Template talk:iPhone

Template:IPhone models

@Nick Mitchell 98, Dimsar01, and Darius robin: we should change the template and replace the current (release, form factor and specs) by by an iPad style (category). --Panam2014 (talk) 10:32, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: The current one is better in my opinion. The iPad one is different as the iPads are more evenly distributed among their series, unlike the iPhone. There’s no need to keep it uniform with the iPad. Darius robin (talk) 11:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I agree with Darius robin The iPhone is different from the iPad, and by having all the “mid-range” iPhones together, the template becomes quite difficult to understand (at least in my opinion). –Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 11:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Mitchell 98, Dimsar01, and Darius robin: yeah but in this case we should merge 6/6s and 7/8 sections. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I agree with that. Darius robin (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin: and for iPhone EDGE/3G/3GS and 4/4S ? They have the same display. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: But the decisive thing is the form factor. Darius robin (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I maintain the opinion that I made in my edits: form factor and specs (and to a slightly lesser extent, release) determine this template. Unlike the iPad, there really are no "mid-range" iPhones, you have each single successive iPhone generation (the SE and X are slight anomalies to the standard convention). – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 22:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Mitchell 98, Dimsar01, and Darius robin: but the Se have the same form than the 6s and the sizes of iPhone 5s. What citera is decisive ? Also, Finally, do the 6 / s, 7/8 have the same form ? --Panam2014 (talk) 11:01, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: Like Nick Mitchell 98 said, I’ll go like this: 1. Form factor|2. Specs|3. Release. I feel that form factor is the main thing. So, from the first iPhone to 3GS should come under one, followed by the 4 and 4S under one group, then the 5, 5S and SE, and finally, the 7 and 8. The 5C can come under the first category (1st to 3GS) maybe? Darius robin (talk) 11:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin: and for 6/6s factor|2. Specs|3. Release ? --Panam2014 (talk) 15:12, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: Sorry, I forgot to mention those, they will come with the 7 and 8. Darius robin (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin: I personally disagree with placing the 5C with this "first category"; for all intents and purposes (spec, form factor and release), it is identical to the 5 just with a plastic back. I think that the listing that we have currently works perfectly well with the 1. Form factor|2. Specs|3. Release idea. The 1/3G/3GS form a consistent form factor and release order, with specs very similar between each model; the 4 and 4S everyone agrees on; the 5/5C/5S are part of the same release series and form factor; the 6/6S everyone agrees on, with the SE being similar release-wide and spec-wise to them; the 7/8 are again similar in all three aspects; and the X is the start of new spec features and form factor. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 02:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Mitchell 98: Guess it’s fine then. Darius robin (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin and Nick Mitchell 98: we should put iPhone 6 with 8. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin and Nick Mitchell 98: --Panam2014 (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I have made my case in my previous message, there is no sense in putting the 6 alone with the 8. The current list is sorted logically by form factor, specs and release. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 00:57, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin and Nick Mitchell 98: but the iPhone 7 have the same form factor, specs and release than the iPhone 6. We should restructurate the template.--Panam2014 (talk) 13:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: So what you're actually suggesting is to put the 7 in the same row as the 6/6S? – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 01:03, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Darius robin and Nick Mitchell 98: yes. No reason to separate the four. --Panam2014 (talk) 00:02, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]