According to sources, Apple's new low-cost "ready for China" smartphone that some are deeming the iPhone Mini, will resemble the iPhone 5, but contain different iPod Touch and iPod classic.
Citing the accustomed "reliable sources," Apple's iLounge website states the new model will be a "cross between iPhone 5, the fifth-generation iPod Touch and the classic iPod," according to cnet.com.
Staying in line with the current iPhone's configuration, the new "low-cost" phone will have, according to cnet.com "a 4-inch 1,136x640 pixel Retina Display and use the new Lightning interface. The sensor, camera, and button arrangement would all match those found on the iPhone 5. The screen itself would stick with Gorilla Glass, say iLounge's sources, but the body would be made of plastic."
Though, details are coming out sporadically, remember, these are still only rumors and should be taken as fact, even though some of the sources include respected outlets like The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg.
The reports contradict themselves-will the phone really have a plastic body? Some say yes, others say no.
For example, about the aforementioned specs, according to Design&Trend.com, Chief of iLounge, says the significant changes will be in the lack of curves and the materials:
"No, it won't just be a Retina-and Lightning-equipped refresh of the iPhone 3G or 3GS, Apple's last plastic iPhones, nor will it look just like an all-plastic version of the iPhone 5. This new model is actually a cross between the iPhone 5, fifth-generation iPod touch, and... wait [sic] for it... the iPod classic. Yes, really. It will have a 4″ screen, like the iPhone 5, a bottom like the latest iPod touch, and a shape that's most similar to the iPod classic."
When asked for his comment on the matter, Senior Marketing VP Phil Schiller, reportedly told the Shanghai Evening News recently that Apple will "not develop cheap smartphones in order to grab market share away." The story, however, was quickly revised, reportedly at the request of Apple, making Schiller's comments seem a bit vague.
This article is copyrighted by Travelers Today, the travel news leader
