Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
1TB iPhone 16 Pro Models Could Face Performance Setback
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I completely doubt that Apple won't be around in 10 years if the next iPhone keeps it's faster storage and sells for the same price. Apple is basically king of the valuation mountain now, competing for richest in the world in any given month. They should not need this kind of nickel & diming to keep growing or being more prosperous. They have the resources and the cash reserves to fuel growth on "insanely great products" and broadening lines with more types of insanely great products.
To me- I don't love pinching a few pennies or dollars- by delivering SLOWER tech, whether I can notice it or not, whether "99% can notice it or not", etc. Cut Apple out as the brand involved here and we would ridicule Samsung or Google on Intel doing this sort of thing. Nobody buying generations of tech wants new generations to be slower/weaker. We covet progress not a step back here, a step back there... especially if it is by profit-motivated choices.
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
As do I- obviously- but recall what seems like about 80%- maybe higher???- of the rest of the posts in any given Vpro thread on an Apple-centric site, typically loaded with passionate fans that will rationalize $20 handkerchiefs and buy them completely out of stock on launch.
Vpro is bold, classic Apple, rolling out something into which I can see high value (albeit at a high price). That's exciting! Go Apple go!
Cutting SSD speed in a new generation of an established product to fatten profit per unit sold is only a bummer through my consumer lens. I can't see any positive in that for buyers. I would have to make up new information to make that make any sense through a consumer lens. To me, that just looks like yet another bone for shareholders!
As also a shareholder, I may benefit a bit by this move. But I would much prefer "insanely great product" launches growing shareholder ROI than nickel & diming choices as rumored in this story... even if it meant the stock had a slide a bit while some redirects to boost consumer goodwill were made. To me, restock the goodwill pond. I can hold the stock for 5 or 10 more years to recoup any short-term dip if a decision to NOT go with slower storage required the stock to slide a bit.
Last edited:
i've seen enough usb drives corrupt that i don't want to risk that with my family's photos/videos.
I keep my backups across three USB drives; two at home and one stored in my desk at work. I rotate them monthly.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
What??? I'm the one in this thread putting Apple DOWN for making this decision if this rumor is true.
If I worked for Apple and was writing this kind of opinion, I'd expect to be fired today.
Last edited:
The "good old days" aren't available. There's so much more tech in today's phones that it's pretty difficult to "innovate". We already have what we need and way more.
As do I- obviously- but recall what seems like about 80%- maybe higher???- of the rest of the posts in any given Vpro thread on an Apple-centric site, typically loaded with passionate fans that will rationalize $20 handkerchiefs and buy them completely out of stock on launch.
Vpro is bold, classic Apple, rolling out something into which I can see high value (albeit at a high price). That's exciting! Go Apple go!
Cutting SSD speed in a new generation of an established product to fatten profit per unit sold is only a bummer through my consumer lens. I can't see any positive in that for buyers. I would have to make up new information to make that make any sense through a consumer lens. To me, that just looks like yet another bone for shareholders!
As also a shareholder, I may benefit a bit by this move. But I would much prefer "insanely great product" launches growing shareholder ROI than nickel & diming choices as rumored in this story... even if it meant the stock had a slide a bit while some redirects to boost consumer goodwill were made. To me, restock the goodwill pond. I can hold the stock for 5 or 10 more years to recoup any short-term dip if a decision to NOT go with slower storage required the stock to slide a bit.
Personally, I think you're jumping too far ahead on this rumor. And in the end, I've not found much value in focusing on any single detail of the Apple products I buy. I trust that Apple has my back on value way more than I trust any other company.
At the risk of staring another flame war, it's why I don't freak out about 8 gb of ram configurations or ssd speeds, etc. Apple is measuring the entire experience of using their tech, and they understand that an overwhelming majority of their customers simply want the computer to work well. And part of that calculation is efficiency in product design and cost.
This article seems to paint a terrible picture; but what if the "slower speeds" that are being discussed are so minimal as to not be noticed by 99% of users. But this tech also seems to provide more storage capacity for size used. So, what if this allows Apple to put in a bigger battery, which in the daily use of people will provide a tangible benefit.
I don't think this rumor, as thin as it is, can tell us much of anything. I'd certainly trade a physically smaller ssd that is not, to me, noticeably slower for a larger battery capacity.
When I moved from 12P to 14P, I decided I’d wait for the 17P this time. Now I’m thinking, “Hell, I can wait until 18P!”
Apple could be working on foldable or rollable tech for their phones, instead of sticking to the status quo. They might be working on a foldable, but we haven't seen any proof of it yet. They already have the standard iPhones to fall back on, why not try something new. Anything at this point would be better than nothing.
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I wish I felt that way. I used to have feelings somewhat towards that kind of view 5-8+ years ago when it came to Apple stuff. My goodwill has been eroded since and modern Apple looks very different than the one I thought I viewed in the past.
I still am about Apple everything, still make my living on Apple products, am one of the 4 or 8 apparently excited about Vpro
, etc. but my rose colored glasses are definitely cracked. I (also) have a PC on my desk now... a PC (first one I've owned in 20+ years). And I'm seriously envisioning a PC laptop has a real chance at being my next laptop in a few years without some rose-colored glasses repair work.Why? Too many instances of this kind of thing... to much "another quarter of records..." which manifests at the consumer level by tangibles like RAM & SSD upgrades at 3-5X market rates, choices to make a new generation have elements that slow down vs. a prior generation, etc. Too much of yet another bone for shareholders at the expense of consumers... whether that's only perception or reality.
Hopefully, Apple will improve my own perception of them before future tech dollars are spent. Vpro has a good chance at my wallet. After that, I don't know.
See, this is what I find interesting. When you ask and answer the "why" question, you say nothing about how well your Apple products work. What value they are providing to you. You only list technical data and prices and quarterly profits.
But how do the products work for you?
Even if they use QLC it will be more than fine, it does not effect read speeds anyway only writes, and even then it's only temporary if you exhaust the cache for a few minutes while it empties which will more than likely be a decent size anyway. How often are you going to write tens of gigabytes of data at a sustained speed constantly every few mins.
My Samsung 8TB SATA SSD is QLC and while I can exhaust the temporary cache which is 78GB on this drive only then will the write speeds plummet. I've never had a read speed issue and this drive is used a lot and I've only encountered the cache filling up twice in over a year, once when I was writing 3TB of files to it and once decompressing a 100GB+ game from Steam.
This is a massively overblown issue, but it will allow them to squeeze more capacity in which is great.
My Samsung 8TB SATA SSD is QLC and while I can exhaust the temporary cache which is 78GB on this drive only then will the write speeds plummet. I've never had a read speed issue and this drive is used a lot and I've only encountered the cache filling up twice in over a year, once when I was writing 3TB of files to it and once decompressing a 100GB+ game from Steam.
This is a massively overblown issue, but it will allow them to squeeze more capacity in which is great.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
They work great. That's why I'm still about "Apple everything."
However, the ones in the past- where it (perhaps only) seemed there was less of this kind of thing in play- worked great too.
And I can pretty much do about everything I do with them on PC as well. Apple is a preference- a very strong one 5-8+ years ago eroding to where I am now.
Remove the "nickel & diming" stuff I keep seeing over and over again and I probably don't get to this point of thought. Instead, Apple's halo shines brightly and I easily rationalize a premium. But this kind of thing- if true- can be viewed as anti-consumer... yet another move for shareholders at customer expense.
IMO: there's too much of that in the last few years. It feels like Apple has completely fallen in love with "another record quarter..." reporting and that is now driving all choices. Yes, it may have always been that way, even in an older incarnation of Apple... but- if so (and it was probably so)- it wasn't so blatant. Instead of growing revenue in the traditional Apple way- "insanely great product" rollouts & product line expansion- there's- IMO- too much of this focus on squeezing more margin out of existing products.
Example: this topic. What's in this move for consumers? Is this superior storage? Objectively no- there's abundant comparisons online about existing SSD type vs. this type. Is this just as good as the existing generation? Apparently not, it's apparently slower. Is any of the cost savings rumored to be WHY this is apparently going to be done going to get passed through in the form of lower prices? I don't know but I'd pretty much laugh if anyone suggested that was the motivation... and point them back to the spin of "with Apple going Silicon and not paying the Intel premium anymore, they can roll out cheaper Macs." Even during Covid one could watch gross margin expanding.
Now, this may feel like mountain out of a molehill and I fully recognize that in a grander scheme, this one little thing may be towards transparent in actual experience for most people. However, this is not the ONLY such molehill. There is cumulative examples of similar choices being made across the lineup. I don't like this kind of decision-making through BOTH my consumer and shareholder lenses (even if it benefits the latter in the most tangible of ways).
This thread will terminate soon and almost be lost in a swamp of old threads... and comments posted within it pretty much forgotten even a few days from now. But just as goodwill piles up on consumer-first perceptions and erodes on consumer-last perceptions, goodwill gains or losses are not forgotten: it influences choices of future purchases at the individual consumer level. I really wanted that brand new, incredible MB Air this year... but that got derailed by choices to demand many times market for commodity items like RAM & SSD storage. Buying a PC reminded me in the most tangible of ways how much value can be had for less overall money. Investing in growing more goodwill even if that is not necessarily best for short-term shareholder ROI can reinforce a willingness to pay the premium.
Last edited:
I had the same question in the past however I do a lot of social media posts for my brands associated with custom car/truck pages. Because of the algorithm changes it is harder and harder to get traction just posting a photo of a car/truck. Now a days on Instagram you have to post videos as Reels to really gain traction. Because of this I go to a car/truck show and end up with hundreds of short videos. Sure I do delete some after I post them but even short videos take up so much space. I then repurpose them for YouTube Shorts etc. and use the videos for throwback posts down the road... long story short the videos eat up a TON of space on my iPhone which is I have a 1 TB iPhone although I do have a LOT of space left at this time. 128,098 Photos and 7,405 video and this is after purging recently.
Did you change your video's to record in 4k?
I also like to keep a history of my messages by never deleting them. Currently my messages take up 60gb
ProRes video shot in LOG and 4K resolution. Also a vast photo library and Apple Music collection in Lossless.
out of curiosity, what do you use to backup? as in what software when it relates to photos/videos?
Apple should hold off until they can offer the same performance, durability and reliability as the current TLC NAND technology. Unless they don’t mind more controversy, being called out by different media outlets, poor PR and lawsuits.
Using 600GB out of 1TB. All are pics/vids/messages. No, not all people like to spend as much money as possible but some of us do buy what we need.
