Apple Unveils Smaller iPhone SE, Starting At $399 (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Apple has officially unveiled a smaller, cheaper iPhone designed to make a splash in the budget-friendly smartphone market. The new device, called the iPhone SE, looks nearly identical to the iPhone 5S but with a new rose gold color configuration. It's the internal specifications that differ significantly. The new iPhone SE will feature a NFC chip for Apple Pay, A9 processor and M9 motion co-processor, 12-megapixel camera sensor with the ability to capture 4K video, and a Touch ID fingerprint sensor. Unfortunately, it does not feature Apple's new 3D touch functionality. The iPhone SE will come in two models, 16GB and 64GB, priced at $399 and $499 respectively. You can buy the new iPhone starting March 31, and it will make its way to 100 countries by May.

Comments

16GB storage

[AcidPenguin9873]

32GB is the sweet spot for phones right now, and because they can, Apple refuses to produce a 32GB model to force you to pay an extra $100 to get a reasonable amount of internal storage. $499 for the 64GB model is certainly cheaper than the current top-of-the-line iPhones, but a cheap Android with 32GB of storage can be had for well under $399 for truly budget-conscious buyers. If you're locked into Apple's ecosystem and are truly budget-conscious...well, tough luck.

Re:16GB storage

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

I know, right? It's not like Apple is using flash storage ICs made from special magical dust or anything.

In fact, their options should be 64GB, 128GB and 256GB. We're in 2016 after all.

Re:16GB storage

[GuB-42]

And that's exactly why they don't do a 32GB iPhone. They want to sell the $499 model.
The 16GB model is a low anchor, that's a basic marketing technique.

And comparing an iPhone with an Android phone on specs is pointless. We all know that you can get more for cheaper with Android, but you won't get an iPhone.

Re:16GB storage

[CastrTroy]

The reason the 16GB configuration is so popular is because there's a lot of people who feel they have to have the iPhone even if they can't really afford the model they want. Paying the extra $100 for the next level up is simply too much for their budget.

It's not the apps that generally take up a lot of space, but rather things like pictures, videos, music, and other content. According to this page, the iPhone only has 11.8 GB free out of the box. By the time you subtract the space that the OS takes up, you really aren't left with much room for the rest of your stuff. My current phone only has 8 GB on board, with 4.8 Free. However, this is no problem because I can easily put in an SD card where I can install apps, as well as have it store all my pictures, music, and videos there. If iPhone just let people put an SD card in, then the 16GB configuration wouldn't be so bad.

Re:16GB storage

[alvinrod]

If they started out at 64 GB then they wouldn't get as many people to pay the $100 upgrade for the next tier. That's how Apple makes their money. Make the base model just unappealing enough that people want to spend the extra $100.

At the volumes they do, we're probably talking about at least a $2 billion yearly revenue loss for them if they made the base model more appealing and fewer people upgrade to the next tier.

They know exactly what they're doing.

Re:16GB storage

[Locke2005]

You obviously don't take 100 selfies every day, like the majority of iPhone owners do! (Especially the female ones, like my daughter.)

Re:16GB storage

[Penguinisto]

Yes, they've always targeted the premium market ... and that's why they're starting to lose.

Mostly because they dominate the hell out of the premium market - probably to the point of saturation. If you've saturated the high end with your product, and want to see more growth, guess where you gotta go?

The pricing they have was only reasonable when they were the only worthwhile smartphone on the market. This is no longer the case.

Depends. I have and use an unlocked LG phone that I bought last year... now the thing is starting to bork-up on the home key, and screen misalignment is starting to become an issue. Sure, I got the $200 I spent back out of it, but meanwhile my wife's ancient iPhone 4 is *still* chugging along just fine, years after it first showed up. My next phone? *shrug* Not sure yet, but damn I'm leaning towards something that would hold up better over time...

Therein lies the whole reason why most folks buy Apple stuff in the first place: It costs more up-front, but you make up the savings over time.

Redefining budget friendly.

[Fly Swatter]

My real 'budget friendly' smartphone was $40 out the door, and that was replacing a 5 year old $30 flip phone I really hated to part with. Since it is used only for making phone calls, I guess I'm a member of the populace that just doesn't get it.

Re:Redefining budget friendly.

[Andy Dodd]

$40 out the door sounds like you had a subsidized phone - this $399 price is the unsubsidized price.

That said, "budget friendly" is a Moto G, $179 for 8GB or $219 for 16GB but with the ability to stick in a 32GB MicroSD for $20 more. Those are the unsubsidized prices.

oh wait... only $11 more now - http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-...

Oh, oh.

[OpenSourced]

Apple, one free word of advice, worth exactly the cost. The bottom half of the market you don't want to have. When the rabble, the unwashed peasants, starts flaunting the bitten apple logo everywhere, the beautiful people will flee to other phones with a clearer status seal. And then, the all encompassing middle unbrained layer will lose the daze caused by all that glitter, and start comparing phones like they do cars. Then some day you will announce the iPhone 15, and nobody will come to the party, because you know... is "Apple".

Re:Sucker's Edition

[cruff]

iPhone Sucker's Edition: why get a 5S when you can get the same for twice the price?

Because it will do additional things the 5S won't, like WiFi calling and ApplePay.

Indication smartphones are under pricing pressure

[JoeyRox]

$399 for a current-spec iPhone (without subsidy) is a very aggressive price point. Looks like the low-priced second and third tier Android phones are having an impact on Apple's unit sales.

Re:ARE YOU IMPRESSED?

[fiannaFailMan]

No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

Re:Sucker's Edition

[brantondaveperson]

Wireless charging is pointless

Waterproof would be cool.

Re:Thanks Apple

[tlhIngan]

Just saved me some money. I said I wasn't going to buy the new phone to replace the 5s if it didn't have all of the features of the 6s. They didn't need to leave out the 3D touch to differentiate it from the 6s models. The screen size was the differentiating feature. I don't want the larger phones because I can't easily work them one-handed but I'm not going to buy a smaller phone that's deliberately lacking in features.

Or maybe it wasn't possible? Force Touch works because it measures the capacitance between the LCD and the glass. Given the iPhone SE reuses iPhone 5s parts (the case and display), I wouldn't be completely surprised if those parts lacked the necessary metal coatings to do the measurement. And given the cost, I'm guessing Apple would rather continue to use iPhone 5 parts across the iPhone 5 (warranty), iPhone 5s (warranty/refurbs) and iPhone SE line rather than have a special SKU just for the SE.

Then again, it could also be that because of the smaller screen, force touch either doesn't work well (too hard to push at the corners, or too soft), or because of the glass geometry, results in cracking of the screen.

(Yes, I thought Force Touch used some special sensing array for pressure, but it turns out it's just measuring glass displacement).