What are your thoughts of a smaller iPhone? If one were to happen, it may just as well be aimed at the pre paid market. Services like Boost, Vergin mobile (both owned by sprint) and Crickit. Or even ATT & Verizon's pre paid area. There are a lot of people who don't want to be on a two year contract and don't want to shell out $700 for a phone. If they can keep the cost down ($200-$250 unsubsidized) Apple could make a huge profet.
- 02-12-2011, 10:55 PM #2
- 02-12-2011, 11:04 PM #3iPhone Nanite
- 5 Posts
- 02-13-2011, 12:17 AM #4
- 02-13-2011, 12:20 AM #5iMore Expert
- 891 Posts
- 02-13-2011, 12:47 AM #6
- 02-13-2011, 01:56 AM #7
- 02-13-2011, 02:00 AM #8
The iPhone 3GS is $49 along with the iPod shuffle. The nano starts off at $149 with the touch at $229 and the classic at $249. Didn't the iPods cost close to $500 when they first came out and that was for a device the thickness of a deck of playing cards, had 5GB of storage, a physical click wheel and used Firewire and had a monochrome display. Plus only worked with macs?
Also look at the apple TV. Its now just $99 or compare the price of an iPhone now, compared to when it first launched back in 2007 or a very good example of price drops is the notebooks. The macbook pro, for the longest time started off at $1999 and today you can pick one up for $1199 or just $1799 for the 15" model. and mind you while the macbook pro is aimed at professionals, its more like the iMac and is pretty much aimed at anyone regardless of the "pro" name.
You guys did bring up some very good points, but like I said, is one would be aimed at a whole another market much like how the iPods or even the macs are aimed at.
They have a low cost mac - The mac mini, why not the phone?
- 02-13-2011, 03:00 AM #10
Original iPod was $399 iirc and yes was Mac only. I'm sure that Apple could come up with a lower cost alternative to the iPhone, the iPhone nano or something along those lines, but the question comes down to if it would be worth it to them to do so.
The smaller iPods are filling a need in the market, not really just a lower cost alternative, but a smaller alternative for those on the go, working out, etc. The nano and shuffle fill that need.
It's been suggested that the iPhone 4 costs approximately $190 in parts alone. That's not counting assembly, shipping and recuperation of r&d costs (which for any hardware and software vendor is significant ).
If Apple were to release a less expensive device, the major cost cutting parts are the screen, the flash memory, ram and processor. To deliver a less powerful device that would run slower and possibly have a difficult time multi-tasking with iOS 4.0+ would be egg on their face. Apple gets the carriers to subsidize th cost of the phone. Apple gets paid more than the $199 or $299 that is paid to ATT or verizon. With subsidized phones out there AND the fact some people go out of their way to pay the unsubsidized price, I dont see what apple would gain by making a smaller phone.
- 02-13-2011, 03:30 AM #11
Well think about this. As I said, it will be aimed at the pre paid market. Now those in that market tend to care less if it has a Retina display or fast memory or speed (somewhat on the speed though) all they want is a good qulity phone that can be in line with the high end phones you get on a contract, but for a much lower price. they don't want a flip, slider or candy bar style phone. They want a smart phone, but don't want to pay too much, not be on a two year contract. thats why Cricket, Boost and VErgin Mobile are having smart phone places for as low as $50-$60 bucks a month. Sure you may be placed on a slower network but hey, you saved money and thats all what the general consumer wants. Theres a reason why they chose to go pre paid and why those networks exist.
You brought up that some may go out and buy the iPhone outright, but you can't expect everyone to toss down $600. You have to look at the general popluation.
Yes, it will be smaller and less performing, but thats the price you pay for a low end product. If you don't want it, then go out and buy the "normal" iPhone. There would be a choice. I dobut the smaller iPhone will be available for the normal carriers.
- 02-13-2011, 11:57 AM #13
- 02-13-2011, 03:40 PM #15
- 02-13-2011, 05:55 PM #16
- 02-13-2011, 07:43 PM #17
A smaller iPhone wont happen just like a 7" iPad wont happen. Apple makes premium products, once they make a cheap version of whatever it's a slippery slope and I don't see them going there. There are so many things Apple could do and make a crap load of money, they don't care because they already make a crapload of money.
- 02-13-2011, 08:02 PM #18
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 02-13-2011, 08:14 PM #19
- 02-13-2011, 09:28 PM #20
- 02-14-2011, 02:06 PM #21
- 02-14-2011, 04:12 PM #22
Recent rumor is the so called "iPhone nano" will be a streaming only device and if that is true then I think i would have to retrack my statements and say that this wont ever happen. iOS needs memory for storage and I dobut many would want to stream, not when both Verizon and ATT will have data caps.
- 02-15-2011, 06:37 PM #24
I think the real reason the EVO weighs a little more is because of the kick stand. I can flip it open and hold the phone and it fells a little lighter.
But lets say the 3.5" becomes the "iPhone nano" and the larger one would be the main phone. You would have a choice and theres nothing wrong with choices. Its not like Apple will have ten different models