Once upon a time pundits proclaimed that Apple simply had to make a netbook, or low cost, low margin laptops from competitors would destroy them in the PC marketplace. More recently, they said Apple just had to make a discounted iPad or cheap, content-subsidized (in theory) tablets from Amazon would quickly overtake them. Today, and not for the first time, the call is coming for Apple to make a cheap pay-as-you-go iPhone to compete with the bargain basement Android offerings taking financially savaged parts of Europe by storm.

But Apple doesn't do cheap.

Under Steve Jobs and now Tim Cook, they never have. They've thought differently, changed the game, and somehow they've managed to survive.

Most north Americans and some western Europeans are far more familiar with the idea of a post-paid phone, if not the term itself. Basically, it means you get the phone up front, heavily subsidized, and in exchange agree to a long term service contract (2 years in the U.S., sometimes less in Europe, 3 years in Canada). You save roughly $400 on your new iPhone, but you're paying roughly $1000 a year for service, so the carrier makes their money back and then some.

In pre-paid markets, you typically pay full price for your phone up front, then pay-as-you-go for service, without any contract or long term commitment. Because you have to pay full price for the phone, however, without any subsidies to defer the cost, cheap phones end up being attractive to far more users. And Apple doesn't have an answer to the ultra low end, uber cheap, bargain basement $100 Android phones that are increasingly dominant in pre-paid markets.

Now Apple doesn't like to leave money on the table, but they love to leave "no money" on the table. They value saying "no" far more dearly than saying "yes".

So far they've said a resounding "no" to high volume, low margin markets.

The Wall Street Journal posited today that Apple's reliance on carrier subsidies were "a crutch" and offered this statement from John Lagerling, Google's director of Android partnerships:

"Our competitors are much more dependent on such subsidies. From a sustainability standpoint, if you have very expensive devices as the only ones available to access your ecosystem, then that can come with a pretty severe hangover in the long run."

Returning again to the theory that past behavior is sometimes the best indicator of future behavior, however, we can look at the aforementioned netbook market for precedent.

Apple's first answer to the netbook wasn't a crappy, creaky, barely usable Mac with a tiny screen and cramped keyboard. It was the MacBook Air. It was a premium product that two generations later became 11- and 13-inch marvels that, while 5 times (or more) the cost of a netbook, to this day has competitors struggling to match its quality and value at the same price point.

Apple's second answer to the netbook was also the iPad. Still a premium product but one that started at half the price of the Air and, while not doing everything a traditional laptop did, was carefully and precisely aimed at doing several important, mainstream tasks better than most laptops could. Certainly better than netbooks could.

Turns out it was a killer strategy. They divided and conquered. The MacBook Air has become a trend-setting laptop, owning a key part of a lucrative product position. And the iPad has become virtually its own product category. Neither are typically subsidized.

Compare the success Apple has had with either of the those products to the results competitors have seen from devalued, depressed, and demoralized netbook offerings, and it's hard to imagine any of those pundits are still in a position to pund (punditize?) let alone keeping punding (punditizing?).

While it's dangerous to draw parallels between the very different PC and mobile spaces, Apple's ability to earn tremendous amounts of profit while owning only a tiny percentage of the market should show how their priorities are aligned. (And is something other companies, like RIM, need to think about carefully if they consider attempting to be successful with small amounts of market share.)

Even when it appears like Apple is selling the iPhone "cheaply", they're really not. They're selling it with massive carrier subsidies. An iPhone 3GS is "free" on AT&T because AT&T is paying Apple hundreds of dollars for it, making it up over the course of the 2-year service plans customers agree to when they get the subsidized phone. An iPhone 4S is only $299 - $499 on contract. It's $49 to $849 off contract.

That's not cheap.

If it means Apple doesn't do as well as $100 off contract Android phones in pre-paid markets, right now it looks like they're fine with that. As fine as they were in not doing well in the $300 PC netbook market.

Apple doesn't have to do well in every market, it only has to do supremely well in the most valuable markets. Sometimes the best way to win is not to play every game.

And if Apple one day decides they do need to present an answer to Greece and Portugal, to emerging markets, and to carriers who balk at subsidizing a flagship Apple device, it probably won't be with a cheap iPhone. It will be to the cheap phone market what the iPad was to the cheap netbook market.

Something thought differently. A game changer.

Source: The Wall Street Journal

The iPhone 5 on the other hand will have a larger screen with a thinner rounder body. It is said to be a sight to behold as it is impossibly light but very solid to hold. The camera will even rival point and shoot cameras and will be a major selling feature of the new model.

Now the bad news, rumors abound that Apple has had a few design and production problems with the iPhone 5; which will result in a slight delay and may affect stock levels right into 2012.

Now as with all of these rumors, take them with a giant size pinch of salt. I remember similar stories about delays to the iPad 2 just before it was announced and they turned out to be false. The only thing I would take from the astonishing amount of rumors that are floating around about the iPhone 5 this week is that this is a sure sign that its launch will be sooner rather than later.

[9to5 Mac]

The especially awesome Phil Nickinson from Android Central went hands on with the Android powered Samsung Vitality on Cricket, and I have to say I liked what he saw quite a bit -- namely:

As you'll see in the video above, Muve is an easy-to-use music service. But what really makes it shine is that Cricket's made the billing process as simple as can be. Actually, there is no billing. No per-song fee. You pay $65 a month for unlimited voice calls. And unlimited data. And unlimited Muve Music. And for our money, it doesn't get much better than that.

Now TiPb's heard going back to WWDC 2011 that Apple has an iPhone nano (or budget iPhone) type device pretty much done and ready to go, and TiPb's since heard that it may not be getting the traditional plans on traditional carriers either (or at least that we might be surprised where it ends up.)

A stripped down, low cost iPhone is one thing when it still requires $100+ on monthly voice and data charges, but a low cost iPhone with a low cost plan like $65 a month to go with it? Super. Sweet.

Apple doesn't compete in the bargain basement computer business. They kick it in the head with something like iPad or the new MacBook Air. But Apple does compete in the lower end MP3 player market with iPod shuffle and iPod nano, so they do understand the market for smaller, less expensive consumer electronics that still tie (not going to say seamlessly!) into their ecosystem.

Whether they ultimately pull the trigger on this, only Tim Cook now knows for sure, but again -- inexpensive iPhone nano with a cheap $65 all-you-can eat service plan? That'll bring a lot of young, mainstream more price sensitive, first phone and feature phone users into the Apple fold, wouldn't it?

Check out Phil's full hand's on via the link below and then come back and tell me what you think -- will we get an iPhone nano version of this deal?

[Android Central]

VintageZen has a post up asking what place in Apple's lineup the iPod touch would serve once a budget iPhone hits the market, especially if it's ultra-cheap and Apple can strong-arm the carriers into offering pay-as-you-go plans and iPad-like month-to-month data plans.

.

With the coming fall event, this is Apple’s opportunity to make a trademark dramatic move and kill off the iPod Touch from their product line. However, they shouldn’t just leave a void where the iPod Touch once was, they should replace it with the much rumored low-end iPhone. The low-end iPhone would fit perfectly into the market where the iPod Touch was, and in many ways would be better than the iPod Touch for most consumers.

Daring Fireball thinks it could help equalize the iPhone product vs. Android OS numbers metrics companies love to trot out.

It makes sense in a lot of ways for Apple. Simpler product lineup. It would even help with “smartphone market share” numbers — iPod Touches are dark matter in such comparisons that only count “phones”. Plus, I don’t recall seeing (or hearing privately, myself) any rumors about a new iPod Touch for this fall.

TUAW battled this out back in June. The whole debate is worth reading (check this link below) but in sum:

Apple has removed the "iPod" branding from iOS 5. In iOS 4 and earlier, both the iPhone and iPad handle music playback via an "iPod" app, but in iOS 5 these two devices instead have a "Music" app just like the iPod touch. It may mean nothing, but it's still an interesting move considering the iPod was Apple's top-selling product for so many years.

Apple certainly has killed products, even best selling products like iPod mini (which was replaced with iPod nano). Right now iPod touch sits in the middle of the road -- no phone, no 3G, no large screen. If the budget iPhone really is cheap to buy and cheap to run, is there any space left for the current style iPod touch? Or do those two lines become one?

[VintageZen, Daring Fireball,

Sohu.com has a report up saying China Telecom, China's third largest mobile carrier, will not only be fielding the iPhone this year, but two new iPhones. We're fairly sure an iPhone 5 is coming this fall, and we've heard for a while now an iPhone nano/budget iPhone might be coming with it. (Two new iPhones in one year? I'll have to call Phil and ask how to deal with that many reviews!)

“According to Sohu.com, China Telecom will offer two types of iPhone that include the iPhone 5 and a ‘simplified iPhone 4,’” says White. “Essentially, this potential ‘simplified iPhone 4′ would be a more economical version of iPhone to target a broader customer base in developing countries such as China, allowing for an expanded market opportunity.”

Apple already owns 66% of mobile profits with one fairly high-end phone. If they get the second, more economical phone (on carriers with plans to keep those costs down), especially for new smartphone adopters and emerging markets, they could push that already astronomical figure even higher.

[Sohu via AllThingsD]

We've been hearing about the iPhone nano, aka the budget iPhone, for a while now and Vietnamese set Tinhte might finally have scored a prototype.

3 pictures below are photographs handset is said to be the next version of iPhone 4 from a very reliable source. Really hard to convince you to believe this because it is exactly like the iPhone 4 white appearance. Some other information that you want to transfer to you is that this machine seems to run faster than the iPhone 4, lighter weight and two glass front and back seem to have been replaced by two plastic sheets, type of sensation and cry other than the iPhone 4. According to information leakage, predictable from the English website, the more likely Apple will introduce the iPhone 4s (cheap version) and the iPhone 5 next month. And it looks like the iPhone that you see below is the iPhone 4s.

That Apple was working on a cheaper iPhone for new entrants and emerging markets has always been assumed -- because it makes sense -- but how exactly they'd go about doing it was and is the big question. Just like the MacBook Air and iPad are to the netbook, Apple has a way of filling holes in the product line-up in unpredictable but often high effective ways.

Instead of making an iPhone physically smaller, or using iPhone 3GS parts, if these pictures prove to be genuine, and this prototype hasn't already been abandoned, the idea of plastic instead of glass and possibly other lower-end components could very easily make for a cheaper iPhone that's still binary compatible with the existing App Store apps and perhaps even current accessories (and Jailbreaks?).

But then would iPhone 5 have to look different so fashionistas don't worry about it being mistaken for the cheap phone?

[Tinhte via MacRumors]

Apple just might have had the iPhone nano -- or whatever you'd prefer to code-name the second, lower budget version of the iPhone family -- ready to go as early as WWDC 2011, though they chose to make that keynote focus exclusively on OS X Lion, iOS, and iCloud. What people mean when they talk (or leak) about iPhone nano is still unclear, however. Just like "Apple is working on a TV" ultimately turned out to be a 27-inch iMac, and Apple's "interesting ideas in the netbook space" ultimately turned out to be iPad and the 11-inch MacBook Air, what "iPhone nano/budget iPhone" turn out to be will no doubt be difficult to predict in advance but obvious in hindsight.

Today, BGR reported:

According to our source, Apple will indeed be launching a prepaid / lower cost iPhone this year. We are told the handset will retail for no more than $350 without contract. Ready for the really interesting part? It’s entirely possible that the low-cost iPhone will in fact be the iPhone 3GS. [[BGR]http://www.bgr.com/2011/07/18/apple-to-launch-low-priced-iphone-for-350-iphone-4s5-end-of-summer/)

We've long speculated that iPhone nano might be a stripped down iPhone 3GS, same lower resolution screen and lower cost, high volume, components, but a smaller, tighter, refreshed package. Again, that's pure speculation but based on iPhone nano not being a straight up iPhone 3GS. (Or just a new name for the discounted iPhone 4 when iPhone 5 goes on sale.)

Apple has been tremendously successful at dominating the high end, premium phone market, and have grown by adding Verizon as a carrier. They've also done a good job in grabbing those who transition from feature phones to smartphones; an ever increasing number. That last group is hugely important, as are emerging markets. Low cost options are important to them, but so are low cost plans. Apple could make an iPhone nano free on a 2 year contract but AT&T and Verizon voice and data plans make that difference negligible when it comes to total cost of ownership (Saving $100 when you're spending $2000 is nice but not transformative.)

Cheaper plans on alternate carriers in the US, and certainly internationally, are one way to address this. (The other is a non-app phone, but it's hard to see Apple pull a ROKR again.)

Either way, it's going to be interesting to see if Apple finally decides to pull the trigger on a second class of iPhone, and how they choose to market it. iPod nano became the best selling MP3 player in history. Could that lightning strike again in the smartphone space?

Previous years have seen Apple's annual fall music event showcase iTunes and iPod in decreasingly spectacular fashion, last year's exceptions being the iPod touch 4 with cameras and the all new, all iOS-powered Apple TV. This year could be very different, with the possibility of Apple introducing up to 5 new iOS devices to the family at roughly the same time. It would be unprecedented, but so was no new iPhone back at WWDC 2011 in June.

1. iPod touch 5

If anything would usually be considered a safe for the fall music event, it would be a next generation iPod touch. For the last four years, Apple has introduced a stripped down, non-3G version of the same year's iPhone wrapped in iPod touch clothes. So this year we'd expect an iPod touch 5 with an Apple A5 system-on-a-chip (SoC) and enhanced cameras. (Along with fierce demands for 128GB option to finally retire the iPod classic, of course.) Since WWDC 2011 came and went with no new hardware, however, and we don't have a new iPhone 5 to base a new iPod touch 5 on, that challenges all preconceptions.

A new iPod touch definitely makes sense for the lucrative holiday season, but with so much else on their plate, it could end up being massively over-shadowed at best.

2. Apple TV 3

Last year's iOS and Apple A4-powered reboot of the Apple TV in a rental, streaming model at the low price point of $99 turned their previous set top box strategy on its head. An Apple TV 3 (or whatever a 2nd generation of the 2nd generation Apple TV would be called) is certainly a possibility for this fall, especially if the new Apple A5 chip could boost it to a true 1080p powerhouse. Would Apple have 1080p streaming content in place to support it? Would any other new technology, like AirPlay mirroring in iOS 5 make more horsepower make more sense? Quite possibly. There's every indication this is Apple's "hobby" entry into the living room app and console gaming market and they're going to want to hit it hard before competitors catch up. Again, it feels like a safe bet but one Apple could just as easily hold off on for another cycle.

3. iPhone 5

Unlike the last 4 years Apple didn't introduce a new iPhone back at June's WWDC 2011 so it feels like we're overripe for one. The general assumption -- and a lot of rumors -- indicate this fall we'll finally see it. Whether the delay was due to Verizon contacts, iOS 5 delays, or hardware production lead times, Apple probably needs to get a refresh out the door just to keep up with competitive pressure from Google, expired iPhone 3GS contracts on AT&T and other contracts, and the increasingly fashion-concious mobile market. Thinner, lighter, faster, these aren't the things Apple's TV commercials tell us matter most, but they're probably the things that will change the most for iPhone 5. The dual-core, ARM Cortex A9-powered Apple A5 processor is probably a given. An 8 megapixel, 1080p rear camera and FaceTime HD front camera feel likely as well. More RAM, 64GB of NAND Flash storage, and a larger, 3.7-inch screen, are on a lot of wish lists as well. (Hopefully 3D isn't, and we're still probably a year away from LTE 4G.)

The big question is whether or not it will be a major redesign or just a streamlined iPhone 4. Rumors have gone both ways, which isn't unusual given Apple typically tests both less and more ambitious prototypes during the design face, and field tests camouflaged units as production gets closer. I'm guessing we'll end up in between. A tweak, but not a major overhaul. Not yet.

4. iPhone nano

iPhone nano rumors have been around as long as... the original iPhone. There's an iPod nano, after all, and it's the most popular model in the industry. Every other manufacturer makes multiple models, so why not Apple? If they want to move into greater demographics and emerging markets, it's a logical move. Just like Intel Macs and CDMA iPhones, they've probably had an iPhone nano, and other variants, deep in the Apple labs for a while, waiting until they felt was the right time for release.

With that in mind, we keep hearing it's done, it's ready, and it's just waiting on Apple to pull the trigger. What "it" is, however, remains a mystery. Just like neither the iPad nor 11-inch MacBook Air are Netbooks, collectively they effectively address -- and eviscerate -- the netbook market. Apple is as notoriously hard to predict in advance as they are seemingly obvious in hindsight. A barebones feature phone is probably out of the question given the size and power of the App Store and iTunes ecosystems, but could a stripped down, 3- to 3.5-inch iPhone 3GS in new packaging work for the ultra casual and emerging markets? The lower resolution but still compatible screen and the other components, now enjoying huge economies of scale, make it an interesting idea.

(Georgia's still hoping the iPhone nano is a watch that "AirPlays" iPhone information to a more convenient screen.)

5. iPad 2 HD/Pro / iPad 3

Whatever you want to call it, Apple really could release another new iPad this year. Since they called 2011 the year of the iPad 2, iPad 2 HD or iPad 2 Pro (given the MacBook Pro and Mac Pro branding) makes more sense, but either way we might just see a new tablet with a Retina Display this fall. It's not an obvious choice, given how it will have only been 6 months or so since the (original) iPad 2 shipped, and since the "pro" market for iPads hasn't even begun to be established. But Apple doesn't exist in a vacuum. Component pricing and production yield rates could mean a 2048x1536 iPad can't be produced at Apple usual $499 price points, at least not any time soon. And while competing tablets from Samsung, BlackBerry, and HP webOS have failed to gain any real traction, they're going to keep coming. Getting a Retina Display iPad out on the market soon, before anyone else is even anywhere close, just makes competing that much harder, and going with a "pro" level price for those who want and can afford it protects Apple's low cost of entry on the regular iPad 2. It would be a tactical gamble, but Apple has often been utterly fearless when it came to those.

Whether "pro" also means LTE, USB, SD, or any other acronyms you want to throw at it, and whether it mandates a newer battery or even newer A5 chipset remains a really interesting question.

6. There is no 6

Rumors of Apple television sets continue to swirl, and there are always other product areas Apple could and one day probably will explore (maintaining growth takes work). However, the last time rumors popped up about an Apple television, TiPb heard it was a 27-inch iMac and low and behold, that's what we got. Could the latest round of rumors be a harbinger for a 32-inch iMac? No idea. The television business is low margin and everything Apple typically isn't. That's not to say they couldn't revolutionize it the way they did smartphones, but I don't think they'll do it this fall.

Remember this morning when I mentioned that The Wall Street Journal iPhone 5 rumors lacked the usual wink-wink, nudge-nudge controlled leak flare? I asked for miracles, and the WSJ gives us Yukari Iwatani Kane. Writing alongside Lorraine Luk, Kane, who's track record is excellent, adds:

A person briefed on Apple's product plans said the company initially planned to launch its next iPhone this summer as it usually does, but the device wasn't ready in time.

This apparently due to production and yield challenges still faced by Hon Hai/Foxxcon, which could result in iPhone 6 delays as well. And speaking of this next, next generation handset:

People briefed on Apple's plans said the company is planning a major iPhone revamp then, with one person saying the company has been experimenting with features such as a new way of charging the phone.

Let's not forget the iPhone nano, which TiPb previously heard might be near completion and simply waiting on a launch date:

Apple has also been working on a less-expensive phone with new features such as an edge-to-edge screen, according to this person.

Should make for an interesting fall event...

[WSJ]

Bloomberg has jumped into the iPhone 5 rumor game, saying that the next generation iPhone will launch in September with the same form factor as the current iPhone 4.

The device will include the A5 processor, the more powerful chip that Apple added to the iPad 2 earlier this year, along with an 8-megapixel camera, up from the 5-megapixel model in the iPhone 4, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the details aren’t public. The new iPhone will closely resemble the iPhone 4, the people said.

This is in stark contrast to yesterday’s rumors from BGR, which claimed an August release for a redesigned iPhone 5.

Bloomberg also claim its sources confirmed a few other rumors that we have heard before. It claims Apple is working on a new iPad with a resolution of a third higher than the iPad 2; with a more responsive touchscreen. This one is a bit sketchy due to the problems this would cause developers. It also resurrected the rumor of a cheaper iPhone for developing countries, which could be the basis for the long standing iPhone nano rumors. This, it says, will use the current chip and screen of the iPhone 4. Sounds like the iPhone 4 will more likely just become the cheaper option for carriers just as the iPhone 3GS is now.

TiPb keeps hearing a September/October release timeframe for iPhone 5, along with the possibility of another iPad this year, and the "iPhone nano" device, in whatever form it takes, so there may well be something to this. What do you think?

[Bloomberg]

According to BGR Apple will be announcing a much improved and updated iPhone 5 as early as August.

We have been told by a reliable source to expect a radical new case design for the upcoming iPhone, though we have not been given any additional details surrounding the design of the new iPhone case.

Lots of recent rumors have pointed to Apple releasing a small upgrade form the current iPhone 4; even going so far as to call it the iPhone 4S. Both This is My Next's iPhone 5 rumors, and now BGR's dispute that. Unless Apple is planning two release (iPhone nano?, someone is going to have to make up their mind and soon.

BGR has also heard that it is possible Apple will hold the iPhone 5 announcement event at the beginning or middle of August with availability to follow as early as the end of August. TiPb has heard similar August rumblings from big box retail sources, but their information is usually hit and miss and hard to source. The major issue with an August timeframe is obviously Apple's announcement of a fall release of iOS 5. There is no way Apple will release a new iPhone prior to the release of iOS 5 -- at least every new iPhone to date has shipped with a new version of iOS.

Could Apple announce iPhone 5 in August and release it alongside iOS 5 in September? Would that make sense?

[BGR]

With just minutes to go before the keynote at WWDC, reports are showing that there are 2 massive banners covered with black cloths. There are 3 confirmed banners on display at WWDC, displaying the much-anticipated iCloud logo, iOS5 and OSX Lion, but what are under these black cloths?

Could this be a 'one more thing' at the end of the presentation? iPhone nano? An updated "iPhone 4S" or all new iPhone 5?

Apple said no new hardware today. Anyone busy the rest of the week yet...?

Don't forget to join our live meta-blog, where we'll find out exactly what is under those sheets.

[AllThingsD]

While it may not be tomorrow's one more thing, could Apple be just about ready to release an iPhone nano? The Wall Street Journal claimed they were working on it, and while there may not be any new hardware at WWDC, there certainly could be soon.

If they do, would it be an iPhone 3GS style, non Retina device to keep compatibility, a third, HP Veer screen size added to iPhone and iPad, or a feature phone, shades of ROKR's past?

None of those sound like ideal options. Touch targets on a Veer-sized iPhone would be tiny or congested, or another complete re-write for developers. A feature phone wouldn't harness Apple's App Store ecosystem. And we already have an iPhone 3GS that could be miniaturized a bit but would it be compellingly different than the original?

During a meeting with Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi, Apple COO Tim Cook referred to the iPhone as "the mother of all halos" because of its ability to expand sales of other core products like the iPad and the Mac. Cook went on to strongly suggest that Apple would be releasing a cheaper iPhone in the not-so-distant future:

The analyst says Cook “appeared to reaffirm the notion that Apple is likely to develop lower priced offerings” to expand the market for the iPhone. Cook said the company is planning “clever things” to address the prepaid market, and that Apple did not want its products to be “just for the rich,” and that the company is “not ceding any market.”

Could Cook be referring to the rumored release of a cheaper, smaller iPhone Nano? Maybe, maybe not. Last time Cook said Apple had ideas about netbooks we got iPad and the 11-inch MacBook Air.

In addition, Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer suggested that rumors of a soft-SIM or "Universal SIM" iPhone may be in the works to help Apple prevent carriers from dictating terms, which would ultimately be beneficial for the consumer.

One last significant tidbit was that Tim Cook indicated the tablet market will eventually out-grow the entire consumer PC market, with all major PC manufactures jumping into the game. However Apple believes that, despite growing competition, they will remain a leader in the space because of their innovations and year-long head start.

What do you think, is Apple interested in expanding their iOS product line, or could they have other ideas to own the smartphone and tablet markets?

[Forbes]

• Our podcast feed
• Download Directly
• Subscribe via iTunes

Rene and Georgia talk Verizon iPhone launch, battling TV commercials, iPhone 5 rumors, HPs new phones and Nokia's burning platform, the greenpois0n Jailbreak, Angrier Birds, and we give away an iPhone! The is iPhone Live!

Show notes and all the week's iPhone news after the break!

Announcements

• Verizon iPhone 4 Review
• TiPb Answers: Verizon iPhone and the limitations of CDMA

Crazy Future iPhone rumors

• Apple releasing a cheaper, contract-free iPhone Nano this summer?
• More iPhone nano, free MobileMe rumors
• iPhone nano — with no storage?
• Apple prototyping iPhone with physical keyboard?!
• Apple going to 4-inch display for iPhone 5?
• Despite still not being there, Apple again the talk of Mobile World Congress

More MobileMe

• More details on the new MobileMe — becoming Ustream + Foursquare?!

New App Store Subscriptions and Guidelines

• Apple announces iPhone, iPad subscriptions for all
• Apple updates App Store developer guidelines, warns against “cheating the system”
• Apple’s new subscription service: the good, the bad, and the ugly
• Warner Bros. launches Dark Knight and Inception as apps

iPhone News

• AT&T airs new iPhone 3GS for $49 commercial
• AT&T giving away 1000 bonus rollover minutes for iPhone
• Daily subscription extension mean iOS 4.3 not coming until March?
• Apple looking to improve iOS notifications… by buying an iPhone app?

Jailbreak

• Why iBooks doesn’t play nicely with Jailbreak
• PwnageTool 4.2 released, untethered, fixes iBooks
• How to jailbreak iOS 4.2.6 on your Verizon iPhone 4 with Greenpois0n

Tips and How to

• Daily tips

Hosts

• @reneritchie
• @GeorgiaTiPb
• @sethclifford

Credits

Thanks to the TiPb iPhone accessory store for sponsoring the podcast, and to everyone who showed up for the live chat!

Our music comes from the following sources:

• I Called You -- iPhone Remix by Pete Leidy
via Sneakmove iPhone Ringtone Challenge

The New York Times is weighing in on the previous rumors published by Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal saying Apple may working on less expensive device with better voice control and MobileMe, but not an iPhone nano.

Apple’s engineers are currently focused on finishing the next version of the iPhone, which is likely to be similar in size to the current iPhone 4, said one of the people. The person said Apple was not planning to introduce a smaller iPhone any time soon. Analysts expect the new iPhone to be ready this summer.

Another person who is in direct contact with Apple also said that the company would not make a smaller iPhone at this time, in part because a smaller device would not necessarily be much cheaper to manufacture and because it would be more difficult to operate.

More important, a phone with a smaller screen would force many developers to rewrite their apps, which Apple wants to avoid, the person said.

An Apple executive reportedly also said it wouldn't make sense to expand the iPhone family at this time, other than continuing the practice of dropping the price of the previous year's model (like the $49 iPhone 3GS still available on AT&T). And that N97 code name reportedly for the iPhone nano? Yeah, the NYT says that was for the Verizon iPhone. (Daring Fireball previously said the Verizon iPhone was N92.)

The voice commands (possibly leveraging Siri artificial intelligence?) sound especially interesting as the article suggests they'll be robust enough to replace virtual keyboards for some uses. Likewise, a more "versatile", perhaps cheaper version of MobileMe could finally allow the iPhone to lose its iTunes tether.

Google's Android platform has system-wide voice control and access to ever-growing, predominantly free Google services, so Apple will likely need to address that with iPhone 5 and iOS 5.

Anyone sad iPhone nano may not be a done deal? And does better voice control and MobileMe lessen the sting?

[MobileMe]

Cult of Mac, who previously rumored a storage-free iPhone nano, is now offering some more potential details on that rumored MobileMe update, including functionality that would make it a mashup of Ustream and Foursquare. According to a "source who wishes to remain nameless":

the centerpiece of the new MobileMe services is a dynamic webpage that sounds like a mashup of Facebook, Foursquare and Ustream. The webpage will collect a ton of information that is automatically uploaded from an iOS device, including the user’s location, photos they’ve taken and video they’ve shot. It will also detail music they’re listening to, games they’re playing, applications they’re using, music and apps they’ve purchased, web sites they’ve visited, status updates, and so on. Users can even send live video to their page, much like the live video-streaming service Ustream.

They also say Apple will offer privacy controls for those who may wish not share. A second service called "Tokens" is also discussed:

Tokens (the name is temporary) allows users to tag GPS locations with information, tips and interesting photos. Users can see what tokens others have left behind. The information could be restaurant reviews, meal recommendations, special deals offered by retailers, or photos of events that took place there. However, the system is complex and Apple is having trouble getting it to work properly, our source said. (And yeah, Apple can’t seem to make the simple version of MobileMe work properly now – but that’s another story).

I'm not going to lie, this isn't really what any of us had been hoping for in a MobileMe revamp. In fact it sounds a little like the Kin services! We've discussed universal login so you can enter your password to activate an iPhone or iPad (rather than tether to iTunes) and pull down all your settings. We've talked about iTunes.com media streaming so you don't have to choose which of your music and movies you sync over USB. We've begged for them to just buy DropBox already. We've never really sat down and dreamed about another Foursquare, Gowalla or Places -- or Ustream for that matter.

Is this the MobileMe revamp you've been looking for? Let us know in comments!

[Cult of Mac]

Mobile World Congress 2011 has brought a couple of Android tablets -- LG Optimus Pad, Samsung Galaxy Tab 2-- and slew of Android and Windows phones -- LG Optimus 3D, Sony Xperia Play and Xperia Pro, and Samsung Omnia 7 -- but a quick look at the blogsphere shows an awful lot of headlines about iPad 2, iPad 3, and iPhone nano -- products that don't (yet) exist from Apple, a company not even at the show. (And which may or may not fit into an iPad or iPhone "family".)

Last year Apple was the talk of MWC after their iPad announcement, and 2009 they got the buzz following the success of Apple's App Store. How does one company who doesn't even attend MWC still manage to hijack so much press?

Rene joked on Twitter yesterday that the iPad 3 and iPhone nano leaks, coming right at the start of MWC, was remarkable timing. Could it also be remarkable, and remarkably effective strategy on Apple's part to keep their competitors on their heels? Do you think the rumors warrant all the buzz they are drawing at MWC 2011?

Cult of Mac is following up on the iPhone nano rumors from Bloomberg and Wall Street Journal saying Apple will make the low price points by getting rid of all onboard storage. No NAND Flash storage, no big price tag. Apple would get around this by streaming everything from an iTunes.com/MobileMe cloud just like Apple TV 2 does today.

However, Apple TV 2 still has 8GB of NAND Flash storage to hold the OS and apps and cache the content. Sure streaming media could make up for lower storage levels but no storage? What about camera roll and apps? Would Apple let me stream Infinity Blade from the cloud? Would I even want to?

It sounds far fetched. However, an 8GB iPhone nano using components from the huge iPhone 3G/iPhone 3GS production runs of the last few years, augmented by cloud storage could be super cheap and super sweet.

What do you think?

[Cult of Mac]

The Wall Street Journal's Yukari Iwatani Kane continues to leak Apple rumors, this time backing up Bloomberg's iPhone nano story and once again raising the idea of a revamped, free MobileMe service to go with it:

One of the people, who saw a prototype of a new iPhone several months ago, said the new device is intended to be sold alongside the current line of iPhones and would be about half the size of the iPhone 4. The phone, one of its codenames is N97, would be available to mobile carriers at about half the price of Apple's main line of iPhones, the person said.

Apple also is exploring a major overhaul of its MobileMe online storage service, the people familiar with the matter said. The service currently requires an annual subscription payment of $99 to $149. Apple is considering making Mobile Me a free service that would serve as a "locker" for personal memorabilia like photos and videos, eliminating the need for consumers' devices to carry a lot of memory, the people familiar with the situation said. MobileMe could become a focal point for an online music service that Apple has been developing for more than a year, the people said.

TiPb took a look at the idea of growing the iPhone and iPad families earlier in the week and nothing here changes the balance. Apple already offers several versions of MacBook Pros and iPod so several versions of iPhone and iPad can never be off the table. What if any compromises Apple is willing to make, especially when it comes to app compatibility, remains the question.

Free MobileMe, on the other hand, could prove essential in matching free services from Google and Microsoft and paving the way to a universal Apple ID for cloud content, sync, and backup. (We can dream right?)

UPDATE: The WSJ has updated their post with info on what the iPhone nano and revamped MobileMe might just be like:

The person who saw the prototype of the new iPhone said the device was significantly lighter than the iPhone 4 and had an edge-to-edge screen that could be manipulated by touch, as well as a virtual keyboard and voice-based navigation. The person said Apple, based in Cupertino, Calif., also plans to upgrade the iPhone 4.

The new MobileMe file-storage and music service could be available as early as June, depending on the progress of licensing talks that are in their preliminary stages, the people familiar with the situation said. Apple had planned for the service to be available a year earlier. The new service would give users access to their iTunes libraries from, say an iPhone or iPad, instead of requiring that the devices be synced by cable with a computer and use space to store the actual files, the people said. The new service likely would be compatible with the iPhone 4, one of the people said.

So now that the Verizon iPhone is off the rumor plate, you have any room left to believe in an iPhone nano?

[WSJ]

Could Apple be planning to expand and round out the iPhone and iPad families by adding higher and/or lower end devices that could appeal to additional segments of the market? While the rumors have been around for as long as the iPhone and iPad themselves, the latest incarnations -- a Retina Display iPad 3 in fall and a cheaper iPhone nano in summer -- make the concept worth looking at again.

iPhone and iPad (and iPod touch) are currently singular offerings. While you can pay extra for more storage, and sometimes last year's model lingers, there's really only one version of each product. Conversely you can get two physical sizes of iMac (though the design is the same), MacBooks, MacBooks Air in 11- and 13-inch, and MacBooks Pro in 13-, 15-, and 17-inch sizes the latter of which has additional ports. On the mobile side, while Apple originally only offered a single iPod they eventually expanded the line, introducing lower price versions like the iPod mini and iPod nano, and an extremely cheap version in the iPod shuffle.

So while Apple never chose to compete with the bargain basement, razor-thin profit margins of low end PCs they did suck all the air out of the MP3 market using massive economies of scale and brilliant supply chain management to keep healthy profits at the same time.

So the question is, will Apple do with the currently singular iPhone and iPad what they did with MacBooks and iPods? Will they offer higher end, pro-style iPads and cheaper nano-style iPhones?

For over 3 years the iPhone was only available on AT&T in the US. Eventually Apple probably figured they'd sold an iPhone to everyone who wanted AT&T or were willing to put up with AT&T just to have an iPhone. They needed a new market. This week they got one with the launch of the Verizon iPhone.

Now while Apple didn't let Verizon put an ugly logo sticker on the iPhone casing, load with bloatware, or lock down its features, they did make a major (for Apple) concession -- they put in a CDMA radio. CDMA is a dying technology. In Canada Bell and Telus have already switched to HSPA+ and in the US Verizon is busy switching to LTE. And if Apple is ruthless about anything it's ruthless about shedding dying technologies (floppy disks, optical disks, Firewire, Flash, etc.) For Apple to invest in designing, engineering, producing, and marketing a CDMA iPhone means they anticipate a huge return on that investment.

But at a certain point everyone who wants an iPhone on Verizon will have one as well. Sure the clichéd RAZR (aka feature phone) users will migrate towards smartphones but not all of them will want the iPhone's singular form factor and not all of them will want the currently still expensive data plans that go with it. Unless Apple addresses their needs, they'll go elsewhere the same way smartphone users who insist on a physical keyboard go elsewhere already.

Apple may not care about them any more than they care about losing bargain PC shoppers to the Acer and ASUS of the world, they may care enough to come up with nano and shuffle-esque solutions, or they may think differently enough to come up with something else entirely.

Likewise Apple may not care about the higher-end tablet market or they may decide they want to do with iPad what they did with MacBook and go pro.

The idea of an iPhone counterpart to the iPod shuffle -- a phone that hooks into iTunes but doesn't require data, just plays music and makes calls and is great to take jogging is interesting and would no doubt capture some of the massive if dwindling feature phone market. But would Apple ever want to field an iPhone that isn't tied into the App Store and the still growing smartphone market? I doubt it.

An iPhone nano -- even if it's just keeping the iPhone 3GS around another year like Georgia suggested on iPhone Live! last night -- is even more interesting. A "free" (subsidized down to $0) iPhone that can use all those App Store apps and has reached such scales that it's incredibly cheap to produce is almost compelling. Whether Apple would want to waste any margin actually making it HP Veer small is debatable but given Jobs' derision of smaller tablet form factors and the user hostility of shrunken UI it doesn't seem likely. Given iPhone 4 went Retina and iPhone 5 will again raise the spec bar, a 3.5-inch 480x320 iPhone could be nano enough.

iPad pro on the other hand is enticing. If Apple can nail the economics of 2x Retina Display on the same 9.7-inch screen it could be downright gorgeous. But what else would differentiate it? Many would love a 7-inch variant but that doesn't say "pro", does it? Others want a version that runs full on Mac OS X but even post-Lion the Mac UI just isn't made for touch. And an iOS that does more Android 3.0 Honeycomb desktop-style computing would have to be universal across all iPads or risk real fragmentation issues. Once an iPad, any iPad, goes Retina, it doesn't seem likely the non-Retina, older generation devices would stick around more than a year or two anyway.

So we're left with there being markets for extended iPhone and iPad families, price points and hardware variations that would appeal to wider user bases, just like the Verizon iPhone is doing right now. Each brings challenges along with it -- some that Apple traditionally wants no part of. But Apple is great at solving challenges in non-traditional ways. Apple will stick to one iPhone and one iPad until they need (not want) to make more. Then they'll expand in a way the rest of the industry doesn't expect -- just like when they brought an iPad to the netbook fight, and an 11-inch MacBook air to the pro portable space.

Bloomberg is reporting that, according to unnamed sources, Apple is working on a smaller iPhone model (iPhone Nano, anyone?) to help close the pricing gap between lower end Android devices and Apple's flagship iPhone product. The move would let consumers pick up an iPhone Nano for around $200 non-subsidized and without a carrier contract:

One version would be cheaper and smaller than the most recent iPhone [...] Apple has considered selling the new iPhone for about $200, without obligating users to sign a two-year service contract.

We previously speculated that Apple would do well by releasing a smaller iPhone to help fend off the never-ending flow of cheap Android smartphones. Apple would be able to sell the device without a contract because the costs to build it would be very low compared to the current iPhone 4 or future iPhone 5. The sources told Bloomberg that Apple is aiming to unveil the device around mid-year, but that plans could still be scrapped depending on how things play out.

Another interesting tidbit was that Apple is working on a technology called Universal SIM which would let users jump from network to network without switching out their SIM card. The SIM would be compatible with both GSM and CDMA networks and would work well in a contract-free iPhone Nano, giving more freedom of choice between networks for the user.

So how about it, would you be interested in picking up a contract-free iPhone Nano now that we know Apple is actually working on one? Let us know in the comments!

[Bloomberg]

Android is already the biggest iPhone competitor and if technology and emerging markets combine to create $100 off-contract Android phones, will Apple need an iPhone nano to keep both user and developer mindshare?

Seth Weintraub at Fortune kicked over this latest Android anthill with an article on how cheaper chipsets and Google strategy could align to make those $100 Android smartphones a reality, shoving the migration from feature phone to smartphone into overdrive. That's interesting in established markets like US and EU, where the idea of walking into a store, laying down very little cash, and walking out with a "good enough" handset, sans additional contract obligations, is a mainstream dream come true. In emerging markets in Asia and Africa, that's the gold mine. Forget a PC on every desk and in every home -- soon it will be a smartphone in every hand.

Nokia and RIM, falling further behind the smartphone software race to Apple and Google, have increasingly looked to emerging markets for their low-cost Symbian and BlackBerry handsets as a way to leverage old technology until their next-generation Meego and QNX-based handsets are finally ready to market.

Google has already got a next-generation OS, perhaps not as polished or usable as Apple's iOS, but "good enough" in the classic, market-dominating sense and ready to go on everything from the highest end geek phone to the cheapest budget handset.

Apple has iPhone 4, $650-$750ish off contract, and last year's iPhone 3GS, $550ish off contract. And that's it.

Given the heavily subsidized, long term contract market that dominates the US, that's been translated into $199-$299 for iPhone 4 and $99 for iPhone 3GS. Those prices were low enough to prevent any umbrella -- to stop any cheap alternatives from gaining traction. But if Android starts arriving at $100, maybe even $75 off-contract, on good-enough devices? That's one huge umbrella opening up underneath iPhone. It's a circus tent.

Jerry Hildenbrand at Android Central points out that while geeks might turn up their noses at cheapy $100 Android handsets the mainstream won't and the resulting sales will have a profound effect among one incredibly important group -- developers. Right now iOS' mind and marketshare means it still has the best apps and most passionate developers on the planet. If Android sales reach the billion unit level, that might change and Apple could quickly lose their developer advantage to Google.

In the MP3 space, where devices have never been subsidized, Apple quickly followed the original iPod (now iPod classic) up with the iPod Mini (now iPod nano) and even the super-cheap iPod shuffle. For years the iPod nano was the most popular iPod. More importantly for Apple, it prevented competitors from differentiating based on price. Who wanted the "good enough" (or even arguably better spec'ed) competition when you could get the Apple brand and everything that came with it for "cheap enough"?

MG Siegler over at TechCrunch thinks North American carriers may, by hook or by crook, prevent $100 or cheaper handsets from taking off so they don't threaten the lucrative contract model. Perhaps. For a time. Or they may switch to a non-Net-neutral model where they bill us per byte to access YouTube or Netflix unless we're on those traditional contracts (or even if we are). Or they may just fork Android, make their own proprietary carrier OS, and only sell first-party phones. The pipes will get paid.

Either way, Apple may have to contend with those $100 handsets the way they contended with Windows in 1990s, and netbooks and cheap MP3 players in the 2000s. None of those are perfect parallels for the smartphone market of the 2010s but together, differentiating on software quality, build quality, and not leaving an umbrella, could they provide a strategy? Could Apple go to an iPhone nano to stop the ultra-cheap Android invasion?

[Fortune, TechCrunch, Android Central]

Is Apple making a smaller, CDMA-compatible "world phone" for Verizon, and readying it for Q3, 2010? Maybe. And TiPb's sure this "report" coming out on Droid Day is purely coincidental, given Google and Verizon's moment in the sun. AppleInsider, however, claims a new report, with the prerequisite "sources in Taiwan" (SiT) say it's so:

Qualcomm's new hybrid CDMA/WCDMA chip offers the potential for a single, global iPhone that users can take to any major carrier, solving the network fractionalization problem. It also solves other issues that had served as roadblocks, including the issue of user confusion that would result from Apple selling separate CDMA and GSM/UMTS versions of the iPhone.

And that it will have a smaller 2.8 inch screen to go with it. (We make fun in the concept picture above, because we had such lingering hopes for a 480p iPhone HD...) With the Android Droid, Windows Mobile HD2, and even the BlackBerry Storm2 going for bigger screens and pixels, however, we're hoping Apple doesn't trend completely the other way...

Since it's only a rumor, however, and a suspiciously timed one at that, we recommend you take it with a full iPhone-sized grain of salt... but let us know what you think!

Ars Technica has once again found references to an iProd 1,1 in Apple firmware, this time iPhone 3.1 Beta 3. iProd was last seen back in May in the iPhone 3.0 betas under the prototype designation iProd 0,1.

For those unfamiliar with Apple versioning, 0,1 is thought to be used for pre-release prototype hardware. 1,1 was used for both the first iPhone (original 2G) and iPod touch. iPhone 3G was 1,2 (minor revision) while the second gen iPod touch was 2,1 (major revision). iPhone 3GS is 2,1 as well, and it's widely expected that Apple will introduce an iPod touch 3,1 in September.

Says Ars about the new, as yet unnamed iProd(uct):

While it's easy to speculate that this may be the rumored Apple tablet we keep hearing so much about lately, we have yet to find any evidence that iPhone OS 3.1 is capable of running on a device with a tablet-sized screen. It's just as possible it may refer to the camera-equipped iPod nano, though we doubt such a device would run iPhone OS. Hell, it might even be an iPhone nano.

To the list of iTablet and iPhone nano, we add iNetbook. Let the speculation increase!

There's been a lot of noise lately about Verizon and the iPhone. Sure, some could be wishful thinking. Some could be to manipulate the ongoing Apple/AT&T negotiations. But could there be anything more to it?

We've heard rumors that an iPhone nano/lite/mini could be coming, and coming to Verizon alongside an iPhone-esque iTablet/iPad.

Yesterday on MacBreak Weekly, Scott Bourne claimed a Verizon insider contacted him and told him "Verizon is getting their own iPhone and the announcement will be in June". Sound like a WWDC 2009 "one more thing" for the ages?

This follows on our friend Duvi letting us know about a rumor posted on the CrackBerry.com forums:

It is confirmed that iphone is coming to vzw...date? Very soon...there is a training for all emp on the internal training intranet website.

Could be smoke and no fire, or it could be Verizon finally warming up the iPhone BBQ, what do you think?

Daring Fireball posted a tremendous article about how Verizon, AT&T, and Apple benefit if the rumors about an iPhone Lite and iPad media tablet on Verizon are true-ish (Gruber also looks at Apple's iPod strategy mapped to the iPhone -- go read it now, I'll wait).

What struck me, however, was how Verizon, AT&T, and Apple benefit from the rumors themselves rather than the actual devices and/or their eventual carriers, if any.

• Apple is, according to a separate rumor, negotiating with AT&T to increase the length of their iPhone exclusivity agreement. AT&T's last earning report showed just how important the iPhone was to their revenues, especially their new customer acquisition and premium service charges. This puts them at a distinct disadvantage with Apple, who could theoretically -- if inconveniently -- re-engineer the iPhone to work on any of the big 4 US carriers (CDMA for Verizon or Sprint, different GSM bands for T-Mobile). Rumors that Verizon is already talking to Apple, then, pushes AT&T over edge of disadvantage cliff. Obviously this is of great benefit to Apple.

• Verizon had what could only be termed a lackluster launch of their so-called iPhone killer, the BlackBerry Storm. With AT&T likely getting yet another mainstream hero phone this year in the form of the 3rd generation iPhone. Sprint, the other CDMA carrier, is getting the less mainstream, but still geek-anticipated Palm Pre as their hot summer hero phone. Where does that leave Verizon? The BlackBerry Tour ("Niagara") and various HTC Touch series Windows Phones which will -- eventually -- be upgradable to the profoundly incremental Windows Mobile 6.5. Great gear, perhaps, but not hero phones on the same level as the iPhone or even Palm Pre (or last year's Android G1 launch on T-Mobile). Rumors that Verizon may (soon) get an iPhone of sorts, or iPad, however, give the perception of a hero phone coming to the network. This is a huge benefit to Verizon, and might even keep some users from switching to AT&T (or Sprint) this summer to get a real device.

• Inversely, AT&T benefits not one bit from these rumors. They hurt AT&T's negotiations with Apple and they may cost them some users who would have defected from Verizon.

We discussed this briefly last Wednesday on the iPhone Live! podcast, and no doubt others have made the same observation this week after reading the series of rumors (yes, even the one about the iPhone Lite actually being the Microsoft iPhone-Killer Pink). However, looking past the devices, it does seem like the rumors in and of themselves carry a hefty benefit for both Apple and Verizon.

Until the 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) networks roll out in a couple years, that might be the closest we really get to seeing Apple and Verizon together.

Drop one tiny Verizon rumor pebble into the pond, and watch the iRipples spread like crazy. Cases in point:

Business Week (via MacRumors) is reporting that Apple will introduce two (2) new devices on Verizon this year:

1. iPhone "Lite", which would be thinner and cheaper than the iPhone proper due to the system on a chip technology Apple has been amassing lately (i.e. PA Semi, Arm and PowerVR licenses, etc).
2. "Media Pad", which would be smaller than an Amazon Kindle but with a larger screen and described as yet another breakthrough device on the scale of iPod or iPhone, with photos, HD movies, music, and Wi-Fi for -- presumably browsing and -- VoIP calls.

To further the rumor, one of these new toys may come as early as this summer. (WWDC time frame?)

We're still not sure about any of this. iPhone did begin life as a larger, iTablet-like Safari Pad, and recently developer Craig Hokenberry made an interesting argument for a "Front Row To Go" pad that sounds similar.

Meanwhile, sucking the oxygen out of the lower-cost market is something Apple did with the iPod nano, however Apple has repeatedly said there'd be no iPhone nano (for whatever that's worth...) but more importantly, unlike the GSM iPhone, a CDMA iPhone Lite or "Media Pad" wouldn't enjoy the international portability of the iPhone (sure, "world phones" typically do some EDGE, but we'd want ultra-fast HSPA+, right?).

Just 2 years post launch, the GSM iPhone is in over 80 countries. The CDMA Amazon Kindle? Still just 1. Apples to oranges, we know, but it's something to consider for "Media Pad" class devices.

Commercial Times is raising the bar on crazy rumors by claiming Apple will release not just one, not even two, but a whopping three new iPhones this summer.

• First would be the next-generation iPhone previous rumors have pointed to, with beefed up processors and features like the camera.

• Second would be a throwback of sorts to the original iPhone, dropping HSPA 3G in favor of EDGE 2.75G to lower costs and smash what little umbrella was left competitors.

• Third would be a special version to support a CDMA carrier in China, allowing Apple to penetrate that last, largest of markets. (And with the mere mention of CDMA, cue baseless Verizon rumors in 3... 2... ) [Note: Chinese CDMA bands won't work on Verizon -- hence baseless]

While TiPb has been on the next-gen bandwagon as a long as anyone, I have to admit the other two I'm not as sure about. Even though I mentioned the possibility of an EDGE-again iPhone on Twitter this weekend, Sacha Segan from PCMag was quick to point out a problem: AT&T is cutting EDGE capacity in favor of 3G. And like Giz says in the link below, Apple's never been a retro-embracing company...

Would anyone be interested in an uber-cheap (free on contract, low EDGE data plan) version of the iPhone? Or is it Next Gen or nothing? And could we see a world where people are smuggling CDMA iPhones out of China?!

[via Gizmodo via Slashphone]

This is not a drill! We finally have someone, likely with no actual knowledge of the engineering or design of the next gen iPhone, going on record as saying:

his sources indicate Apple is readying a new iPhone that will ship in June with an upgraded camera that could deliver big improvements to the iPhone experiences, including both still and video capabilities "with possibly another camera on the front for video chat."

iChat on the iPhone has been a perennial favorite among rumormeisters before every new launch, real and imagined, just like iPhone nano speculation. Speaking of which...

Apple Insider's coverage of Barclay's Capital analyst Ben Reitzes' predictions doesn't stop there, of course, as we also get the prerequisite low end iPhone nano-ized rumors, the high end video iPhone Pro rumors.

Some of these are logical inferences, some are wishful thinking. We're thinking -- why let analysts have all the fun? What are you wishing for? Do we want Mobile iChat video? Could AT&T even support it in iPhone numbers? And if Apple isn't going to fracture the platform with different screen sizes, are features a realistic way to differentiate their offerings?

Also touched on briefly during Apple's Q1 conference call yesterday was the prospect of a low-end iPhone, and Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook was quick to dispel hopes of that (and of an iPhone nano?) as well (text via Macworld):

Tim: We're not going to build a low-end voice phone. Our objective is not to be unit share leader, it's to build the world's best phone.

Interestingly, however, Apple is still pondering what to do about unsubsidized markets (where, unlike AT&T, the carriers don't foot part of the phone cost, making it initially much more expensive for buyers):

Largest example is India. Sales less in non-subsidized markets, obviously. Huge market opportunities and will make adjustments in future to play in a stronger way.

So what does this mean? No iPhone nano or iPod with phone features bolted on, it seems. But how will Apple increase sales in those non-subsidized countries? a 4GB SKU? Or when the iPhone hits 32GB, will the 8GB become a special SKU for those markets? Maybe if we get an iPhone HD this summer, the 3G itself will become that SKU?

The again, Apple is famous for denying (even bashing) things until the moment they release them...

Our forums are weighing in, so head on over there and let us know what you think!

We're still considering these iPhone nano rumors to be way over on the far side of fetched, by they just keep on keeping on, so here's the latest (via MacRumors):

DigiTimes highlights a report from Taiwan's Economic Daily News stating that two chip manufacturers, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company and United Microelectronics Corporation, are expected to receive chip orders for Apple's rumored iPhone nano. The report states that orders would likely come in March, leading to a June release of the iPhone nano at the earliest. [...] Meanwhile, American Technology Research analyst Brian Marshall believes that the iPhone nano will not initially be launched in the United States.

Marshall (via International Business Times) bases this claim on no word of AT&T testing an iPhone nano, and then leaps to the speculation that China would be a likely place to the launch the new device.

Aiya.

We're coming up on MacWorld awfully quick now (TiPb will be there, natch) and so the rumors are flying. Expectations have been decidedly lower than in years past due to the absence of his Steveness, but there's one persistent rumor that just won't go away: the iPhone Nano.

The universal response to these rumors has pretty much been "Meh." Engadget wants to know what the deal is. Macrumors thinks that it's just case makers riding Apple rumor coattails. Gizmodo doesn't believe either.

The rumor won't die, though, so: what if it were true? What would an iPhone Nano look like?

Our esteemed editor Rene has worried that an iPhone Nano seems like a non-starter because it would split the unified iPhone platform -- forcing developers to plan for multiple screen densities and feature sets. That has been a recipe for pain on other mobile platforms (though, to be fair, Windows Mobile manages fairly decently), so it seems unlikely that Apple would do that. Then again, given the way the App Store is going, if any mobile platform can handle fragmentation right now, it's Apple.

The common wisdom is that Apple is no longer interested in feature-phones for obvious reasons: the MotoROKR debacle, the fact that all phones will become 'smartphones' in the near future, the fact that Apple's selling the $199 iPhone just fine, thank you very much. I'm inclined to agree with all of these arguments. But the rumors. won't. die. Plus, well, maybe, just maybe, Apple is blinking in the face of the tanking economy and thinking they need to actually release something inexpensive.

Let's start with the assumption that Apple will be good to their burgeoning iPhone/iPod Touch platform and not fragment it into multiple screen sizes and form factors. What then?

If you've been following the Apple news of the past few months, you may remember some of the Papermaster hiring saga, namely that he's replacing Tony Fadell, who wanted Apple to create a much less ambitious iPhone based on Linux.

Here's a thought experiment: imagine if Apple followed Fadell's original plan for a bit before abandoning it, developing the iPod Classic OS just enough to support basic phone functionality (or, alternately, stripping out most of the iPhone OS to make it a featurephone OS). If they had, then the plans for such a phone would be sitting on the shelf, waiting for Apple to notice the economy tanking and consumers wanting something less expensive. Fadell's basic iPod + Phone would sport a fully functional iPod Classic slapped onto a featurephone and frankly that would appeal to a lot of people. On the outside, it looks exactly like a classic iPod, on the inside, a simple phone.

There have been a few sets of people who have been resistant to the iPhone's charms. One of the larger groups: people who still adamantly love their RAZRS because they're small, sexy, and because they're flip phones. This group of people still believe that the iPhone is "Too much phone for me" and want something simpler -- even if it's only perceived as simpler. Give them a flip-phone with a real iPod on it and, well, they'd buy. Oh yes, they'd buy.

I'm still not sold that it's going to happen. Apple famously isn't interested in the low end -- until they are. The iPod Nano and iPod shuffle are huge sellers for Apple and their obvious quality helps the Apple brand. If they can pull the same thing off with a clamshell phone, it would be a Pearl Flip killer.

Not to be outdone by the Apple media server rumors, the iPhone Nano rears its tiny mutant form again, this time on the website of case-maker Vaja. Does this add weight to the rumor, or simply volume? MacRumors rightly points out:

While it may be that Vaja is simply taking advantage of the hype surrounding the iPhone Nano, the rumors have been persistent over the past few weeks. While Apple does not give case manufacturers information about unreleased products, Apple must contract out to factories to manufacture their hardware. It is believed that it is through these contracts that case design specs are often leaked ahead of time. As we've said before, case manufacturers have a huge financial incentive to have cases ready in time for new product launches.

Macworld is only a week away (though even if the rumor is true (and we're still not holding our breath) we may have to wait until Apple -- and Steve Jobs -- hold another special media event to know for sure.

Are you getting convinced yet? Or just tiring of the rumors?

Blurry off-angle photo? Check. Recycled tag line? Check. Recycled hero artwork? Check. Photoshop? Check.

Yes, folks, Jon4Lakers appears to have iPhone Nano fakes just in time for Macworld? And could it be from the same fine folks who brought us the fake Mac Mini poster?

Sure, case makers have made iPhone Nano rumors all the rage again, but just shrinking down the screen's physical size making capacitive targets difficult for beefy fingers to hit doesn't make much sense, does it?

With Apple, anything can happen, so the only question is, what's more likely? Phil Schiller whipping out an iPhone nano at Macworld, or tons more fakes before he ultimately doesn't?

(Thanks to Kurt Lyon for the tip!)

A week ago we linked to a story that brought fresh iPhone Nano rumors to the foreground. Today those rumors are picking up a tiny bit of speed. Seems the folks who brought us leaked iPhone 3G and 4th gen iPod Nano cases are listing an iPhone Nano case.

Of course, an iPhone Nano presents certain problems. Would Apple just stuff a standard 320x480 iPhone screen into a tighter package, like the iPod Nano? (Or BlackBerry Bold for that matter). They'd need to do something to avoid fracturing the mobile WiFi platform they've taken so much trouble to establish. And capacitive touch screens, for all their responsiveness, require beefy enough targets to hit with a finger. Would certain features be cut that just couldn't scale down effectively? Or would this truly be phone-and-iPod only (see mock up, above), leaving the "breakthrough internet device" space for the full featured, full sized model?

But we're getting ahead of ourselves. Could just be the lack of Macworld hype making the intertubes all crazy. Macrumors, for their part, says:

To add more uncertainty into the mix, we've heard that some of Apple's initial plans for Macworld may have been delayed. So, even if an iPhone Nano was originally in the works, we're not sure when we'd actually see one.

At a special event, on Apple's schedule, on Apple's terms, with Steve Jobs on a stage maybe?

With Macworld fast approaching, the rumor rate should begin increasing exponential. iTablets will be hot once again, of course, as will the iPhone Nano. Says MacRumors:

[iDealsChina] claims the product will be announced at Macworld San Francisco 2009. iDealsChina, however, has a very mixed track record. In August, it passed off renderings of knock-off iPod clones as the real thing and also claimed that the new iPod Touch would have GPS (it did not). The site, however, did previously have access to Griffin case moldings that appeared to be real. The sizes could correlate with smaller touch screen photographs that iLounge published in June.

MacRumors thinks such an iPhone Nano may break App compatibility with the existing iPhone and iPod Touch due to screen size and resolution. Shrinking the screen down using a higher DPI, like the iPod Nano would lessen part of the problem (though hitting tinier capacitive touch targets would no doubt be an interesting exercise in frustration).

What do you think? iPhone Nano for Macworld? And is it a Good Thing?

...Just multiply! So says MacRumors, gossiping this time about a UK report that has Apple launching an iPhone Nano just in time for the holidays. But is anyone buying what the DailyMail is cooking?

Nope. Not even on coupon night. Though MacRumors does state the more sensical:

More reliable sources have indicated that Apple has been working on a smaller iPhone, but there is no expected time-frame for that product's release.

Of course, at any time the uber-secret Apple labs are doubtlessly working on countless projects, many of which Steve Jobs is proud have never seen the light of day. iPhone Nano could be one of those too, just like it's much bigger, equally mythical iTablet brother...

(Now watch both drop this Tuesday...)

First came the iPod, then came the iPod Nano. Well, okay, there was the intermediary Mini, but that's neither here nor there. Eventually -- and currently -- there was -- and is -- the Nano. So it should come as no surprise that ever since Steve Jobs dropped the iPhone bomb back at Macworld 2007, people (and analysts, who may still technically be people?) have been predicting an iPhone Nano.

And now some Apple patents have been revealed which may just bring it a few technical hurdles closer to being!

In a nutshell, it covers a method for making an iPhone-style touchscreen out of "sensor panel substrate called polyethylene terephthalate (PET)". It's directed towards an iPod Classic style device, although an example phone is also detailed, but in our iPhone world, we're imagining it might also one day find its way into an iPhone Nano as well...

Check the read link for a much more in depth rundown...

Read

Dual-sided, transparent, flip-capable iPhone Nano?

El Jobso and Co. might just be exploring the possibility according to a recent patent filing unearthed, as usual, by the folks at Apple Insider.

Some of the juicy details include:

"capacitive array element [that] may be a dual-sided panel that is capable of sensing touch from either side and sending signals indicative of the touches to a host device (e.g., a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a digital music player or a mobile telephone unit)."

Of course, many Apple patent filing simply disappear into the dim, dank vaults of 1 Infinite Loop while others show up in ways or products we never could have guessed -- but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try!

I'll admit, the idea doesn't hold much appeal to me, or to those still waiting for their big-apps iTablet Safari Pad, but I've learned never to underestimate Johnny Ive and Cupertino's finest. If anyone could make this little miracle as functional as it is "lick-able", it's them.

What do you think? Does this give us any hard insight into a next-gen iPhone? How does the idea of a translucent touch screen grab you? Is a flip phone a great idea or just another point of failure in the waiting?