5 ms·

"That's never been an issue before. Other iPhone product cycles have been well under two years and still introduced new features." Not so, the pattern of intro

by _djo_ 15y ago

"That's never been an issue before. Other iPhone product cycles have been well under two years and still introduced new features." Not so, the pattern of introducing an entirely new model only every second year and a performance boost of the existing model in between is one that Apple has followed since the iPhone 3G: iPhone 3G -> iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4 -> iPhone 4S For that reason I was not expecting an iPhone 5 and was bemused by all the hype surrounding it. Yet objectively this is a significant upgrade with a huge performance gain, the addition of a very exciting feature in Siri (I suspect it's limited to the iPhone 4S as a result of the decision to add dedicated processing hardware) and a vastly-improved camera. The iPhone 4 design is great and extremely successful, I don't understand why people are so upset that it wasn't changed.

CamperBob 15y ago
I don't understand why people are so upset that it wasn't changed. IMHO the iPhone 4 is already fast enough. It didn't need a new system board, it just needed a bigger screen, and they needed to get rid of that Radio Shack-style square enclosure. This release was an exercise in fixing things that weren't broken while giving the competition a break.
- ajross 15y ago
  Also, I suspect it was about dropping the price to $99 while still preserving the enthusiast market who will continue to buy the $299 devices on sheer inertia. The former part of that decision is good. The latter is IMHO a very dangerous platform to base your business on (i.e. "dumb users will continue to pay more for our products"). Apple tried that in the 90's. It worked... poorly.
- _djo_ 15y ago
  That's fair enough, but it seems like more of a personal wish list than an analysis of what the iPhone really needs. Does it need a bigger screen and a new enclosure? The sales figures don't seem to suggest that it does. Assuming for a minute that I'm right and the screen size and enclosure are not market liabilities for the iPhone, then my personal opinion is that the upgrades are sufficient to maintain sales, with the performance boost, new camera (along with the improved processing hardware) and Siri all being enough to keep it competitive at the high-end.

by _djo_ 15y ago

CamperBob 15y ago

I don't understand why people are so upset that it wasn't changed. IMHO the iPhone 4 is already fast enough. It didn't need a new system board, it just needed a bigger screen, and they needed to get rid of that Radio Shack-style square enclosure. This release was an exercise in fixing things that weren't broken while giving the competition a break.

ajross 15y ago
Also, I suspect it was about dropping the price to $99 while still preserving the enthusiast market who will continue to buy the $299 devices on sheer inertia. The former part of that decision is good. The latter is IMHO a very dangerous platform to base your business on (i.e. "dumb users will continue to pay more for our products"). Apple tried that in the 90's. It worked... poorly.
_djo_ 15y ago
That's fair enough, but it seems like more of a personal wish list than an analysis of what the iPhone really needs. Does it need a bigger screen and a new enclosure? The sales figures don't seem to suggest that it does. Assuming for a minute that I'm right and the screen size and enclosure are not market liabilities for the iPhone, then my personal opinion is that the upgrades are sufficient to maintain sales, with the performance boost, new camera (along with the improved processing hardware) and Siri all being enough to keep it competitive at the high-end.