The Iphone 5s & Iphone 5c [not Tri-Band LTE] (was "Next iPhone to be announced on September 10")

[nobius]

Just putting it out there, but I see the total number of iPhones sold a bit skewed. While people are saying that the iPhone 5s still broke records, they should leave it at that. People that couldn't, or wont, pay $200 for a new phone, paid $99 for the iPhone 5c. I think that really made it more possible for them to sell so many iPhones.

 

Basically, what I'm saying is. Do any of you agree that without the 5c apple could have still sold 9 million units of the 5s?

Even though the 5c is almost the same thing as the 5, it's still something new for those 4 and 4s users to upgrade to.  IMHO, if Apple just came out with the 5s and no 5c, then those that couldn't spend $199 would have gotten the 5 instead.  I don't think Apple would have done 9M in 5s sales.

[rf40928]

In the age of carrier complaining about subsidies, it makes no sense to aim for locked-down devices. I think its just Sprint being resistant to change. We shall see if the CSIM comments are true.

 

My 5S should arrive tomorrow; looking forward to it. Sure, I'd love it to support band 41 but that is only one consideration among many. People claiming that is their primary consideration must have some really strange/uncommon uses of their cell phones.

 

Did you get the gold ? 32g ? or 64g?

[rf40928]

Just putting it out there, but I see the total number of iPhones sold a bit skewed. While people are saying that the iPhone 5s still broke records, they should leave it at that. People that couldn't, or wont, pay $200 for a new phone, paid $99 for the iPhone 5c. I think that really made it more possible for them to sell so many iPhones.

 

Basically, what I'm saying is. Do any of you agree that without the 5c apple could have still sold 9 million units of the 5s?

 

 

-Luis

 

I take the questions of cynicism as ones of irrelevance. 

 

A few articles are out there, but one pegged 5s sales around 3 1/2 times more then the 5c .. another said 5s sales were closer to 500% of the 5c..  Either way the 5s sold around close to 7 million units and broke last years record by itself by close to 2 million.  

 

This in 3 days time... To put this into perspective it took Samsung 4 weeks  to sell 10 million G S4's .. 

 

Obviously, the launch figures of the 5s/5c don't include iPhone 5.   Older iPhone 5's remaining in stock are still being pushed and people who don't know the 5c is actually slightly better ( it has a bigger battery, better front camera, more LTE bands ) opted for the iPhone 5 just because of the premium exterior.  Most people assume the 5c is simply a 100% iPhone 5 with plastic exterior. 

[MagnusOchncap]

I take the questions of cynicism as ones of irrelevance. 

 

A few articles are out there, but one pegged 5s sales around 3 1/2 times more then the 5c .. another said 5s sales were closer to 500% of the 5c..  Either way the 5s sold around close to 7 million units and broke last years record by itself by close to 2 million.  

 

This in 3 days time... To put this into perspective it took Samsung 4 weeks  to sell 10 million G S4's .. 

All of those articles sourced the 3.5x purchases of iPhone 5s from an app analytics company. So, likely not representative of realty, but simply of people opening applications on their new iPhones that use Localytics' backend.

 

Much as we can assume from third-party application analytic data that consumers who purchase less expensive handsets are likely not pro users that use lots of applications on their phones. In example, if people that normally wouldn't chose a $199 iPhone 5s are instead buying a $99 iPhone 5c rather than a competing $99 Android handset, they are likely to use less applications or even browse the web on their devices. [source: http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/07/22/apples-ios-maintains-dominance-over-android-with-63-mobile-browsing-share]

 

All we know if Apple sold nine million iPhones, a combination of 5s and 5c. Is that a 50%/50% split? We'll never know, and anecdotal evidence from third party backend service providers are suspect for being representative of reality.

[Mondays In Flames]

It is probably a little bit of that, but perhaps mostly of launching in more markets this year for the simultaneous retail start. Last year was nine markets; this year was 11 markets, including China.

That's right! I overlooked this detail.

 

I take the questions of cynicism as ones of irrelevance. 

 

A few articles are out there, but one pegged 5s sales around 3 1/2 times more then the 5c .. another said 5s sales were closer to 500% of the 5c..  Either way the 5s sold around close to 7 million units and broke last years record by itself by close to 2 million.  

 

This in 3 days time... To put this into perspective it took Samsung 4 weeks  to sell 10 million G S4's .. 

I don't quite understand what you mean by questions of cynicism?

 

Also, I'm not saying that sales weren't through the roof, just asking if maybe the absence of the 5c would have yielded the same results. I probably should have worded my statement better, it makes more sense in my head.

 

 

-Luis

[Mondays In Flames]

All we know if Apple sold nine million iPhones, a combination of 5s and 5c. Is that a 50%/50% split? We'll never know, and anecdotal evidence from third party backend service providers are suspect for being representative of reality.

If it's a 50/50 split, would it be fair to say that they broke their previous sales records based on a single device (5s), or the total amount? When the 5c was introduced they made it more accessible to many many people.

 

This is what I was trying to get to before btw.

 

 

-Luis

[tommym65]

In amongst all the discussion about which is bigger, which is sexier, mine is better than yours, etc., etc., has anyone actually used one of the silly things? I am interested in phone and data performance, as I am going to be forced to buy one (or the other) for my sig. other.  (And the thought of those bright shiny cases hurtss us, Precious, because we are Android bigotses.)

 

Or should we open another thread just to talk about performance?

[rf40928]

 

If it's a 50/50 split, would it be fair to say that they broke their previous sales records based on a single device (5s), or the total amount? When the 5c was introduced they made it more accessible to many many people.

 

This is what I was trying to get to before btw.

 

 

-Luis

 

It's not a 50/50 though.  It's more like 80/20 ... When the 5c was released the news was no one was buying them.. you could preorder them half a week before the 5s went on sale.

 

http://venturebeat.com/2013/09/23/iphone-5s-outselling-iphone-5c-by-up-to-500-and-not-just-in-the-u-s/

[rf40928]

In amongst all the discussion about which is bigger, which is sexier, mine is better than yours, etc., etc., has anyone actually used one of the silly things? I am interested in phone and data performance, as I am going to be forced to buy one (or the other) for my sig. other.  (And the thought of those bright shiny cases hurtss us, Precious, because we are Android bigotses.)

 

Or should we open another thread just to talk about performance?

 

I did try one at the Apple store ( the 5s ) .. it was very quick and I couldn't slow it down at any point.

 

The review at www.anandtech.com   showed the new 64bit CPU bested almost all smartphones in every category.  Basically it was performing closely with intels desktop processor.  The GPU also best most smartphones in most catergories.  Frames rates were done as "off screen" at 1080p.. meaning phones were hooked an exterior 1080p screen so GPU would be filling the same space and not be at advantage if they had smaller screens.  The 5s loaded webpages twice as fast the the S4 using Google's own chrome benchmark .. other trusted web benchmarks like webmark showed the same results.

 

5s CPU at anandtech:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/5

 

5s GPU:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/7

[tommym65]

In amongst all the discussion about which is bigger, which is sexier, mine is better than yours, etc., etc., has anyone actually used one of the silly things? I am interested in phone and data performance, as I am going to be forced to buy one (or the other) for my sig. other.  (And the thought of those bright shiny cases hurtss us, Precious, because we are Android bigotses.)

 

Or should we open another thread just to talk about performance?

 

I did try one at the Apple store ( the 5s ) .. it was very quick and I couldn't slow it down.

The review at www.anandtech.com  ( look for 5s review ) showed the new 64bit CPU bested almost all smartphones in every category.  Basically it was performing closely with intels desktop processor.  The GPU also best most smartphones in most catergories.  Frames rates were done as "off screen" at 1080p.. meaning phones were hooked an exterior 1080p screen so GPU would be filling the same space and not be at advantage if they had smaller screens.  The 5s loaded webpages twice as fast the the S4 using Google's own chrome benchmark .. other trusted web benchmarks like webmark showed the same results

 

Thanks, rf40928, I had seen some of the tech reviews and they are helpful.  But what I am really looking for is someone who has bought and used the Sprint variants, and can tell me about things like voice quality,  PRL priority (is 800 voice 1st, or 1900?), LTE performance, etc.

 

[rf40928]

 

Thanks, rf40928, I had seen some of the tech reviews and they are helpful.  But what I am really looking for is someone who has bought and used the Sprint variants, and can tell me about things like voice quality,  PRL priority (is 800 voice 1st, or 1900?), LTE performance, etc.

 

 

I have a Sprint iP5 and voice quality is great..  800 voice isn't priority on the iPhone thanks to Sprint, but that might change once 800 voice is everywhere.  RIght now I don't care at all - and what I mean is - if my voice quality sucked I would care, because 800 would help that, but my voice quality has almost always been great.. handoff's are great and I rarely drop calls.

 

Some phones don't hold onto a signal as well and therefore would benefit much more from 800. I feel Sprint hasn't prioritized the iPhone on 800 because of this. Sprint has mostly Android phones on it's network and probably half of those phones need 800 much more.

 

All Im really waiting for is some LTE because Im in a market where I have nothing except some 2500mhz.  By the time 2500 phones are out in a few months I'll have 1900 LTE anyways.  For the next year this will be good enough for me - which I'll upgrade my phone next year..    I had a Samsung windows phones 4 years ago on AT&T and Sprint voice on my iPhone trumps the voice I had on ATT.  I'm hoping the LTE will soon begin justifying the reason Im waiting ..

[metayoshi]

I did try one at the Apple store ( the 5s ) .. it was very quick and I couldn't slow it down at any point.

 

The review at www.anandtech.com   showed the new 64bit CPU bested almost all smartphones in every category.  Basically it was performing closely with intels desktop processor.  

That is a very misleading statement as Intel's Bay Trail is not even close to their "desktop" processor's performance or quality. Bay trail is basically the next generation version of their Atom processor (think netbook), and that is what Apple's A7 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 are basically going head-to-head with.

 

That's not to say the A7 is bad. In fact, the A7 is an amazing SoC considering it can basically go head to head with CPUs with more cores and almost twice the clock speed (1.3 GHz Dual core A7 vs. 2.3 GHz Quad core Snapdragon 800).

[MacPCS]

That is a very misleading statement as Intel's Bay Trail is not even close to their "desktop" processor's performance or quality. Bay trail is basically the next generation version of their Atom processor (think netbook), and that is what Apple's A7 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 are basically going head-to-head with.

 

That's not to say the A7 is bad. In fact, the A7 is an amazing SoC considering it can basically go head to head with CPUs with more cores and almost twice the clock speed (1.3 GHz Dual core A7 vs. 2.3 GHz Quad core Snapdragon 800).

the actual quote from the review most applicable to that is probably here:

 

The A7 SoC is seriously impressive. Apple calls it a desktop-class SoC, but I'd rather refer to it as something capable of competing with the best Intel has to offer in this market. In many cases the A7's dual cores were competitive with Intel's recently announced Bay Trail SoC. Web browsing is ultimately where I noticed the A7's performance the most. As long as I was on a good internet connection, web pages just appeared after resolving DNS. The A7's GPU performance is also insanely good - more than enough for anything you could possibly throw at the iPhone 5s today, and fast enough to help keep this device feeling quick for a while.

Sounds like you're in agreement with Anand then.

[rf40928]

That is a very misleading statement as Intel's Bay Trail is not even close to their "desktop" processor's performance or quality. Bay trail is basically the next generation version of their Atom processor (think netbook), and that is what Apple's A7 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 are basically going head-to-head with.

 

That's not to say the A7 is bad. In fact, the A7 is an amazing SoC considering it can basically go head to head with CPUs with more cores and almost twice the clock speed (1.3 GHz Dual core A7 vs. 2.3 GHz Quad core Snapdragon 800).

 

Yes, true, but the only processor going head to head with Bay trail is the A7.  As an SOC ..snapdragon 800 isn't close in the CPU area, only in a few GPU parts was it close to A7.

 

Reading on some of these tech forums you get the impression some of Android fans think Samsung has designed snapdragon because Samsung has a license from ARM to fabricate it as they do the fabrication for Qualcomm - of which Qualcomm has an architecture license from ARM to manipulate ARM's chip design.  Apple had a POP license ( the mid level of the 3 available ) until  2.5 yrs ago when they got the 'top' license from ARM (which Qualcomm has) .. again, the 'architecture license'.   

 

Funny thing is ARM ( Advanced RISC Machines ) began as the result of a joint venture between Acorn Computer, Apple Computer ( now Apple Inc )  and VLSI Technology.  Apple sold most of it shares of ARM, but it still owns about 14-15% of the company.  it's a weird relationship.  Samsung makes ( fabricates, not designs ) chips for companies it would rather not ( Apple and Qualcomm ), and Samsung depends on the designs of the chip company ARM which was in part founded ( and still partially owned) by Apple !  Samsung doesn't have the know how to do a lot so it depends on Qualcomm which uses and manipulates ARM designs.  Meanwhile Apple depends on Samsungs foundry's, but is forging new relationships to lessen that dependence.  Apple is now into designing because it has gained much know-how from its acquisition of the California chip company they bought 4 or 5 years ago.  I believe next year Apple will reap a lot of benefits from  a year of 64 bit under its belt and be ahead in this respect with more apps behind that as well.

[metayoshi]

Yes, true, but the only processor going head to head with Bay trail is the A7.  As an SOC ..snapdragon 800 isn't close in the CPU area, only in a few GPU parts was it close to A7.

 

Reading on some of these tech forums you get the impression some of Android fans think Samsung has designed snapdragon because Samsung has a license to fabricate it as they do for qualcomm.  Apple had a POP license ( the mid level of the 3 available ) until  2.5 yrs ago when they got the 'top' license from ARM (which Qualcomm has) : an architecture license.   

 

Funny thing is ARM ( Advanced RISC Machines ) began as the result of a joint venture between Acorn Computer, Apple Computer ( now Apple Inc )  and VLSI Technology.  Apple sold most of it shares of ARM, but it still owns about 14-15% of the company.  it's a weird relationship.  Samsung makes chips for companies it would rather not, and depends on the designs of ARM which was in part founded ( and still partially owned) by Apple.  Apple is now into designing because it has gained much know-how from its acquisition of the California chip company they bought 4 or 5 years ago.  I believe next year Apple will reap a lot of benefits from  a year of 64 bit under its belt and be ahead in this respect with more apps behind that as well.

In defense of the Snapdragon 800:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7314/intel-baytrail-preview-intel-atom-z3770-tested/3

 

Bay Trail shows that it can do pretty well here, but Qualcomm's MSM8974 MDP/T Tablet concept and even the LG G2 can best the Bay Trail in certain benchmarks. Saying the Snapdragon 800 can't compete with Bay Trail is far from the truth, and reading both the iPhone 5S review and the Bay Trail preview on Anandtech shows each SoC has their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, Bay Trail comes out on top in the end, but the Snapdragon 800 is no slouch either.

 

Still, my main point was that Bay Trail is nowhere near what I would consider a "desktop" class CPU. Once Apple's A-series SoC's start going head to head with the same generation's Intel Core i-series, then I will consider that the truth instead of just marketing talk.

[xenadu]

Did you get the gold ? 32g ? or 64g?

 

 

I got a black 64GB, wife is waiting on a gold 64GB.

 

 

 

Just putting it out there, but I see the total number of iPhones sold a bit skewed. While people are saying that the iPhone 5s still broke records, they should leave it at that. People that couldn't, or wont, pay $200 for a new phone, paid $99 for the iPhone 5c. I think that really made it more possible for them to sell so many iPhones.

 

Basically, what I'm saying is. Do any of you agree that without the 5c apple could have still sold 9 million units of the 5s?

 

 

-Luis

If you run the numbers, accounting for the different models and launch countries, Apple beat the previous launch by about 30%, not the nearly double the raw numbers might indicate. That's still fantastic performance any company would kill for.

 

The margins on the 5C and 5S are probably similar, if not better on the 5C so from an investor's point of view it is somewhat irrelevant what the mix of models was. Some people even think the 5C has a much better margin leading to similar profit from either model.

 

As a developer, I know 90%+ of all iOS users will be on iOS 7 within a month or two so the mix is irrelevant in that sense too.

 

 

I predict the mix will heavily favor the 5S for some time as the early adopters want the latest and greatest, but the 5C will probably do blockbuster sales for the holidays. China is interesting, Apple is still selling the iPhone 4 there at a greatly reduced price. I believe the 4S is also cheaper there. Since Apple supports the iPhone with software updates for much longer than any Android phone ever, they can buy a top of the line device and keep it for 3-4 years or more, plus it's a status symbol for some.

 

 

Apple has never had the majority of the phone market and never will because they will never make a budge phone to go after the low end. BMW has less than 1% of the car market but I don't see anyone predicting their downfall anytime soon.

 

The iPad was an aberration because "everyone" had decided that tablets were a low-volume niche business and that Apple was jus selling a big iPod. I remember journalists being very "meh" about it and competitors being shocked they were selling it for 499.

[rf40928]

In defense of the Snapdragon 800:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7314/intel-baytrail-preview-intel-atom-z3770-tested/3

 

Bay Trail shows that it can do pretty well here, but Qualcomm's MSM8974 MDP/T Tablet concept and even the LG G2 can best the Bay Trail in certain benchmarks. Saying the Snapdragon 800 can't compete with Bay Trail is far from the truth, and reading both the iPhone 5S review and the Bay Trail preview on Anandtech shows each SoC has their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, Bay Trail comes out on top in the end, but the Snapdragon 800 is no slouch either.

 

Still, my main point was that Bay Trail is nowhere near what I would consider a "desktop" class CPU. Once Apple's A-series SoC's start going head to head with the same generation's Intel Core i-series, then I will consider that the truth instead of just marketing talk.

Did you read the report or just look at benchmarks ?  It seems the benchmarks he ran were in an Android environment & problem is in  Bay trail preview you're not getting optimal results YET ( for bay trail ) as Intel even said they had a lot of work to do..   Anandtech:  "Depending on where you were in the Android UI, there was some definite stutter, but I’m told this is a result of an issue with Dalvik not allocating threads to cores properly that Intel is still tuning, something which you can see plays itself out as well in the AndEBench Java test that runs in Dalvik"

 

 A7 and Snapdragon 800 are shipping with programs that have updates /optimizations modified and written with code to take advantage of them, while when it comes to especially Android optimizations are still in the works for Bay Trail.   The iPhone 5s was reviewed just  7 days ago ( a week newer then the Bay trail preview you linked above) and for example:  In that review of the JavaScript benchmark Anandtech gave a result of 566.6 ms (for bay trail)  putting it in 2nd place ..  but  Intel responded with by running the same benchmark under IE 11, which baytrail suddenly comes in at 329.6 ms in the same benchmark..  HUGE DIFFERENCE.

 

Also Baytrail will be used in tablets, not just phones and Windows will run much differently then Android - .. so we'll have to see how it runs Windows on tablets versus Android when Anandtech does a formal review.

[sbolen]

There are places that are broadcasting band 41 but not band 25. Personally, if I am paying for a top of the line phone and paying the same amount for the full use of the network, I want a phone that can utilize all of it and not just some of it.

I was using an iPhone 4S for two years on Sprint's legacy 3G network. So, there's that.

[rf40928]

 

 

 

Apple has never had the majority of the phone market and never will because they will never make a budge phone to go after the low end. BMW has less than 1% of the car market but I don't see anyone predicting their downfall anytime soon.

 

The iPad was an aberration because "everyone" had decided that tablets were a low-volume niche business and that Apple was jus selling a big iPod. I remember journalists being very "meh" about it and competitors being shocked they were selling it for 499.

 

The first part I agree with fully.

 

The last part not fully.  Apple was very close to Google. So close at one time that Google asked Jobs to be its CEO and Apple put a Google man on Apple's board of directors.  The Google man ended up being a mole.  They discovered this guy before Jobs revealed plans to the board about the tablet.  So Apple had a true headstart there.  Jobs designed the tablet like 15 years before but the technology didn't exist to make it.  Google's original vision for Android looked more like Blackberry's OS until they saw how ios on the iPhone looked.  I think when it comes to tablets they just got a headstart period.

[rf40928]

There are places that are broadcasting band 41 but not band 25. Personally, if I am paying for a top of the line phone and paying the same amount for the full use of the network, I want a phone that can utilize all of it and not just some of it.

 

While I agree in the biggest way.. Consider the Eye of the Beholder factor:  You need to consider the millions of Chinese ( as well as millions in other countries ) buying Galaxy S4's, HTC's, and iPhones ( all 4G capable ) while they use them over their 2g & 3g networks.  Guys are blowing a months worth of salary to buy these phones. 

 

And all this in a country ( China ) where the Android experience sucks - You think the Chinese can use half the services you can here in the USA?  They aren't getting anywhere near the experience you are.  China especially hates Google.  All their services are banned.  My question is can the Chinese use BING on their iPhones? haha

[Mobilesolutions]

Only Robert has any knowledge of my secretly humane inner core.

 

The rest of you can pass me the @#$%ing sweet potatoes.

 

 

AJ

 

Excuse me! I will pass you the potatoes, but can i please have a ginger ale?

-Will

[MacPCS]

I was using an iPhone 4S for two years on Sprint's legacy 3G network. So, there's that.

me too, it's painful. That being said, I have a 5S on the way.

 

Also why is anyone arguing over any of these performance numbers anyway?

[rf40928]

me too, it's painful. That being said, I have a 5S on the way.

 

Also why is anyone arguing over any of these performance numbers anyway?

 

You'll be going to a faster phone with faster internet.  And it looks like 4g is pretty wide spread there in OK .. even though they aren't done by far..

 

There's really no argument, the A7 numbers are very solid, it was more about intels baytrail numbers ..

[Mondays In Flames]

Apple has never had the majority of the phone market and never will because they will never make a budge phone to go after the low end. BMW has less than 1% of the car market but I don't see anyone predicting their downfall anytime soon.

 

I never said that Apple was going out of business, I don't see how this comment has any relevance to what i asked

 

Regardless, I got my answer.

 

 

-Luis

[S4GRU]

Only Robert has any knowledge of my secretly humane inner core.

 

The rest of you can pass me the @#$%ing sweet potatoes.

 

 

AJ

And I will never betray the secret of your inner gooey nougat center!

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk