2 new conflicting iPhone reports support “multiple iPhone models” rumor
Image via information architects
Remember when crazy faithful Macenstein reader Doug wrote us telling us to expect Apple to release at least two and possibly even three models of iPhone this spring? (see Even more rumors: The new iPhones’ specs) Well, two conflicting reports from two fairly major and reputable sites suggest their may be something to Doug’s claims after all.
First came reports from Engadget that the new 3G iPhone would come with GPS and be a bit larger/thicker than the current model, something Doug mentioned in his claims, and something that most of our readers blasted him for. While it is nice to think that Apple would continue its trend of slimming its portables with each new revision, logic would suggest that the current iPhone’s innards are packed pretty tightly, and adding a GPS module might very well necessitate a slight change in form factor. So when we read Engadget’s claim, reportedly from a trusted source who had actually held one of the new iPhones, we re-read Doug’s report and said, “hmmmm…”
Today, however, Electronista is claiming that “The next generation of Apple’s phone should include a significantly smaller phone that may replace the existing model… with a 2.8-inch screen replacing the 3.5-inch model used today” .
Hmm… One says bigger, one says smaller… So, who do we believe? Or are they BOTH right? Doug’s claims would seem to support the idea that both sites may have correct information, and may in fact be speaking of two different models of iPhone.
Despite the clamoring for “true” iPhone GPS on the internet, I can completely see Apple offering a model of iPhone sans GPS to those who do not view GPS as a must-have feature. Personally, I pretty much know where I am about 99% of the time, so GPS isn’t personally that exciting a prospect if it means increased size/weight and lower battery life. Add to that Apple’s seeming move into the enterprise market (a market used to carrying around laptop-sized PDA/Smartphones) with the iPhone 2.0 software, and even a slightly bigger iPhone would seem like a miracle to business users who might want a larger screen.
Obviously, we’re rooting for Doug, as that means we may have a bonafide rumor source, so perhaps we’re reading too much into these reports (as if you could ever over-analyze an iPhone rumor!). That being said, we’re waiting until we see an iPhone shuffle before we send him a cookie.
What are your thoughts? Will Apple create multiple iPhones tailored for different users, just as they have for the iPod and MacBook lines?
It would make sense that they come out with multiple versions. Just like with iPods, not everyone wants to drop $500 on the top of the line model; for some people the $80 model is just right. Apple ends of selling more product than they would if just had the high-end model and customers get what they want.
Ok honestly, what point is there in an “iPhone Shuffle”
The whole point of an iPhone is to have at least two things in one…the iPod and a phone. Add more, and that’s just better, but take some off and all you’re going to have is either a phone or an iPod which you can get separately anyways. I’m guessing that an iPhone Shuffle would likely have a memory of 4GB or so, and cost at least $100 (probably more). Plus service and activation fees. And I don’t know about you, but the iPhone screen is small enough for web browsing…the iPhone Shuffle’s screen looks like it would be enough to read a few lines at a time, assuming they left that capability available. Nor is the screen big enough for much else that the iPhone is capable of.
The iPhone Nano seems like a pretty good idea though. Personally, I’d stick to the full size model only for screen size. But for those that want the capabilities of the iPhone in a smaller size its a great idea.
I’d also really like to see a fully capable GPS integrated into the iPhone…weight isn’t much of an issue for me.
But seriously…a Shuffle model? C’mon people.
@ Mason
The rumor is for one larger, one smaller (2.8 inch screen). The illustration of the shuffle is a joke, follow the link.
I heard that Doug is some 400 lb. guy in Palo Alto, CA taking care of his grandma. He used to work at Apple until he got fired…he forgot to clean the men’s 2nd floor bathrooms.
Of course, this is just a rumor, just like the iPhone shuffle.
“But for those that want the capabilities of the iPhone in a smaller size its a great idea.”
Well, the screen is arguably one of the “capabilities” of an iPhone. For example, you could run a web browser on a smaller screen, sure. But would it be worth using in anything other than a desperate emergency?
That’s the tricky part. Can Apple cram an iPhone experience into a smaller size? Consider the iPod–even without a visual interface (iPod shuffle), it still does what you want it to do: Play Music. Most people don’t “use” their iPods–they set them and forget them. Bring up the appropriate playlist and start listening.
But I think people actually use their iPhones. Web browsing requires a decent screen. We can, arguably, passively watch videos on an iPod nano screen. But actually trying to interact with the web? I don’t think so.
And with more applications coming for the iPhone, people will be using them for more and more things. But I certainly don’t want to track my expenses on a little tiny screen.
So the argument now becomes, “What do I lose from the lesser versions?” Imagine the proverbial “iPhone shuffle.” It makes phone calls and plays music. Personally, I wouldn’t run out and buy one because I’m not really gaining anything from my two separate devices: cheap cell phone and iPod.
There should be three versions maximum. One built to the current iPhone with all the goodies, one built for road warriors with extra battery life and a girlie version for people with tiny hands and arms too weak to lift the other two models. Maybe the small model is geared for Asians due to their smaller size.
I do believe people should have some choice in models since all the other handset companies give users choices in models. One size does not fit all. However, I do not see how the current iPhone is too big and heavy. Has America really become the land of couch potatoes?
I can see Apple putting out two different phones, but three would be a crowd. Once you get down to the supposed iPhone Shuffle, it would necessarily be too cheap/low end to include a touch screen (price range of say $80-$140?), and without a touch-screen, it’s not an iPhone anymore. I don’t think Apple will get into the low-end phone market. The iPod line doesn’t just magically carry across to iPhone.
I deeply believe, however, that Apple will introduce a line of two phones with markedly differentiated features to appeal to different markets, even if they are in similar form factors. A higher-end phone would lead the way in new features, including 3G and possibly GPS, and will maintain a higher-maximum amount of storage – say 32GB over the lower-end’s 16GB (or 16GB to 8GB). The lower-end phone would be similar to the iPhone we enjoy today and would not likely include 3G. Both phones would support all enterprise features introduced in the 2.0 update, and both would have matching or similar battery life ratings.
This is just what makes sense to me, based on how I perceive the way Apple thinks.
@ Peter:
I agree completely.
@ Constable Odo:
Everyone else makes cheap phones, Odo. Apple simply has no reason to try to compete in that kind of market. Sure, they could make a better cheap phone, but it still wouldn’t be the iPhone experience they have already created.
Ok… HOW would you type numbers (or for that matter text messages) on the iPhone Shuffle?!?
another contridicting site posted this http://www.ipod-addicts.com/iphone/3g-iphone-rumored-to-be-only-slightly-thicker-and-have-glossy-black.html one day and then posted this the next http://www.ipod-addicts.com/iphone/new-3g-iphone-reports-3g-iphone-to-be-smaller-and-lighter.html
interesting how sites have all the rumors but no announcement from apple yet!
What if they are adding a second screen so that we can do video chat without moving the camera