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.
Other Why has Apple cancelled the Mini series
- Thread starter iMarkypad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
the "regular" iPhone 13 (and 13 Pro) is 6.1", not 6.7". Mini is 5.4", so the regular 13 is not even a full inch larger. Only the 13 Pro Max is 6.7"
This would be the ideal compromise. Updating the Mini line every 2 years. Maybe Apple will update the 13 Mini to a 15 Mini if we are lucky.
sales and really apple thought the market for a smaller phone would be more popular but clearly not up to their sales standards.
Apple do recognise the market for small iphones, the man himself Tim Cook, addressed this when unveiling the SE3 where he specifically stated that the SE line caters to those who like 'small iphones'. Watch it back if you don't believe me. So hopefully the next SE4 will not be based on the XR/11 chassis as its too big, but rather the 5.8" iphone chassis (rumours state it will have a thicker bezel to make it 5.7"). But it may be the end of the line for 'premium' priced small iphones like the 12/13 mini, hopefully I'm wrong though.
Hopefully you arenāt. Iād really like to see the next iPhone SE with a 5.7ā LCD display, because OLED offers a superior image quality but some people are uncomfortable using it (like myself) because of PMW.
By the way, where did you read that rumor? Is it based on the Ross Young tweet?
I cant remember exactly, but it was on macrumours and was also discussed in some other previous MR threads about small iphones and the iphone SE. Other members may be able to chime in on this with the exact source.
Edit - Found it:
Last edited:
Yeah, thatās Ross Youngās tweet. Letās hope heās right and next SE carries a 5.7ā LCD screen. Heās one of the most accurate leakers so far.
In the last earnings report, Tim stated the iPhone SE if the perfect phone for those looking for affordable smaller phones.
Yeah, I think most people who own the SE will want it to stay smaller. Iāve owned both the XR & 11 (just switched from the 11 to SE3) and they are much bigger and heavier in the hand, and after years of Plus sized phones I am much happier with the SEās form factor today.
Apple obviously sees the need to continue making smaller iPhones, as they now have 2 in their current lineup, and despite what all the speculation in this thread may imply, neither have been cancelled.
Between the SE & Mini, I wonāt be surprised if the next variant of the SE sees a redesign and cancels out the Mini, but at least one smaller iPhone will continue to be offered.
Except it was. The Original SE was $250 less than the 6s. The 12 and 13 mini were only $100 less than the 12 and 13. Also the battery life on the Original SE was better than on the 6s. The 12 and 13 mini really only were attractive to those of us who specially wanted a small iPhone, there arenāt any other significant benefits. For $100 more you could get a bigger screen AND significantly better battery life.
Loved this reveal!
Absolutely LOVE my 13 mini. A Pro mini would be a dream!
Adding to your point a redditor on the Android subreddit argued people who prefer to have a small phone because they already have other large screen devices are actually a privileged minority. For many people (especially in emerging countries) their smartphones are the only internet device they can afford and that audience would naturally graviate towards whatever phone is the biggest that fits their budget.
Unfortunately for us the poor sales of 12 and 13 mini proved they were right.
That argument really doesn't even pass the sniff test. Think about it, Chromebooks are under $200. If consumers can afford a phablet, they can certainly afford another device like a notebook computer.
There is plenty of data showing adoption of phablets around the world, regardless of geographic region. Below is some data from 2015. I wouldn't consider Spain, Germany, or the UK to be emerging countries.
What the data suggests is a generation gap. Gen X, Y, Z are increasing screen time each year. Many of them grew up without the need for a notebook or desktop. But there is a small group of middle aged and senior users who haven't increased their screen time. They still take voice calls, don't use more than an app at a time, don't use the camera, and don't mind smaller displays. This group along with price sensitive users are those hanging on to small devices.
I remember buying the SE 16 on the first day and paying it ā¬604. The 6s presented 6 months earlier did not cost 250ā¬ more, perhaps it cost 150ā¬.
Of course, those who buy a mini like an SE 16 are because they think it necessary to do it, for ergonomics or something, not for money. Personally I buy small phones because I have to use them with one hand, because a phone that needs two hands to be used is a wrong product, thought out and mismade. To use it with two hands you might as well buy a tablet.
Excuse me, but it seems to me an analysis devoid of any validity.
The graph you posted only talks about propensity to buy in various countries, not market segments based on age. Then there is a noticeable mistake: Gen X reaches those born until 1980, Gen Y until 1998, Gen Z until 2010.
How can you make assumptions about generations so distant from each other by also citing previous generations also claiming that they would use smaller devices, when already decades ago, with devices with physical keyboards, they used huge keyboards precisely to make up for visual defects?
But have you ever seen a 60-year-old, 80-year-old and 40-year-old use a device?
It seems not.
But who told you that consumer demand has changed?
Because it seems to me you look at a phenomenon and look for the supporting causes you like best.
All 3 products mentioned had only one problem: the cost.
HomePod cost 3 times the price of competitors; 12-inch MacBook was aimed at a specific target (who preferred portability to the rest, and were willing to pay for it, instead of scrap Air); Apple Watch Edition cost twice the price of the most expensive Apple Watch and 5 times the base one.
So the inferences you find in the āchange of propensity to buyā are all wrong.
If anything, you can discuss what the tie was for each of these products, and I think it was very low, which is why the cost was very high.
It is deleterious to approach the elite market as well as the mass market, they have reverse logics.
But any product that reaches the sale has behind it an in-depth study of the target audience, the propensity to buy, the balance of production costs, the number of pieces to be produced, the maximum price the customer is willing to spend.
Itās science because it costs money, weāre not about the āchange in propensity to buyā of the target audience, like sorcerer apprentices.
No one is asking for organizations to cover niche markets but, coincidentally, Apple also makes niche productions, such as MacBook 12ā, HomePod, Apple Watch Edition, iPhone mini (note that the mini comes when the SE 16 almost finished iOS support, perhaps someone understood, despite attempts made with Xr, SE 20, iPhone 11, that a certain slice of the market would not buy a larger iPhone but a smaller Android).
Stockholders may not like them (they love mass products and hate higher costs than small productions) but those are also slices of the market, as were buyers of Xserve, Mac Pro and other extremely expensive products.
Until recently there was Ive and the historic design team to guarantee those buyers, today there is no more, and that is why expensive products no longer exist or exist in limited pieces, and then we have ridiculous objects like the Mac mini Pro (Studio).
If Apple canāt afford collectibles, who can? Here, then buy Apple shares and mass products, collectors will buy more.
In the end, the one who loses us from the point of view of the image is the brand, therefore the holders of shares, not the management, who can redeem them in time.š
In the US the 6s was $649 and the SE was $399. Some people (and companies) most certainly got the SE over the 6s because of the larger price difference.
I thought I saw somewhere that the 12 mini was actually outselling the 13 mini currently, which shows that there certainly are price sensitive buyers out there. Would the mini have been a huge hit if Apple would have made it a $200 price difference from the regular version? Like if the would have just discontinued the 12 mini and priced the 13 mini $100 lower. Maybe not, but I think it would be safe to say it would have at least doubled its share. Myself I would have bought the mini even if it was the the same price or even more than the regular sized versions as I just prefer smaller phones for the same reason you do.
They probably wonāt: they are going to sell gazillions of the new 6.7ā regular iPhone
People are opting for the 6.7" size phones. To me, that's the in between size which likely Apple will focus on.
