With Nokia and RIMM struggling the time is right for Apple to aggressively penetrate…

Infinite
With Nokia and RIMM struggling the time is right for Apple to aggressively penetrate…

Stop it

If they did, it would be good and bad. Bad because a shift in market share may lead developers to focus on iOS and neglect Android instead of focussing on both (but tbh they're being silly if they focus on just one, regardless). Mostly good, because increased competition is, well, good. As long as it is increased competition and not the beginning of the end for other operating systems.. which it shouldn't be.

To be honest, I don't see this as being that much different to what they did last year.

They launched a brand new iPhone that was a huge leap up from the previous model, and then reduced the price of the old model, leaving people a choice. Talking purely about contracts here rather than Sim Free - the 3GS was available 100% free on most contracts at that point, whilst the iPhone 4 still carried at least a £100 premium even on £60 a month tariffs.

So they already have a budget iPhone - and I don't think they will drop the price much lower, as a huge part of the iPhone appeal for many buyers is the perceived exclusivity of it - especially of owning the latest one. Dropping the price too far just shatters its image and a large part of the credibility imo.

What has changed this time around is that the iPhone 4 is much much more competitive now than the 3GS was a year ago, so this time around the budget version will still be a premium phone when compared to the vast majority of cheaper Android devices - and definitely compared to all the ones in the sub £400 (Sim free) bracket.

We shall see - I hope that there is at least a decent upgrade to the current iPhone 4, with something that can tempt me. I am going to upgrade in September and it's a choice between another iphone, keeping my iPhone 4 or jumping ship to a windows mobile handset..I have my fingers crossed for the built in solar panels that they patented earlier this year ;)

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/01/apple-wins-their-first-solar-powered-patent-for-portables.html

I worry that you may be right on two points:

1. That the iPhone 4S is going to be “S” for smaller capacity, in line with the strategy they employed with the 8GB 3GS, which I consider a very poor value. I am not sure how attractive iPhone contracts have gotten with other network, but the only one that I was interested on release is the 12 months Tesco one. Currently, the price difference between the 16GB iPhone 4 and 8GB iPhone 3GS at Tesco mobile is £85. That's in line with the price difference of the handset on Apple's website (£82). For a 16GB (or even 12GB) 3GS it would've be a viable budget alternative, but 8GB for £428 dire value, and I'd MUCH rather buy a 16GB 3GS second hand for less from friends I know take reasonable care with their devices, or even take a punt on Ebay.

2. I bought my iPhone because it was a good deal, not because it was new. Exclusivity and image be darned as far as I am concerned. I am sure I am not alone on this, though I fear you may be right that Apple will not want to “cheapen” their brand (otherwise the 8GB 3GS would be closer to £300).

On your point about the iPhone 4 being much more competitive than the 3GS was a year ago, I am not so sure. I think that the 3GS brought more of the “need to have” bit over the previous generation than the iPhone 4 which brought more of the “nice to have”.

Anyway, unless the next main iPhone comes with a minimum of 32GB, I fear that the 4S will be stuck with 8GB, and that would be a disappointment. I'd much rather have a 16GB 3GS than a 8GB iPhone 4.

Spud1
To be honest, I don't see this as being that much different to what they did last year.

Yes, didn't we have the “Apple to launch a midrange phone” rumours last year?

One thing's for sure though, if Apple does decide to launch a mid-market phone there will be a lot of very earnest meetings at the top every other company with an interest in the mobile phone market. They might just have to raise their game yet another level.

This being the case I would argue that it's a good thing. I want to see some innovations in phones (especially coming up to June next year - which is when my current contract runs out), and if whatever comes out from Apple forces that situation, then they'll get an “attaboy” from me. :thumbsup:
And I'm not talking about ‘fake’ stuff like 3D, I want stuff like phones that covert (cheaply!) to a laptop and/or tablet form. Maybe some game playing ability a la PSP that doesn't mean that you've got to have a charger on standby. Really vibrant OLED screens, etc.

I'm totally uninterested in iPhone5, (not slagging it off, but there's other devices that suit me better - specifically Android or WP7 based devices), but I await with interest the bow wave that it'll undoubtedly create. And for that reason a 4S/5 dual launch would be something that I'd welcome - especially as I suspect that the iPhone design team will have been burning the midnight oil to gain back some of the prestige they lost over the iPhone4 faults, so the '5 could potentially be very special.

Interesting times ahead … I hope! ;)

Infinite
With Nokia and RIMM struggling the time is right for Apple to aggressively penetrate…

Giggedy!

Spud1
To be honest, I don't see this as being that much different to what they did last year.http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/01/apple-wins-their-first-solar-powered-patent-for-portables.html

True, they did already have a cheaper model (the last model) and I think this strategy has paid dividends in widening the market share (though all Apple products remain overpriced for me). There have been rumours however that the new iOS will not be compatible with the 3GS, so this would preclude continuing to use the model as the cheaper option, the iPhone 4 received bad press at the beginning, causing a shorter life span, so they probably pulled back on production a bit.

Personally, if they do produce a cheaper model, I believe they would be going for the younger market, rather than the less well-off/bothered market. It could act as the “Mac mini” of the phone department, giving mere mortals the chance to own a shiny Apple device, but the golden chalice of brand marketing is starting them off “on the ground floor”. Since the iPod the Apple brand has been “cool in school” but school kids/parents can't really afford top-end smartphone prices. This also stops the iPhone from being as good a platform as it could be for iOS game developers, and the iPhone/iPad are quite interesting game platforms.

As far as competition goes, I see no real big-hitter other than HTC. And thank God for them, as I believe they are the only phone manufacturer keeping Apple anywhere near honest in this market.

Spud1
I have my fingers crossed for the built in solar panels that they patented earlier this year ;)

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/01/apple-wins-their-first-solar-powered-patent-for-portables.html

Please tell me that's a joke.

hermano pequeño;2095623
There have been rumours however that the new iOS will not be compatible with the 3GS, so this would preclude continuing to use the model as the cheaper option, the iPhone 4 received bad press at the beginning, causing a shorter life span, so they probably pulled back on production a bit.

Nope it is definitely compatible - I have been testing my apps with iOS 5 on a 3GS..its slow but it does still work on it and they keep updating the betas to support it.

aidanjt
Please tell me that's a joke.

Nope it's deadly serious..and are you telling me that you don't think it's an absolutely genuis idea? Or is it the fact that Apple have won another patent that you disagree with?

Solar panels built into the screen of a mobile device which are hidden from view is very clever - they have the tech patented (there are more that just what I linked above), and it has the potential to dramatically increase battery life when playing games or using the phones without having them to your ear.

hermano pequeño;2095623
As far as competition goes, I see no real big-hitter other than HTC. And thank God for them, as I believe they are the only phone manufacturer keeping Apple anywhere near honest in this market.

Don't forget Samsung. The Galaxy S family is the most popular Android device in many countries, and Samsung is the only other phone-maker that has its own SoC. It also has extensive manufacturing facilities, making things like storage and screens. Finally it has the best cross-platform position with extensive PC and TV businesses.

There's a reason why Apple has picked Samsung to go to war with on mobile devices.

Scott B;2095684
Don't forget Samsung.

There's a reason why Apple has picked Samsung to go to war with on mobile devices.

Indeed, Samsung and HTC are the only two competitors really worth talking about - largely because of the hardware quality (watch and learn ZTE!) and the fact that they both have great UI's. HTC have Sense, which they piloted on WM6 and have successfully brought it over to Android, and Samsung with their so-close-to-ios-but-still-different UI, which Apple are currently complaning about.

I do really like the Galaxy S II - I just wish it was running Windows Phone. Ideal world would be where you can buy the exact same hardware but choose what OS you could have on it, without custom roms (you can do it with custom roms - its possible to run Android, iOS and various version of windows on a jailbroken iPhone for example).

Spud1
Nope it's deadly serious..and are you telling me that you don't think it's an absolutely genuis idea? Or is it the fact that Apple have won another patent that you disagree with?

It's not that it isn't an absolutely genius idea. It's that it's an absolutely obvious and old idea.

Spud1
Solar panels built into the screen of a mobile device which are hidden from view is very clever

That's a little bit more original. But the solar powered patent is absurd.

aidanjt
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/01/apple-wins-their-first-solar-powered-patent-for-portables.html It's not that it isn't an absolutely genius idea. It's that it's an absolutely obvious and old idea. That's a little bit more original. But the solar powered patent is absurd.

Hmm, that's what I thought - I can run my phone/mp3 off of an old “Freeloader” battery pack and that's solar/usb powered and I've certainly had both active.

Spud1
Indeed, Samsung and HTC are the only two competitors really worth talking about - largely because of the hardware quality (watch and learn ZTE!) and the fact that they both have great UI's. HTC have Sense, which they piloted on WM6 and have successfully brought it over to Android, and Samsung with their so-close-to-ios-but-still-different UI, which Apple are currently complaning about.

I wouldn't discount the old guard - Motorola and Sony - just yet. Moto have shown that they can deliver some innovative designs, and Sony's (arguably!) got just as strong a “brand” as Apple. Okay SE, to quote another website, really “screwed the pooch” with Xperia to date, but you've got to assume that they've learned their lessons by now. Likewise Moto have had some poor software in the past, but they seem to be increasingly strong in the US.

Spud1
I do really like the Galaxy S II - I just wish it was running Windows Phone. Ideal world would be where you can buy the exact same hardware but choose what OS you could have on it, without custom roms (you can do it with custom roms - its possible to run Android, iOS and various version of windows on a jailbroken iPhone for example).

Oooh yes, that's a really good idea - but I can't see Apple allowing iOS to be installed on that, nor smiling on someone putting WP7 on “their” phone. To be honest, other than that nebulous “exclusivity” tag, I don't know why Apple didn't think about selling iOS licenses to other manufacturers. Or allow users to buy MacOS to put on their PC's (which I'd like to have done legally).

crossy
Oooh yes, that's a really good idea - but I can't see Apple allowing iOS to be installed on that, nor smiling on someone putting WP7 on “their” phone. To be honest, other than that nebulous “exclusivity” tag, I don't know why Apple didn't think about selling iOS licenses to other manufacturers. Or allow users to buy MacOS to put on their PC's (which I'd like to have done legally).

Apple was not happy with the quality of the Mac clones in the past IIRC and so controlling both the hardware and software seems to be what they prefer to do now. Also,it probably means they have better margins now.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
Apple was not happy with the quality of the Mac clones in the past IIRC and so controlling both the hardware and software seems to be what they prefer to do now. Also,it probably means they have better margins now.

Granted, but I'm not suggesting that they start trying to compete with Windows 7 - merely that if someone wants to buy the OS and install it on their own kit, then they should be able to do so. On the other hand, it's on the understanding that the resulting combo doesn't have to be supported by Apple. Let's be honest, there's precious little difference between the ‘oily bits’ in a Mac and a PC these days. You never know, you might end up with a system that runs MacOS better than a real Mac! ;) (And yes, I know theoretically you can buy MacOS and bung the Apple sticker from an iPod onto your PC and be compliant with the letter of the MacOS license - but it still strikes me as dodgy)

Getting back to the phones, if Apple were to license iOS to others - say Samsung - then I would assume that they'd be able to dictate things such as minimum hardware specs. Maybe I'm being simple minded, but surely the more devices that are running the OS the better? Personally, I'd be fascinated to see what kind of iOS phone another manufacturer could deliver or, and I realise this is heresy to some, whether another manufacturer could deliver a better iOS tablet than iPad2?

It won't happen as Apple won't tolerate fragmentation of the hardware platform. Plus Apple would look stupid if someone else released a 2Ghz quad core iOS running phone while the Apple spec was pitful. And there's no way Apple would allow modification of the iOS for branding. There's control freaks, super control freaks and then there's Apple…

crossy
Getting back to the phones, if Apple were to license iOS to others - say Samsung - then I would assume that they'd be able to dictate things such as minimum hardware specs. Maybe I'm being simple minded, but surely the more devices that are running the OS the better? Personally, I'd be fascinated to see what kind of iOS phone another manufacturer could deliver or, and I realise this is heresy to some, whether another manufacturer could deliver a better iOS tablet than iPad2?

It's never going to happen. It goes against Apple's core principles - cutting hardware and software out of the same mould and retaining 100% control over every aspect of the user experience. Making both the hardware and the software is a core element of the Apple experience and one of the things that Apple most often plays upon.

Remember, this is the company that's taken four years to consider it acceptable to assign a hardware button to the camera. Do you really think they'll ever relinquish control of their entire hardware platform?

Mattus
It's never going to happen. It goes against Apple's core principles - cutting hardware and software out of the same mould and retaining 100% control over every aspect of the user experience. Making both the hardware and the software is a core element of the Apple experience and one of the things that Apple most often plays upon.

I'm well aware of that - I just thought it'd be interesting to hypothesise as to what could come out of some competition closer to home. Plus, an iOS licensee could target the low-end side of the market, something which (understandably) Apple is unwilling to do. Unless, of course, the second launch is the “iPhone nano” that some commentators have talked about.

Mattus
Remember, this is the company that's taken four years to consider it acceptable to assign a hardware button to the camera. Do you really think they'll ever relinquish control of their entire hardware platform?

My point exactly - some competition would force them to up their game - not so good for them, but probably good news for us consumers. ;)

I think opening up the market for iOS would destroy Apple for a second time. It would be a bad move for consumers and a bad move for them..the only positive thing that would happen would be a price drop - but nothing more. The main reason technologically why Apples products are such a success is that they have complete control over the hardware (marketing aside - from a technology viewpoint this is their key advantage). Apple don't have to content with hundreds of OEMs making tweaks that break the software - they have to write a few drivers which they can do very very well, as you can focus on the quality when you are writing much less code. Windows and Android both suffer horribly because of that issue - and whilst it's not an insurmountable problem and the larger OEMs don't tend to have these issues, it does damage the brand and cause issues for consumers.

I've been laughed at before for saying that Android is “too open” - well, it is. It is one of its greatest strengths as a platform but also it's biggest weakness.

It makes absolutely no business sense for Apple to open up their software to other companies in the current market - at the end of the day they are in it to make money and thats it, and they do very well with their current strategy..If they could every single competitor would do exactly the same thing as Apple in a heartbeat.

Things may change in the next 10 years or so though, as this sort of success isn't likely to continue. I think we'll end up seeing Apple moving to a Software model eventually but it will start off small with a single very large OEM partner; not sure we'll ever see a mass OEM market with them.

You can never be ‘too open’. But being open isn't for Apple, and they're doing well as a company regardless.

crossy
Oooh yes, that's a really good idea - but I can't see Apple allowing iOS to be installed on that, nor smiling on someone putting WP7 on “their” phone. To be honest, other than that nebulous “exclusivity” tag, I don't know why Apple didn't think about selling iOS licenses to other manufacturers. Or allow users to buy MacOS to put on their PC's (which I'd like to have done legally).

i think there are quite big differences between the computer and phone markets, in that people tend to do a lot more with computers, they are upgradable easily with both hardware and software, whereas phones at least not now or the forseeable future aren't really upgradable, so having an OS that is specifically designed for the product range is better. opening up IOS for other phones isn't half as appealing as they would have to do more work and testing to run on other devices, it opens the market up whilst they already have the lions share, and as a mobile OS can't be sold for anything like the money that a full computer OS does, it would mean the potential “extra” revenue would be small, whislt losing out a number of sales to people who want IOS but don't want to pay apples hardware prices

i've been all for OSX to be available to everyone for a long time, as i thought apple could benefit from increased sales to people who wouldn't dream of splashing out a grand for a mac but would maybe spend £50-£100 for OSX to try the apple experience, and potentially they may garner some market share. i also for a long time said that apple should let windows run on it's products (not via parallels), and they've embraced that and it seems to work well, and they've probably gained a few sales from doing it from people put off that the macbook can't run sage accounts or whatever is only available on windows. if the pricing wasn't such an issue the mac computers would sell a lot more from being able to adequately run both systems. you can get a decent hackintosh system but few would use it seriously for business use

i think apple have found their niche in that mobile phones are the type of device that benefits more from a closed system than an open one, and they are currently on top of everyone else who perhaps are only realising that now