or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Rogifan

If it's not enough to convince people to spend $100 more then is it really worth $100 more? And faster chip, force touch, 2GB RAM and better camera isn't enough but a plastic case is? A $99 6 with plastic case might keep margins up but more sales of the mid tier won't keep ASP up.
Wait, so the mid tier and the low end iPhone are going to look exactly the same but just have different internals?Putting something in a plastic case to prevent cannibalization seems to me like its not about the product but protecting profit margins. I'm fine with the low end having differentiation (and I figured that's what the 5C was all about); heck I argued that Apple maybe should create an entire separate down market brand using Beats that could be the colorful...
Yes this makes sense.It makes no sense to make both the mid tier and low end iPhone plastic in an effort to not cannibalize the flagships if you end up selling less phones overall. There's no guarantee making the mid-tier plastic will get people to upgrade to the flagship. It could be they don't upgrade at all or they buy something else.
Apple needs to make their flagship offerings worth upgrading then. If Apple is worried that $100 cheaper iPhone 6 will cannibalize the 6S then clearly they know the 6S is going to be mediocre upgrade. Unless you're suggesting things like force touch and possibly OIS wouldn't get people to upgrade. Though I seem to remember you claiming Touch ID was worth a $100 premium with the iPad mini.Also the current mid tier, non flagship phone is not plastic. I will be very surprised...
Oh come on. There's nothing negative about hoping a future version of the Watch has an always on display. After all it's called Apple WATCH and one of the three tent pole features according to Apple is an accurate time piece. I'm not aware of any mechanical watch that makes you raise your wrist to see the time. I'm sure the reason Apple Watch doesn't is because of battery life. But there are other smart watches that do have always on display so it is possible. And my guess...
Well obviously Apple did as they brought him to Cupertino to fix his problems. Btw, Jim has said multiple times now he was a dummy for not having a backup.
I know you get charged. But does Apple send an email before the 90 days are up reminding you that you're going to get charged? Or do you just get an email saying your card was charged $9.99/$14.99? I guarantee you there are people that signed up didn't who read any fine print and Apple forums will be full of them complaining about being charged and wondering how to turn it off (as subscriptions are buried in settings).
I'm sure it was in the fine print somewhere when setting up Apple Music that you would be charged after 90 days. I do wish companies would make this opt-in rather than opt-out. Of course they don't because they're counting on people forgetting to unsubscribe. But it could be so simple. Just send an email saying the free trial is coming to an end and if you like the service and want to continue receiving it click here to turn the subscription on.
I think what should be top of Apple's priority list (outside of faster native 3rd party apps) is an always on display for the time. I've seen several comments in my Twitter feed that Watch sucks as a watch. John Gruber's review mentioned it too...that when he's typing away on his computer he'd like to be able to just glance at his wrist and see the time without having to raise it. If Apple can come up with a low power way to always display the time like some Android Wear...
I see there's a post going around about a better UI for Watch. A couple places I saw it though failed to point out the guy who put it together works for Google. obviously he's going to try and turn Watch into Android Wear. No! I'm sure there are improvements Apple is working on or thinking about but turning it into Android Wear shouldn't be one of them!
New Posts  All Forums: