The point is, you have no choice. What you perceives as the market confirming something is actually Apple deciding what to sell you. In fact, the SE may have easily become too successful for their liking considering its relatively low price.
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.
Apple Discontinues iPhone SE, iPhone 6s and iPhone X
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the SE was “too successful” and cannibalizing other models, they never would have dropped the price from $399 to $349. The fact is, even after dropping the price the SE still didn’t sell well.
Furthermore, it’s intended purpose of providing a low cost entry level price point was frustrated by the fact that most entry level users wanted a larger device, even if it was priced higher. Apple will continue to sell the 6s in price-sensitive countries for something around what the SE was selling for, maybe $379.
I know it’s hard for SE owners to deal with, but most people don’t want what you want. No different from the 17” MacBook Pro. Everyone gets that you prefer it over any other device, but it’s simply not a profitable market segment for Apple. They may be able to figure out a way to make a smaller iPhone profitable, and if they do, they’ll bring it out. However, that device may or not have the features and/or pricing you personally would want.
According to Apple who may have just a little bias.
iPhone X and SE were equal this year.
The iPhone SE with a mix of 2012/2013/2015 technology is of course not going to be as satisfying than the iPhone X. An updated SE would have been a different story.
Apple's market share of computers is a minority case. The majority use machines that have SD cards/USB-A etc alongside USB-C.
Also Apple is supposedly interested in the environment and soldering and non reparable machines are not environmentally friendly.
Plenty of consumers are open to upgrading their machines - they are just unaware of what can be done and think they need to replace their machine as soon as becomes slow (which is of course what Apple wants). I've done so many upgrades for people, most didn't know it was possible and in many cases it meant they didn't need to buy a new machine. Again, not what Apple wants.
[doublepost=1536892570][/doublepost]
The iPhone SE exceeded demand when it was introduced. If you look at iPhone user shares worldwide, it did pick up considerable share. The iPhone SE did sell well considering it was by the end quite outdated technology.
The SE is blamed for the average selling price of iPhones in one or two quarters of 2016 going down. That would tell me it was too successful, as it doesn't have the margins that other devices had. And Apple doesn't care about what people enjoy using, as long as it is "Good enough" to sell and makes a higher profit margin then thats what they'll go with.
From what I see and hear, people tend to not care that much. I know plenty of people who bought 4.7 inch iPhones because in their words a "bit big, but good enough". Good enough is not equal to completely satisfied.
If Apple offered a PROPER range of small phones that didn't sell and not just the SE which was a strange offering for trying to be inexpensive but also trying to be for the smaller phone market then you could say that most people don't want it.
[doublepost=1536892707][/doublepost]
I'm sorry but the iPhone SE was profitable. They had a profit margin on the iPhone SE and they sold a lot of them. Investment in technology was very minimal, the case was already there, the screen as already there and the logic board + camera were as well.
The problem was it wasn't 'Profitable enough'.
Why should they make a choice of only a vocal minority wants it?
[doublepost=1536893131][/doublepost]
Apple uses 3rd party studies. The one you posted is just another study.According to Apple who may have just a little bias.
iPhone X and SE were equal this year.
The iPhone SE with a mix of 2012/2013/2015 technology is of course not going to be as satisfying than the iPhone X. An updated SE would have been a different story.
Apple's market share of computers is a minority case. The majority use machines that have SD cards/USB-A etc alongside USB-C.
Also Apple is supposedly interested in the environment and soldering and non reparable machines are not environmentally friendly.
Plenty of consumers are open to upgrading their machines - they are just unaware of what can be done and think they need to replace their machine as soon as becomes slow (which is of course what Apple wants). I've done so many upgrades for people, most didn't know it was possible and in many cases it meant they didn't need to buy a new machine. Again, not what Apple wants.
[doublepost=1536892570][/doublepost]
The iPhone SE exceeded demand when it was introduced. If you look at iPhone user shares worldwide, it did pick up considerable share. The iPhone SE did sell well considering it was by the end quite outdated technology.
The SE is blamed for the average selling price of iPhones in one or two quarters of 2016 going down. That would tell me it was too successful, as it doesn't have the margins that other devices had. And Apple doesn't care about what people enjoy using, as long as it is "Good enough" to sell and makes a higher profit margin then thats what they'll go with.
From what I see and hear, people tend to not care that much. I know plenty of people who bought 4.7 inch iPhones because in their words a "bit big, but good enough". Good enough is not equal to completely satisfied.
If Apple offered a PROPER range of small phones that didn't sell and not just the SE which was a strange offering for trying to be inexpensive but also trying to be for the smaller phone market then you could say that most people don't want it.
[doublepost=1536892707][/doublepost]
I'm sorry but the iPhone SE was profitable. They had a profit margin on the iPhone SE and they sold a lot of them. Investment in technology was very minimal, the case was already there, the screen as already there and the logic board + camera were as well.
The problem was it wasn't 'Profitable enough'.
Apple's whole market share is a complete minority.
Why do they make the HomePod if only a minority want it?
What makes the one Apple chose any more correct? Apple is of course going to chose the one that supports their 'Vision'.
HomePod is a new product. People said the Watch flopped too...#1 watch in the world later...
Apple has staggering financials so their flop is the entire yearly revenue for another S&P500 company.
If the SE was still available, i'd buy it today, as price sets the goal.. (or it should).... if all people want are features, then that says to me, money is no problem.
Doesn't matter that its a new product - it sells only to a minority. By your logic, why are they making it?
Also the iPhone SE would also be the entire early revenue for another company. I'd assume the SE had lower R&D than the Homepod and a higher profit margin.
They won’t if it doesn’t build momentum but since there aren’t alternatives at the moment, they will keep pushing it. The SE has plenty of new, better alternatives.
The SE doesn't have any alternatives at the moment.
But again, Apple doesn't care about what the customer wants. They care that they can sell less product with a much higher profit margin, because people who want a 4 inch phone will just buy what is 'good enough'. In a business sense that is fine, but it is very much Microsoft of the 90s and early 2000s - Windows sold so well because it was 'good enough'.
That's called an Apple Watch
Not quite. An iPod Nano 7th Gen sized device (or a smidgen larger) w/ edge to edge screen would be uber cool.
https://support.apple.com/kb/SP656?locale=en_US&viewlocale=en_US
Size and Weight
- Height: 3.01 inches (76.5 mm)
- Width: 1.56 inches (39.6 mm)
- Depth: 0.21 inch (5.4 mm)
- Weight: 1.1 ounces (31 grams)2
- True volume: 0.95 cu. inch (15,537 cu. mm)
GIVE US AN IPHONE NANO!!!! 50mm wide x 90mm tall (or thereabouts).
whereas the Series 4 watch would be impossible to text on, or do 1/2 the things you can do on a 4" screen.
Case Size
Stainless Steel - 44mm
- Height: 44mm
- Width: 38mm
- Depth: 10.7mm
- Case Weight: 47.9g
Last edited:
Any company selling 8% of anything isn't going to discontinue it, its not a small number of items.
Look at it from a customer point of view, would you like to piss off millions of customers?
[doublepost=1536910254][/doublepost]
The point was that 8% is a large part of your customer base and you are pissing off millions of customers.
You'd be a perfect candidate for an SE, from your carrier if it has them, or someplace like Swappa. . .the SE is slightly taller, about 5/16" , but is narrower by about ⅛". And the SE is 1.25 oz or so lighter. And, you'd have a very upgraded security and operating system: a much safer phone. For about $200. . . .since you don't want to carry a brick around.
On the plus side, the dropped iPhone SE & 6S are going to be supported with software updates for another 4 years.
Looks like I’ll be holding onto my SE for at least another year. Fairwell to the most utilitarian phone they made :/
The X, albeit larger really isn't a "large" device, and you get used to it very quickly, and then you appreciate the extra screen space and display quality. However, if you literally don't use your phone for anything other than the odd text and phone call - and maybe rarely browsing the internet then the SE is a great device, but if that's the case, go out and buy another one/two. They're cheap now, and have been for a while to shift stocks. In fact over here in the UK you can get them for literally free (pretty much) with a contract like Sky are/were offering for £10 a month for 2 years including calls, texts and some data... That's £240 for the phone and usage - can't complain at that.
How do you know it's 8%? Only Apple knows for sure.
How do you know they are pissed?
Too bad about the SE. I wanted to move to one for reasons I outlined elsewhere. If the XR was $150 cheaper, I may have considered even with that resolution, but Apple are Apple.
You could argue the same about Macs... all that money and the vast majority use it to surf the web and for light productivity apps.
I think a more reasonable explanation for Apple migrating away from small screens is twofold: 98% of users prefer bigger screens (based on sales) and it gives Apple a larger canvas for their UI. If you think smaller screens would be just as popular, you haven't been looking at the trends and data... there's a reason why Apple's sales went through the roof when they released the 6 and haven't seen that kind of jump since. In many countries, a person's smartphone is their one and only computer.
I’m honestly surprised there’s not an SE-sized phone with the X’s styling. I did the math once upon a time, and you can fit a display at least as big as the one on the 6S, 7, etc. on an SE body. And that was before the X came out. With the notch and rounded corners, you could probably go quite a bit bigger than that.
I'd say for the most part, yes... consumers want better cameras, faster and more accurate biometrics, launch apps instantly, waterproof, dustproof, shock-proof, beautiful yet sturdy, more realistic graphics, more accurate GPS, faster wireless connections, bigger & brighter screen in a compact form factor, etc... all of this while increasing battery life.
Like with most tech advances, they just don't know they need it until they use the latest and greatest and then try going back to older tech.
The only problem is, if you use a bigger screen it uses more power, you'd also have a better camera and other features that people would probably want (if the price was increased) and because of the larger screen more people would use it for more than just the basics, meaning the size of the battery you could fit inside the device wouldn't be good enough. You'd then have to either make the thickness increase for a larger battery, or the overall size a bit bigger - which is basically then a re-design.
I do think it would work, and can potentially seeing Apple go this route in the future, but I don't think that time is now. Perhaps they're still working on one, or they're going to launch it with next years range rather than the "S" line up this time round.
Do you really think Apple made this decision to actively pissoff a small part of its user base?
No, they made it for a business reason, plain and simple. You may not like the decision, which I can competely empathize with, but to act as if this was some personal afront by Apple is just silly.