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.
Smaller iPhone to Eliminate Storage, Rely on Cloud-Based Content?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The world isn't ready for this. Very few carriers have networks large enough and fast enough to stream everything onto your device.
Hopefully they're just pushing the online service to be used and they'll still have internal storage, maybe 16GB or so.
And I really hope the iPhone 5 is available in 64GB.
Hopefully they're just pushing the online service to be used and they'll still have internal storage, maybe 16GB or so.
And I really hope the iPhone 5 is available in 64GB.
Dumb
I never thought I'd say it,
If this phone gets released it may possibly be the most useless device. Even Motorola Razors can carry MP3's and with all the innovation and technology, Apple will neglect everything that makes the I-Phone good? DUMB
They should just look to improve the I-Phone 4 and release it for ALL carriers.
I never thought I'd say it,
If this phone gets released it may possibly be the most useless device. Even Motorola Razors can carry MP3's and with all the innovation and technology, Apple will neglect everything that makes the I-Phone good? DUMB
They should just look to improve the I-Phone 4 and release it for ALL carriers.
Okay - possible if they use the iPhone 4 form factor (but smaller like those pictured) but mostly screen area, using a 3GS non-retina display, same back camera as the 3GS, low quality front camera, 4 Gig RAM - $200 possible...
You buy an iPhone. You can't do much with any of the other 'Free' contract based phones, so either way this isn't much of a surprise.
Well 4-8GB is still pretty good.
Say 1/2GB* for system and 1/2GB for File Meta (used so the system can keep track what's in the cloud)
Leaving +3Gb of scratch space for the users stuff they want to carry with them. Which might be tight if you have any amount of video. Yet still good enough for a days Audio, a few apps, ebooks and media.
Workable as standalone but greatly enhanced with a cloud sync system that lets you trash songs,apps, video off the device without loosing the small amount of information that makes them yours.
Can't be standalone cloud, probably not enough storage to be comfortable as a standalone device. Still certainly viable with a combo. If that combo includes MobileMe wifi network as well then we're looking really interesting.
*It's funny my first Mac G3 came with a massive 500MB HD now that only just fits the Streamlined iOS.
It seems like Apple is adrift in a sea of uncertainly about it's future. While currently raking in revenue at a brisk pace, at what point does the honeymoon with mainstream customers end, leaving only the MacHeads?
The undeniable truth is nothing lasts forever.
But it evolved into it.
A phone that will not have those capabilities from the start - doubtful...
It's Apple that's not ready. They've got their hands full simply trying to get MobileMe to function reliably. All the while hitting us hard, a big fat $99 per year for a marginal experience.
Yet that said Apple's very successful at inserting it's head in the clouds...
It appears, Apples no longer to be taken seriously. Just let them drain your bank so the fanboys can crow about their massive revenue. How thrilling, at least it drives my stock higher & higher.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
I just think it's unlikely because AT&T / Verizon will probably moan about a less expensive competitor, not on thier network...
Furthermore, smaller screen does indeed = less enjoyable user experience, something Apple is not fond of (save for the voice nav only Shuffel from a few years back).
I just think it's unlikely because AT&T / Verizon will probably moan about a less expensive competitor, not on thier network...
Furthermore, smaller screen does indeed = less enjoyable user experience, something Apple is not fond of (save for the voice nav only Shuffel from a few years back).
Wow this thread is still going.
I own and operate a marketing firm and deal with part vendors, OEM's and Wireless carriers.
There is no iphone nano. If there is that will be the biggest mistake Apple could make. Trust me. If there was we would be getting part numbers and large orders, like now.
I said this in my last post:
"The next iphone will have a larger screen, will be redesigned. These media pundits are getting the cheaper iphone confused with the iphone 4 which they will still be selling along side the iphone 5. Much in the same way they sold the 3gs 8GB with the iphone 4.
The smaller iphone will be the iphone 4. And it will have way less memory. Not a iphone nano.
I can see some of the confusion. But now they are purely speculating because they don't know what is going on. The same way they said there would be a iphone nano when the 3gs came out and they still sold the 3g 8GB iphone.
Dont believe the hype."
You will see a iphone 5 'leaked' photo very soon I am sure. The parts are already being shipped. And production is going to take place. They try and disguise their part numbers. But you can put two and two together and pretty much know what parts belong to whom.
The iphone 4 is the cheaper iphone. It would make no sense to invest in another design and parts just for a smaller device if you can make the same device with a bigger screen like the iphone 4. Designing a device costs millions, investing in manufacturing cost millions, investing in new parts, CPUs,memory, wireless chips cost millions. And require long term contracts.
The iphone 4 has been in production for awhile. There is no designing costs, no new part numbers, no new contracts to sign. Manufacturing costs down over the life of a product.
We heard these rumors before.
I own and operate a marketing firm and deal with part vendors, OEM's and Wireless carriers.
There is no iphone nano. If there is that will be the biggest mistake Apple could make. Trust me. If there was we would be getting part numbers and large orders, like now.
I said this in my last post:
"The next iphone will have a larger screen, will be redesigned. These media pundits are getting the cheaper iphone confused with the iphone 4 which they will still be selling along side the iphone 5. Much in the same way they sold the 3gs 8GB with the iphone 4.
The smaller iphone will be the iphone 4. And it will have way less memory. Not a iphone nano.
I can see some of the confusion. But now they are purely speculating because they don't know what is going on. The same way they said there would be a iphone nano when the 3gs came out and they still sold the 3g 8GB iphone.
Dont believe the hype."
You will see a iphone 5 'leaked' photo very soon I am sure. The parts are already being shipped. And production is going to take place. They try and disguise their part numbers. But you can put two and two together and pretty much know what parts belong to whom.
The iphone 4 is the cheaper iphone. It would make no sense to invest in another design and parts just for a smaller device if you can make the same device with a bigger screen like the iphone 4. Designing a device costs millions, investing in manufacturing cost millions, investing in new parts, CPUs,memory, wireless chips cost millions. And require long term contracts.
The iphone 4 has been in production for awhile. There is no designing costs, no new part numbers, no new contracts to sign. Manufacturing costs down over the life of a product.
We heard these rumors before.
Well they can provide a micro sd card slot and allow the customers to decide/choose if they want onboard storage/memory or not
Cloud i don't think is going to be a hit in many countries, the bandwidth limitation itself is an issue big enough, against it.
Cloud i don't think is going to be a hit in many countries, the bandwidth limitation itself is an issue big enough, against it.
I agree, if they go down the route of no onboard flash memory then an SD slot or new apple proprietary slot/card would be the route to go. A lot of the time wen I want to use cloud services like spotify on my iPhone there is just no signal to be found
Last edited:
Ah, but that's the catch here. When that day DOES come that wireless coverage is THAT good, by then ... the price of solid state memory will likely be dirt cheap.
And the whole reason for going cloud is to avoid the high price of that memory!!!
Besides, no matter how good the cloud gets, local hard drive memory will always be faster and more reliable.
It is at home, work and most cafes and pubs.
Where is Apple TV used - home.
Where is the majority of use of a laptop? Home. Work.
Even trains have wifi on board.
And laptops have hundreds of GB of data already on board - if you can't find a particular song and you're out of range of the internet, then you at least can play one of the other 5000 songs on your computer.
Anyway, it's a moot point as I'm certain that the device will have around 8GB of memory on board. Even if iOS is advancing to the stage that it uses it more as a cache of internet content (or personal content via WiFi syncing, etc), it will still sync in the same way as before.
I believe this means there will be a service to get files from your computer whereever you are, via something that could be called "Cloud Sync". Instead of driving the sync process from iTunes, you drive it from the phone, via WiFi or 3G. The computer will need to be on - or itself sync these files into MobileMe (for example) - for it to work, but it will finally split out syncing from iTunes.
Get off the cheap wagon already....
Listen we all get the concept of a cheaper iPhone, I do, but do you realize that Apple completely changed the mobile phone industry with the release of the iPhone? Do you know about whats been going on at Nokia and why they are now in a strategic relationship with Windows?
Nokia was the largest handset maker in the world and were caught off guard by the tremendous boom in smart phone market share. Stephen Elop said that Nokia had no idea that people would pay $500.00 or more for a smart phone, and that Apple have paved the way, and shown that people will pay a higher price for a high quality easy to use device that has an eco-system to support it and that people will pay more for a high quality user experience. Nokia is now trying to get back in the game with a viable OS...
Apple don't build cheap stripped down devices to supply to the general population. Apple's strategy has been to build the single best device on the market. The most desirable device on the market. Apple supplies the best user experience on the market, why would Apple change now by building a device that would in fact be inferior experience to the original? It's not about market share. Apple makes more net profit off each iPhone than any other manufacturer. They could easily lower the cost of the current iPhone to make it more affordable and still make a tidy profit off each device.
This whole thing is a half baked story at best...
iPhone Nano does not make sense.
Listen we all get the concept of a cheaper iPhone, I do, but do you realize that Apple completely changed the mobile phone industry with the release of the iPhone? Do you know about whats been going on at Nokia and why they are now in a strategic relationship with Windows?
Nokia was the largest handset maker in the world and were caught off guard by the tremendous boom in smart phone market share. Stephen Elop said that Nokia had no idea that people would pay $500.00 or more for a smart phone, and that Apple have paved the way, and shown that people will pay a higher price for a high quality easy to use device that has an eco-system to support it and that people will pay more for a high quality user experience. Nokia is now trying to get back in the game with a viable OS...
Apple don't build cheap stripped down devices to supply to the general population. Apple's strategy has been to build the single best device on the market. The most desirable device on the market. Apple supplies the best user experience on the market, why would Apple change now by building a device that would in fact be inferior experience to the original? It's not about market share. Apple makes more net profit off each iPhone than any other manufacturer. They could easily lower the cost of the current iPhone to make it more affordable and still make a tidy profit off each device.
This whole thing is a half baked story at best...
iPhone Nano does not make sense.
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/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm not buying it because of battery life either. WiFi isn't available everywhere and 3G usage eats up battery life big time. I just don't see a device like this being useful unless you've got WiFi access most places where you'll consume media on the device.
For me that's generally when I'm on the move. In a car, in a plane, walking somewhere, etc. WiFi access when I'm doing those things is the exception and not the rule. Do I like the idea of cloud based access to the media that you can't load on an iOS device for space reasons? Absolutely but I think only cloud based access would be a mistake.
If memory is really the problem then put an SD card slot in the device and let the end user decide how much to spend on storage above and beyond the cost of the device with cloud based access to the rest of your media. That route seems like a much more reasonable compromise than the inherent and significant disadvantages of going cloud only.
thejadedmonkey said:
I'm not buying it because of battery life either. WiFi isn't available everywhere and 3G usage eats up battery life big time. I just don't see a device like this being useful unless you've got WiFi access most places where you'll consume media on the device.
For me that's generally when I'm on the move. In a car, in a plane, walking somewhere, etc. WiFi access when I'm doing those things is the exception and not the rule. Do I like the idea of cloud based access to the media that you can't load on an iOS device for space reasons? Absolutely but I think only cloud based access would be a mistake.
If memory is really the problem then put an SD card slot in the device and let the end user decide how much to spend on storage above and beyond the cost of the device with cloud based access to the rest of your media. That route seems like a much more reasonable compromise than the inherent and significant disadvantages of going cloud only.
Listen we all get the concept of a cheaper iPhone, I do, but do you realize that Apple completely changed the mobile phone industry with the release of the iPhone? Do you know about whats been going on at Nokia and why they are now in a strategic relationship with Windows?
Nokia was the largest handset maker in the world and were caught off guard by the tremendous boom in smart phone market share. Stephen Elop said that Nokia had no idea that people would pay $500.00 or more for a smart phone, and that Apple have paved the way, and shown that people will pay a higher price for a high quality easy to use device that has an eco-system to support it and that people will pay more for a high quality user experience. Nokia is now trying to get back in the game with a viable OS...
Apple don't build cheap stripped down devices to supply to the general population. Apple's strategy has been to build the single best device on the market. The most desirable device on the market. Apple supplies the best user experience on the market, why would Apple change now by building a device that would in fact be inferior experience to the original? It's not about market share. Apple makes more net profit off each iPhone than any other manufacturer. They could easily lower the cost of the current iPhone to make it more affordable and still make a tidy profit off each device.
This whole thing is a half baked story at best...
iPhone Nano does not make sense.
who said the device would be some cheap POS? is the ipod nano or ipod touch a cheap POS?
Not every user needs a top of the line iphone 4. There are ways to make an iphone nano and make it at a reasonable price. The breakdown price of an iphone 4 is around $187 i saw in an article. Get rid of a majority of the storage and the retina display and don't have such a high quality camera and it can easily be done and sell-able for $200.
you are acting like this will be REPLACING the current iphone. this will catch pretty much every person in the cell phone market if they bring it to market.
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)
Now your confusing the issues... The iPod Nano and iPod Touch both have a purpose in this world that have nothing to do with market share or finance.
The iPod Nano was not brought into the world to offer consumers a cheaper priced music player. The purpose of the Nano was portability for active people. It's easier to work out with a Nano than it is with an iPod
Classic. It serves a real world purpose.
An iPhone Nano does not serve a purpose... The iPhone is already one of the most compact devices on the market. Have you even thought about the practical aspects of using this mythical iPhone Nano? As somebody pointed out in an earlier thread, the trend is to have a bigger screen than the iPhone currently has. Nobody wants a smaller one because it's not practical.
And even if it remained the same size and was stripped down as your suggesting, it still doesn't make sense for Apple to take a couple of steps backward.
If your right, I'll be happy to eat humble pie, but I seriously doubt there ever will be an iPhone Nano or even a stripped down version.
rmhop81 said:Listen we all get the concept of a cheaper iPhone, I do, but do you realize that Apple completely changed the mobile phone industry with the release of the iPhone? Do you know about whats been going on at Nokia and why they are now in a strategic relationship with Windows?
Nokia was the largest handset maker in the world and were caught off guard by the tremendous boom in smart phone market share. Stephen Elop said that Nokia had no idea that people would pay $500.00 or more for a smart phone, and that Apple have paved the way, and shown that people will pay a higher price for a high quality easy to use device that has an eco-system to support it and that people will pay more for a high quality user experience. Nokia is now trying to get back in the game with a viable OS...
Apple don't build cheap stripped down devices to supply to the general population. Apple's strategy has been to build the single best device on the market. The most desirable device on the market. Apple supplies the best user experience on the market, why would Apple change now by building a device that would in fact be inferior experience to the original? It's not about market share. Apple makes more net profit off each iPhone than any other manufacturer. They could easily lower the cost of the current iPhone to make it more affordable and still make a tidy profit off each device.
This whole thing is a half baked story at best...
iPhone Nano does not make sense.
who said the device would be some cheap POS? is the ipod nano or ipod touch a cheap POS?
Not every user needs a top of the line iphone 4. There are ways to make an iphone nano and make it at a reasonable price. The breakdown price of an iphone 4 is around $187 i saw in an article. Get rid of a majority of the storage and the retina display and don't have such a high quality camera and it can easily be done and sell-able for $200.
you are acting like this will be REPLACING the current iphone. this will catch pretty much every person in the cell phone market if they bring it to market.
Now your confusing the issues... The iPod Nano and iPod Touch both have a purpose in this world that have nothing to do with market share or finance.
The iPod Nano was not brought into the world to offer consumers a cheaper priced music player. The purpose of the Nano was portability for active people. It's easier to work out with a Nano than it is with an iPod
Classic. It serves a real world purpose.
An iPhone Nano does not serve a purpose... The iPhone is already one of the most compact devices on the market. Have you even thought about the practical aspects of using this mythical iPhone Nano? As somebody pointed out in an earlier thread, the trend is to have a bigger screen than the iPhone currently has. Nobody wants a smaller one because it's not practical.
And even if it remained the same size and was stripped down as your suggesting, it still doesn't make sense for Apple to take a couple of steps backward.
If your right, I'll be happy to eat humble pie, but I seriously doubt there ever will be an iPhone Nano or even a stripped down version.
again, you're acting as if they are gonna make this version and not have an iphone 4 or 5. The iPhone 5 could be bigger and better. and an iPhone nano would be a cheaper option. again, NOT everyone who has an iPhone needs the 16gb of storage space that it provides. I have an iPhone 4 and only have a few apps and use it primarily for facebook/internet/email on the go. I don't listen to music on it, so for a lot of basic users the iPhone 4 is overkill and a cheaper option would work for most people.
if apple wants to compete with all the markets they have to come up with a cheaper option. not everyone can afford or want to buy a $600 phone.
and in regards to your ipod nano comment.....if that was the purpose, what is the purpose of the shuffle? Remember it's a stripped down version of a nano and even smaller, but hey, apple would never do that!
by apple making this move, all cheap free phones would die off and create a new market of smaller/cheaper smartphone options. why would u get a basic cheap bar phone when you can get a fully function mini smartphone for FREE OR $200 no contract. it's a win win.