or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple CEO Tim Cook on cheap smartphones: 'We're not in the junk business'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple CEO Tim Cook on cheap smartphones: 'We're not in the junk business' - Page 3

post #81 of 208

"New is easy. Right is hard." - Craig Federighi

 

Bravo, sir.

 

I feel like people are missing the point of the iPhone 5C. Everyone is looking at it like it's this whole new phone that Apple came out with and it's missing all of these features, etc. No... just no...

 

What Apple has done is great, really. Instead of doing what they've been doing for years, which is knocking the year-old iPhone model's prices down $100, they've turned it into a new, yet same (if that makes sense), phone. They've redone the looks/components on the outside, yet kept the components on the inside the same(?) (is there anything different on the inside compared to the 5? I'm not positive. I know it's nothing worse, that's for sure.)

 

So at the end of the day, they have a phone at the $199/$299/$399 price point, a phone at the $99/$199/$299 price point and a phone at the free price point. How is that anything worse than any other year? No one ever complained that the 4S was too much last year, or the 4 was the year before, etc... why is the 5C this catastrophe? They're keeping the same premise, but making it new at the same time. I applaud them for turning a piece of their business into something sort of new.

 

I'm confused as to why people are confused...

post #82 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post
 

 

The point is Apple has gone for cheaper in terms of casing - but that's not reflected in the price.
 
How many times have posters on this board dismissed Android or Windows phones as being 'cheap plastic crap'? A U-turn as far as plastic goes.
 
Now the iPhone 5c brings the worst of both worlds. Plastic casing ...  but ... same premium prices. Exactly the same prices they've always charged for last year's technology. 
 
Nobody is expecting any Apple product to be dirt cheap, but instead of using plastic savings to get a bit more competitive on price, Apple is using it to bolster their already healthy profit margins.

 

Have you held the 5C?  If not the shut up.  No one in their right mind would call it cheap.

 

Samsung phones ARE cheap plastic crap.  They bend ad are flimsy to the touch.

post #83 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Meanwhile, Mixpanel is showing iOS 7 adoption rate now around 30%. That's 30% in about 16 hours. 1eek.gif

https://mixpanel.com/trends/#report/ios_7/from_date:-2,to_date:0

 

Indeed, and if you crunch the numbers on the back of an envelope, I think you come up with a bytes/sec number that is so huge that instead of complaining about Apple's unforgivable inability to perfectly manage this (as some did in a post yesterday) we should be thankful that the internet backbone itself didn't implode.  (Joking... sort of.)  And we should be flat-out amazed that Apple was able to manage it anywhere near the level at which they did.  (I'm looking for some of yesterday's complainers to backpeddle a bit - if they can't quite bring themselves to do a complete 180.) 

 
Thompson
post #84 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8 View Post

I love it when I here Apple is "Greedy" or "Apple Tax"

It is not that Apple is over priced it is that the competition is in a race to the bottom for 5% profit or less per unit.

Apple does not fall for the pressure of the competition to compete for "junk".

I here how people talking about there 3rd or 4th generation back device like the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s with the latest iOS 7 on said device and how happy they are.

Do you hear that about Samsung, Black Berry or HTC?

That alone speaks VOLUMES about the quality of Apple devices.

So when fan boys are ripping Apple for not producing a device designed to last 2 years or less take into account they are only doing so because the product they use on a daily basis is no where to quality level that Apple produces.

I believe you can't copy quality because if you are copying some other companies product in the first place you already have a lack of innovation or creativity and are always following and never leading nor will you ever.

Look at all phones in the last 4-5 years, 75% of all the true inovation has come from Apple and the 5s in no different with real useable fingerprint tech and complete 64bit. 

Now with in the next 6 months every MFG and Android will offer the same specs but again it will not be as fluid and polished like Apple products because..... they will be copying instead of leading.

Done with my rant, thanks for reading...flame away

When people talk about an Apple Tax, they're looking at the cost of individual components and saying, "I can build that cheaper" (especially with computers).

What they're not looking at is the quality of design, the OS and the ecosystem. And they're also not looking at the productivity improvements when using Apple's versions of these devices. It also doesn't take into account how long these devices last (my Macs especially last forever, unlike the PCs I've been forced to use.)

That's not to say that I've never thought that Apple was too expensive. And I've certainly considered getting my mother a Kindle.

But overall, I think Apple is worth it and I'm always a bit surprised on my daily subway trips where I see tons of Apple devices used by people who, based on appearance or where they got on the subway, wouldn't appear to be earning high wages.
post #85 of 208
This sort of arrogant and dismissive language toward a group that includes all the people on the edge of becoming our new customers is not at all helpful to us stockholders.

A device that is all it can be at a lower price point is a perfectly valid product. I agree completely that Apple has better opportunity in the high end market it dominates and owns. But trash talking is a lightening rod for the type of social pile on that cost ordinary people billions of dollars the last few days.

Applause rings out from a bunch of fans who probably would be hard pressed to guess three issues to address to stack up a bunch of sapphire lenses. Apple's strength is in is design, engineering and execution. It's not some sort of bizarre reality show.
post #86 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post
 

Apple managed to reduce the iPod concept to the super-cheap iPod shuffle. I guess it's a lot easier to do that with a music player than a phone/computer/camera/video player/music player/etc. 

Your guess pretty much answers itself and contradicts your initial premise.   The original iPod was just music.  So there was no 'reduction,' just refinement.

 

The shuffle served a job that Apple wanted to fill for its consumers [highly mobile set and forget music player for highly active people].   If anything, the iPod Touch was the outlier [an iPhone without the phone].  The shuffle is mainstream, distilled back to the core.

 

With the iPhone, and iPad,  Apple is building 'mobile personal computers.'   and have a minimum experience (iPod+phone/camera(s)/application service/motioncontrolled/multi-touch/Always-networked/cloud enabled).

 

No different than all apple laptops have vidcams, all have wireless, etc.   You can't get an Apple Laptop with 'less' than the minimum.

 

That's the difference between a uniform experience, and the 'open' world.  How many times did I install SW on a PC, only to find out there wasn't a driver, or even the necessary HW to make it run.  As a developer you want an every _increasing_ set of capabilities to sell your wares… not forking your apps for some 44,000 combos of different screen sizes, resolutions, and graphic accelerators,  (when an app experience is not 'in a window' but 'IS the window,' how big your window is is important;-).   You can argue that 'oh, write to the API and it will take care of it,' but in reality, when it's 'uncompromising' user experience you're after,  a fuzzy icon there, or a little delay here, or shadowboxing an app there is not tolerated. 

 

Hence, if you write an app that, say, takes a picture of the user, and there is no 'FaceTime camera,'  Well that sort of sucks for the developer and the user of the app ("Turn the device around and guess where you are in the screen and click the button you can't see")

 

Or if you use 'shake to XXX' in your app, and there is no accelerometer/gyro/M7/GPS  in the 'cheap version,' well that now forks the experience and the code again.

 

So When Apple says 'yes' to something to be added to the mobile 'family' (after 1000's of 'NOs'), it's there… as a baseline, for several generations.   It's what the developers expect and the consumers desire (I never want to say, I can't move to the iPhone 14, because the iPhone 12b was the only phone that supported my NFC wallet application).

post #87 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


When people talk about an Apple Tax, they're looking at the cost of individual components and saying, "I can build that cheaper" (especially with computers).

What they're not looking at is the quality of design, the OS and the ecosystem. And they're also not looking at the productivity improvements when using Apple's versions of these devices. It also doesn't take into account how long these devices last (my Macs especially last forever, unlike the PCs I've been forced to use.)

That's not to say that I've never thought that Apple was too expensive. And I've certainly considered getting my mother a Kindle.

But overall, I think Apple is worth it and I'm always a bit surprised on my daily subway trips where I see tons of Apple devices used by people who, based on appearance or where they got on the subway, wouldn't appear to be earning high wages.

 

 

Also add R&D expense (other companies just copy Apple, so low R&D)

Add costs of customer service

Add costs of retail stores

Add costs of OS development and updates

 

You can't expect a premium product without a premium price.  You get what you pay for.  I've been using an Android tablet and phone for the last 2 years and it SUCKS.SUCKS. SUCKS.  When something goes wrong I need to spend hours on the phone or researching on the net.  ZERO customer service.  Some of my favorite Apps don't work or are constantly crashing.  I'm stuck with a 3 year old CRAP OS.  My Android tablet is now my toilet reader.  My iPad cost 200% more but its worth every single cent.

 

I've been counting the days so I can trash my piece of crap Android phone and replace it with the 5S.

post #88 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post

The point is Apple has gone for cheaper in terms of casing - but that's not reflected in the price.
 
How many times have posters on this board dismissed Android or Windows phones as being 'cheap plastic crap'? A U-turn as far as plastic goes.
 
Now the iPhone 5c brings the worst of both worlds. Plastic casing ...  but ... same premium prices. Exactly the same prices they've always charged for last year's technology. 
 
Nobody is expecting any Apple product to be dirt cheap, but instead of using plastic savings to get a bit more competitive on price, Apple is using it to bolster their already healthy profit margins.

Difference is other vendors just mold plastic into a shape and Apple improves upon the plastic by reinforcing it and attaching the metal antenna around the border. Drop the GS4 and the 5C. What plastic will pop off first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBH View Post

It just turned out the shuffle was "cheap." Cheap was not their goal. Hooray for Apple.

Cheap relative to the nano/touch however the shuffle was more limited in features.
post #89 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post

The point is Apple has gone for cheaper in terms of casing - but that's not reflected in the price.
 
How many times have posters on this board dismissed Android or Windows phones as being 'cheap plastic crap'? A U-turn as far as plastic goes.
 
Now the iPhone 5c brings the worst of both worlds. Plastic casing ...  but ... same premium prices. Exactly the same prices they've always charged for last year's technology. 
 
Nobody is expecting any Apple product to be dirt cheap, but instead of using plastic savings to get a bit more competitive on price, Apple is using it to bolster their already healthy profit margins.

There are two possible reasons why Apple made the 5C out of plastic:

1. They wanted to offer a colored iPhone because they saw a demand for one. In this case, the case wasn't done as a reduction in cost, it was done as a posative feature.

2. The aluminum iPhone 5 case is simply too complicated to mass produce economically in the quantities required for both 5 and 5s production. In this case the price does in fact reflect the case downgrade (let's not forget that the 5C is less expensive than the 5 ever was).

Personally, I think the truth is likely a combination of the two, and I say kudos to Apple for taking a necessary downgrade and turning it into a selling point.

As for the other phones being cheep pieces of plastic, we say that because it is true. Android makers do use plastic because it is cheep, and they don't go to any great length to improve the quality of the device. Meanwhile durring the keynote they explained that they went to great lengths to make the 5C into a solid product even with the plastic case, and even though I have never held one, I am inclined to believe them because that is how Apple does things.
post #90 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post
 

 

The point is Apple has gone for cheaper in terms of casing - but that's not reflected in the price.

 

Yes it is; the iPhone 5C is $80 cheaper than the iPhone 5 was, and is actually better in a number of ways (battery, camera, LTE bands).

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #91 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

 

Yes it is; the iPhone 5C is $80 cheaper than the iPhone 5 was, and is actually better in a number of ways (battery, camera, LTE bands).

 

"Was" at introduction?

 
Or would be now?
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #92 of 208

Thanks Tim!!! Your statements just made my day.  :D

post #93 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

And Samsung has the highest rated cable primetime drama with a multi-ethnic cast at 9 PM!

 

Arbitrary restrictions are just a kinder way of moving the goalposts.

 

No idea what you're talking about.  Drama at 9pm?  A kinder way?  What's any of that supposed to mean?

 
Anyway, you're full of it.  Here, from the horse's mouth:
 
Quote:
There’s a segment of the market that really wants a product that does a lot for them, and I want to compete like crazy for those customers,” he says. “I’m not going to lose sleep over that other market, because it’s just not who we are. Fortunately, both of these markets are so big, and there’s so many people that care and want a great experience from their phone or their tablet, that Apple can have a really good business."

 

Market segments, see?  That particular quote is fine.  Nothing much wrong with that.  But when you start attaching judgements like 

Quote:
“There’s always a large junk part of the market,” he says. “We’re not in the junk business.”

 on the other segment, that's when you sounds trashy, like you need to slag off your competitors.  Apple doesn't need to do that.

 

That's all.  No FUD.  Just disappointment.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #94 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
 

 

"Was" at introduction?

 
Or would be now?

 

"would be now?" is meaningless.  Apple doesn't sell the iPhone 5 now.  They never sold it at any other price than the price at introduction.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #95 of 208
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Here, from the horse's mouth:

 

How about a quote (and link) showing he’s saying anything at all about dumb phones, since that was your entire point which you got wrong from the start?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #96 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

 

"would be now?" is meaningless.  Apple doesn't sell the iPhone 5 now.  They never sold it at any other price than the price at introduction.

 

If you say so.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #97 of 208

I woke up a little late today, but this is just the sort of article I like to read to start off my day.

 

Haha, screw Android, screw cheap people, screw Fandroids, screw clueless analysts and screw people who desire junky devices!

 

It's good to see Apple coming right out and telling it like it is!

post #98 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

Samsung phones ARE cheap plastic crap.  They bend ad are flimsy to the touch.

 

Hmmmm... not the one that I have.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #99 of 208
I love to hear Tim Cook defends Apple strategy on the DNA way. That's what he gets payed for. In a positive manner.
post #100 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Have you held the 5C?  If not the shut up.  No one in their right mind would call it cheap.

Learn to read I didn't call it cheap. I called it cheaper, in referring to manucfacting. Why don't you pick up a 5C in one hand, a 5S. And tell me? Which do you think cost most to manufacture, and which is higher quality? 

post #101 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

How about a quote (and link) showing he’s saying anything at all about dumb phones, since that was your entire point which you got wrong from the start?

 

Ok

 
Quote:
Quote:
To Cook, the mobile industry doesn’t race to the bottom, it splits. One part does indeed go cheap, with commoditized products that compete on little more than price.

It's ambiguous about whether the article is talking about the entire mobile industry or just the smartphone industry.  I assumed the former, maybe I'm wrong it could be the latter, it's not definitive.  I don't think it makes a great deal of difference either way, so it's not the entire point at all.  My point is that trash talking makes you sound trashy; it doesn't really matter what you're talking about.

 

Link (should be obvious):
4th paragraph

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #102 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


They keep misinterpreting stats too. At one point, they say:

"According to market researcher IDC, Android runs on nearly 80 percent of the world’s smartphones and nearly two-thirds of its tablets."

Google has activated 1 billion units, Apple has sold over 650 million (they say it'll be over 700m soon), the recent worldwide sales share may be 80% but the amount of active Android devices is not 80% of the total. 40% of the Google ones run Android 2.x. Reporters keep making out like the usage stats conflict with the marketshare and they really don't. Apple is selling more premium devices than anyone else. They are only 2nd in overall volume to Samsung and Samsung makes up half of all Android devices.

The point that gets raised about Android volume eventually becoming a tipping point for developer support has some merit but it ignores the fact that relative volume isn't as big a factor as absolute volume here. If a developer targets iOS, they still have a potential audience of 700 million (give or take some broken devices). Even if Android tops 2 billion and outnumbers iOS 2:1 in say 3 years, the sheer volume of iOS users is still really compelling to make iOS a priority, especially considering the portion of iOS models that are flagship models.

 

you're on the right track. but ... how many of the older models of iOS and Android phones/tablets included in those grand totals are still actually in use? many have have been thrown out by now or are laying insider a drawer in someone's house. the survival/resale/resue rate of iOS products has to be significant higher than the Android stuff too.

post #103 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post
 

 

Have you actually read any reviews of the 5C?  Like at Anandtech?  Go ahead, it is on the front page.

 
This is not a "cheap plastic casing" (unlike some other unnamed companies use).  It's a high quality polycarbonate casing.  And the reason they used it is not to cut costs.  The reason is because some people apparently want a phone in some bright color.  And there's no real evidence that this housing is all that much cheaper than the one the 5S uses.
 
Now, if Apple had thrown some POS together, with some crap plastic?  I would agree with you.  But that's not what happened.

 

See above. I don't doubt for a moment that Apple have done a quality job with the plastic. But it still plastic, and much cheaper to make. I liked the feel of my iPhone 3GS - in some ways the rounded edges made it nicer in the hand. But it doesn't have the same quality as the glass and aluminium finish of subsequent iPhones.

 

I am not denying it's a very good phone. Only that having made it plastic and  cheaper to manufacturer, Apple is charging exactly what it has always done for last years model, except this time in a cheaper case. Savings => Apple's pocket.

 

Good news for shareholders.  Bad news for customers.

post #104 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

"We're not in the junk business."

Yeah, f*ck you Samsung.

Standing ovation for Mr Cook.

 

I am in full agreement! :)

post #105 of 208

Samsung's smartphones aren't junk either, but they're selling for $100 to $200 less and often have features that iPhones lack, such as larger screens.

 

Apple's making the same mistake it made in the nineties. It's assuming that its products are different enough to command a premium price. But as technologies mature, it gets harder and harder to create products that are better enough to justify those higher prices.

 

Apple's already began to hit that point in the curve. To justify keeping the price of an iPhone 5c high, they've been forced to blather on about color and plastic. That won't wash. Even a third grader can tell that the 'new' iPhone doesn't look any different from dozens of other phones that are also plastic and in bright colors.

 

There's an old medical adage that, "In the early stages of a disease, diagnosis is difficult but treatment is easy. In the later stages, diagnosis is easy but treatment is difficult." The smartphone market is transitioning from one where new features matter to one where price matters more. If Apple doesn't come to that diagnosis while treatment is easy, it'll find itself in a situation where treatment becomes difficult as millions of once-potential customers are now happy Samsung users. It will find itself on the wrong side of product lock-in.

post #106 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post
 

Learn to read I didn't call it cheap. I called it cheaper, in referring to manucfacting. Why don't you pick up a 5C in one hand, a 5S. And tell me? Which do you think cost most to manufacture, and which is higher quality? 

 

Actually, and no I don't have a link since it was in the comments, someone at Anandtech was explaining that the difference in cost between the aluminum and the ploy cases was nearly non-existent when looked at from the whole BOM price.  It was there, but very, very small.

post #107 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImAndrewSmith View Post
 

"New is easy. Right is hard." - Craig Federighi

 

Bravo, sir.

 

I feel like people are missing the point of the iPhone 5C. Everyone is looking at it like it's this whole new phone that Apple came out with and it's missing all of these features, etc. No... just no...

 

What Apple has done is great, really. Instead of doing what they've been doing for years, which is knocking the year-old iPhone model's prices down $100, they've turned it into a new, yet same (if that makes sense), phone. They've redone the looks/components on the outside, yet kept the components on the inside the same(?) (is there anything different on the inside compared to the 5? I'm not positive. I know it's nothing worse, that's for sure.)

 

So at the end of the day, they have a phone at the $199/$299/$399 price point, a phone at the $99/$199/$299 price point and a phone at the free price point. How is that anything worse than any other year? No one ever complained that the 4S was too much last year, or the 4 was the year before, etc... why is the 5C this catastrophe? They're keeping the same premise, but making it new at the same time. I applaud them for turning a piece of their business into something sort of new.

 

I'm confused as to why people are confused...

Even if Apple gave away phones AND subsidized contracts there would still be analysts complaining.  #FAnalysts

post #108 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


All valid points. Next few years will certainly be interesting. 1smile.gif

 

you're all forgetting that next year Apple will likely knock the 5c price down another $100 and still be able to maintain it's profit margins. at that point Apple may also finally launch a larger screen version of the 5c at the previous price.

 
and as long as Touch ID - clearly iOS' new "killer" feature - is not matched by other OEM's, Apple is not going to drop the price of its top model at all. so the 5s will be taken off the market next year like the 5 is being discounted now. then only the iP 6 would have Touch ID next year.
post #109 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

For me the greatest problem I see for the 5s is not its cost per say as it is what you get for that money. Here I'm specifically thinking flash memory which is quickly becoming marginal in capacity and too high in price on the iPhones. Really 32 GB should be the minimal configuration on a flag ship model. The system and the common apps demands it.
 

I agree with this for sure.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #110 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Meanwhile, Mixpanel is showing iOS 7 adoption rate now around 30%. That's 30% in about 16 hours. 1eek.gif

https://mixpanel.com/trends/#report/ios_7/from_date:-2,to_date:0

 

i think this is a pretty good indicator for the proportion of iOS users who are genuine "early adopters." more than i thought.

post #111 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post
 

Samsung's smartphones aren't junk either, but they're selling for $100 to $200 less and often have features that iPhones lack, such as larger screens.

 

Apple's making the same mistake it made in the nineties. It's assuming that its products are different enough to command a premium price. But as technologies mature, it gets harder and harder to create products that are better enough to justify those higher prices.

 

Apple's already began to hit that point in the curve. To justify keeping the price of an iPhone 5c high, they've been forced to blather on about color and plastic. That won't wash. Even a third grader can tell that the 'new' iPhone doesn't look any different from dozens of other phones that are also plastic and in bright colors.

 

There's an old medical adage that, "In the early stages of a disease, diagnosis is difficult but treatment is easy. In the later stages, diagnosis is easy but treatment is difficult." The smartphone market is transitioning from one where new features matter to one where price matters more. If Apple doesn't come to that diagnosis while treatment is easy, it'll find itself in a situation where treatment becomes difficult as millions of once-potential customers are now happy Samsung users. It will find itself on the wrong side of product lock-in.

 

To some degree I agree with you but the third week of January 2014 should give a clearer indication of Apple's condition.

 
I believe the Chinese market is the key.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #112 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

 

Yes it is; the iPhone 5C is $80 cheaper than the iPhone 5 was, and is actually better in a number of ways (battery, camera, LTE bands).

 

You're comparing it with last year's flagship model! 

 

The 5 on which it is based is now last year's technology. It has been superseded. The right comparison, is with last year's 'previous model'. 

 

The 5C is exactly the same price, despite the savings plastic affords.

post #113 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post

 

You're comparing it with last year's flagship model! 

 

The 5 on which it is based is now last year's technology. It has been superseded. The right comparison, is with last year's 'previous model'. 

 

The 5C is exactly the same price, despite the savings plastic affords.

 


I'm comparing it to the model it most closely resembles.

If you prefer to compare it to the iPhone 4S, then it is superior in just about every way you can name. The back plate is more durable now too! And for the same price as the 4S was selling for just a few weeks ago.
Edited by Crowley - 9/19/13 at 9:43am

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #114 of 208

Awesome interview. Every quote they said made me happy. Confirms that Apple's philosophy and DNA has not changed, and that they still have their priorities straight and their eye on the ball. 

post #115 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

 

i think this is a pretty good indicator for the proportion of iOS users who are genuine "early adopters." more than i thought.

 

It's actually at 37% now. The number is rising quickly.

post #116 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevt View Post

See above. I don't doubt for a moment that Apple have done a quality job with the plastic. But it still plastic, and much cheaper to make. I liked the feel of my iPhone 3GS - in some ways the rounded edges made it nicer in the hand. But it doesn't have the same quality as the glass and aluminium finish of subsequent iPhones.

I am not denying it's a very good phone. Only that having made it plastic and  cheaper to manufacturer, Apple is charging exactly what it has always done for last years model, except this time in a cheaper case. Savings => Apple's pocket.

Good news for shareholders.  Bad news for customers.

Another choice and a cheaper way to get into the iOS ecosystem is bad for customers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post

Samsung's smartphones aren't junk either, but they're selling for $100 to $200 less and often have features that iPhones lack, such as larger screens.

Apple's making the same mistake it made in the nineties. It's assuming that its products are different enough to command a premium price. But as technologies mature, it gets harder and harder to create products that are better enough to justify those higher prices.

Apple's already began to hit that point in the curve. To justify keeping the price of an iPhone 5c high, they've been forced to blather on about color and plastic. That won't wash. Even a third grader can tell that the 'new' iPhone doesn't look any different from dozens of other phones that are also plastic and in bright colors.

There's an old medical adage that, "In the early stages of a disease, diagnosis is difficult but treatment is easy. In the later stages, diagnosis is easy but treatment is difficult." The smartphone market is transitioning from one where new features matter to one where price matters more. If Apple doesn't come to that diagnosis while treatment is easy, it'll find itself in a situation where treatment becomes difficult as millions of once-potential customers are now happy Samsung users. It will find itself on the wrong side of product lock-in.

That sure sucks for Apple for being the most profitable PC maker. Oh wait.

How's that transition going for price? Apple still sells 2 or 3 of the top five phone models in the world.
post #117 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by VicAustin View Post

This sort of arrogant and dismissive language toward a group that includes all the people on the edge of becoming our new customers is not at all helpful to us stockholders.

A device that is all it can be at a lower price point is a perfectly valid product. I agree completely that Apple has better opportunity in the high end market it dominates and owns. But trash talking is a lightening rod for the type of social pile on that cost ordinary people billions of dollars the last few days.

Applause rings out from a bunch of fans who probably would be hard pressed to guess three issues to address to stack up a bunch of sapphire lenses. Apple's strength is in is design, engineering and execution. It's not some sort of bizarre reality show.

 

I'm a stockholder and I disagree.    A company has to be pick its markets.    While BMW has cars priced from $31,000 and up, they don't make junk cars.    Apple is not in the business of making a Chevrolet Spark, Ford Fiesta or Kia Rio.    In the electronics world, look at Sony and Panasonic.  In the past, they made tons of low (and high) priced TVs and DVD/Blu-ray players.    They lost money on every one.   Neither Sony or Panasonic has made money on televisions in almost a decade.   They've both severely cut back on the 2013 product lines.  Last year, Sony said they would going to "de-emphasize" TV and might even leave the TV business, although they recently released new high-end 4K UHD models.   

 

Apple's stock price has dropped in the past on announcements of increased sales, but slightly lower margins.   A substantial margin drop in the interest of market share would kill Apple's stock price, IMO.    You can already supposedly buy an Android phone for $50.   So how low would Apple have to go to compete effectively?

 

That's not to say that I wouldn't like to see Apple phones and Pads sell for lower prices.    But I don't think Cook did anything wrong by declaring which part of the market they want to focus upon.   

 

I applaud Tim Cook's statement that "we don't make junk" because it's a very clear statement about Apple's strategy.   In fact, I think they should go further.   If they want the strategy for the company to ignore the low-end of the market, they should only sell in high-end stores.   That was the purpose of the Apple stores.   I think they should stop selling in places like WalMart.      In spite of the fact that WalMart is the nation's largest retailer, I think selling in WalMart (and places like it) devalues the Apple brand.    

post #118 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
 

 

Hmmmm... not the one that I have.

 

I've spent time with the Gaxlaxy S4 and Note2 and both feel so cheap in my hands.  They feel like $200 phones.  IMO the $200 Nokia has better build quality then both of those Samsung flagships.

post #119 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post
 

Samsung's smartphones aren't junk either, but they're selling for $100 to $200 less and often have features that iPhones lack, such as larger screens.

 

Apple's making the same mistake it made in the nineties. It's assuming that its products are different enough to command a premium price. But as technologies mature, it gets harder and harder to create products that are better enough to justify those higher prices.

 

Apple's already began to hit that point in the curve. To justify keeping the price of an iPhone 5c high, they've been forced to blather on about color and plastic. That won't wash. Even a third grader can tell that the 'new' iPhone doesn't look any different from dozens of other phones that are also plastic and in bright colors.

 

There's an old medical adage that, "In the early stages of a disease, diagnosis is difficult but treatment is easy. In the later stages, diagnosis is easy but treatment is difficult." The smartphone market is transitioning from one where new features matter to one where price matters more. If Apple doesn't come to that diagnosis while treatment is easy, it'll find itself in a situation where treatment becomes difficult as millions of once-potential customers are now happy Samsung users. It will find itself on the wrong side of product lock-in.

 

Whar a ridiculous post. You seem to take your opinions extremely seriously with all that mumbo jumbo. First of all, what "mistake" in the 90s? Apple made alot of mistakes at that time, but I don't see a single analogy to today. Would they have been in a better position today than if they sold cheap shit back then? I don't get the point you're trying to make, other than the knee-jerk, mindless cliche of Apple being on the path to "being doomed" as they apparently have been forever, if we look at how often that statement is being repeated. Apple has the best selling Phones, tablets, music players, ultrabooks, notebooks, etc on the planet, the most active digital appstores in the world, and make the majority of the mobile industry's profits, all from products that get the highest customer satisfaction rates in the industry, so I don't know in what world they can be compared to what they were inthe 90s. 

 
"Samsung's smartphones aren't junk either, but they're selling for $100 to $200 less and often have features that iPhones lack, such as larger screens."
 
Is screensize really a "feature" that the iPhone "lacks". Screensize is just an aspect of a phone, not a "feature" like wifi, bluetooth, etc. The way you're framing it is intellectually lazy and childish, because you think it helps with some sort of point you're trying to make. I'm pretty damn sure Apple has the know-how to make a larger screened phone, they've consciously decided not to at this point (for a myriad of reasons). It's a design and product decision, not a lack of a "feature". Do you also think Samsung phones are lacking a "feature" of build quality? Of course you don't, even though that can much more be defined as a "feature" than screensize. Samsung's phones use some of the cheapest, ugliest plastic on the planet (as expressed even by reviews from Android/Samsung fansites) that almost every other OEM would be embarrassed to use, but apparently that doesn't factor into your "BUT SAMSUNG MAKES AWESOME CHEAP PHONES" argument. 

 

Maybe you, and some third graders as you state, can't tell the difference in build quality from an iPhone 5C and some other cheap plastic phones. But the rest of us, and certainly those of us who read reviews, can certainly come to the rational conclusion that there IS a difference, and a significant one at that if initial impressions are anything to go by. 

 

You can always tell a weak, trolling post by the way it ends with some shitty analogies (treatments/diagnosis) and yours certainly fits the bill. 

post #120 of 208

Picking up on what zoetmb was saying a bit, I think that this Burberry partnership  was a definite step in the right direction.  Apple connecting their brand to one such as Burberry is really helpful as far overall image goes.

 

The less that Apple products in general, and iPhones specifically are seen as commodity products, the better.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple CEO Tim Cook on cheap smartphones: 'We're not in the junk business'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple CEO Tim Cook on cheap smartphones: 'We're not in the junk business'