Apple Is Set to Announce Two iPhones | Hacker News Reader

Apple Is Set to Announce Two iPhones

nytimes.com

"cheaper version of the soon-to-be-outdated iPhone 5, coming in a variety of colors, with a plastic case instead of aluminum. "

I somehow feel that Steve Jobs wouldn't have compromised like that.

Don't most iPhone owners use a case? The shiny beauty of the phone is really wasted.

The shiny beauty draws them to the Store and buy the phones and they buy cases to protect that shiny beauty.

Most smartphone owners I see use a case - iPhone or Android. I think it's a pity because the devices look so much better without cases.

The devices may be awesome, but they are delicate, slick and slippery and cases make them grippy, resilient and personal.

People use cases because iPhone is fairly susceptible for screen cracking on drops. In that case, it costs $600 for replacement. Search for iphone screen cracked and you would see how popular this search term is and how many businesses have mushroomed around this.

FWIW, the last time my 4S screen broke, I got the whole phone replaced at an Apple Store for $200. What's more, they recently started replacing just the screens in-store for $150.

http://9to5mac.com/2013/06/06/apples-149-in-store-iphone-scr...

No kidding. They wrap their fancy aluminum with a cheap plastic exterior anyways!

iBook laptop vs Macbook Pro?

Look at what they did with the iPod (under Steve's leadership) to capture all the price points in the music device market. Expect similar tactics in phones and tablets.

soon-to-be-outdated?

What the fuck? Plastics are an awesome material and Apple is no stranger to using it – especially under Steve Jobs.

The believe that this is in any way a compromise is just so fucking weird.

I have heard several variants of this opinion, from several people, and it always blows my mind.

Steve Jobs practically invented garish colored plastic housings. Don't you remember the iMac? In translucent 'Bondi Blue' and then every color under the sun? And how somehow just about every product on earth -- even like kitchen gadgets and car air fresheners and shit -- suddenly started coming out in weird-colored plastic housings?

And then how Apple-under-jobs returned to that playbook for their music player line?

I think the people who now say Steve Jobs wouldn't have made a cheaper colored-plastic-clad iPhone are the same ones who now say he would never have worn stonewashed jeans with huge non-functional thigh and knee patches.[1]

[1]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF-tKLISfPE

> Steve Jobs practically invented garish colored plastic housings.

And then he and Ives went onto Titanium and ultimately settled on aluminum. They've not made a plastic computer since. Jobs most likely would see plastic as a regression.

Actually, right now I am anxiously awaiting the latest model of Apple's flagship computer, which will ship later this year and is made out of plastic:

http://www.apple.com/mac-pro

It is not plastic

Oh really?? Cool; just because it isn't true that Steve Jobs wouldn't release a plastic computer, that doesn't mean I want to spend ten grand on one... :-D

So what material is it? Do you have source for that info?

> And then he and Ives went onto Titanium and ultimately settled on aluminum. They've not made a plastic computer since.

Macbook from 2006 to 2011 says Hi!

It's currently 2013 in case you didn't know :)

> I somehow feel that Steve Jobs wouldn't have compromised like that.

But he did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3G

"Still, even if the price is fairly high, a cheaper iPhone should appeal to a subset of people in developing countries who flaunt gadgets as status symbols, like jewelry."

As opposed to the subset of people in developed countries that do exactly the same ?

Pretty sure the iPhone stopped being a status symbol in the US when everyone got one.

However, I'm sure it's still used as a status symbol in the US when you get your 7 year old kid one.

This would be in effect a statement by Apple that there is nothing much left to innovate in Smartphone arena. Only way to beat competition is by price difference. It used to be that every year new iPhone release was actually exciting making me crave the latest model. After 4S, new innovations have been basically faster CPU, thinner body and resolution. The improvements are on border line justifiable to be even called "incremental". And still, there are so many things left to do with Smartphones. Here is my nerdy wishlist for iPhone (please add on yours too :)):

* Ability to use phone as walkie-talkie.

* Weather sensor

* FM HD radio

* NFC chip

* Built-in programmable FPGA

* Ability to put out digital, analog signals from iPhone (turning it to Arduino)

* Higher precision gyroscope and accelerometer

* Infrared LED

* Ability to run apps in background listening mode

* Infrared 2nd camera

* RF transmitter/receiver (900 MGHz range)

* Pen input

* Pressure sensitivity

* Continuously dimmable screen (all the way to 0)

You know what's amazing about Apple? The iPhone 4 is still a fantastic phone. I use it every day and it runs great. It's what 3 years old now? It might be hard to sell consumers on how great a 3 year old phone is, but gosh, it's still pretty fantastic.

I can understand why they would want to do the 5C, if only so they can get customers and developers unified around the larger device size, and so that they have a newer product that people are willing to pay for.

Still, it's astounding just how good the iPhone 4 still is, especially in light of the other phones that launched around the same time - the original Galaxy S and the Motorola Droid six months before that).

In your opinion, what is it about Android phones that were contemporaneous to the iPhone 4 to be inferior in quality?

Let me volunteer - slow and poor multitasking, buggy apps and lack of quality apps

Android phones that were released around the same time as the iPhone 4 were running Android 2.x and mostly not updated to Android 4.x. I still use an old Galaxy S sometimes, and it's a fine phone but android 2.3 really feels outdated.

I'm running 4.2 on my Galaxy S just fine.

I have a Samsung Galaxy S variant (the Vibrant). It simply does not compare to anyone's iPhone 4 on the following:

1. Up to date software.

2. Responsiveness.

3. Ease of use.

The iPhone 4's iOS 6 is strictly superior to the Vibrant and other Galaxy S pre-ICS Android. The former also is much more responsive on web pages, far smoother when switching apps, and quicker to the camera and GPS lock.

I honestly did not believe the Galaxy S released at the same time as the iPhone 4. That is rather unbelievable. They are so far apart!

I do run CyanogenMod ICS now on my Vibrant, but it doesn't match the iPhone 4.

I'm the biggest Android fan out there and would only own an Android device ... but they don't stand the test of time as well (especially if you're not into the ROM scene). An Android phone from that era with stock software is going to be very very slow compared to an iPhone 4. I don't know why, but it's true.

Does it slow down over time (why?) or was it slower to begin with?

Prior to Jelly Bean (when "Project Butter" brought heavy optimizations and enhanced GPU acceleration to the UI), Android definitely exhibited some interface lag. Combined with older hardware, the lag makes the older handsets age less than gracefully. I'm optimistic that the more recent versions of the OS will change that for the better going forward.

Definitely slows down over time. This is a combination of two things:

1) Android was not very optimized for smoothness before 4.1 Also Android updates in general have addressed a lot of performance issues (TRIM in 4.3 was a big one).

2) Apps are generally coded to harness the power of modern devices. In Android the difference in power between today's devices (Quad Core 2.0Ghz) and the devices of yesteryear (Single Core 1Ghz) are massive.

I have an iPhone 4 as well, but with iOs7 coming I'm afraid it could be time to upgrade.

Newer versions of the OS tend to be optimized for newer devices, I remember how my old iPod touch become slow as hell after they introduced multitasking.

poor man's iphone.

Would Ferrari manufacture a poor-man's car?

Comparing Apple to Ferrari is a mistake. Apple makes mainstream consumer products, Ferrari is a luxury car manufacturer.

They say a poor man's Ferrari is a used one.

'They' haven't priced any 250 GTs lately.

Interesting point. I'd think they'd create a new brand. Maybe it won't bear the "iPhone" moniker.

Actually in the world of cars, most expensive luxury car brands are manufactured or owned by the "poor man's" version. Fiat owns Ferrari. Honda owns Acura. Tata owns Jaguar.

Summing this move into "poor man's" is just too simplistic.

Daimler manufacture Mercedes and Smart. Smart isn't a poor man's mercedes

Yea but they segregate the brands, which is what I think the OP is getting at.

Exactly. Starting a new brand would take a long time to push, whereas using iPhone and Apple names for their cheaper phone automatically guarantees sales but might hurt them in the future.

I'm a little skeptical of breaking technology news in an article that refers to Tim Cook as "Timothy D. Cook."

Why???

Anyway, FYI, using people's complete formal names is a long-standing editorial policy at the NY Times and some other established papers. They referred to Steve Jobs as Steven P. Jobs, too.

further title to this would be something along the lines of "the state of and movement in the Global Mobile Market"

There's like 10 companies in here I have either never heard of or not heard from in a good while.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com