iPhone go. (Italics optional.) I know, what an incredible revelation. Anyway:
IF Apple has chosen an iPad mini-without-the-mini*** path for a new form factor iPhone (be it polycarbonate unibody-based or whatever), that’s the only “suffix” that makes sense to me. Why?
An iPhone that’s got worry-less (not worry-free, but getting there) unibody polycarbonate or something durability (Jony Ive’s done it before with the one-off unibody polycarbonate MacBook). Add some water resistance or splash protection? Sure, why not.
An iPhone with everyday usability, necessity and style (mix Jony Ive’s proven design sensibilities with COLORS).
An iPhone which, with the above qualities, fits the “on the go” lifestyle.
An iPhone which seems a bit more “youthful” (though that won’t necessarily be part of the public-facing marketing pitch), more iPod touch-“playful” than iPhone 4/5-“purposeful” – which corresponds to being more active, which also feeds back into the whole “go” deal.
An iPhone which, if the pundits are “finally” correct, is based on the pay-as-you-go (or something like it) concept, being unlocked or unsubsidized or less-subsidized or whatever. (Though I’m sure it’ll also be available for $99 or so on a typical carrier-subsidized 2-year smartphone plan.)
Hence, “iPhone go”.
***By which I mean iPad mini is basically an iPad 2 with a dash of more current-gen-type tech (in iPad mini’s case, LTE) in a new form factor. If iPhone go were to have, say, the A5 SoC + current-gen 1136×640 Retina Display + LTE, it’d be a similar product packaging concept, with the two exceptions of iPhone go having the the same-size-and-pixel-count Retina Display, which also means iPhone go would be roughly the same size and perhaps a bit thicker than the iPhone 5S (unless Apple boosts screen size and/or resolution for the 5S, in which case Apple might have a striaght-up iPhone 6 in the works this year).