Making a Last Minute Dash for Idiot of the Week

Who am I referring to? That’d be: Canalys principal analyst Pete Cunningham. As quoted by Christina Bonnington on Wired.com about the 3.5″ screen size of the iPhone: >Cunningham said this was a “noticeable weakness” of the device. He expects the next iPhone will have a 4-inch or 4.3-inch display, rather than the 4.6-inch behemoth reported…

Who am I referring to? That’d be: Canalys principal analyst Pete Cunningham. As quoted by Christina Bonnington on Wired.com about the 3.5″ screen size of the iPhone:

>Cunningham said this was a “noticeable weakness” of the device. He expects the next iPhone will have a 4-inch or 4.3-inch display, rather than the 4.6-inch behemoth reported by Reuters. “I don’t think Apple can go much above 4.3 because of the need to meet so many different people’s needs,” Cunningham said. Unlike the 5.3-inch Samsung Galaxy Note, the iPhone is a mass-market device, and Apple will have to find the “sweet spot” for such a product.

Where’s the data to backup the assertion that the iPhone’s 3.5″ display is holding it back — [certainly the sales data doesn’t show that](http://www.asymco.com/2012/03/21/estimates-for-apples-second-fiscal-2012-quarter/). So if it is a “noticeable weakness” then I want to know why — what would change? Does Cunningham really think sales are being stunted because of the screen size?

And as for that “sweet spot” that he refers to, I think Apple has already found it. And the sales data *does* back me up on that one.

This website makes use of affiliate links whenever possible, these links may earn the site money by clicking them.


Discover more from The Brooks Review

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.