MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Jun 05, 08 - 01:44 pm Comment from: JadisOne

This company probably supplies the Chinese iPhone knock-off makers.

Sounds bogus to me. 2.8 and 3.2 versions ? No way. Unless one was an iPhone and one an iTouch. And there's no way that Apple would drop the 3.5 inch screen.

Jun 05, 08 - 01:47 pm Comment from: Jubei

Doesn't make sense for Apple to make the screens smaller... must be one of those knock off products.

2.8 and 3.2 are the width of the base and not the diagonal?

Why make the screen smaller?

Screen Smaller = No Thank You.

A smaller screen is not an improvement.

I think a smaller screen is a maybe but i doubt the current model would get smaller, no reason to more to a 3.2 that part doesnt make sense.

Aha... I've got it. What about the rumoured iPhone Nano and Shuffle models (although that's an old rumour possibly now invalid (but maybe not)).

Jun 05, 08 - 02:15 pm Comment from: AlanAudio

Maybe you could explain some of the conflicting iPhone rumours if there were going to be two new iPhones, a standard-sized one and an iPhone mini.

The iPhone mini could be the one that is sold very cheaply or given away for free with a suitable contract, as is commonplace with European phone companies, while the standard one has all the bells and whistles.

A 2.8 and the existing 3.5 would be nice, but I want it to match feature for feature. Fat fingered people are not going to want the 2.8 regardless of whether the keyboard goes landscape or not.
I expect Apple to make version 2 distinguishable from version 1, other than size, however, it ain't broke, so maybe it doesn't need fixing on the outside.
What if these are in addition to the 3.5, with three choices at three price ranges. Not typical of Apple to muddy up their line, but it is going from what, 6 countries to 70, so maybe a variety would be feasable, but analyzing how many of each to make would be a nightmare.

Jun 05, 08 - 02:26 pm Comment from: Crazylegs

If it's not fake and Apple will be releasing a smaller version of the original iPhone at a lower price point, this would be a huge deal to blow out the addressable market.

Imagine if the smaller one cost Apple say $150-$175 to produce and they could double the price to the carrier ($300-$350) which the carrier could easily subsidize down to $50-$100, then this is a game changer. I doubt this will be the case though as Apple doesn't like to cheapen their brand. BUT if they sense they could go for the jugular perhaps they'd do it to addict more people to iPhones. Interesting.

maybe there will be an iPod Nano touch screen next. There may be a whole new lineup of touch version iPods of different sizes?

Jun 05, 08 - 02:43 pm Comment from: Cubert

When has Apple EVER moved in the direction of smaller screen sizes for one of their products?

Waiting.......

Smaller? --- Why?

@Cubert
When Steve pulled the iPod Nano out of his jean pocket.

These pics don't agree with the form of the latest, "Portable Multifunction Device", patent, folks!

Jun 05, 08 - 02:58 pm Comment from: Brau

A smaller iPhone seems very credible to me if Apple follows a similar route to the iPod. They will likely continue producing a "Halo" device along with a variety of lower end models to appeal to those who want a lower price point (maybe free with a cell plan) and to directly challenge the bulk of the cell market while making a run for market share. Remember the Shuffle ... it sold 10 million units in record time. This time the stakes are much bigger as every phone sold increases OS X market share.

It makes no sense for Apple to have 2.8 and 3.2 models, both smaller than the current models. More production costs, more engineering costs, and more software to compensate for two different screen sizes. That just adds complication to the iPhone/iPod Touch products, and Apple is facing enough complication with the SDK, iPhone app store, etc.

um, well regular ipod to nano. It seems as though an original ipod wasn't the right thing for everyone...

the current iPhone is way too big if u just want to use it as a great phone with a great UI

i really hope they make a smaller one.

the amount of people claiming this as fake must mean it's TRUE.

=]

Jun 05, 08 - 04:44 pm Comment from: BC Kelly

naw, i don't buy it

apple wouldn't allow this kind of detail to escape on eve of such an important global launch

and especially if it involved 2, count 'em, two hardware versions of 2.0

however, if true, then someone about now getting a serious Steve butt-fsck




bc

i am a size queen.. I like it big

lately a friend of mine told me: "thank you for talking me into the iphone, this is the greatest device i have ever owned (he also bought an imac and a macbook recently - call that a switcher!) but frankly i hardly ever use the internet on it, it is not convenient." and i have to agree. this is such an amazing device but i personally not only wouldn't care if the screen was smaller, i would actually love it. the current 3,5" iphone is too bulky for me. i want it smaller, lighter, thinner. 2.8"? sounds good to me.

Could these be OLED displays? I might understand the downscaling if they were OLED.

Jun 05, 08 - 09:16 pm Comment from: ChrissyOne

Another controlled Apple leak to take us into show week...?

Yes, I think.

I know its been said before but I'm going to say it again.
What about the 3.5" screen??
How the heck can they go.....WHYY the heck would they go from 3.5" to 3.2"????
Thats just insanely, stupidly silly!!

Jun 05, 08 - 09:53 pm Comment from: Ampar

"i am a size queen.. I like it big"

I think I saw a shirt that said that in one of C1's party photos.

Re: going from 3.5" to 3.2" – would the missing .3" make *that* much of a difference? Really?

Jun 06, 08 - 06:25 am Comment from: Cubert

Blue Dream,
That was the introduction of a new product line, not a change of a current product. I didn't mean a new smaller iPhone wouldn't appear, but the full size iPhone out today most certainly will not get a smaller screen.

I guess I didn't post clearly last time.