M
Mr.damien
Guest
"WSJ: Less Expensive iPhone Could Come as Soon as This Year"
That's great. Now can somebody tell me when real journalists will come at WSJ ?
That's great. Now can somebody tell me when real journalists will come at WSJ ?
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.
WSJ: Less Expensive iPhone Could Come as Soon as This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't believe this because of this statement:
"will be aimed at customers in developing countries"....
They can aim it at whoever they want, but a lot of these will end up in the developed world and seriously cutting into sales of the older iPhones, and possibly the flagship iPhone!
If however they were planning on releasing a cheaper iphone to all markets to replace the older models they are still selling, that would be something different, but that's not what this article is saying...
"will be aimed at customers in developing countries"....
They can aim it at whoever they want, but a lot of these will end up in the developed world and seriously cutting into sales of the older iPhones, and possibly the flagship iPhone!
If however they were planning on releasing a cheaper iphone to all markets to replace the older models they are still selling, that would be something different, but that's not what this article is saying...
So tell me, how rich and selfish are you exactly to make such statements?I guess it'll help broaden the customer base, but its kind of frustrating to know poor people will be able to get the same phone as me
On the other hand:
I don't like the way Apple is going..
Because they're very big now, they constantly have to make their shareholders happy and increase revenue. I think Cook is focusing too much on increasing revenue and margins (he's better than Jobs at that). But he forgets that the core apple fan base once used Apple products because they were very well designed and innovative. They still are very well designed, don't get me wrong but it feels like Apple only cares about money nowadays. Some might argue that they never cared about anything other than money; that might be true, but I guess they focused on other things back then: innovation. Nowadays they think they're innovating, but they're not anymore, they're just marketing the crap out of little features to brainwash average joe into buying their products.. And to increase profits even more, they play the Samsung game (if the rumor is correct
) by bringing out a cheaper iPhone so even more people will buy one and pay for apps.
Last edited:
Great! How about getting rid of the need to force me into a data plan instead. Still don't care about 'net' access anywhere and don't want to pay needless fees for something I don't have a use for. All want is an iOS PDA that can make Phone calls and maybe a text... maybe.
Apple need to think like this now they are into the Asian and Chinese markets. One larger and cheaper phone that could be a huge seller in these markets would make home and European markets look like loose change!
Refurbished phones cost more to build than brand new ones (Apple builds a new phone at full cost, something happens, Apple refurbishes the phone at extra cost). And what makes you think that legacy phones are cheaper to build? Building a first generation iPhone wouldn't be any cheaper than it was in 2007. You'd need a complete redesign to actually reduce the cost.
If you visit http://www.o2.co.uk and check the price for an iPhone 4 or 4S, you get the shock of your life. Either the people setting their prices have not the slightest clue at maths, or they are intentionally trying to rip off people who want to save money by not buying the latest phone, or they intentionally want to keep you away from the iPhone 4 and 4S. If you _carefully_ compare their prices (which is hard because they make them as difficult to compare as possible), you'll find that at this company, the iPhone 5 is actually the cheapest iPhone.
(They also offer the iPhone 5 at different initial prices and different monthly prices - if you pay £50 more for the phone, you save £5 per month for 24 months. Which adds up to £120, so by trying to save £50 you pay £70 more. )
At O2, if you carefully check the prices, iPhone 5 ends up costing about £22 per month for the phone and £13 per month for the service (unlimited calls, unlimited text, 1 GB data) over two years, so it is very much the cost of the phone. Of course the company hides that by putting most of the cost of the phone into their contracts. And they probably hope that you don't switch to a cheaper contract after two years when the phone is paid. They make it actually very, very hard to find cheaper contracts.
Some people will never get that. An iPhone costs exactly what Apple charges on their store. In the USA, $649, $749 or $849 plus tax, depending on memory. That's what you pay. The seller may be hiding this buy putting the cost or most of the cost into the monthly payment, but the full price is what you pay.
So if a 16GB iPhone 5 is offered for $x for the phone and $y per month on a 24 month contract, here is how you calculate it correctly:
1. You pay $649 for the phone.
2. You are given a loan (not a subsidy) of $649 - $x, which you pay off over 24 months at ($649 - $x) / 24 per month.
3. The service therefore costs $y - ($649 - $x) / 24 per month.
4. The phone costs you $649 / 24 = $27 per month.
Last edited:
There are plenty. My iPod Nano (6th generation) is about the perfect size for a phone. When I want screen size, I use two 27" monitors.
It's okay, you can come out and say it ... I lack self-esteem. =) I think there are many interpretations of those ads. I think Apple was quite happy reinforcing the 'cool' factor even if it meant it rubbed others the wrong way - much like a rebellious teenager (which, for Apple - as a company in its late 20s by that point - seemed immature).
It was never about elitism it was and still is about good taste and an appreciation of quality. The developing economies of Asia are filled with potential customers who just can't come close to affording the current iDevices. That doesn't make them any less than you because of their situation. In fact judging by your remark quite the opposite is probably true.
So tell me, how rich and selfish are you exactly to make such statements?
On the other hand:
I don't like the way Apple is going..
Because they're very big now, they constantly have to make their shareholders happy and increase revenue. I think Cook is focusing too much on increasing revenue and margins (he's better than Jobs at that). But he forgets that the core apple fan base once used Apple products because they were very well designed and innovative. They still are very well designed, don't get me wrong but it feels like Apple only cares about money nowadays. Some might argue that they never cared about anything other than money; that might be true, but I guess they focused on other things back then: innovation. Nowadays they think they're innovating, but they're not anymore, they're just marketing the crap out of little features to brainwash average joe into buying their products.. And to increase profits even more, they play the Samsung game (if the rumor is correct
So the markets they created with their iDevices are not results of innovation. You can't expect completely new things every year. One every ten years would be good but Apple have been doing better than that. The whole portable devices market owes its existence in its current form to Apple.
If Steve was still alive, I would say "no way". His view was to be the no-compromise brand and not build it unless it was insanely great.
Tim Cook et al must be looking at it as a way to avoid having what happened with the Mac and Windows - the Mac was better, but Windows was cheaper. Even though Apple had from 1984 through 1990-1992, Windows still ate up market share. This gets people locked into iTunes and attempts to avoid that.
Tim Cook et al must be looking at it as a way to avoid having what happened with the Mac and Windows - the Mac was better, but Windows was cheaper. Even though Apple had from 1984 through 1990-1992, Windows still ate up market share. This gets people locked into iTunes and attempts to avoid that.
I'm in the believe it when I see it camp too. I don't think Appe is as freaked out about Samsung as Wall Street is. How often has Apple done things because of competitive worries? If that's what their concern was/is we'd have a 5" iPhone and $199 or $250 plastic/rubber iPad mini. Oh and back in the day we would have has a cheap netbook too. Can't forget how everyone was saying Apple had to do a netbook.
They don't have to make it out of plastic to make it cheap.
The iPod shuffles are anodised aluminium and cost Apple virtually nothing to manufacture.
All Apple need to do is ensure their top of the range iPhones are desirable enough to sell over the budget model. They are going to need a standout feature on the iPhone 6 anyway. Perhaps a bevel-free display or liquid metal body, etc. Something like that will ensure the people with iPhone 5's upgrade. I imagine eventually the iPhone will just be a seamless slab of toughened glass, but not for a few more generations.
There is a huge number of people who would never buy iPhones at the current price, so get cheap android's instead. This is the market that Apple could steal and they will have to do it if they want to find brand new customers.
The iPod shuffles are anodised aluminium and cost Apple virtually nothing to manufacture.
All Apple need to do is ensure their top of the range iPhones are desirable enough to sell over the budget model. They are going to need a standout feature on the iPhone 6 anyway. Perhaps a bevel-free display or liquid metal body, etc. Something like that will ensure the people with iPhone 5's upgrade. I imagine eventually the iPhone will just be a seamless slab of toughened glass, but not for a few more generations.
There is a huge number of people who would never buy iPhones at the current price, so get cheap android's instead. This is the market that Apple could steal and they will have to do it if they want to find brand new customers.
Last edited:
This report is one of the most devastating things to hit to Apple in a long time. This article is an image change maker. Whether they make this phone or not, Apple's image of being the best and warranting the profits they make, has changed to just another producer of junk products. Looks like it might be time to switch my stock investments from Apple to Google since stock prices are mostly based on corporate image, not earnings.
In retail there are three key matrix:
1. Profitability (of course)
2. Volume (of course)
3. Market share
Smartphones can't operate without data plans. Apps need to access data from outside the phone. Siri and Maps come a close second to Mail. If you don't want a data plan, don't get a smartphone.