Why the iPhone 5se will be great for upgrade-shy Canadians

Daniel Bader

January 27, 2016 3:28pm

When Apple released the iPhone 5c in 2013, it was said by many to be a misstep, a notional rehash of the iPhone 5 built on weak bones. It was an iPhone 5 by any other name. And for a while, it appeared the critics were right; though Apple didn’t release specific sales figures for the product, the iPhone 5c’s neon plasticity didn’t seem to produce the desired result for the company.

But, towards the end of its life cycle, with price cuts and some effective marketing behind it, Apple found success with the product; it dropped to free on contract at many carriers, and represented an inexpensive way for customers to enter the smartphone market, or upgrade from an iPhone 3GS or 4.

Now, for the second time in its near nine-year lifespan, the iPhone is set to receive a refresh of its least expensive variant, and, barring mid-cycle carrier additions such as the Verizon iPhone 4, the first released before WWDC — aside, that is, from the original iPhone.


Rumoured to be called the iPhone 5se, the value proposition is obvious: retaining its 4-inch screen size (and, presumably, its 326ppi 1136 x 640 pixel display), it would bump the current iPhone 5s, a phone approaching its third birthday, from the company’s lineup. If the upcoming iPhone 5se looks as rumours and leaked photo(s) suggest — that is, a diminutive iPhone 6, with curved glass and rounded bezels — it would, for the first time since the iPhone 3GS, temporarily unify the design of the company’s iPhones.

More importantly, if the iPhone 5se gains the iPhone 6’s A8 chip, along with its NFC antenna, it would allow every iPhone to use Apple Pay, which is a growing market for the company. Other benefits, like an improved camera with Live Photos support, and a faster Touch ID sensor, would push some of the iPhone’s most popular features to a more accessible price point.

By putting out a new smaller iPhone, Apple also satiates the pent-up demand for one hand-friendly smartphones, a market that has been largely forgotten since the introduction of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus in 2014. While some Android makers like Sony tacitly support the same dwindling user base, the cries for a refreshed iPhone of that size have been more vociferous. When the iPhone 7 launches later this year, Apple would have had to decide whether it wanted to bump the iPhone 6, which is too large for some, to the cheapest tier, eliminating that 4-inch option altogether.

Related reading: iPhone 5c Review

For Apple, updating its smallest iPhone accomplishes a few things all at once: it justifies a price increase, which in turn raises the overall ASP, or average sales price, of its entire iPhone line. But even with a modest rise in cost, the iPhone 5se will still be Apple’s most affordable iPhone, and may be offered for free, or close to free, on subsidy from many American carriers. In Canada, the iPhone 5c was introduced at $129 on a 2-year term, but quickly dropped below $100, and then $50, as the iPhone 6 approached.

With the Canadian Dollar as weak as it is, at currently $130 on contract many potential customers see the iPhone 5s as their only option for a mid-cycle upgrade. Spending a bit more than that, say $160, for a considerably more capable and future-proof iPhone 5se, would alleviate much of the anxiety around purchasing Apple’s older products.

According to a survey taken by iMore, nearly an equal number of people would be interested in a smaller iPhone for its size as its lower cost. Should the iPhone 5se be both smaller and less expensive, but have specs equal to or exceeding that of the iPhone 6, it could reinvigorate demand for such a form factor.

Beyond that, by releasing a new iPhone in March, it allows Apple to focus on the future, not an echo of the past, at its September event, which is increasingly become about more than just a single product category.

In the past two years, Apple has announced the Apple Watch, the iPad Pro, a new Apple TV and a number of new services, such as Apple Pay, at its September event. While an iPhone 5se is unlikely to singlehandedly turn around flagging iPhone demand in Q3 and Q4, it may go a long way to flattening the huge demand that occurs immediately following the September quarter.

The iPhone 5se may not be Apple’s most exciting device released this year, but if it does exist — and we’ll know in less than two months, if rumours are correct — it demonstrates a company that, after releasing a lot of 1.0 products in 2015, redoubling its effort to retain its core user base. At the same time, it gives upgrade-shy Canadians, tired of rising smartphone prices, another great smartphone option.

  • Omar

    The iPhone version of a Nexus 5X.

    • danbob333

      but more expensive and crappier

    • El Capitan Morgan

      The iPhone for people who just wanted an iPhone. They’ll deal with the slowness later.

    • cartfan88

      Rose gold with a little less rose, a little less gold..exactly the amount that a budget $700 16gb iPhone deserves… Don’t even show your face at Starbucks with this.

  • Techguru86

    Just without the QHD display and larger battery capacity

  • Raj Singh

    It comes down to finances and the majority of North Americans are debt-ridden and poor.

    • Omar

      The majority of North Americans aren’t poor, but they’re not rich either. There’s a difference between being poor and being irresponsible financially.

    • Brett Arnold Allard

      Unfortunately Canadians are having a much harder time then the Americans right now..

      As a previous oil worker I truly feel like I’m “officially poor” but everyone has different lines of work.

    • jayzon12

      The minimum wage in most states is 7.25 or less than 2.50 if you make tips. They are in a much worse place than we are and have been for a long time. We have seen a larger fluctuation in the last 2 years but still have not hit the low of the average worker in the states yet.

    • Elton Bello

      Yes jayzon, and if you follow the news, they are discussing of making min wage 15$/hr…not like here, 11$/hr haha

    • jayzon12

      Discussing is not their state now and if they did increase minimum wage there will be other challenges like cut hours and increased unemployment. Based on your comment Alberta is in the best state in Canada because they are discussing a 15 minimum wage as well. AS of right now Canada is in a better place. That could change or it may not. Sorry about the rant I have lots of family in the US and have wanted to move there many times to be closer to my family but the day to day life there is much more challenging there than here

    • monsterduc1000

      No $15 Alberta minimum wage anymore with the downturn in the dollar and economy. It’s been put on hold by the NDP until things turn around.

    • neo905

      Except $7.25 USD is the equivalent of $10.30 CAD, which is our minimum wage, because our dollar sucks so bad. Now who is worse off? I would worry about our plight far more than Americans. At least they started deleveraging after their house crash. We continued on and have one of the largest housing bubbles in the world and consumers up to their eyeballs in debt. Not too mention inflation eroding our paychecks daily.

    • rick

      And that’s not taking taxes into consideration.

    • Erik N.

      It doesn’t matter how the USD compares to CAD for things such as min wage though. Things in the US are still priced fairly the same (with a few exceptions) then here, they also have to pay for health related expenses and many other things. So yes, they are worse off than Canadians. The things you mentioned are happening at a much alarming rate in the US…find me a major city in Canada that has suffered the fate of Detroit??

    • neo905

      You have no idea what you are talking about. The cost of living is WAY lower in the US compared to Canada. That is the benefit of having the Global Reserve currency and the majority of trade done in USD.

      They pay less at the pumps and in the grocery store, big box stores and any consumer good. The average price for a home in Canada is $440,000 and is $285,000 in the US, but the average house in the US is 2,100 sq/ft but is 1.500 sq/ft in Canada. We both take home $50,000 on average income wise. But their dollar goes a lot farther in the US. I am not even sure why you are even arguing this.

      Why even bring up Detroit? Detroit has been a hole for the past 30 years. What does that have to do with anything. lol.

      Ontario as a Province is in worse fiscal shape than Greece. That is just a fact. The Wynne Liberals have been a corrupt, wasteful spending, disaster. That isn’t even arguable.

      Don’t even get me started on our health care system. It is bloated and unsustainable. We pay the same amount for Health Care as Americans it is just spread out differently. I had a friend attend a funeral for a daughter who couldn’t get a bed to receive a life saving surgery for Leukemia because there wasn’t a bed available because it was so backed up so much with patients, so she ended up dying waiting. If things aren’t life threatening and you can wait then things aren’t as bad. Otherwise, it is a crap shoot.

    • Erik N.

      Well sir, thank you for schooling me! I have to agree with you, you raised some interesting points and I was going on by my own biased opinions. Thanks!

    • Goran Mihajlović

      Lolwut the US spends 50% more per capita on Healthcare for inferior coverage for fewer people. That story happens in the US all the time If you can’t just pay outright. You wait and you still pay exorbitant fees.

      I can’t even RE Greece/Ontario. Saying “it’s just fact” doesn’t magically make it so. Ontario hasn’t gone bankrupt yet so that alone means they are not better off than Ontario. Nevermind all the other things. I will however absolutely agree with the corruption and wasteful spending bit.

    • neo905

      Ontario debt is $300 billion dollars. Per capita it is worse than Greece. It is half our countries national debt. Ontario is a fiscal disaster with a bloated cuddled public sector that is the equivalent of Greece. We don’t have the the private sector to support our bloated sunshine list and their retirement compensation long term. It just isn’t sustainable. Just because we haven’t had our house of cards moment like Greece doesn’t mean we aren’t on that path. And Wynne is doing a great job accelerating that process.

      Guess what. People in Canada have a lot of misconceptions about about health care system. If you ask most people on the street they will say it is “free”. Well it is not. We get taxed heavily to support it. I think both systems are flawed. I am not saying the US is some utopia because even during when their housing market crashed more people went bankrupt because of health care costs than mortgage default. I also don’t think anyone should be denied basic care when they are ill. It is inhumane. Obama Care hasn’t solved the issues either. Life and death, in Canada you could die waiting or In the US you could die broke. However, the actual quality of care in the US is light years ahead of Canada in most cases. It’s just that you better be affluent.

      I mentioned that story because I don’t think people that live here thinks this EVER could happen in Canada. We are pretty naive. There really should be a two tiered system in Canada but that would never fly because as a country we are too liberal. Make no mistake about it. If one of my children was in that situation, they would be on a plane or I am driving them across the border and getting immediate care in the US. I am not even messing around. It already is happening more than you think.

    • Elton Bello

      Poor as f*ck dude, poor as f*ck

  • BriniaSona

    lame 16GB no SD device meant to force people to use your insecure cloud
    storage or force people to pay more for a better device.

    • Jonah Emery

      We don’t know for sure it will be 16 GB… but year it probably will.

    • El Capitan Morgan

      Yeah. You are right. It may be even just 8GB.

    • rick

      Could be 8

    • Andrew Meyer

      How is iCloud insecure you non-contributing zero? The 4chan incident was done through phishing username and password from iCloud users. Dumbass.

    • Homer J. Simpson

      There was security loophole to allow you to bruteforce username and passwords using FindMyIphone. Most sites will lock you out after a few tries. That’s security 101 and Apple missed it. Also, at the time, Apple’s two-step verification also didn’t protect against this.

    • Brad Fortin

      It’s almost as if they’ll be offering one model with 16 GB for those who don’t need more than that and likely another model with more than 16 GB for those who need more. The horror.

    • Victor Creed

      16GB shouldn’t even be a consideration in 2016. Tiers should start at 32GB

    • Vito R.

      Cost is always a consideration.

    • Marc Palumbo

      The difference between 16 and 32 GB is so small. It’s 2016, all bottom tiered phones should start at 32GB.

      Even if cost is a consideration, it’s a premium iPhone, cost shouldn’t be a consideration. Seriously.

    • Brad Fortin

      The difference is low-balled at ~$10 for off-the-shelf NAND storage, but Apple likes to go custom (including a custom NAND controller) so it’s likely closer to $15-20. Looking at the average selling price of iPhones we can deduce that the most popular tier is the 16 GB tier by a wide margin. Last year Apple sold ~220 million iPhones, and if the majority are 16 GB that gives us at least 150 million sales of the 16 GB tier. At ~$15-20 per phone that would be a few billion dollars. That’s no small chunk of change, even for a company like Apple.

    • Marc Palumbo

      Then it’s an easy fix for Apple and still maintain margins. Add the 16GB to the first tier and charge the extra 20$. Anyone who covers Apple and their yearly releases have been anticipating the 32GB tier 1 phone and have been disappointed the past 2 years.

      1st Gen iPhone came with 4GB as the first tier. The iPhone 3G came with 8GB as the first tier. Any excuse to not move to 32GB as the first tier is, well lack of a better word here, inexcusable. Apple seems to have been late when it comes to hardware upgrades (NFC, memory, etc.) lately. the iPhone 7 needs to be 32GB. Apps get larger in memory and now that the iPhone shoots in 4K resolution, local memory is important.

      No excuse now.

    • Abel

      I made a similar comment below, stating that Apple could (and would) pass on that difference to consumers (and even mark it up) but somehow MobSyr is censoring it.

      Oh, well…

    • Brad Fortin

      “No excuse now.”

      lol, you say that as if you’ve addressed every aspect of increasing the storage.

      The most important of which is: How much storage do people actually need?

      Offer as many anecdotes as you want but the only entity with enough information to properly answer that question is the company that designs the device. Apple has diagnostics from hundreds of millions of iPhones, do you really think they wouldn’t notice if the majority of their 16 GB users were running out of room on a regular basis? They’re smarter than that, and you’re smart enough to know they wouldn’t ignore valuable information like that.

      If the majority of 16 GB users don’t need more than 16 GB why spend twice as much money and create twice as much environmental waste than necessary?

      Another things to consider is that Apple is already the world’s largest consumer of NAND memory. Simply releasing a new model of iPhone is enough to cause a worldwide shortage because of how much memory Apple needs. Now imagine if they double it.

      And it’s not like they don’t offer a higher capacity for people who need it. The only excuse that can be used on any side of this argument is “I’m too cheap to pay for more storage, I should get it for free! I’m entitled to it!”.

    • Marc Palumbo

      No, but when your camera shoots video and takes pictures with higher quality, it means that each file created takes up more memory than it did before. if the iPhone 6s and 6s plus takes 4k video, wouldn’t you assume that the video file created takes up more memory than their previous cameras in older iPhones? I store files locally and on the cloud and if I had 16GB locaclly, I would need to take time to go through my multimedia and my apps to see what i can uninstall and what can be deleted. Why should I need to do that?

      If on average, you find out that 33% of your 16GB userbase would be satisfied and find it beneficial to have 32GB of space, would you put an increase in the local memory?

      Anyways, if Apple in September decides to put 32GB as their 1st tier offering, you’ll find someway to come back to me and tell me that Apple had enough data to make the choice to put it at 32GB.

      And who cares about environmental waste when a large chunk of iPhone users purchase iPhones on a yearly basis. If they cared, they would keep their iPhones until they died.

    • Brad Fortin

      You realize that even 64 GB and 128 GB models can run out of room with enough pictures and videos, right? It just takes longer. Waiting until your storage is full before trying to manage it is a terrible idea, no matter how much or how little you have. The solution is pretty simple, though: Treat it like any other camera, digital or film. That is, when it’s full, take out the old pictures so you can take some new ones. Simple enough, right?

      If only 1/3rd needed the storage increase I’d work on ways of reducing that number, like app thinning. If, despite all these other efforts the number of users who need additional storage keeps rising I’d make the switch at a time when it’s anticipated to pass 50%. That would be my decision, though, which isn’t nearly as informed as the people who *actually* make the decision.

      If Apple *doesn’t* increase the storage you, and others like you, will continue to moan and complain that 16 GB isn’t enough for you (despite the ongoing existence of the 64 GB and 128 GB models, but you’re apparently too cheap to pay for those).

      Apple *does* care about the environment. They’re generally regarded as the most environmentally-friendly tech giant. They’ve made massive investments in solar farms and sustainable forests, made great strides in improving the efficiency of their products, packaging, materials, chemicals, recyclability, etc. To think otherwise is to live in a little fantasy world. Let us know what it’s like there.

    • rick

      Apple cares about money. If they can make more money spinning their love for the environment then that’s what they’ll do. Firmly think you need to look in the mirror to reflect on fantasy world.

    • Brad Fortin

      So, tell me, what part of building in solar farms makes money? Do solar panels print money or something? If it was such a profit centre why hasn’t every other big company made similarly huge investments?

    • rick

      The part where the subsidies from China makes it profitable. Bloomberg Business quotes

      “Profitable? Yes, for both, although Apple and First Solar didn’t disclose the deal’s full terms ”


      “Profitable? Yes, because of China’s subsidies, according to BNEF, though the terms weren’t disclosed”

      Apple makes money – period. As far as why other companies haven’t…….gee let me guess. Maybe because its not as profitable for them given they don’t have a HUGE manufacturing footprint in China.

      I think you would gladly pay to bathe in Apple’s feces if you could and try and sell it as being the bestest most environmentalist most awesomest thing in the world.

    • Brad Fortin

      You think Apple is the only company of its size?

      It isn’t even Apple manufacturing anything in China, it’s Apple’s suppliers like Foxconn. Why hasn’t any other company with the same suppliers tried the same thing? It’s a heck of a reach to say “they’re doing it because it’s profitable” while nobody else is cashing in on this supposedly-profitable venture, especially when so many of Apple’s competitors are struggling to make any kind of profit.

    • rick

      Lots of reasons – could be as simple as clout or presence or visibility. Its a lame question – why aren’t there several companies engaging various States in the US to build a battery plant like Musk did……..because it was only profitable for Musk given his clout, profile, companies presence and its potential. Its also irrelevant to the discussion – you’re deflecting the question. I guarantee if this wasn’t profitable for Apple then they wouldn’t be doing it. Its profitable so they are. That was the question – you seem to think Apple does things as an altruistic and morale company. That simply is not the case. Its ALL about the dollars for Apple – especially now.

    • Brad Fortin

      Sounds like you’ve already got the “Apple only chases profits” narrative in your head and you’re trying to make everything fit that narrative. “They can’t possibly be doing it because it’s the right thing to do in the face of climate change, they must be doing it to profit! And they’re the only ones smart enough to do it so they can profit!” Great rationalization.

    • rick

      Everything is secondary to profits for apple. Those other things may add to the equation, but if it wasn’t profitable out of the gate with no other considerations then they wouldn’t do it. Plain and simple. They’ll use the secondary objectives as marketing spin. “look at us we’re green”. I never said Apple was smart. I did say their primary driver is profit and profit only. Which is pathetic when you look at the money they have.

    • Brad Fortin

      Apple’s been buying back stock since 2012. So far they’ve spent over $100 billion on stock buybacks. I’m not really into the stock market but maybe you, with your wealth of knowledge of all things profitable, can explain how giving >$100 billion to shareholders is profitable?

    • rick

      Really???? Companies buy back stocks for a few reasons. All of which are to maintain or grow value. A company with too much outstanding stock can see large swings in stock price at every little whisper of missing targets or changes within the company. More investors usually = less educated and therefore skittish investors. More Mom and Pop investors and this is exactly what recently happened with the Chinese market. Another reason to buy back stock is the less there is out there, the more attractive it looks. By reducing the number of outstanding shares, a company’s earnings per share ratio is automatically increased. In addition, short-term investors often look to make quick money by investing in a company right before a scheduled buyback. The rapid influx of investors artificially inflates the stock’s valuation and boosts the company’s price to earnings ratio.

      The primary reason to have shares is to raise equity capital to do things. Apple has no shortage of cash – it doesn’t need investors money.

      YOU ARE MISSING THE FUNDAMENTAL POINT. If Apple is increasing value for the remaining stockholders………they’re also increasing the value of the company. The two are one in the same.

      And maybe in 2012 Apple realized there is no way they can sustain the year over year growth they’ve experience. SO to mitigate a highly volatile reaction to missing results (hmm wonder when that just might happen), they embarked on a buy back program to reduce their vulnerability……………

    • Brad Fortin

      Wait, so are you confirming that Apple is doing something that isn’t profitable? But earlier you said “Its ALL about the dollars for Apple” and “Everything is secondary to profits for apple”, so why would Apple do anything that doesn’t immediately generate profits? After all, if everything is secondary to profits, according to you, they should only ever be doing things to directly increase those profits. Giving those profits back to the shareholders isn’t generating more profits, it’s losing them. You’re contradicting yourself.

    • rick

      How is increasing value not increasing profitability? How is not letting your stock become volatile not retaining value and therefore growing profitability. AGAIN they are not buying back stock JUST because they want to be nice to their investors OR to save the environment. Its in their best interest to retain value and in turn make themselves more profitable. I’m not contradicting myself. You just don’t understand fundamentals of why a company would buy back stock. I think I’ve far proved my point as you’ve demonstrated you’re an apple zealot. You may continue to bash your head against the wall – because definition of insanity. Have fun

    • Brad Fortin

      Value and profitability might be connected but they’re not the same thing. One puts money directly into their bank account, one promises money later on. Value isn’t profits, and you said everything is secondary to profits for Apple, that would include prioritizing immediate profits over value.

    • MassDeduction

      App thinning after the fact… that’s a solution looking for a problem. Windows Universal Apps thin by default. It doesn’t even download the unnecessary stuff. The other day I downloaded an app that said it was 48MB when looking at it in the Store, but it was a universal app and the moment I clicked download it suddenly said it was 39MB once it analyzed my device and concluded what was actually needed.

      Ultimately, iPhones could benefit from internal expandable storage. Adopt microSD, create a proprietary solution, whatever. It’s hard to know two years in advance of what your storage needs are going to be, so having to decide up-front sucks; over-buy and you wasted money, but under-buy and you might have to replace the device early. Ultimately being able to add on when you need it is the best. I had a 32GB microSD in both my Surface Pro 3 and my Lumia, but recently upped each of them to 128GB thanks to a Boxing Week sale. No device change needed.

      So, thin apps at the server level before download, and allow expandable internal storage, and there’d be nothing for people to complain about. Even the 16GB iPhones would be reasonable if they allowed internal expandable storage.

    • Abel

      I believe you are “Apple-blinded”. What you say makes little sense.

      To begin with, Apple may (and in fact, I’m sure do) know those metrics, but they are betting on that vast majority of iSheeps coughing up an extra +100 bucks to get to 64 GB so that the revenue is larger in the end. This is being unfair to their customers, lots of whom would do fine with “just” 32 GB, but what do they care?

      Also, manufacturing 32 GB chips does not double the expense, only marginally increases it. And even if it did, they could (and I’m sure would) pass it on to consumers.

      As to your ludicrous excuse of “environmental waste”, you do know that 16 GB chips and 32 GB are almost identical in terms of waste (mostly same size, weight, etc) and they basically differ only in the density of their micro-components, which, being as tiny as they are, don’t really matter much in terms of environmental footprint. Based on this flawed logic, they wouldn’t manufacture 64 GB because, hey, they cause 4 times as much waste as 16 GB!

      You can defend Apple all you want. The reality is that they do not manufacture 32 GB iPhones because they want to take more money from customers’ pockets and place it into theirs.

      As to your last paragraph… no, that does not really mean people are being cheap. My phone is a 32 GB one, and I’ve had it for +3 years. And recently, it’s being running short on storage (to a point that I cannot install the next OS upgrade unless I uninstall some apps and delete data), but I’d have been pissed if I had had to go to 64 GB 3 years ago because the manufacturer forces me to, especially if I didn’t needed it… not back then anyways.

    • Brad Fortin

      “To begin with, Apple may (and in fact, I’m sure do) know those metrics, but they are betting on that vast majority of iSheeps coughing up an extra +100 bucks to get to 64 GB so that the revenue is larger in the end. This is being unfair to their customers, lots of whom would do fine with “just” 32 GB, but what do they care?”

      That’s making the assumption that Apple only cares about revenue, not a good product experience, but history has shown that the opposite is true. That you’re calling them “iSheeps” shows that you’ve got a pretty massive anti-Apple bias, though.

      “Also, manufacturing 32 GB chips does not double the expense, only marginally increases it. And even if it did, they could (and I’m sure would) pass it on to consumers.”

      Except the figures we have, low-ball estimates from firms like IHS, state otherwise. Off-the-shelf NAND starts as low as $6 for 16 GB nowadays, $12 for 32 GB, and $23 for 64 GB. It’s an almost-linear price increase. But like I mentioned above, that’s a low-ball estimate for off-the-shelf parts, and Apple prefers to go custom, increasing the cost (and performance).

      “As to your ludicrous excuse of “environmental waste”, you do know that 16 GB chips and 32 GB are almost identical in terms of waste (mostly same size, weight, etc) and they basically differ only in the density of their micro-components, which, being as tiny as they are, don’t really matter much in terms of environmental footprint. Based on this flawed logic, they wouldn’t manufacture 64 GB because, hey, they cause 4 times as much waste as 16 GB!”

      Size and weight might not change much but needing twice as many memory cells means twice as much material to make the memory cells, the gates, etc. That extra storage doesn’t appear from thin air. More memory = more material = more waste if never used. Do you remember what the 3 R’s are? The first one is reduce, as in “reduce your usage to only what you need, not what you want”. However, there are some power users who need more, and so Apple offers more to those people. For everyone else who doesn’t need more? 16 GB seems to be enough right now. And, if most users upgrade every year, like @marcpalumbo:disqus is trying to argue below, the less memory is wasted the better. And, like I mentioned above, Apple is the world’s largest consumer of flash memory already, if they doubled the memory at a time when most users didn’t need it they would also become the world’s largest waster of flash memory and environmentalists would have a field day.

      Your last paragraph sounds exactly like what I outlined in my last paragraph. “I’ve got 32 GB and I’m running out, so they should have included more, but I wouldn’t have been willing to pay for it, so they should have just included it at the same price and taken the loss.”

    • Abel

      OH. MY. F&*^KING. GOD! Your apple-disease is even worse than I would have fathomed!

      I’m not going to debunk your points because, well, they are senseless. But I do recommend you take a step back and realise that, even though you can admire a certain technology (be it phones that run iOS or Android or Windows, or even Blackberry), that doesn’t mean everything is perfect, neither with the technology nor with the companies that produce it (be it Apple, Microsoft, Google et al, or Blackberry, respectively).

      The only thing I *will* refute is your last paragraph: to begin with, my previous last paragraph doesn’t sound AT ALL like yours. And secondly, and more importantly, I never said they should have included more storage, and certainly not free. I said that my phone had a good 32 GB of memory (which probably was slightly above standard back then) and I would have been upset if the option had not been offered and instead, only 64 GB was available, obviously much more expensive -because, admittedly, if they had provided the 64 GB at the 32 GB price I would have jumped with joy! There is no loss if you offer a 32 variant at a price, and a 64 at a higher price (which would not be just a net addition of the cost, but also including a markup).

      You might like to take some anti-Apple vaccines, you know. It may prove helpful for you in your future, when you need to use your neurons to actually rationalise and get to the bottom of some economic/social/political phenomena that may come across your path, rather than blindly accepting whatever lies are spread by very powerful interests. Failing that, you might like to read properly what others write, rather than assume that when a point of view is different, it’s what you want it to be and not what it actually is.

      I’m signing off…

    • Brad Fortin


      People like you are the reason I troll. It’s been fun.

    • rick

      eeedeeeott. its been more fun

    • rick

      You are truly uninformed and pulling stuff out of your azz

    • Omar

      “That’s making the assumption that Apple only cares about revenue, not a good product experience, but history has shown that the opposite is true. ”

      I hope you wrote this on your brand new iPad Pro, with a $100 pencil, while your iPhone is charging in the ugliest $100 charging case, as you contemplate what apps to delete because you ran out of storage on your $900 16GB iPhone. Or better yet, your new Macbook with 5 USB dongles to make it equivalent to an actual laptop in terms of doing anything purposeful with it besides watching YouTube.

      Apple doesn’t care about revenue… I lol’d.

    • Brad Fortin

      Why would anyone buying a MacBook need 5 USB dongles? If you need to plug that much stuff into a portable computer you’re going to need a huge bag for all those USB devices anyway and dongles would be the least of your worries. What are you carrying in your bag, a mobile command centre? Get the right tool for the right job.

    • Marc Palumbo

      I’ve been out of town since this was posted, but I didn’t try to argue, I did argue and I was correct until Apple had their previous earnings release, was that most people that bought the iPhone were not upgrading to the S line from the iPhone 6. This was the first time in a long time that this happened, so people in general, waste. Why is it up to Apple to be “green” when it is the fault of the consumer?

      If people are buying iPhones each year because they want the latest and greatest iPhone, then so be it. But there’s quite a bit of waste. And it’s not like Apple will advise its customers not to do so, that would be insane. So in the end, it’s all about profit maximization. That is the primary goal of any company whether you like it or not.

    • Brad Fortin

      So many people buying their products on a regular basis is part of the reason why they’re so environmentally conscious: They know that if they don’t do anything it’ll lead to huge amounts of waste, so they’re proactive in making their devices, chargers, packaging, etc, to have as little an environmental impact as reasonably possible. For example, they minimize vampire power draw when their chargers are plugged in and not charging a device. There’s no profit in it, in fact it costs more than making a cheap charger with a higher idle power consumption, but Apple still does it because profits *aren’t* their primary concern.

    • Marc Palumbo

      Out of everything you’ve ever said, profits not being a company’s primary concern is some of the dumbest things ever. it’s the first thing they teach you in business school and profits is what makes Apple who they are. Or else we would have not see Apple products at their prices.

      I would say profits *IS* the 1st concern for any company because any organization except for non profit organization is to maximize profits. Every other thing is up to the company such as low costs, profit margins, markups, environmental waste, etc.

      If you believe Apple is this feel good company with rainbows flying out their butts, then I think you have lost your grip on the real world. Every company is out for profits, or else we would be in a wonderful, beautiful communist nation /s

    • Brad Fortin

      Apple learned 20 years ago that chasing profits can lead to a company to doom, but that making great products leads to great profits, and that along the way it should be a company’s responsibility to make sure their products do as little harm to the world and people living in it as possible. Investing in sustainable forests does nothing for profits. Investing in solar farms and fuel cells does nothing for profits. Minimizing environmental waste costs money. Minimizing power consumption costs money. Conducting independent audits and ensuring suppliers’ workers have a safe working environment and living wage costs money.

      If Apple were only interested in profits they wouldn’t be doing so many things that take away from those profits. Instead they’ve learned from their past mistakes and learned to make great products and to do so responsibly.

    • Marc Palumbo

      I’m not arguing that whether they are true or not. Only top level executives and board of directors or anyone high up on the hierarchical ladder knows that. I did not say they are chasing profits, good companies make the profits come to them. But your original argument what that profits was not a primary concern, which is different from chasing profits. You are putting words in my mouth.

      Every single company, not even theoretically, but are actually concerned with profits and it being number 1 on their list. Actually, like I have said before, profit maximization is the primary goal of every company excluding non-profit organizations. Anyone with a business brain knows this.

      Sustainability is a concern that has been brought into focus for the past 15 to 20 years whereas before it was just a thought. Apple isn’t the only company looking into sustainable solutions, but that they may be a leader, sure, whatever floats your boat. But to say sustainability is their primary focus… no. It’s high, but it is not 1st. You cannot argue that.

    • rick

      you think Apple performs analysis to save customers money?????

      A world wide shortage – come on buddy. Nand memory does not increase in price when Apple launches a phone. There is supply and demand. Barring an unplanned manufacturing disruption (plant fire, destroyed manufacturing capacity), Apple’s demand is built in.

      The only thing wrong with this is Apple charging 100 to 150 for 10 to 20 worth of tech. Which I’d actually accept for any other company. But when you SPECIFICALLY market your devices to JUST WORK to consumers who don’t want to have to understand how much memory they need…….well you’ve completely missed your self defined mission statement. What is “simple” about making non tech people understand the difference for needing a 10 -20 dollar memory module. Just charge consumers 20 more and live up to your mission statement. Oh ya – because greedy r*p3 customer mentality.

      ““We believe that we are on the face of the earth to make great products and that’s not changing. We are constantly focusing on innovating. We believe in the simple not the complex. We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products that we make, and participate only in markets where we can make a significant contribution. We believe in saying no to thousands of projects, so that we can really focus on the few that are truly important and meaningful to us. We believe in deep collaboration and cross-pollination of our groups, which allow us to innovate in a way that others cannot. And frankly, we don’t settle for anything less than excellence in every group in the company, and we have the self- honesty to admit when we’re wrong and the courage to change. And I think regardless of who is in what job those values are so embedded in this company that Apple will do extremely well.” Tim Cook

    • Omar

      Okay and what if we consider that the reason people buy the 16GB over other tiers is because it’s the cheapest tier? If you want anymore more than 16GB in Canada its going to cost you over $1000, so which do you think sold more in Canada? I’m sure if Apple offered a 32GB tier at a similar price to the 16GB it’d sell ever more than their 16GB tier…

    • rick

      So increase the price of the phone by 15-20………not 100 to 150

    • El Capitan Morgan

      APPL got to stay above $100.

    • Brad Fortin

      Because… you say so?

      Tell you what, put together all the information you have about how people use the data on their phone and see if you have more data than Apple would have from the diagnostics of hundreds of millions of iPhones. Whoever has the most data should be in the best position to determine how much storage users need.

    • Omar

      The intention behind offering 16GB and then 64GB is to coerce people to spend more on the 64GB.

    • Mo Dabbas

      At least somebody shares that explanation with me. I said it before on this blog, 32Gb is enough for most people now, 16 not really. So people are pushed to buy the phone with more memory.
      Thank you Omar for confirming something I mentioned before.

    • Brad Fortin

      Someone agreeing with you doesn’t necessarily mean you’re right.

    • Mo Dabbas

      Usually me saying something makes it right. After all they call me Mr. Right for a reason 😉

    • Brad Fortin

      Because you’re right-handed? or it hangs to the right?

    • Marc Palumbo

      Ya I’m in some sort of agreement. I don’t see the need to have 64GB of space on my phone, but 16GB is definitely small. I enjoy having 32GB plus SD card. I can’t believe people are defending the 16GB tier 1 offering. it’s not like Apple never increased the memory!! I mean, they’ve done it in the past.

    • Pigs Can Fly

      ^ this guy gets it.

    • Brad Fortin

      Or it’s so that power users who need more than 16 GB can get a quadrupling in storage instead of just a doubling.

    • Abel

      And what happens to those middle users who don’t need as much as power users, nor as little as basic users?

      Oh, right, they either purchase the smaller one, which will result in a crippled overall experience, or spend an extra 10-15% of the money and buy the 64 GB version which they might not want in the first place. My guess is that most will go for the larger (much more expensive) variant, to Apple’s joy.

    • Brad Fortin

      If you need more than 16 GB you’ll get more than 16 GB. There was likely a trend in power users toward the 64 GB model before they had a 128 GB model, causing 32 GB models to either fill up or drop in sales, so Apple got rid of it, dropped the price of 64 GB by $100, and introduced a 128 GB tier at the same price as the previous 64 GB tier. Now people who don’t need more than 16 GB don’t have to pay for more than what they use and people who need more than 16 GB have ample room to expand.

      ISPs are always complaining about 1-2% of users who use more bandwidth than the other 98-99% of users, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a similar trend in storage usage (where some people never use much at all but the ones who use more use *A LOT* more). Power users gonna power use.

    • Omar

      Um, no. It’s so that people are given an incentive – more space – to shell out extra money for 64GB. With the OS on the phone, a 16GB phone is looking at what, 10 or 11GB of free space? For $900? Ouch…

      Do you sincerely think that if Apple offered a 32GB model for $899 it wouldn’t harm the sales of their grossly priced 64GB and 128GB models? Because if so, you’re simply trolling.

    • MassDeduction

      Going from 16GB to 64GB is more than a quadrupling of available storage since the size of the OS is relatively constant. It’s the difference between (last I checked) 11.6GB and approx. 56GB available. That’s closer to 5x more than 4x more.

      Similarly, a 32GB iPhone would be more than double the available space (to the user) of a 16GB iPhone.

      The 16GB option would be great if Apple chose to support internal expandable storage. You could start with 16GB, but if your needs grow so too can your available storage.

    • El Capitan Morgan

      Why can’t they offer 32 GB the least instead of 16 GB? I think saying that people don’t need more than that is a pathetic excuse. We all know that storage is pretty cheap now a day.

    • Brad Fortin

      If by “cheap” you mean “a few billion dollars”, sure. Remember, Apple sells *lots* of phones, several hundred million a year, and doubling the storage would add $15-20 per phone. I’d hardly call that pocket change, even for Apple.

    • Marc Palumbo

      You make it sound like Apple never did this in the past.

    • Brad Fortin

      They did… when they saw the need based on customer usage. And who has the most data on average customer usage? Apple. Do they see a need to increase it again? So far, doesn’t look like it.

    • Marc Palumbo

      You will never disagree with a single thing when it comes to Apple. You make it sound like they never did something you didn’t like. If I’m wrong, please tell me right now with an example.

    • Brad Fortin

      Haha, do you want the full list? We could be here for a while.

      How about not refreshing the smaller iPhone in 2 years? I tried the 6 for about a year, didn’t like the size, and switched back to the 5S. I prefer my phones to be one-handed.

      Their laptop lineup could use some work, too. I’ve delayed purchasing a new computer for almost 4 years because none of them have the right combination of components I want. You can’t even get a dedicated GPU without splurging for the largest, most expensive model! They should at least make a 13″ model with Skylake and Iris Pro graphics.

    • Marc Palumbo

      So this means you will be buying the iPhone 5SE? For the time being, majority of smartphone users wanted larger screens, which is why they saw a large part of their userbase switch out of iPhone to Android phones, just for screen size.

      Doesn’t the MacBook Pro have a dedicated GPU? but this goes for every OEM practically, especially ones with premium builds such as Microsoft. If you want a laptop with a dedicated GPU, you gotta get the Surface Book which starts at $2000.

      I digress here. If you say that Apple has the largest amount of consumer data over any other, then why are they not looking at non Apple consumers? Don’t they want them? This is why I don’t like your argument. Create more product depth. It’s not about environmental waste or what Apple consumers prefer. It’s amount profit. It’s easier to make more money if the 16GB sells at 199 and the 64GB sells at 299 than adding in the 32GB at 249. The 64GB model seems less attractive.

    • Brad Fortin

      Depends what it includes. I wouldn’t consider a 5SE/30 unless it included the faster A9 chip, the newer TouchID sensor, and Apple Pay. If they have a new lineup this fall that sees all 3 screen sized updated I’d really want to get a breakdown of the sales by screen size to see if the driver is actually screen size or another feature bigger phones tend to have (battery, camera, etc).

      The 13″ MacBook Pro has Iris 6100 graphics through the line, the base 15″ model has Iris Pro 6200 graphics, and the upgraded 15″ model is the only one with the Radeon R9 M370X (starting at “only” $3049). It’d be great to see some more powerful chips in the 13″ line.

      I’m sure they gather as much outside data as possible but it’s hard to gather data from a device you don’t make with an OS you don’t control. It’s possible, but not likely, that they have some sort of deal with OEMs or Google to share that kind of info, but since Android works differently the storage requirements won’t necessarily translate 1:1 between iOS and Android. But if you mean that in terms of “why don’t they try to entice current 32 GB models with their own base 32 GB model” then they’re just offering switchers the same options as everyone else: If you don’t need much storage there’s 16 GB, if you need more it skips past 32 GB and goes to 64 GB.

      I’m sure money plays a role in the decision-making process but it’s hardly the primary focus. They design the product first, then decide the price later.

    • Marc Palumbo

      Umm, I would first like to say that I’m pretty sure money is a HUGE deciding factor. The margins need to be maintained so investors don’t freak out. Money is the reason why Apple got to where they are now, especially when it comes to the iPhone. I’m pretty sure each phone variation has a cost target that they wish to meet. Anything that goes over those targets are quickly assessed and revisited to see if the cost can go down.

      Money plays as big of a role as design does. Profit Maximization is the goal for any company. It doesn’t happen because out of thin air.

      Why don’t you just build your own Mac?

    • Brad Fortin

      Way to blow things out of proportion again, Marc.

      I said money plays a role, it just isn’t the primary focus. The primary focus is making good products, and as a result those products are worth a price premium. I have no doubt that they have a cost target, but I also have no doubt that they leave themselves a bit of wiggle room in case they change something later in the design process or a component ends up costing more than anticipated. They’re also masters of iteration, so their starting point for cost is likely the previous model’s cost with a margin of error that decreases as the design is finalized.

      Build my own Mac in the sense of customizing a Mac on the Apple Store or building a custom laptop and putting OSx86 on it? I don’t build my own Mac because I could never build the same quality Mac at the same price as Apple.

    • Marc Palumbo

      Ok, so until Apple puts the exact components into a Mac, you will never buy one. Also, you’ve been delaying a purchase for 4 years. So if you have been delaying it, what reason do you need to buy a new computer? If you needed to do specific work on it, you would have bought one. So really, you should be ok with getting a regular Mac.

      If it’s to play games, you’re better off with a Windows PC, but for you, that would be like jerking off in church during Sunday mass.

    • Brad Fortin

      Oh I’ll get one eventually, but I won’t be as satisfied with the purchase as if they had put the desired components into it. Right now I’ve got a desktop, but it’s getting long in the tooth and can’t quite keep up with some of the newer software I’m throwing at it, both on the OS X side and the Windows side. I’m on the move now more than I was when I got the desktop, so I want my next machine to be a laptop but don’t want to end up with less CPU or GPU power than a 7-year-old desktop. Right now the CPUs are up to the task but the GPUs are lagging behind. One of the things that could lead to an earlier purchase is Thunderbolt 3, which would allow for an external GPU, but that won’t ship on a Mac until later this year and won’t be supported in OS X until… who knows.

      My gaming varies. Sometimes I just want to play some classic Roller Coaster Tycoon, sometimes Planetary Annihilation, sometimes Just Cause 3. Having a fast integrated GPU could get me through the first two, but the later would need either a Thunderbolt 3 GPU or a PS4 with the Remote Play functionality Sony says is in the works.

      I’ve got a Windows PC, too. It’s mostly a media centre and gaming machine, but I don’t want to switch computers just for a particular task.

    • rick


      Not 100 +

      Your revenue lost is such a lame one. Just stop

    • Brad Fortin

      You’re a bit late to the trolling game, aren’t you?

    • thomas nguyen

      you sure? maybe it will be 8GB for the price conscious people, and 16+32GB if you want to pay more.

    • Brad Fortin

      They had an 8 GB model, but recently discontinued it in favour of 16 GB. They probably saw that most people with 8 GB were filling it up and that 16 GB would be good for a new minimum.

    • Vito R.

      Kinda of like…. The Nexus 5x?

    • Mo Dabbas

      Yeah, but the Nexus 5X costs less than half what the cheapest iPhone option cost now. You can’t compare a 300 USD (or 390 CAD) device with a 700 USD (or 900 CAD) one

    • Vito R.

      The Nexus 5x is a much better value, I’m just saying it only has 16GB RAM.

    • Mo Dabbas

      ya. But it’s designed as an entry level phone. iPhone is not in any way designed as an entry level phone. If you are just pointing that the nexus 5x starts at 16Gb with no comparison intentions (which didn’t seem to be the case), I believe everybody on this site already knows the memory options of a nexus 5x.

    • Vito R.

      Apparently not since I’m replying to the guy’s comment that 16GB is too small and requires cloud storage to be effective – a statement I agree with. As the comment section here has a heavy Android bias I’m just pointing out that Apple isn’t alone is selling 16GB phones. While the 16GB iPhone 6 is still expensive, it is their entry level device.

    • Abel

      But the Nexus has 16 GB AND 32 GB. The iPhone jumps from 16 to 64.

      I think that’s the point one of the commenter above was making.

    • Vito R.

      Not sure what point you’re trying to make. Nexus 5X doesn’t offer 64GB, only 16GB and 32GB while iPhone offers 16GB/64GB/128GB.

      There’s no question Apple considers the 64GB its “standard” model and has priced it to encourage people to chose it over the 16GB model. Basically, $749US is the price of the “normal” iPhone but you can get a “cheaper” one with only 16GB of storage for $649. I don’t have a problem with Apple selling a lower priced version with less storage – it’s still an excellent phone.

      For comparison, the list price of the 64GB Galaxy S6 was $799.

    • Abel

      You are missing the point of the original critique. They were complaining that 16 GB is a low start, especially because the next one is 64 (bypassing the 32 option).

      The Nexus doesn’t have 64, same as the iPhone doesn’t have 256 (so far anyways). There has to be a ceiling somewhere, and it just happens to be higher for the iPhone than for the Nexus.

      If Apple had 16-32-64-128 options, each with a reasonable price difference, they wouldn’t be so many complaints in this respect: there would be an option for mostly everyone. However, bypassing the 32 tier they are effectively pushing most people to get the 64, since 16 is too low for everyone except light users.

      I frankly couldn’t care less, since I have never owned an iPhone nor an Android phone, but I do understand the grievance.

    • Vito R.

      Yes, Apple is absolutely nudging people towards the $750 64GB iPhone – that is their baseline – but they will begrudgingly sell you a 16GB iPhone for $650 if you want to save some money. They have no desire to split the difference and offer a $700 32GB model. The people that are complaining about it are mostly people that wouldn’t buy an iPhone anyway.

      Frankly, I was more annoyed that I couldn’t buy a 64GB Nexus 5X than I was that I couldn’t buy a 32GB iPhone 6.

    • rick

      How about a 670 32GB model……..oh ya because NO ONE would buy the 64GB model. Yes, there would be people buying 128 and even 256, but very few would opt to get the 64. You’re either a low memory user or a high memory user. I don’t think there’s actually much room in between. Apple is gouging people based on that analysis.

      If Apple were as “smart” as Brad above would like us to believe they are….they’d have a 670 32 gb model. No 16 gb model and then jump to 128 and 256.

    • Vito R.

      Haha, why would nobody buy the 64GB model? I would still prefer the 64GB model to the 128GB model.

      Regardless, as I said, Apple *wants* people to pay $750 for the iPhone, not $670. Why is this difficult to understand? A 32GB version priced only $20 higher than the 16GB version seems silly for them to do when they’ve been doing just fine with the memory/pricing allocation as it is. They sold 75M iPhones last quarter – they’re in no rush to increase their minimum storage.

    • rick

      I wasn’t talking about Apple “doing fine”. I was talking about the consumer and oh ya – apple living up to its marketing and vision statements.

    • Vito R.

      They have the highest consumer satisfaction across a variety of product categories – they look after their customers a lot better than most companies.

      Last I checked we lived in a free market economy and Apple was a corporation. I wish their stuff was cheaper but they’ve obviously priced it correctly seeing as how all their main products are market leaders.

    • ShaBi

      Dude, Apple IS smart to leave out 32GB. It’s one of the smartest thing they’ve done. How many more records does Apple still needs to break before you can look pass your bias? How many more profits do they still need to make before you acknowledge the brilliance of their business strategies?

      Having a 32GB “forth” model will break everything they have setup. No one will buy the 16GB and less will buy 64GB, which throws their estimates, productions, and balances off. Whether an individual like it or not, what Apple has been doing is working wonderfully for them, and their investors have also benefited greatly.

    • rick

      Oh I never said Apple wasn’t smart from a short term point of business view. Ya its shrewd for sure and forces customers to spend more money. Customers tend to remember such things though. Doesn’t lead to a long term customer retention model. There will always be devotees who will ALWAYS buy anything apple, but its still just a fraction of their current customers. History is full of tech companies that were once at the top of the hill who suddenly weren’t. Apple included – so ya I think bending over your user base is somewhat short sided in the grand scheme of things.

    • ShaBi

      Perhaps. But like you said, only a fraction of their sells are from the devotees, yet they’ve been having record sales quarter after quarter after quarter. That means more people from other platforms are moving over to Apple, which in a way proves that this strategy is not as big of an issue as most people make them out to be. Most of those who are complaining are the ones who aren’t buying in the first place.

      Anyways, not here to argue, just different points of view.

  • Vito R.

    I remember people saying it was just an iPhone 5 in a new case and that it came in at too high a price to make a difference.

    I don’t remember anybody saying it was “a notional rehash of the iPhone 5 built on weak bones”.

    • Marc Palumbo

      I did. I remember people saying the iPhone 5C would tarnish their image, which could have been a motive for Apple to discontinue it. But let’s be realistic here. If I owned a regular iPhone, what would make me upgrade to the C? It is tough to go from Premium to anything less. It may just be cheaper and better to upgrade to an older iPhone such as the 6 (even next year). At least you don’t get a plastic phone.

    • Vito R.

      Dude. Re-read my comment again.

    • Marc Palumbo

      I did, I’m not arguing against it.

    • Andrew_notPorC

      Mobile Syrup is too fond of the thesaurus, and totally mangled their meaning. I have no idea what they meant by ‘notional’–it was a real product. I wish the writers here would leave out the $5 words, particularly if they are not comfortable in their grasp of their meaning.

    • Marc Palumbo

      lol sometimes, it’s like reading some i***t’s blog on MySpace.

  • FTR_Part_deux

    I picked up my iPhone 5s Oct 14′ and to this day is still quite useable. For a 3 yr old device, I’m quite happy with it and hoping it will last me another year, despite my contract being up this coming year.

    I’ve held and used the iPhone 6 and 6s. I certainly enjoy the larger displays, but for me, I prefer a more compact device.

    If rumours are true and the price is reasonable, this iPhone 5se would certainly be on my upgrade radar.

    I’m glad that there are some phone manufacturers that are still catering to phones that are still compact.

    Eagerly anticipating this release.

    • rick

      Most have a compact option. And they’re also still less than the 5se will be.

  • Jonah Emery

    Another option is fine. I would really like to know how Canadian iPhone sales are going: I just don’t see the people around me spending $400 on a 2 year contract for a 16 GB phone. When I was last in Telus the four people in front of me were all getting a 5S because it was free on contract. I have a Macbook and an iPad but will stick to a Nexus 6P because of iPhone’s cost.

  • gommer strike

    Nice to see that there’s options in the smaller form factor.

  • stnflds

    What do people figure the pricing might be for one of these, unlocked?

    • rick

      600 Canadian – same as the 5s. Apple not gonna charge you less when their books are hurting. Heck, I’d bet you see a bump to 650 or 700 if it supports apple pay.

      I say no less than 650 canadian.

  • cartfan88

    This won’t cause much of a pop in sales. The upgrade junkies want the latest and greatest that happens in the Fall. The buyers of this will remain mostly those that want the cheapest iPhone offered by a carrier but this will likely increase the cost of that upgrade. Similar to the way the iPad mini 4 with last years internals just replaced the mini 3 and didn’t cause much impact overall. By passing thru yet another price increase at the lower end, they will alienate consumers just looking to get a cheap iphone.

  • martinw392

    I never understood why extra gigs of storage on an i-phone is such a big deal when i can buy a flash drive with 64 gigs for 30 bucks, its all just hype for i****s. Apple could easily give lots of storage as a standard but they make it out to be a big deal to create a false economy.

  • Leo Perry

    Considering some of the statements made during the Q1 earnings call, I wouldn’t be bringing my hopes up for a reasonably priced iPhone 5se.

    One of the executives was presenting his explanation of why Apple’s sales numbers were not up to analyst expectations, citing that about $5 billion was lost to volatility in foreign exchange.

    The loonie is just too volatile; last year, after the release of the iPhone 6s, the Canadian dollar cost of the previous generation iPhone 6 went up compared to its flagship price before the 6s! No iPhone has ever been priced below USD $450; there’s no reason to expect that this will cost any less than the outgoing iPhone 5s.

  • marshallpower

    No reasons needed to convince us , just say go and buy the iPhone5se…it’s the same on this website…

    • Mo Dabbas

      When I read the title I actually thought it’s Rob who wrote this piece. lol. I mean somebody is excited about a product that isn’t even released yet. And it’s not like it’s coming within the next week. No, we are talking about a March announcement and release (That’s almost two month from now).
      With a name that isn’t confirmed yet, specs that are still a question mark, a design that is still for you to imagine …. yeah, somebody is very excited.

    • marshallpower

      Yeah they think this type of marketing is still working with us, I guess it’s still working on some other people…it sounds desperate more than anything else to me…they have to work hard to convince us, that’s how bad the product is.

  • jay

    I think it will do very well here in Canada for people they want an iOS device or business owners. 16GB sure is not enough space but for some people enough. Sure there are better phones out there and there always will be but I can see that they will sell a lot phones!

  • Anthony

    this 100% rumour… apple has not made any hint about making a device like this. why even post something like this in NEWS??

  • Raj Singh

    The only reason to buy an “entry level” version of the Apple phone is money. The majority of North Americans are poor and debt-ridden but expect to be gifted the right to buy things they can’t afford, which is why most people will buy it subsidized or on credit. We’ve been conditioned by design.

  • Longtin

    It’s true it would be smart for apple to come out with a mid tier phone, it will be on a base plan of 80$ I can’t see them putting it on the $70. Also I agree it should be 0$ on a 2yr contract; if you put it to $49,$99 or $149 than there will be no point because G4, 6P M9, S6 etc… are all better for that price point hands down. The iPhone 6 should be no more than $149 on a 2yr to begin with. It’s also a good point there has been quite a few customers interested in a 4″ phone; not everyone uses it for the apps, just a reliable phone to call and text and they like the fact that they can facetime /imessage for free when there kids go to school out of town.

  • Elton Bello

    Lol at the title: Upgrade shy canadians. Do you live in canada or not? People are poor dude, wages are sh*t, cost of living sky high lol…upgrade shy…sorry Daniel, had to.

  • rick

    Is it going to be available here? Thought this was an “emerging market” phone.

  • jay

    There is always a place for a cheaper iPhone.

  • Pingback: Iphone 3g S | Apple iPhone()

  • Nahuel1988

    If you think this is going to be a cheaper alternative, keep dreaming, this is Apple. There is good and better one hand usability oriented devices like the Z5 compact or my personal daily driver, the Oneplus X.

  • Ashley Mann

    Hey Daniel. How can you say the iphone 5c didnt produce the desired result for Apple when Apple never released any sales figures specially for the iphone 5c. The truth is this: none of us know how the iphone 5c sold. Thats what you should have wrote.

    • blzd

      Lots of reports came out during that time from retail workers. Only like 1/10 people were choosing the 5c and they sat on shelves compared to the more expensive option.

  • MassDeduction

    “But even with a modest rise in cost, the iPhone 5se will still be Apple’s most affordable iPhone, and may be offered for free, or close to free, on subsidy from many American carriers”

    Which American carriers (plural) would those be? T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon have all done away with handset subsidies now. The only carrier (singular) I can think of who is still doing it is Sprint.

  • people in media should just start calling it the iPhone 6 mini.. that is exactly what is is.. not a 5S enhanced.. nothing about it is derivative of the 5.. all the design cues are taken from the 6 lineup (judging from the leaks).. even the curved glass around the screen.. Now if Apple release the phone and it looks exactly like the 5S with only internal specs bump, then by all means call it 5SE or whatever.. if not, very very bad marketing decision.

  • KW

    And the Cattle desire another salt block… duh