backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by Xplorer4x4.. on Jul 9 at 1:47 PM

Pictures claim to represent a lower-priced iPhone offering with polycarbonate case

The last time Apple dabbled with a polycarbonate case for its iPhone family was back in the 3G/3GS days. Back then; the cases were notorious for developing cracks, especially around the dock connector and headphone jack. Since that time, Apple has experimented with other casing materials such as steel/glass and even aluminum.
 
These days, evidence is mounting that Apple is looking to revisit the use of a polycarbonate case, this time in a "budget" iPhone model. New images from Techdy claim to show a fully assembled model, complete with its 4” Retina display.

 
As for the quality of the aforementioned case, Techdy claims:
 
When we hold the budget iPhone in our hands, the plastic chassis does not feel cheap at all. Unlike the plastic build quality of the Samsung Galaxy phones, the plastic material used on the budget iPhone feels more sturdy.
 

You can view video footage of the claimed budge iPhone here.

Source: Techdy



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: This will drive the Sammy Fanboys crazy
By BRB29 on 7/8/2013 12:55:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Remember the iPod? Eventually Apple filled the whole product spectrum


how could you say this when apple sells the most expensive media players. $229 for an ipod nano is not filling a gap.
The cheapest being small shuffle at $50 that has no screen and little memory. There's a ton of mp3 players with no screen and have more memory for much less. Hell, with the shuffle's price range, there's a bunch of mp3 players with screens and the same or more memory.

Apple's new move into the lower markets is mainly Tim Cook trying to mass dump products instead of keeping up with what made them successful. I wouldn't be surprised if they start selling $700 laptops soon.


RE: This will drive the Sammy Fanboys crazy
By cyberguyz on 7/8/2013 1:34:28 PM , Rating: 2
To give Tony his due, I really didn't qualify that Apple's product families had to actually be affordable by mere mortals. We all know Apple's products are obscenely overpriced for what you get.

Apple did put out a range of players from the expensive iPod nano toy all the way to the hideously overpriced touch (in essence an iPhone without the phone). So yes, they did actually take a product line and offer up a few levels of it (all expensive).

Not sure why they waited so long to do that with the iPhone. I would think that their marketing boffins would have clued in that they would get a lot deeper market penetration if they simply offered them up with a few different levels of features. After all, not everybody can afford, or wants, the top of the line. Sometimes they need a little less at a price that is scaled accordingly.


By cyberguyz on 7/8/2013 1:36:39 PM , Rating: 2
-- correction -- reference to 'nano' = reference to 'shuffle'

** I'm not an Apple fan so I'm not always up on the product names.


By BRB29 on 7/8/2013 2:52:13 PM , Rating: 2
Bro, ipod nano and ipod shuffle are different products. They have clear differences in interface and the media it is able to play.

Saying they are the same products that fill different price gap is like saying ipod touch and iphones are the same products.


RE: This will drive the Sammy Fanboys crazy
By Tony Swash on 7/8/2013 4:06:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple did put out a range of players from the expensive iPod nano toy all the way to the hideously overpriced touch (in essence an iPhone without the phone). So yes, they did actually take a product line and offer up a few levels of it (all expensive).

Not sure why they waited so long to do that with the iPhone. I would think that their marketing boffins would have clued in that they would get a lot deeper market penetration if they simply offered them up with a few different levels of features. After all, not everybody can afford, or wants, the top of the line. Sometimes they need a little less at a price that is scaled accordingly.


All the comments about the product limits or excess price of the iPod range are moot as it crushed the competition and made vast profits. It was therefore an utterly successful product range perfectly priced.

Apple is not chasing market share in relation to any product sector it operates in, never has and never will. If as a byproduct of producing a good quality product that delivers the sort of end user experience Apple wants to achieve Apple secures a larger market share then I am sure they are very happy about it, it's just not one of their core strategic aims. Achieving a high market share is not necessary for Apple to succeed as a business. A cursory glance at the companies history would show that. For example in the PC market where Apple has been a small market share operator for decades Apple currently makes more profit than all the other PC OEMs added together.

Apple entered a series of new markets in the last decade or so, music players, tablets, phones, and their aim every time was to disrupt existing markets by offering a new sort of product that by combining hardware, software and Apple's service and content stack in a new sort of product configuration would deliver a new sort of end user experience that was very attractive to customers. Given their sales and business results they seem to have succeeded in delivering a series of successful disruptions.

As far as growing and diversifying the iPhone range of products much depends on supply chain and technology constraints. Apple only makes things that in it's words 'deserve to exist', that is things made to Apple's standards and that means things that can be made to a certain standard in bulk and be delivered at a profit. For much of the steepest parts of the iPhone and iPad growth trajectory it appeared that Apple was constrained by supply side limits, even though it has one of the world's best supply chain management systems. An additional constraint is the complex supply side issues raised by its need to disentangle themselves from Samsung, a process now well underway. So maybe now is the time for a limited iPhone diversification.

The next Apple disruption will almost certainly come from some sort of wearable device. The last 25 minutes of Horace Dediu's most recent podcast is worth a listen as he discusses what the iWatch could mean.

http://www.asymco.com/2013/07/02/the-critical-path...


By retrospooty on 7/8/2013 4:26:30 PM , Rating: 2
"crushed the competition and made vast profits"

"their aim every time was to disrupt existing markets by offering a new sort of product"

"Given their sales and business results they seem to have succeeded in delivering a series of successful disruptions."

"Apple only makes things that in it's words 'deserve to exist', that is things made to Apple's standards "

"For much of the steepest parts of the iPhone and iPad growth trajectory it appeared that Apple was constrained by supply side limits, even though it has one of the world's best supply chain management systems. "

"The next Apple disruption will almost certainly come from some sort of wearable device. "

ROFL... Seriously Tony, do you actually read the stuff you write? You sound like a marketing exec touting the virtues of your company... I used to think you were just a pathetic basement-bound rabid fanboy, but now I really do have to wonder if you are being paid for this. To think you spend your own time to post such "rah rah" pro company crap is almost funnier.

What light through yonder window breaks... It is Apple, her golden hair waving in the wind and her supple skin glistening with anticipation.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki