The 16GB iPhone controversy, and the Model S 70

[anticitizen13.7]

There has been some controversy in recent years that Apple's iPhone continues to have a base storage level of 16GB. Many Apple fans believe this is now insufficient in 2015, as iOS takes up about 3.5GB, leaving only around 12.5GB free on a new device. App sizes have also grown significantly in recent years. This is causing problems for people who did not expect Apps to become so large. Low storage means more inconvenience when taking photos or videos, or doing something as mundane as applying an iOS patch or version upgrade.

Various supplier leaks and analyst notes point to the iPhone 6S also having 16GB of base storage. For more context: http://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/03/kgi-iphone-6s-storage-16gb-64gb-128gb/

Basically, Apple's lineup looks like this (prices are full retail)

16GB iPhone 6: $649
64GB iPhone 6: $749
128 GB iPhone 6: $849

People have complained that Apple deliberately ships the base iPhone with a cripplingly low amount of storage, rather than increase the base iPhone storage to 32GB, in order to up-sell the 64GB iPhone 6, or alternatively, sell people more rental space in the iCloud. With flash memory prices as inexpensive as they are, charging $100 for a memory upgrade surely results in a hefty increase in profits.

While the vast majority of people understand the business case for upselling iPhones, it has left many people feeling like Apple is not offering good value for the price increase, given the low price of flash memory. iPhones have no external storage expansion slot, so the storage cannot be expanded later.

This is in marked contrast to Tesla's strategy, which is to offer a compelling product no matter what tier the customer buys.

Originally, Tesla had Model S with 40, 60, and 85 kW batteries. Tesla dropped the 40 because Elon felt that it didn't give the customer a great experience in terms of range and performance. Tesla eventually dropped the 60 kW and replaced it with the 70 kW. The 60 was sort of good, but 70 is almost indisputably great. Everyone who buys a Tesla today has a great experience with the product.

Personally, I think Apple is making a mistake by offering a lowest tier flagship iPhone with less than stellar storage. Making customers mad is not good in the long run, and more than a few iPhone 6 users have become unhappy with 16GB. The iPhone 6S unfortunately appears to be on its way to making more customers mad.

 

[FlasherZ]

I concur. In my extended family, I deal with more questions about the "special" 16GB iPad mini's that they stood in line for during Black Friday sales (why can't I upgrade this without using iTunes? Why does it insist on downloading 18 petabytes of crap in iTunes to do an upgrade that the OS says is 100 MB?! ", etc...

That said, the other side of the coin is that if you're a cash-strapped consumer, and you *really* want an Apple product, you might be willing to go through the hoops to have it. A $299 tablet is in quite a different class than an automobile.

 

[James Anders]

There are many people who want iPhones who don't take a lot of photos or movies or have dozens of apps. Plus there are some who use the cloud (not necessarily iCloud).

 

[Nosken]

With the advent of iCloud photo library, now, simple reduced versions of the photos can be stored on the phone, and the storage is optimized. This analogy is fairly close, to the 70, since you can take photos, and upload them to the iCloud, and it is similar to just recharging the 70 as you drive.
Supporting iPhones is what I do independently on a daily basis, and the majority of the people that I run across, are a bit limited with the 16 GB, but they do fine with it. The thing to remember is, if you upgrade to the next larger capacity for $100, when you sell it or turn it in, you usually get almost 50% of that back.
The storage problem is likely do you become more of an issue with the new phone that is to be introduced next week. With the rumored ability to take 4K video, you can eat up storage space very quickly.

 

[fwgmills]

The only reason to offer a 16Gig phone or a 40 or 60kwh battery is low cost bragging rights. It doesn't matter that nobody buys it. "...starting at $$" is a phrase that excites and draws people in never mind that the lowest cost option almost always leaves the user wanting more.

My Mom bought the 8Gig iPhone because it was the cheapest. By the time I forced an upgrade on her we had to delete practically everything off the phone to do system upgrades. She is much happier with the 64Gig iPhone 6 she has now. She doesn't have to worry when she takes a bunch of pictures.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

The storage problem is likely do you become more of an issue with the new phone that is to be introduced next week. With the rumored ability to take 4K video, you can eat up storage space very quickly.

I've read that Apple is working to reduce the footprint of iOS 9 and apps (something called "app thinning" which allows users to download apps specific to their device, rather than one gigantic app that contains assets for all different devices with different screen resolutions and 32 or 64 bit processors). The camera upgrades though do look significant enough that they might overwhelm footprint reduction measures.

The only reason to offer a 16Gig phone or a 40 or 60kwh battery is low cost bragging rights. It doesn't matter that nobody buys it. "...starting at $$" is a phrase that excites and draws people in never mind that the lowest cost option almost always leaves the user wanting more.

My Mom bought the 8Gig iPhone because it was the cheapest. By the time I forced an upgrade on her we had to delete practically everything off the phone to do system upgrades. She is much happier with the 64Gig iPhone 6 she has now. She doesn't have to worry when she takes a bunch of pictures.

One thing that may hurt Apple is the demise of the 2-year mobile phone contract. T-Mobile got the party started by separating device and service charges, and Sprint, Verizon and AT&T are following. When people have to pay the full cost upfront, the price of the iPhone (and its peers from Samsung and others) begins to seem crazy.

$199 (with 2-year contract) sounds great. $649 for a 16GB phone doesn't sound great at all in 2015.

I wonder what the result would be if Apple changed to this:

$699 for a base 32 GB iPhone
$799 for a 128 GB iPhone

The sense I get from the various Apple sites is that 32 GB is comfortable for most people, and that 64 GB is a bit too much. Under this pricing strategy, Apple would make $50 more on the huge volume unit, and customers would get the amount of memory they generally want and need. The people who need a ton of local storage get a $50 discount. Mathematically this is a worse deal than $749 for a 64 GB device (+50 for +16GB, rather than +100 for +48GB), but for some reason I feel the 32GB option is more psychologically acceptable. I think this is because people wouldn't feel like they were being pushed to a tier of storage that they might not want or need.

 

[lucy]

Currently have 64gb 5S, with <5 of space left. Plan to use an iPhone as my primary media source in my anticipated MX, I listen to podcasts a lot and have read in these forums that media loaded into the car will start playing as the car turns on and off during charging and precooling/prewarming, etc. I don't want to constantly have to try to relisten to an episode because the car lost my place. Guess I'll still be stuck with at least this much memory in the next iPhone.
:frown:

 

[liuping]

Different people have different needs. Why should someone who only need 16G of storage have to pay more because someone else is "mad" that that is too little and thing the min spec should be higher?

My Wife has a 16G iPhone 6. She uses it for primarily for email, audio books, pictures, and GPS. She has a couple G's still free.

I have a 64G iPhone 6+, and i use it for videos, a ton of music, pictures, email lots of games, etc. I also have 5 G free.

So we each bought the phone that made sense for us and we both has a great experience.

The same goes for the 60kWh model S. Many people don't road trip, and 60 is more than the ever use, so it fit's there lifestyle and they have a good experience.

I drive a lot, and my next Model S will be a 90kWh battery, so I will have the best experience.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Different people have different needs. Why should someone who only need 16G of storage have to pay more because someone else is "mad" that that is too little and thing the min spec should be higher?

My Wife has a 16G iPhone 6. She uses it for primarily for email, audio books, pictures, and GPS. She has a couple G's still free.

I have a 64G iPhone 6+, and i use it for videos, a ton of music, pictures, email lots of games, etc. I also have 5 G free.

So we each bought the phone that made sense for us and we both has a great experience.

The same goes for the 60kWh model S. Many people don't road trip, and 60 is more than the ever use, so it fit's there lifestyle and they have a good experience.

I drive a lot, and my next Model S will be a 90kWh battery, so I will have the best experience.

This. The only key difference is that having an SD card slot is easier than having a removable battery.
I don't have an iPhone, I have a Moto E Gen 1 which has 4GB on board, and use a 16GB SD card for media. When I get my wife a Moto E Gen 2, which has 8GB on board, she'll need a 32GB SD card because she has more music.