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.
Small iPhone to Have Edge to Edge Screen, Voice Navigation?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's because you don't have one.
I know that my posting easily can give that impression. I said something similar to a guy who obviously hated the MacBook Air because he couldn't afford one.
As for the iPad, I was really impressed and excited to test it until I actually did try one. I wasn't impressed about it at all. Graphics were grainy and it felt uncomfortable to hold it and write... maybe I was just holding it wrong, what do I know? I just don't need such a huge iPod.
However, it was never like I couldn't afford an iPad, because I certainly can. But for the same reason that I don't find the iPad worth the price (or even a fraction of the price), I feel sick to see all the headlines still hyping it up.
Well first off this is obviously absolutely ridiculous, but for arguments sake lets pretend its not. According to this unnamed source Apple is going to release a mini iphone with entry level smart phone features for consumers not interested in the advanced abilities of more expensive androids or the iPhone 4. But since they are definitely not going to cut this iphone light off from the app store this group of old people and young children are going to pay the 90 or whatever dollars a month to use the phone they bought because of there lack of need for the advance features they would have to pay more for? Sorry but this sounds completely idiotic to me!
It depends on the person. Everything is subjective to the needs of the consumer. For every one person who doesn't think the iPad is worth a fraction of the price, there are 10,000 who think it is.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Those positing that iPhone nano will not have access to the ap store are off base. Why would apple sell a cheaper (likely less profitable) version of the iPhone and not utilize it's best asset- the aP store ecosystem? People buy iPhone nano get aps- love aps, then buy iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc. The nano halo effect- just like tue iPod before it.
Those positing that iPhone nano will not have access to the ap store are off base. Why would apple sell a cheaper (likely less profitable) version of the iPhone and not utilize it's best asset- the aP store ecosystem? People buy iPhone nano get aps- love aps, then buy iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc. The nano halo effect- just like tue iPod before it.
It didn't. That's why there's a
in my post.If you don't like that iPad, you don't like the iPad. That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. I've thoroughly enjoyed using mine, and I think it's worth every penny.
Yes, extremely idiotic.
Especially the part of it being unlocked at $200 (not gonna happen in the USA).
I think someone might have seen one of those smaller Chinese iPhone knock-offs and mistook it for an Apple prototype and now everyone's running with it...
maybe 2 phones
maybe 2 phones:
1/ "smaller" iphone 5:
resolution: same as iPhone 4
total size of external dimensions of case: smaller than current iPhone 4
weight: probably about 20 grams lighter than current iPhone 4
price: same as current iPhone 4. none of this USD 200 price point.
2/ "same size as iPhone 4" iPhone 5
more disk storage space than iPhone 4
more memory than iPhone 4
larger battery than iPhone 4
NFC module
larger focal point zoom camera
price: premium to smaller iPhone5
maybe 2 phones:
1/ "smaller" iphone 5:
resolution: same as iPhone 4
total size of external dimensions of case: smaller than current iPhone 4
weight: probably about 20 grams lighter than current iPhone 4
price: same as current iPhone 4. none of this USD 200 price point.
2/ "same size as iPhone 4" iPhone 5
more disk storage space than iPhone 4
more memory than iPhone 4
larger battery than iPhone 4
NFC module
larger focal point zoom camera
price: premium to smaller iPhone5
Plus common opinions on tech forums aren't known for siding with the 10,000. Many seem to take pride in being the one.
Hey where is the technically superior Nomad these days?
well you are exaggerating quite a bit when you say nearly impossible to use
everyone here who has an i phone has noticed how impressively easy it is to click on a specific tiny link or button in the web browser due to the ability of iOS to determine your fingers focal point
not sure why you think all current buttons would cease to be functional if the size was reduced by 25%
I never said I would like a smaller screen just pointing out that it's feasible
for example, look at mjay2k's mockup on page 5 of this thread and explain to me how that looks completely unusable
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
You just did: The iPhone Basic System - smaller, lighter and just makes calls.
Cheerwino said:
You just did: The iPhone Basic System - smaller, lighter and just makes calls.
Seems like this will probably go one of two ways:
1. iPhone Nano offered as a replacement to the current low-cost iPhone (i.e. 3GS). Perhaps slightly reduced screen area (not to much or the physical size of UI elements will become too small), and reduced bezel, but otherwise hardware more or less in line with iPhone 4 hardware (although perhaps without the retina display--the iPhone 4's most expensive part).
2. Newly designed phone targeting the 'feature phone' segment. This would basically be an iPod nano / phone hybrid. A data plan wouldn't be required. Rather than being iOS-based, this phone would be based on the (non-touch) iPod OS.
My guess is that Apple goes with option #1. Apple seems to place its bets on long-term trends. Smartphones represent the fastest growing segment of the cell phone market.
Option #2 would also present serious branding problems. In the mind of many consumers iPhone is basically synonymous with smartphone. Option #2 would be really confusing to market within the iPhone brand.
My guess is that the iPhone nano was developed because the current iPhone 4's parts costs is currently around $170 (perhaps this might drop to $160 by June), too much to have a phone that can be offered for free with a contact after overhead and manufacturing costs. Meanwhile the 3GS is getting pretty outdated. An iPhone nano could be developed to have a much lower parts cost while also generating a great deal of interest and excitement.
1. iPhone Nano offered as a replacement to the current low-cost iPhone (i.e. 3GS). Perhaps slightly reduced screen area (not to much or the physical size of UI elements will become too small), and reduced bezel, but otherwise hardware more or less in line with iPhone 4 hardware (although perhaps without the retina display--the iPhone 4's most expensive part).
2. Newly designed phone targeting the 'feature phone' segment. This would basically be an iPod nano / phone hybrid. A data plan wouldn't be required. Rather than being iOS-based, this phone would be based on the (non-touch) iPod OS.
My guess is that Apple goes with option #1. Apple seems to place its bets on long-term trends. Smartphones represent the fastest growing segment of the cell phone market.
Option #2 would also present serious branding problems. In the mind of many consumers iPhone is basically synonymous with smartphone. Option #2 would be really confusing to market within the iPhone brand.
My guess is that the iPhone nano was developed because the current iPhone 4's parts costs is currently around $170 (perhaps this might drop to $160 by June), too much to have a phone that can be offered for free with a contact after overhead and manufacturing costs. Meanwhile the 3GS is getting pretty outdated. An iPhone nano could be developed to have a much lower parts cost while also generating a great deal of interest and excitement.
Referring to a couple posts back... if the screen is the same size and resolution to the current model, and the screen is edge to edge, where are they going to put the volume out speakers for phone calls (the one currently on the front by the facetime camera)?
It's an interesting idea to have a cheaper or free iPhone, yes, but I don't see Apple being the company to do something like that. The only thing I can see them doing is maybe going back and using much cheaper internal parts, something with the capabilities of the iPhone 3G...which even then is REALLY unlikely seeing as that technology is three years old. But I don't see any other option to have a free phone and still be an iPhone.
The reduced features in the iPod Touch pushes their prices down to 229,299,and 399 dollars but you still need the cellular chip.. which is like $100 I believe..I can't see this happening until I see a couple more details on what the feature trade off will be..
As for the large screen sizes, I believe Steve Jobs, who still makes major decisions, has said that he thinks that the current size is perfect.
It's an interesting idea to have a cheaper or free iPhone, yes, but I don't see Apple being the company to do something like that. The only thing I can see them doing is maybe going back and using much cheaper internal parts, something with the capabilities of the iPhone 3G...which even then is REALLY unlikely seeing as that technology is three years old. But I don't see any other option to have a free phone and still be an iPhone.
The reduced features in the iPod Touch pushes their prices down to 229,299,and 399 dollars but you still need the cellular chip.. which is like $100 I believe..I can't see this happening until I see a couple more details on what the feature trade off will be..
As for the large screen sizes, I believe Steve Jobs, who still makes major decisions, has said that he thinks that the current size is perfect.
Very interesting concept, but that was filed 4 years ago. Is this something that we should be expecting in Apples lineup of iPhones/iPods/iPads?
That would be amazing.
The interface guidelines say the target should be 44pixels between centers on the original res screen, this means each target is a little smaller then a 7mm circle. On a 3.0inch screen that would reduce to 6mm and 5mm on a 2.5inch screen*. The difference is really minor.
Yet my fingers pushed against a ruler is about 15mm which is far bigger than the first, yet at 2.5inch screen would still only overlap the same number of control objects. So its not the size that matters it's the resolution of detection to pick which control is truly center of my finger touch. Although the users motor control also factors in still something between 2.5 to 3.0inch would still seem practical.
*Sorry for the mismatch of units.
That actually looks like a decent concept picture iPhone nano
. However, it's barely any smaller than the iPhone 4.. and is smaller only because it doesn't have the physical button, which I believe an overwhelming large majority of people are in favor of keeping...While I think Apple is not interested in the dumb phone market at all, they may release such a product as an iPhone Nano in the smart phone market to push the "ceiling" down for the wannabe, thus making the market Apple wants to dominate even more miserable for the competitors.
Few posters in this thread picked up on the "voice navigation" aspect of the small iPhone (and likely the standard sized iPhone). This may be a great end run on any complaints about keyboard size reduction, if it should be an issue.
A smart phone needs to understand voice to a much greater extent than it does at present. Especially to lessen poking in so much text.
You offered two alternatives, with this one being the most likely. I would propose a third alternative, and that is there will be no Nano iPhone.
Think back a few days and HP announced their new line-up which included a nano-sized phone. Additionally, of all the new devices, this small phone would be the only thing coming onto the market before the usual iPhone release date.
This rumor could be nothing more then FUD thrown out by Apple via WSJ as their patsy, to make people hold off on the HP small phone to see what Apple has to offer. Thus blunting the introduction of the HP release.
Even if Apple has a June release of a iPhone Nano, they've accomplished the same thing and not tipped their hand.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Edge to edge screen gets Apple closer to their no-design design philosophy. I see this happening along with the 'total rethink' design of iPhone 5.
Edge to edge screen gets Apple closer to their no-design design philosophy. I see this happening along with the 'total rethink' design of iPhone 5.
Except the WSJ is usually pretty conservative about publishing rumors. They are a respected publication and won't publish a rumor unless they can reasonably substantiate it. The VZW iPhone rumors gained significant credibility once the WSJ announced it was coming. Sure enough, within a month, the device was launched.
Until the past year, Apple had a reputation for being extremely secretive. Whether it's a change in tactics by Apple (i.e. controlled leaks), more scrutiny from corporate espionage types, or more talkative suppliers (or some combination) I don't know, but lately, the rumor mills have been pretty accurate.