Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Vaja Also Hints at iPhone Nano?

Cost reduction

Given that monthly data-plans and fixed-term contracts represent the biggest costs and limitations associated with iPhone, then I believe iPhone Nano will address those areas.

The leaked photos suggest iPhone Nano could be one of:
  1. Telephone iPod (with different screen)
  2. Simpler iPhone (smaller package, but same screen size & DPI)

An unlocked telephone iPod would drive iPod sales in a major new direction -- replacing existing phone hardware with Apple hardware, and allowing users to continue to use existing service plans. Driving iPod sales is becoming increasingly important as some markets reach saturation.

Introducing a new screen-size might complicate the App Store, but in fact we already have a fragmented experience with iPod games.

A smaller iPhone is a very natural evolution of the product. If Apple can squeeze current functionality in to a "Nano" package, then the current iPhone 3G form-factor could be differentiated with bigger battery, better camera, increased memory, increased storage etc.

Let's hope Phil (at least) shares a roadmap with us next week :)
 
Don't know if this has been suggested before but I think they may make it pay as you go only, no contract. It would sell for around $199 for 8gb. Basically same price, no contract. This may even allow Apple to unlock the phone to other carriers as it may not be in breach of their contract with AT&T.

Just a thought. But I don't see how the app's will work. to be the same all the buttons etc would need to be smaller making them harder to touch.
Guess we'll find out soon!
 
Work backwards

Apple gets @$500/iPhone.
Apple gets @$200/Touch.
The data plan allows large subsidy.
Remove data plan, and can't get as much.
Keep it, and simply have a smaller form iPhone.
Keep wifi, and have a smaller form Touch, w/ phone (and camera).

If nano arrives, I vote a touchscreen nano, w/ phone and camera. That's it. (Maybe texting for $). No apps (or maybe a few specialized ones via computer download). No browser (if you want that, get an iPhone). No goodies.
 
Prof. said:
2qibcyq.png

minus the Wi-Fi icon of course.
Click to expand...
iphonenanofv5.jpg


I made a better one. The iPhone Nano 3G
 
dacreativeguy said:
It ABSOLUTELY won't have all of the capabilities of the current iphone. Otherwise, it would cannibalize the sales of the existing iphone. No chance that Apple does anything stupid like that.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your premise regarding cannibalization but agree with the assessment you made regarding capabilities - in a neutered iPhone Nano. I think it SHOULD have the same capabilities but it will not as Apple does things differently than others. I am holding out hope for a 2.5G phone with WiFi and similar capabilities - then I can ditch my 2G phone for a smaller Nano with Edge and WifI. I have no 3G in my Big 10 town and we are not slated for 3G until somewhere in the early 2010's.

D
 
Ok I I have stated before that this iphone nano concept is ridiculous. The only way I CAN see this happening is if the phone has one or two extrordinary features; maybe some that the current iphone does not boast. Now to go along with that, I'm thinking how. Its too small to even perform some of the regular functions of the current iphone. Gaming, texting, emailing, talking even would be less enjoyable. I have never been one to doubt Apple on anything, but as of late . . There have definitely been some question marks. :cool:
 
skythefly13 said:
Why?! The iPhone is already small enough in the first place, how are they going to decrease the size and still let the keyboard be enough to type on? I really hope they don't make a shorter, fatter version of the regular iPhone!
Click to expand...

Again, I disagree. for YOU - a Nano iPhone is small and not useful but for people like my brother who looked at and ultimately decided against the iPhone 3G due to size - this would be the ticket. I would like a smaller iPhone with similar features and better DPI for smoother fonts and graphics - but it seems I am in the minority - as I am in most things.

If Apple is worth their salt in design and envisioning new techniques and technology - why would you expect them to NOT nail this? They rarely flub one and most often hit a double if not one out of the park. I am no fanboy as can be seen from my criticism of the way Apple does business - but I more than willing to acknowledge when someone does something right - and Apple is great at design and technique if sometimes short on vision and substance.

D
 
iPhone Nano, State Of The Art Technololgy menas $Higher Selling Price$

EVERYONE continues to assume that a Smaller iPhone would be sold for less money, when in fact, smaller, state-of-the-art technology is typically demanding higher sale price.

I would not put it past Apple, now that the current top-of-the-line iPhone, sells for $299.00, to come out with a slick, very powerful ARM-based Nano, pulling in $499 and $599+ prices again.

Due to it's processing power, miniaturization and overall sleekness (all the standards included, 3G, GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.), the Nano will be primarily driven by voice recognition instead of touch.

Would not surprise me one bit, with Apples ever increasing desire, to set the standard.

I could see Phil pulling it out of a Deck Of Cards box.
Of course not with the showmanship Steve would have provided, but still a nice launching pad for Phil. ;)
 
j5045096 said:
I posted in another thread that the experience on the current iPhone is like perfect in terms of size. Any bigger and it's too bulky and gets into netbook territory; any smaller and I wouldn't want to use it. The keyboard is hard enough to send e-mails on (TouchType has been an awesome app though--landscape typing for e-mails is a Godsend).

BUT this is what I don't get: if they sell an iPhone nano for $99 do they even make money (or enough to make it worth while?). Just because it's smaller doesn't mean it's cheaper to make! The touch screen technology has to be the same, sound chip, processor, glass etc. ...it's just smaller!?

When the iPod nano came out vs. the Classic it wasn't much cheaper--wasn't the original Nano 4GB like $250 vs. $300 for the cheapest classic? Part of that was the cost of flash memory at the time, but even still, they shared a lot of the same technology; it was not that much cheaper to make it than the Classic?

If they use a 4gb chip vs 8gb are they saving that much money to make it worthwhile? And then I have to ask another business decision question: why now? The Touch and iPhone are selling like crazy right now--adding Wal-Mart is going to increase that and time is only help right now as people are coming off contracts with other carriers and choosing not to re-up but to switch to AT&T. I've had probably 15 friends in the past 3 months that have switched to AT&T for iPhones when their current plans ended. It's a cash cow they should be riding right?
Click to expand...

What you don't seem to understand is that if the iPhone Nano is sold with contract for $99 then in all likelihood AT&T paid Apple something like $299 for the iPhone Nano and then subsidized it for new activations, etc.

If it costs Apple $100 to manufacture it and they sell it to AT&T for $299 it doesn't take a math genius to figure out how much money they are making.

Profit margins on traditional mp3 players are getting smaller and smaller every year and Apple knows this. The upscale phone market is a huge opportunity for Apple to sell millions of devices at the types of profit margins they used to enjoy on their iPod product line.

How people can stick their head in the sand about this is beyond me.
 
BuffyzDead said:
EVERYONE continues to assume that a Smaller iPhone would be sold for less money, when in fact, smaller, state-of-the-art technology is typically demanding higher sale price.

I would not put it past Apple, now that the current top-of-the-line iPhone, sells for $299.00, to come out with a slick, very powerful ARM-based Nano, pulling in $499 and $599+ prices again.

Due to it's processing power, miniaturization and overall sleekness (all the standards included, 3G, GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.), the Nano will be primarily driven by voice recognition instead of touch.

Would not surprise me one bit, with Apples ever increasing desire, to set the standard.

I could see Phil pulling it out of a Deck Of Cards box.
Of course not with the showmanship Steve would have provided, but still a nice launching pad for Phil. ;)
Click to expand...

The market for extremely high end phones that require pricey data contracts is limited. For every person who will spend $80-$100 a month for an iPhone 3G there are probably 10 people that would like something like the iphone but with a lower price contract, smaller size, etc.

A lot of people here seem to be frustrated with the idea that Apple will take the iphone concept and apply it to lower cost phones. They want to continue to see super expensive elitest products from Apple (makes them feel special maybe? who knows).

The reality however is that Apple has repeatedly in their history built a product following on a high end model and then produced a lower price/feature version of the product that is sold to the masses at very high profit margins.

Millions of people want an iphone without really wanting an iphone. In other words they don't need 3G data, GPS, etc. They want the rich media experience of an ipod with some telephone capabilities.

The iPhone Nano would be this product and will make Apple a fortune. Even without a data plan, carriers will beg apple for this handset and they will agree to still sell it at a massive subsidy for new contracts, etc. This is because it is going to get them subscribers. If you are going to get a new subscriber who is going to spend $1200 over two years on a contract, subsidizing a super hot phone $200 is NOTHING. I would expect this to sell at $99 with contract and Apple probably gets $300 per unit sold. Which means Apple makes a fortune on it.

Much as people fawned over the high capacity iPods of yesteryear, when in fact Apple made far more money selling larger quantities of their low capacity, cheap to produce ipod minis.
 
jmpage2 said:
The market for extremely high end phones that require pricey data contracts is limited. For every person who will spend $80-$100 a month for an iPhone 3G there are probably 10 people that would like something like the iphone but with a lower price contract, smaller size, etc.

A lot of people here seem to be frustrated with the idea that Apple will take the iphone concept and apply it to lower cost phones. They want to continue to see super expensive elitest products from Apple (makes them feel special maybe? who knows).

The reality however is that Apple has repeatedly in their history built a product following on a high end model and then produced a lower price/feature version of the product that is sold to the masses at very high profit margins.

Millions of people want an iphone without really wanting an iphone. In other words they don't need 3G data, GPS, etc. They want the rich media experience of an ipod with some telephone capabilities.

The iPhone Nano would be this product and will make Apple a fortune.

Much as people fawned over the high capacity iPods of yesteryear, when in fact Apple made far more money selling larger quantities of their low capacity, cheap to produce ipod minis.
Click to expand...

For us unlockers and jailbreakers, AT&T is still the problem... :eek:

I pay $51/month for 1000 minutes, unlimited nights/weekends, 400 texts, and unlimited EDGE data on T-Mobile... :D
 
gkarris said:
For us unlockers and jailbreakers, AT&T is still the problem... :eek:

I pay $51/month for 1000 minutes, unlimited nights/weekends, 400 texts, and unlimited EDGE data on T-Mobile... :D
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think Apple or Steve Jobs for that matter gives a rats ass about unlockers or the whims of people who don't want AT&T service.

The market for pay as you go phones and unlocked handsets is tiny in the US compared to selling to a major carrier that agrees to buy millions of handsets at a shot.
 
Stop creating site traffic for these people.

Arn, this story should be removed from the site!

All these companies are doing is creating traffic for their sites!

Unless MacRumors is getting Ad revenue from this (hey if you are then more power to you) you should stop.

Just wait and see how many more of these case companies add dead links on their site for the iPhone Nano case!
 
Good Strategy for Apple

Although this is still a rumor, it really makes sense in light of Apple's recent partnership with Wal-Mart. Wal-mart, as you know, caters to price-conscious (and who isn't these days) consumers. By offering a "slimmed" down version of the iPhone (both physically and feature-wise) at a lower price (say $100.00 new), Apple has the most direct route to these price-conscious consumers, with the added benefit of Wal-mart also serving as an additional distributor of the full-featured iPhones. I really does make sense.
 
whatever said:
Arn, this story should be removed from the site!

All these companies are doing is creating traffic for their sites!

Unless MacRumors is getting Ad revenue from this (hey if you are then more power to you) you should stop.

Just wait and see how many more of these case companies add dead links on their site for the iPhone Nano case!
Click to expand...

Yes, god forbid that Mac Rumors would post stories about rumors about Apple products!! :D
 
jmpage2 said:
Yes, god forbid that Mac Rumors would post stories about rumors about Apple products!! :D
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that all Mac Rumors is driving traffic to Vaja's website. At one point there was a form for stupid people to fill out about the iPhone Nano!

Vaja is not even a major player in the iPod or iPhone case market. Apple doesn't even sell their products! And let's face it, a majority of people buy their iPod and iPhone cases when they buy the product!

There will not be an iPhone Nano. Trust me. One of the biggest complaints about the iPhone is that it's difficult to type on it because of the screen, so let's shrink it down further!

Also don't hold your breath for an iPhone to run on Verizon anytime soon!
 
Anyone stop to think of how an iPhone Nano makes no sense?
Is the iPhone REALLY too big? Or are they just trying to cut the cost?

And how in the world will you use the virtual keyboard on a smaller device?
 
If it's real, then it would be great fun if it had a physical number pad...

Just watching the kiddies spinning around trying to fit real buttons into their previous touch-oriented worship of Jobs' salesmanship skills, would be priceless. I think their heads would explode.
 
The technology exists to create such a phone however in the US the market simply doesnt, however in Europe and Southern Asia its possible a market exists there, it would be competing with phones such as the Samsung Tocco etc however i simply dont see with such a small phone where the profit would come in for Apple, as they make a lot from the Apps and surely on such a small screen this would be a bit limited.

Also Vaja may simply be making cases for the fake version of this phone available in Malaysia.
 
Jeve Stobs said:
Why couldn't the nano be the smaller and more exclusive and expensive version of the iPhone? Don't see why everone expects it to be cheaper. See the Nokia 8xxx series or something similar.
Click to expand...

Because hardly anybody wants a more expensive iPhone.
 
zedsdead said:
After all of these rumors I do think an iPhone Nano is coming, but I do not think it will be announced at Macworld. As Jobs' has stated, the iPhone is "near and dear to his heart." I doubt Shiller would be the one to introduce it, but you never know. Also, based on most of the other rumors, Macworld seems like it is going to be Mac-centric.
Click to expand...

Steve will show; it will be a huge surprise.

You heard it here first. ;)
 
mccldwll said:
Apple gets @$500/iPhone.
Apple gets @$200/Touch.
The data plan allows large subsidy.
Remove data plan, and can't get as much.
Keep it, and simply have a smaller form iPhone.
Keep wifi, and have a smaller form Touch, w/ phone (and camera).

If nano arrives, I vote a touchscreen nano, w/ phone and camera. That's it. (Maybe texting for $). No apps (or maybe a few specialized ones via computer download). No browser (if you want that, get an iPhone). No goodies.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I want. And everyone else I know.

And they know that.

And this is what I think we're getting......
 
Kilamite said:
If the iPhone nano does come out - developers would most likely have to re-produce their games and apps to accommodate the smaller screen.

So you'd end up with two App Stores - one for the iPhone and one for the iPhone nano.
Click to expand...

When I switched from my 13" macbook to my 15" MBP, I had to buy all new programs. That really sucked. Oh wait a minute, no I didn't :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back