How Apple Plans to Change the Way You Use the Next iPhone | Hacker News Reader

How Apple Plans to Change the Way You Use the Next iPhone

bloomberg.com

20 pointsmatco1149 comments

If all this is true then it sucks. Oh, not because of the phone as that seems cool! The issue is I want to be suprised at the Apple event. That is part of the fun. I hate all these leaks.

... don't read the leaks, then?

Sure because it is not like the information is not front and center on a ton of sites home pages? A picture of the phone was on the front page of Ars Technica a few days back IIRC.

I'm disappointed by the facial recognition authentication. I had it on my Nexus 4 and it was annoying. You can't discreetly unlock your phone in your lap or in your pocket and steal a glance at a notification, or use the phone in any number of other scenarios unless the phone is square with your face. Touchid was perfect for this.

How can you be disappointed by something that hasn't been released yet?

I want the base model to have 64GB. That's the sweet spot for how much data I keep on my phone (and I suspect I'm not alone). I'm afraid Apple is going to cripple the base model somehow in order to keep us paying for higher capacity ones.

It sounds like what you really mean is "I want the 64GB model to be cheaper".

But really, the lowest-tier price should not be the "sweet spot" for storage, because why should all the people who want less than the "sweet spot" have to pay for that extra storage? The "sweet spot" should be the middle tier.

It should be noted that, on iPhones, there is no 64gb model offered. It's 32gb, 128, and 256. On the Jet Black, it starts at 128.

True. And I think that's a recognition of the fact that 128GB is actually the sweet spot, not 64GB. Meanwhile there is a sizable number of people who don't really need any storage at all, which is why the 32GB model exists.

I think it has more to do with price anchoring the 128GB one, to make it look like a great value compared to the 32GB, since another large price bump only brings you another doubling of (dubiously useful) storage from there.

Also, 32GB is bordering on unusable in late 2017 when many of the "essential" apps are taking up hundreds of MB or more, each and the phone records 4K video at 60fps.

As I've said in other comments, there is a big chunk of users that use effectively no storage at all, and would in fact be perfectly happy with the 16GB that used to be the lowest tier. I think Apple only bumped it to 32GB for PR reasons (well, and to help with OTA updates, because it was too easy to use up enough space on the 16GB model that there wasn't room for an OTA update).

It's the sweet spot for Apple for upselling, not for customers.

64gb is hardly a middle tier these days. Not when Apple wants us to take high resolution (and live) photos and movies, and watch movies and games on our devices. 32 GB is closing in on unusable for a modern phone with a few dozen apps.

I'd consider 64GB to be the bottom tier, with 128 and 256 or 512 the next two tiers. And based on the specs on the pro devices (even the mini 4), Apple seems to agree.

You're discounting all the people who basically don't use storage on their devices.

I guarantee you my grandmother has no need for 64GB of space.

Spot on. I'm still using a 16GB iPhone and plenty happy with it. Really don't get why so many people want me to have to pay for a higher spec I won't use.

You won't pay for that higher spec - the low end phone will always have the same price point.

The argument could also be flipped - why do people who want a reasonable amount of storage on their phone be forced to pay $2-300 for $50-60 of memory?

64gb costs Apple $5. They're beyond taking their customers for granted at this point. This entire conversation is absurd given the price of 64gb now.

The price for 64gb has come down to what it used to cost them for 8gb or 16gb, and they're simply refusing to upgrade the base memory as a means to stick it to their loyal customers for a sliver of added margin.

And my mother fills her phone with pictures and movies of her grandchildren, and is aggravated that she has to constantly offload all those photos.

A single data point is just that - one data point. With higher resolution cameras and videos, they need more space to store the same number of pictures and videos. Those cameras have always been a big selling point for Apple.

Then your mother should have a larger phone. The fact that most people want more than 32GB doesn't mean there isn't a need for a 32GB model.

We shouldn't forget that an SD card slot would solve this problem. And while we are at it, allow disk and memory upgrades on Macbooks.

> We shouldn't forget that an SD card slot would solve this problem. And while we are at it, allow disk and memory upgrades on Macbooks.

Aside from the fact that an SD card slot would make it much harder to charge a premium markup on the hardware (which is where Apple makes most of its money), there are genuine usability concerns with putting SD cards on mobile phones.

They're not insurmountable, which is why Samsung and other manufacturers do it, but Google and Apple both avoid it for their flagship devices, because from their perspective, forcing the user to have to think about the difference between internal and external storage is an anti-pattern.

Power users may not like that answer, but beyond the revenue, that's the other reason they do it.

Samsung, to be fair, stopped doing it on flagships for a while, too, bringing them back on last years S7 and Note7.

Users wouldn't be forced to think about the difference between internal and external storage. They could ignore the SD card slot and pretend it doesn't exist. Those who want to put up with the hassle could use it.

There's an advantage in saving space and cost, and a major advantage for Apple in forcing people to buy absurdly expensive upgrades from them, but it's not about making the experience better somehow.

I'm not sure what is your experience with SD cards but mine have been a horrible one. It can impact performance, and even freeze your phone. Now if you buy expensive SD cards it could solve the .... oh, just buy the upgrade!

Expensive SD cards still don't cost anything like what Apple charges for storage upgrades.

As if the price of upgrading is anywhere near just buying an SD card.

It's also because most SD cards have garbage performance and wouldn't get anywhere near Apple's storage speeds. And that definitely would be a negative for the experience.

Again, people would have the option of not using them.

Well, some microsd cards go already up to 300 MB/s.

Even cheapo (for size) 256 GB Samsung Evo+ does 90 MB/s+.

I think that's fast enough for large media files.

I am sure money is the main reason. All other reasons could easily be worked around if they chose to do so. I spent a few hundred more on my Macbook Pro just to make sure I have enough RAM and disk just in case I need it. If I had an iPhone (my Moto G5 has an SD slot) I would probably also go with the 128 model just to be sure.

I'm a power user and I agree. Cheap SD card can slow down your phone and impact performance in a big way.

Then get a better one. That's not a reason to not having a slot. Otherwise let's take out the battery. Forgetting to charge also has a big impact on the phone performance.

Most users will opt for the cheap SD card though. That's why they didn't buy the upgrade. I just went ahead with the 128GB in iPhone 7+ and I can see why Apple did that: You don't have money, you have space issues. You pay for the upgrade, then you have way more space than to bother.

They are basically pushing users to the 128GB version.

"They are basically pushing users to the 128GB version."

Correct. That's not because SD cards are bad but because they make more money.

And no SD card can stop you dead when your internal memory is full. Rotten either way.

It's absolutely not about users caring for external vs internal. In case of Google, it's about forcing users into cloud services so that Google can collect all your personal information. Note how Chromebooks have ridiculously small hard drives, despite this compromising their usefulness as general-purpose laptops.

It solves that problem and creates other problems.

I really do wonder where Bloomberg got all this predictions from and looking forward to the 9/13 when they have to update this article.

Either the author didn't know about future tense or he just tried to give his employer some traffic.

It's just stupid to pretend that you details which of course are well secretly kept.

Bloomberg hired the author (Mark Gurman) from 9to5Mac last year. https://www.recode.net/2016/6/1/11835514/bloomberg-mark-gurm...

He was a senior editor there. His 9to5Mac bio shows quite a stellar track record

https://9to5mac.com/author/markgurman/

  inductive charging

What about the headphone jack?

Are the two connected somehow?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(connector)

It doesn't say they're removing the lighting connector though does it? It just says they're adding inductive charging. The lighting connector is used for more things than charging. Such as headphones, as you said yourself. And aren't most headphones bluetooth these days?

What about it? its gone, its never coming back. Frankly I'd rather have the waterproofing features that a lack of a headphone jack gives you than one. I use bluetooth speakers much more than I plug in a 3.5mm jack on my current android.

Oh please. Samsung managed to have a waterproof phone with a headphone jack.

Sony as well.

And how much profit do they make on each one compared to Apple?

Having inductive charging AND a headphone jack - that is just crazy! I think I'll keep my Nexus 5 for a while.

Too bad they can't keep the headphone jack on the Plus models. They have much more real estate on the Plus models

Reply on news.ycombinator.com