" moniker will stand for "Color", given the multitude of various color casings that have leaked.

Make it cheaper - add color. Long held tradition in consumer products. Couldn't agree more.
 
How does "plastic" fit to Apple efforts to lead on having the lowest possible environmental impact?

Somehow this new plastic product including the packaging doesn't make sense if you look at all the effort Apple puts behind this.

Or is this some kind of 'magic' plastic without toxics that is fully biodegradable?

http://www.apple.com/environment/reports

"Executive Team members regularly review each new product during its development, focusing on material and design choices, the supply chain, packaging, and product energy efficiency. Each of these areas has a direct impact on our environmental footprint. .... Every product we offer meets the ENERGY STAR guidelines for energy efficiency, is free of many harmful toxins, and is made of highly recyclable materials."
 
Unfortunately those do look genuine... I've seen less-genuine stuff (like the leaked iOS7 photos) ...

That sucks. Talk about spoilers.
 
If this photo is real then I agree with earlier posts about the C being for Carbon Fibre. The box will probably be carbon fibre too. This also means that there will not be a "cheap" plastic iPhone.

We know that apple have a patent for colored Carbon Fibre so why not?
 
Color?

The "C" stands for "cheapo". I understand the desire to appeal to a lower tier of phone carriers, but it completely violates Apple's company vision. They strive to create the best product on the market. This is intentionally creating subpar product.

I understand the business move, but in light of Apple's hold to excellence, I can't help but be slightly disappointed.
 
in a packaging facility these packges would never be sitting, banging around like that. unless these are prototypes, this is fake. That's not to say they aren't similar to the final product but they would keep them much close to mint condition to avoid scratching or damaging them before receiving the iphone to put in.
 
I imagine that there would be a sale to clear out old stock, although leftovers can be held for use as warranty replacements.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
I guess then, the resale value of the iPhone 5 will be much lower than previous generations when the new iPhones would be announced :/ Better sell mine quick I guess!
 
I think those are just custom protective holders/carriers used during iPhone 5 assembly.
 
iPhone 5S is upgraded internals and slight bump in camera pixel nothing else.( I highly doubt the bigger screen or finger print sensor

I agree there is no way we'll see a bigger screen. It's too soon after the iPhone 5 introduction and we'd have seen a leak by now. As for the fingerprint sensor, they could build something into the home button without changing the chassis, so I'm still open to the possibility.
 
I'm pretty sure they want to get away from the 30-pin connector and 3.5 inch screen.
That's what I said?

A plastic iPhone 4S with Lightning connector and 4-inch display, as well as a plastic back to increase profit margins.

We're on the same side and we've got the same ideas. Stop fighting.
 
How does "plastic" fit to Apple efforts to lead on having the lowest possible environmental impact?

Somehow this new plastic product including the packaging doesn't make sense if you look at all the effort Apple puts behind this.

Or is this some kind of 'magic' plastic without toxics that is fully biodegradable?

http://www.apple.com/environment/reports

"Executive Team members regularly review each new product during its development, focusing on material and design choices, the supply chain, packaging, and product energy efficiency. Each of these areas has a direct impact on our environmental footprint. .... Every product we offer meets the ENERGY STAR guidelines for energy efficiency, is free of many harmful toxins, and is made of highly recyclable materials."

They make products with plastic cases, such as the Mac Mini, Time Capsule, Airport Extreme, and Airport Express.
 
oh wow --- um, packaging - great reporting there! all of these product leaks over the years are so cheap and unimaginative - the product launch always looks NOTHING even like the leaks - history repeating why do we keep being so engaged ? because of us that these really fake unimaginative leaks keep going on folks.

Obviously you just dropped in from an alternate universe because in this one your entire post is factually wrong.
 
How does "plastic" fit to Apple efforts to lead on having the lowest possible environmental impact?
Let's not kid ourselves into believing that Apple hasn't been pushing out plastic products all along. Clear, thick plastic packaging for various iPods and the part-plastic Magic Mouse... plastic powerbricks and cables... AirPort Extreme / Time Capsule... and the laser-cut unibodies may be highly recyclable but the manufacturing process is insanely wasteful and energy intensive, like the bowling pin gag on Simpsons where each pin that's knocked down is replaced with one that's freshly manufactured in the basement, wasting an entire tree for each pin.

Apple is just as detrimental to the environment as any other company, they're just better at projecting a treehugger facade in order to appease aloof Prius-driving californians. Including most actors, who have no problem working for the movie industry even though it's the 2nd worst polluter in CA after the fuel refining industry, according to a UCLA study.
 
I heard somewhere that the iphone 5 and 5s were in pipeline under SJ. It makes a lot of sense that these models would go on to be produced in part out of respect for Steve. They look like products envisioned circa 2010, in terms of screen size, technological limitations on industrial design at the time, lack of competition, cell carrier 2 year contracts, etc. Even Tim Cooks comments about larger screens not being adequate at All Things D recently harken from that time. Any criticism that the iphone 5 is lacking shouldn't be directed at Tim or Jony, they're Steve's last decisions.

I really hope that the iphone 6 is Tim's time to shine. An effort based on discussions among top executives. It will be very interesting to see what they come up with, aesthetically as much as technologically. It's possible that they'll do excellent work.

We still have the TV, wearables, auto, and home automation innovations to look forward to in years to come. I just hope that Apple is able to beef up their ecosystem.

To do this they should:
Get a damn good email address. (@mail.com)
Make security a priority, as the ecosystem becomes more integral to our life. (finger sensor)
Make a web based Itune's lite. (to show up in search results along with amazon, and google play)
Business products (web based iWork is great)
Allow any file be stored in the cloud. (a single folder to put anything into, use tags to organize)
An interface so simple it looks like Craigslist or an arty blog.
 
So many ridiculous and immature responses here. I assume there must be a lot of high school kids on this site that have yet to learn anything about basic economics or business, and probably judge people's socioeconomic status or personal worth over whether their phone is metal or plastic. Hilarious.

This is the real deal, get over it. These are likely legit photos, and they make total 100% rational sense.

An iPhone made of plastic or poly-carbonate, in various colors, at a lower price point when compared to the current iPhone 5/5S makes complete and total sense both 1) economically, 2) strategically, and 3)business-wise.

The iPhone 3G and 3GS were made of poly-carbonate/plastic, and they sold extremely well for years until the introduction of the iPhone 4 and 5. Absolutely nobody complained about those devices being "cheap" or "crap" or how Apple was descending into "cheapness". People loved them.

Totally absurd comments on here, and I find it amazingly naive how people just don't see things rationally, especially from Apple's point of view.

Seriously, over 50% of you need to enroll in a basic college course on economics.

Let me guess, "Tim Cook and Co. are doing something wrong? They've lost their minds -- a plastic iPhone! Oh my god! Cheap!"

Grow up kiddies. These are going to sell very well and I expect a price point of around $400 off contract.

And one more thing: the general consumer, which accounts for 99.5% of all people, doesn't care whether something is metal or plastic. They view things two ways:

1) Price
2) What they get for the price/Appearance/Quality

A $650 iPhone 5 is a large sum of money for most people, if not 99.5% of consumers. In developing countries or countries with lower per-capita GDP, these are extreme luxury goods and out of reach.

A $400ish iPhone, in multiple colors, is a fair price for many people, and a large percentage of average consumers will pay within this price range for an iPhone.

Anyways, I'm amazed at the fools on this site who lack basic economic-thinking skills. Jesus.

Well said!
 
Did people believe that the iPhone 3G and 3GS were cheap looking?

Yes, the iPhone 3G made compromises for the antennae, and I thought the plastic curved back was definitely unattractive for an iPhone, I much preferred the iPhone 1's look (and the iPad 2 over the iPad 1 for the same reason). The iPhone 4 was the first iPhone that every part was aesthetically pleasing (I disliked the fake chrome on the iPhone 1's trim too).
 
iWatch

It actually makes me thing the ipad mini is heavy, thick and bland in comparison, i wish it was pretty red like my ipod. :(

I've been thinking the same thing lately, and I wonder if Apple will eventually blow up the phone category completely by moving phone functionality into the watch, and then offering a variety of front-end devices that can interface with it. So you could make calls using the watch and Siri, or you could tie the watch to your iPod Touch, iPad Mini, iPad or even your Mac and use that as the interface.

I could see the iPod touch growing larger - somewhere around the width of a "phablet" without the weight and the bulk - and perhaps being rebranded an iPad Nano. Folks would carry those around as their web-surfing and app-running device, with the watch providing phone capabilities and internet connectivity.

We've seen this kind of tech envisioned before. On Star Trek: The Next Generation they wore a piece of voice-activated jewelry as a communications device, but interfaced with and interacted with the computer largely via touch screens, including little tablets smaller than the iPad Mini. I think something "phablet" sized but without the massive bulk would make a great interface device, but makes a lousy phone. Move the phone functionality out to a watch though and you have something a lot more usable.

Another thought would be to move the phone functionality entirely into an earpiece...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.