iPhone 6

[anonymous-user]

Digitalize said:

bakerstreet said:

You are basing it in a site that has rumours on the title

They always get somethings right, but tey also get a lot of things wrong

Yes but it's the most reliable source for these rumours on the Internet, literally everything we know so far is just a rumour, but having been following them for about 8 years now, leaks like those look bang on. They tend to filter out all the rubbish and only post stuff that's quite likely too.

Unless I've been told porky's by someone I know who was told by a friend of a friend involved in the launch, or they were told lies, it's iPhone 7.

Which probably means it's an iPhone 8

[Digitalize]

garyhun said:

Unless I've been told porky's by someone I know who was told by a friend of a friend involved in the launch, or they were told lies, it's iPhone 7.

Which probably means it's an iPhone 8

Ah, the very reliable source! Considering the leaked parts almost exactly match the 6 parts other than small tweaks, it would be hugely unusual for it to be anything but follow the 'S' trend.

Unless your friend of a friend is currently in Cupertino working in the relatively small team of people preparing the event, and decided to risk their job to tell you, they know nothing. No one who works at any Apple Store knows anything, no carriers know anything etc.

[Zod]

Digitalize said:

garyhun said:

Unless I've been told porky's by someone I know who was told by a friend of a friend involved in the launch, or they were told lies, it's iPhone 7.

Which probably means it's an iPhone 8

Ah, the very reliable source! Considering the leaked parts almost exactly match the 6 parts other than small tweaks, it would be hugely unusual for it to be anything but follow the 'S' trend.

Unless your friend of a friend is currently in Cupertino working in the relatively small team of people preparing the event, and decided to risk their job to tell you, they know nothing. No one who works at any Apple Store knows anything, no carriers know anything etc.

their job and their wealth (Apple stock options that would presumably be forfeited).

[Jobbo]

garyhun said:

Digitalize said:

bakerstreet said:

You are basing it in a site that has rumours on the title

They always get somethings right, but tey also get a lot of things wrong

Yes but it's the most reliable source for these rumours on the Internet, literally everything we know so far is just a rumour, but having been following them for about 8 years now, leaks like those look bang on. They tend to filter out all the rubbish and only post stuff that's quite likely too.

Unless I've been told porky's by someone I know who was told by a friend of a friend involved in the launch, or they were told lies, it's iPhone 7.

Which probably means it's an iPhone 8

Have you shown them this yet?

[Blown2CV]

anyone you meet down the pub, or a mate of a mate who says they have insider knowledge does not, and is a lying .

[Ruskie]

Gio G said:

AstonZagato said:

Gio G said:

Looking to upgrade from old 4S, to potentially a 6S. What is the smart way of procuring these days? Buy the phone from Apple, then SIM only plan. Works out cheaper? Alternative is to go pay monthly deal, no doubt pay over odds over 2 years for handset...

Thanks G

Usually they are about the same cost (they were when I looked about a year ago. SIM only gives you lots of flexibility. O2 does something sensible which they call "Refresh". They break the monthly contract into "minutes" and "cost-of-phone". When the phone is paid off, the monthly contract drops to the cost of just the minutes.

No idea if others have started doing the same.

I am with Orange/EE, don't think they do that.. As a comparison recently got my son an iPhone 6 for £36.99 a month, no upfront cost with unlimited calls and text and 2GB of data. Considering the phone still costs over £500, that is roughly £14-£15 a month for the plan over the 2 years. Did not think it was too bad..

G

With 4g I would say 2GB is no where near enough. I'm using 6-8GB a month with average use and not much streaming.

[Mousem40]

Live photos is pretty cool!

[Tycho]

Mousem40 said:

Live photos is pretty cool!

They might take off now Apple has done them but HTC's Zoe was the same thing and seemed to be just a gimmick.

[Alucidnation]

Im looking to purchase one outright this time but im confused about the sim thing.

If i bought one from Apple and i put an EE sim in, would it lock the phone to EE or would it stay unlocked with an option to use whatever sim i liked whenever i liked?


Ta.

[Esseesse]

Alucidnation said:

Im looking to purchase one outright this time but im confused about the sim thing.

If i bought one from Apple and i put an EE sim in, would it lock the phone to EE or would it stay unlocked with an option to use whatever sim i liked whenever i liked?


Ta.

It would stay unlocked.

[kev1974]

Mousem40 said:

Live photos is pretty cool!

Nobody uses it on the myriad other phones that have been able to do these for years.

Problem is they are not very shareable off the device (unless Apple has used something vaguely standard like animated .gif, which has also existed for decades) which limits any benefits of the format. And can't be printed, beyond the one key frame, until Harry Potter newspapers become the norm.

Should make the storage manufacturers and cloud space vendors happy though.

[bad company]

Esseesse said:

Alucidnation said:

Im looking to purchase one outright this time but im confused about the sim thing.

If i bought one from Apple and i put an EE sim in, would it lock the phone to EE or would it stay unlocked with an option to use whatever sim i liked whenever i liked?


Ta.

It would stay unlocked.

That's what I do with O2. Bought the phone from Apple and a sim only deal from O2. That way I am in a strong negotiating position when my O2 contract comes up for renewal.

[Esseesse]

Live photos seems like a gimmick to me.

The haptic stuff is probably the most interesting new feature. Apple probably has the biggest lead over everyone else with the SoC, this is likely (as in previous year) to be the most impressive feature, also not easily replicated by competitors.

[ZesPak]

Esseesse said:

Apple probably has the biggest lead over everyone else with the SoC, this is likely (as in previous year) to be the most impressive feature, also not easily replicated by competitors.

I agree the SoC is a nice piece of design, but the previous ones were just able to keep up with the competition rather than take the lead, no? The iPhones have never been power beasts, it's the combination of hardware/software that makes them perform as good or better than a lot of the competition.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/snapdragon-...

Edited by ZesPak on Thursday 10th September 11:35

[Esseesse]

ZesPak said:

Esseesse said:

Apple probably has the biggest lead over everyone else with the SoC, this is likely (as in previous year) to be the most impressive feature, also not easily replicated by competitors.

I agree the SoC is a nice piece of design, but the previous ones were just able to keep up with the competition rather than take the lead, no? The iPhones have never been power beasts, it's the combination of hardware/software that makes them perform as good or better than a lot of the competition.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/snapdragon-...

Edited by ZesPak on Thursday 10th September 11:35

The same performance at a lower power consumption is (normally) the other side of the same coin as more performance for the same consumption. You're right that in the products the chips were released in you may experience a similar performance, however I think that Apple are quietly building a technical lead. Also I'd imagine the Apple chip is running with far more headroom to spare.

ETA: "I think that Apple are quietly building a technical lead" - Also, I think that if Apple were not confident that it could and will do this, it would not bother to invest in building it's own chip. Apple philosophy seems to be to not outsource anything that is your core competency (competitive advantage), and to outsource and drive the cost down on anything that isn't. Maybe getting burned previously with IBM development of PPC has something to do with this also.

Edited by Esseesse on Thursday 10th September 11:59

[Alucidnation]

bad company said:

Esseesse said:

Alucidnation said:

Im looking to purchase one outright this time but im confused about the sim thing.

If i bought one from Apple and i put an EE sim in, would it lock the phone to EE or would it stay unlocked with an option to use whatever sim i liked whenever i liked?


Ta.

It would stay unlocked.

That's what I do with O2. Bought the phone from Apple and a sim only deal from O2. That way I am in a strong negotiating position when my O2 contract comes up for renewal.

Excellent, thanks!

[ZesPak]

Esseesse said:

The same performance at a lower power consumption is (normally) the other side of the same coin as more performance for the same consumption. You're right that in the products the chips were released in you may experience a similar performance, however I think that Apple are quietly building a technical lead. Also I'd imagine the Apple chip is running with far more headroom to spare.

ETA: "I think that Apple are quietly building a technical lead" - Also, I think that if Apple were not confident that it could and will do this, it would not bother to invest in building it's own chip. Apple philosophy seems to be to not outsource anything that is your core competency (competitive advantage), and to outsource and drive the cost down on anything that isn't. Maybe getting burned previously with IBM development of PPC has something to do with this also.

That' a lot of speculation and to be seen of course, for now they have competitive products with no clear lead in them (ok battery life but not class leading, same for performance). If they could take a significant lead in either I don't know why they would be holding back?

I think the main idea of their own chip design was more to implement certain features natively into the chip, so that they can be processed at a much more efficient level. Something like Motorola has done, but with extra (low power) chips/cores.

Efficiency is key here and it's a bold step taken by Apple but one that, as you say, they might possibly reap great benefits from in the future (maybe already in this iteration?), but so far it's just about on par with the competition as far as I can tell.

Interesting stuff, and it'll take significant investment from them to keep up with the dedicated manufacturers, but that shouldn't be a problem for a company like Apple .

[Esseesse]

ZesPak said:

That' a lot of speculation and to be seen of course, for now they have competitive products with no clear lead in them (ok battery life but not class leading, same for performance). If they could take a significant lead in either I don't know why they would be holding back?

Battery life in terms of device use time may be comparable, but I think I'm correct in thinking that iPhone batteries are generally far smaller capacity? Holding back... don't know, perhaps being able to launch something later with a significant rather than incremental improvement makes it more difficult for competitors to respond. Also however there are benefits such as smaller batteries being cheaper.

ZesPak said:

I think the main idea of their own chip design was more to implement certain features natively into the chip, so that they can be processed at a much more efficient level. Something like Motorola has done, but with extra (low power) chips/cores.

I think you're right that this is a significant reason.

ZesPak said:

Efficiency is key here and it's a bold step taken by Apple but one that, as you say, they might possibly reap great benefits from in the future (maybe already in this iteration?), but so far it's just about on par with the competition as far as I can tell.

Interesting stuff, and it'll take significant investment from them to keep up with the dedicated manufacturers, but that shouldn't be a problem for a company like Apple .

It is interesting... how long before you can get a Macbook Air with an ARM chip in it? Intel CPU's aren't cheap...

[ZesPak]

Esseesse said:

It is interesting... how long before you can get a Macbook Air with an ARM chip in it? Intel CPU's aren't cheap...

True that, there's much speculation about this as well. The thing is, how about software? OSX is popular because it can actually replace a windows machine. It can run Office, Adobe software,...
If they change architecture, they NEED the third party support.

That brings home the point of their PowerPC decision. They tried and tried but in the end had to cave and switch to the Intel hardware, which at that point had surpassed the PowerPC in many ways.
Of course, they had different orders of budgets pre-iPhone .

[Esseesse]

ZesPak said:

Esseesse said:

It is interesting... how long before you can get a Macbook Air with an ARM chip in it? Intel CPU's aren't cheap...

True that, there's much speculation about this as well. The thing is, how about software? OSX is popular because it can actually replace a windows machine. It can run Office, Adobe software,...
If they change architecture, they NEED the third party support.

Indeed. I did wonder if the move to the Mac App store might have been in preparation... I'm not sure if they require submission of universal binaries? They did a good job with Rosetta when they went from PPC->x86, I'm not so sure it's as easy in reverse. Could be wrong though.

ZesPak said:

That brings home the point of their PowerPC decision. They tried and tried but in the end had to cave and switch to the Intel hardware, which at that point had surpassed the PowerPC in many ways.
Of course, they had different orders of budgets pre-iPhone .

I don't think IBM couldn't justify the development costs. Now I wouldn't be surprised if the Apple A chips are the largest minority of 'high end' ARM chips shipping today? They sell many times more Macs now too.