Apple’s marketing should make a final decision on the next iPhone’s name as the last step in pre-launch preparations. Many fans have expected the handset to be called iPhone 8, but a new report suggests the device will be marketed as iPhone X.

That’s according to a report from Dutch site iCulture (Google Translate), which learned from a reliable source who’s working for a global mobile phone operator that the upcoming 5.8-inch flagship OLED iPhone will “definitely be called iPhone X.”

This source predicted the 10.5-inch iPad Pro’s exact launch date, lending it some credibility.

The source claims that a team of higher-ups at this provider visited Apple’s Cupertino headquarters last Thursday. The managers discussed launch details and were reportedly told that 2017 iPhones would be adopting the following nomenclature:

  • OLED iPhone → iPhone X (pronounced “iPhone ten”)
  • iPhone 7s → iPhone 8
  • iPhone 7s Plus → iPhone 8 Plus

The source added that pre-orders for the new phones will open on Friday, September 15, with the devices scheduled to land on store shelves the following Friday on September 22.

9to5Mac somewhat corroborated the report, saying that Apple will indeed skip the S-branding and go straight from iPhone 7 to iPhone 8 rather than iPhone 7s.

The site, however, claims that the OLED iPhone will be marketed as “iPhone Edition”.

9to5Mac has ostensibly learned this from case makers at IFA in Berlin, Germany.

“One case maker has updated its internal SKUs based on the info and is actively printing packaging which I was able to see in the form of preliminary artwork,” says the report. “The other had made sticker labels which they were showing to their partners behind closed doors.”

Both makers requested anonymity “for obvious reasons.”

I’m glad that Apple is potentially abandoning the S-branding for new iPhones because it’s gotten a bit boring and, in my opinion, has never clearly telegraphed the fact that S-upgrades actually get, in most cases, better hardware upgrades.

Image: iPhone 8, 7s and 7s Plus dummies courtesy of YouTube creator Danny Wingnet

  • I wonder what the official pronunciation of iPhone X will be: [iPhone eks] or [iPhone ten]

    Even though OS X is pronounced [OS ten], [iPhone ten] is very unlikely due to possible confusion

    This leaves us with [iPhone eks]

    • eXoguti097

      Maybe iPhone X Edition so we can call it iPhone Edition

    • MrDDify

      Probably iPhone eks, just like OS X is called OS eks and not OS ten

      • You don’t own a Mac, do you? if you do, open Terminal, type “say Mac OS X”

      • MrDDify

        I’ve had Macs in my live my entire live.

  • burge

    So whats Apple going to call the device after the 9s ? Sorry but I don’t see this myself.

  • zebonaut

    I christen thee; “The iPhone Decade Edition”

  • HamptonWalley

    Fake news! Iphone 7S is coming this year and there won’t be any X or annyversary edition. Not mention the Iphone 7 was the 10th generation. So bad nobody can’t count!

    • Mike Colacone Saal

      Tenth anniversary.

    • Jose Rivera

      Actually, the iPhone 7 is a 9th generation iPhone. It’s model identifier is iPhone9,1-9,4. The first iPhone was iPhone1,1 and the iPhone 3G was iPhone1,2. The iPhone 3G was literally just a repackaged 1st gen iPhone with 3g added and a shittier battery. I just recently learned this. The first two iPhoens have the exact same hardware except to the cellular part and battery.

      • HamptonWalley

        Wrong! Iphone 3G so much different than 2G, by look, by material, inside totally different build, not a screw would match. The only similar thing between 2G and 3G is the processor. Iphone 7 is the 10th generation, you can count by IOS versions. The new Iphone 8 is the gen 11.

      • No it’s not. The case may have changed, but the hardware didn’t. The 3G literally is a 2G with a 3G antenna. It even has the same processor and RAM.

      • Jose Rivera

        See you get it. The outside may have changed entirely but the internals didn’t what so ever. The 3G was literally a reissued 2G with 3G capabilities and a smaller battery. The model identifier calls the first iPhone iPhone1,1. The iPhone 3G is iPhone1,2. The iPhone 3GS is iPhone2,1. IF we are going by logical reason and OS numbering, yes the iPhone 7 was supposed to be iPhone X. But if we actually look at it hardware wise, the iPhone 7 was a 9th generation device. The iPhone 7 falls under the iPhone9,x identifier. The iPhone 5S was iPhone6,1. The iPhone 4 was iPhone3,1. The only iPhone to actually fall under the right identifier was the iPhone 5. That one is iPhone5,1.

      • HamptonWalley

        Oh, ho, ho… I link just the motherboard now, which shows the 2G and 3G are entirely different. 3G is absolutely a new generation, while the 3GS is an upgraded 3G with faster CPU. However I count also the 3GS as new generation…

      • Alright, sure, the motherboard design changed, but the processor is the same 412 MHz ARM 11. They also have the same 128 MB of RAM. Changing how the motherboard looks like does not give you a performance enhancement. Nor does it alter how the phone functions in any major way. Which is why it is the 1,2, not the 2,1.

        If you have any further doubts, the reason why the iPhone 3G performed so poorly on iOS 4 because it literally has iPhone 2G internals.

      • HamptonWalley

        Man, I agreed above processor is the same, but everything else totally different. What you try to sell here is nonsense. Just for an example the Vw Golf 3rd gen use the same 1.6 8 valve petrol engine as the 6th gen Golf. Is that mean the 4th, 5th and the 6th gen Golfs are not new generations? The 6th Gen Golf is just like the 3rd gen Golf because powered by the same engine? Whoaaa…

      • You are missing the point! The iPhone 3G, despite being SLIGHTLY different, still has the model identifier 1,2. NOT 2. NOT 3. 1. ONE. NUMBER ONE! The same nubmer as the 2G.
        Meaning Apple clearly thinks it’s basically a redesigned 2G. Read what Jose Rivera said.

      • HamptonWalley

        That is just number and Apple does strange things with numbers, like they call Iphone 7S for 8. Jobs intrudeced the 2nd gen. as the new iphone and that is what matters!

  • eXoguti097

    I think we’ve known this. I don’t know why none of the media called it the iPhone X, it made more sense than iPhone 8. iPhone 7s, 7s+, and 8? What?

  • Jim Hart

    The actual name of the phone should be “iPhone CC” – Credit Card Edition

  • Jay


  • To me, the iPhone X makes completely sense if Apple will have the intention to keep two different lines of phones. Keep evolving the current models at lower prices and goes for the X as a new high end, and next year maybe the iPhone X2…

    But this “iPhone edition” sounds strange.

    In the end, let’s find out next week how it will going to be called.

  • askep3

    iPhone Pro makes the most sense, since the entire rest of Apples lineup is either like that or heading in that direction, but if they want to sell it as a premium device in general, not just for pros they will probably name it iphone edition

    • Alan

      I agree – either iPhone Pro or iPhone Edition seem the most likely.

      It could never have been called iPhone 8.. think of what next year’s lineup would be; iPhone 8s / iPhone 8s Plus and iPhone 9? Messy. As for iPhone X, if they pronounce it iPhone 10, then the rest of the lineup will eventually catch up to iPhone 9s, and then it’ll be messy again. And in the meantime, what would the next-generation high-end iPhone be called? iPhone 11?

      And if they pronounce it as iPhone “eks” then it’s only referencing OS X, something that was abandoned in favour of macOS to streamline Apple’s software platform lineup.

      Apple Watch was never given a Pro series, because it’s not designed for heavy interaction anyway. That’s why I’m leaning more towards iPhone Pro than iPhone Edition, but either one would avoid numbering confusion with the rest of the lineup.

      • Iskren Donev

        I’m in the same camp. You have MacBook – MacBook Pro, iMac – iMac Pro, iPad – iPad Pro. It just makes sense from a consistency standpoint to call it iPhone Pro.

        As for the Apple Watch – I think that even Apple is still confused about its branding, hence the Sport, Regular and Edition SKUs. However I do think that in the coming years they will also simplify the Apple Watch lineup by having an Apple Watch and an Apple Watch Pro.

        As for the “X” moniker, I completely agree that that ship has sailed (along with the “i” prefix)

      • askep3

        There is no sport anymore, the aluminum ones are the Apple Watch

      • Iskren Donev

        Huh, I didn’t realize that there was no explicit “Sport” brand of the Apple Watch Series 2. I guess I mistook the Apple Watch Nike Edition for it 😀

        I suspect that with each generation the watches will become more and more capable and at some point there will be a need to rebrand the Edition watch to Pro (I agree that the Edition is the de-facto Pro version right now).

        Hopefully Apple will do away with the Edition moniker – it sounds too elitist and clashes with Apple’s place in the market – they are supposed to be a luxury brand that the majority of people can afford, not something exclusively for the 1%.

      • askep3

        Apple has always been a premium brand, and the only thing differentiating the normal Apple Watch and the one 800 dollars more is that it has sapphire and ceramic. Maybe as you said, in the future they will have differentiating features, but for now it’s all based on luxury and elitism

      • Shadowelite123

        I don’t know about the simplification of the Apple Watch line, but I do think well know in the near future. Theres supposed to be a cellular Apple Watch released alongside the iPhone this year and this new watch is supposed to have better tech. I personally feel the Edition branding would be best suited for the Apple Watch and should stay that way. The only thing I could see for adding Pro in the Watch line is if they made a completely standalone watch, but how much could they actually fit into it?, How much performance would they need to optimize to make a significant difference from the regular line? In the end, the Apple Watch lineup is based on materials, not tech. The Pro branding would probably end up under the materials branding rather than the tech branding.

      • Shadowelite123

        I’m almost positive that the X isn’t nor was ever intended to be in reference to OS X. Its their tenth anniversary iPhone. They are trying to make a splash with the release. For one, there hasn’t been a single tie between product names of one line to the software of another line, it wouldn’t make sense to start now. In regards to that, the next high end iPhone wouldn’t be called iPhone 11, thats not what the X was for.

        I do however agree with it being that the Pro and Edition branding would be used instead of X. The X has no ties or history to be a likely choice except the fact that its the 10th anniversary of the iPhone line and how unrelated to the branding of their other products it is.

        The best branding choices are the iPhone Pro (mostly likely in my opinion) because of it being a more advanced version of the iPhone line, or iPhone Edition because its a more valuable version of the line that harbors better tech and materials than the current line of iPhones.

        The only chance the X branding would be a thing is the fact that Apple has never aligned the branding of different products. An example would be the Air. I think we had the MacBook Air debut first, then the iPad Air, and then when the iPhone was believed to be released as the iPhone Air, we were given the same regular iPhone name branding. They had the chance, but didn’t do it in the end. I think i’d be surprised and not surprised if they released it as iPhone X simply because of the Air scenario. Pro would be best I think because the Edition was seen as it being a higher quality materials branding for the Apple Watch and while the iPhone 8/X/Pro/Edition will have higher quality materials, the focus is the tech.