Poll: iPhone 6...

Which iPhone have you bought/ordered?

  • iPhone 6 16gb

    Votes: 82 15.1%
  • iPhone 6 64gb

    Votes: 223 41.1%
  • iPhone 6 128gb

    Votes: 49 9.0%
  • iPhone 6 plus 16gb

    Votes: 18 3.3%
  • iPhone 6 plus 64gb

    Votes: 109 20.1%
  • iPhone 6 plus 128gb

    Votes: 62 11.4%

  • Total voters
    543
Soldato
Joined
5 Nov 2010
Posts
23,961
Location
Hertfordshire
16GB is still a perfectly viable storage size for the iPhone. If you don't use it for music or video then it's fine. I have loads of apps on my 16GB 4S with space to spare.

For some people it is, and a lot of business users, yes.

But for the majority of general users i very much doubt it. Why would you want to carry an iPhone and an iPod or other media player around with you? One of the main points of these devices is that it's smart and can do everything you wish from a single device, a media player is up there with one of it's main functions.

For me, i should go for the 64GB version as i'm always going to be switching music in and out on 32GB. But hell am i paying that much for 32GB more storage.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 May 2009
Posts
4,185
Location
Hampshire
I jumped from iPhone around a year ago purely because of the small screen size.

Used Android and W8.1 (which I have currently) but I do want to come back to iOS so as long as the 32GB isn't stupidly priced, I'll be grabbing the 5.5" model!
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Oct 2003
Posts
7,831
The big con is the fact you can't add additional storage and the price difference between the 16/32/64 models, when the actual cards themselves cost tiny amounts.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jul 2007
Posts
7,691
Location
Stoke on Trent
Even though I'll most likely opt for the 4.7 version, I'm curious what the 4" offering will be. Will it really be a continuation of the 5S with no spec/storage bump at full price?
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Oct 2008
Posts
6,693
Location
London
Even though I'll most likely opt for the 4.7 version, I'm curious what the 4" offering will be. Will it really be a continuation of the 5S with no spec/storage bump at full price?

My guess would be a 5c type device with 5s internals, just so all their devices across the line are 64bit + touchID, also think all iPad will have touchID this year expect the 4/mini.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Jul 2014
Posts
3,857
Location
Oxon
Depending on the price, I hope the 5.5" isn't delayed too much. I'm looking to replace my 5 with something that can work as a phablet. Probably make the jump to 32GB too if it isn't too extortionate.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2010
Posts
12,421
Location
London
Little worried that we've only really seen leaks for the 4.7" so far, maybe the 5.5" really is delayed :(.

Something seems fishy regarding the 5.5" - I'm not sure if it's the lack of component leaks or how the design at that size just looks awkward. Are we sure it isn't someone doing some personal wish fulfillment with mockups or creative use of Photoshop? Or that pic of two phones side by side with the new design isn't a revamped regular sized iPhone (as the cheaper option) and the 4.7" one being the premium model?
 

rpg

rpg

Associate
Joined
7 Jan 2010
Posts
558
Location
London
16GB is still a perfectly viable storage size for the iPhone. If you don't use it for anything then it's fine. I have loads of apps on my 16GB 4S with space to spare.

Fixed. ;)

I'm more worried that the 5.5" will be the flagship version and the 4.7" will become the new 5C of the range with downgraded specs. I don't want a comedy big phone :(

That would be a disaster. A 5.5" iPhone would be an awkward lump of a thing, I have no interest in a 2-handed phone tablet hybrid. My iPad mini serves me fine in that department.

I won't buy the 4.7" if it doesn't have the fastest CPU, camera etc., so for the first time I might have to look elsewhere for a new phone when my iPhone 5 'expires'.

But I've read a lot of reports that the 5C was a failure, it was far too expensive (£470!) for a plasticky handset. So hopefully they cut this 'budget-friendly' nonsense and put the top specs in both handsets. iPhones are and always will be expensive, they'll never be cheap; I'd much prefer to spend £550 on a model with the top specs, than £470 on last year's internals.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2008
Posts
7,844
Location
N/A
But I've read a lot of reports that the 5C was a failure, it was far too expensive (£470!) for a plasticky handset. So hopefully they cut this 'budget-friendly' nonsense and put the top specs in both handsets. iPhones are and always will be expensive, they'll never be cheap; I'd much prefer to spend £550 on a model with the top specs, than £470 on last year's internals.

The 5C is outselling the Galaxy S5 despite not being top of the range but still expensive and from last year - it's far from a failure which must infuriate Samsung.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Oct 2008
Posts
6,693
Location
London
The 5C is outselling the Galaxy S5 despite not being top of the range but still expensive and from last year - it's far from a failure which must infuriate Samsung.

Latest numbers don't agree, and no one even mentioned Samsung but off course you will take any chance to try and make Apple look good while making Samsung look bad, top notch trolling as always.

http://www.counterpointresearch.com/top10may2014

Rank Brand Model Category
1 Apple iPhone 5s smartphone
2 Samsung Galaxy S5 smartphone
3 Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone
4 Samsung Note 3 smartphone
5 Apple iPhone 5c smartphone
6 Apple iPhone 4S smartphone
7 Xiaomi MI3 smartphone
8 Samsung Galaxy S4 mini smartphone
9 Xiaomi Hongmi Redrice smartphone
10 Samsung Galaxy Grand 2 smartphone
 
Back
Top Bottom