We’re still several months of the presentation of the iPhone 7 but all rumors suggest that the design of the next iPhone will be very similar to the current. Yes, there may be doubts about whether there will be or not headphone jack, if dual camera will be exclusive model 5.5 inch or if there will be Smart Connector or not, but otherwise, there will be no major changes, at least on the outside. Because this could be now the trend, at least so implies Nikkei, a Japanese newspaper that ensures that the cycle of renewal of the iPhone will be two to three years, beginning just this year. Arguments in favor? And against? I detail them you then.
An exception in 2016
I think that, at this point, few now doubt that there will be a significant aesthetic change on the new iPhone. While I was one of the skeptics in this aspect, there is not obliged to accept that the iPhone 7 will be very similar to the iPhone 6-6s. But that happen this year doesn’t mean it will already be the guideline to follow from now on. We are facing an exceptional situation: 2017 is the year that marks the tenth anniversary of the iPhone, and that means that Apple could have prepared a redesign spatially dedicated to this model.
Could a different model be launched this year and another new next? It would have been an option also, but the cost which has a design of this type is high, adapt all chains mounting to a new design, materials, parts and suddenly to next year return to change everything, is inefficient. The wisest seem to “lose” a year with a very similar design and the surprise of the year of the celebration of the 10th anniversary with a spectacular iPhone.
Has been exhausted innovation?
One of the arguments of the Nikkei to support 3 year cycle is that little room for innovation there is. That is something that seems obvious, there is no longer as many surprises as before, screens are all high-definition cameras are spectacular, very thin devices, premium materials are already the norm and almost all phones are already very similar to the iPhone. But to say that innovation enough to cycles of two years there is already no is absurd.
Much remains to be done: integrate the touch ID on the screen, minimize the frames almost until non-existent, integrate the front camera on the screen, make disappear the mechanical parts and use touch pads, more resistant screens, curved screens, longer-lasting battery listing of elements that include new models is very long, and we’re only talking about hardware. If you look at software improvement possibilities are endless. Already there is no room for innovation is not true, and wouldn’t be a plausible excuse.
Saturation of the market?
Actually the iPhone market is already saturated. After years breaking sales records without ceasing seems that already we have peaked and the iPhone begins to fall in sales. In spite of that the figures remain astronomical and enviable income of Apple by any other company, the reality is that the iPhone is sold less than before, but continue selling very well. Is the market already asking a less frequent renewal? I doubt it.
Precisely in these times in which people already is not the need to renew your iPhone every year is the time take imagination and do over again to feel that obligation. Precisely a design change is perhaps the most “simple”. IPhone is often redesigned in “no S” models and add innovations in “S” models. Innovations may already be somewhat scarce (although we have seen before that there is still much room) but the design will never end because it is a matter of thinking in new forms, materials and finishes, something infinite. The saturation of the market rather than an excuse to change should be the stimulus for the opposite.
The exception that proves the rule
By this I do not think that Apple is going to change your renewal cycle and move to launch a ‘new’ iPhone every 3 years. This year there will be an exception that will be the confirmation of the rule meticulously accomplished so far. The tenth anniversary of the iPhone seems to me a more than adequate and probably excuse for this fact, just that. I don’t think you have to look in other arguments justifying the unjustifiable. Or at least I think so.
