or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Twice the speed, half the price*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Twice the speed, half the price*

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 



The disclaimer aims to buff up the speed claims rather than the price. I don't think anybody is arguing that 3G isn't twice the speed. But clearly the 3G iPhone isn't half the price if you take into account increased data plans. The disclaimer should refer to the cost, not the price. The irony :-)
post #2 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

clearly the 3G iPhone isn't half the price if you take into account increased data plans.

That's not to do with Apple though. If the image is from a phone network page then I agree it shouldn't say that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

The disclaimer should refer to the cost, not the price. The irony :-)

I think that last bit refers to the price (i.e half the price is based on the 3G 8GB iphone vs the first generation 8GB iphone) so ideally they'd have two stars or a numbered footer but it would mess with the design.
post #3 of 30
if i buy a $60k car that requires regular unleaded or a $30k car that requires premium, the price of the car is still half. the additional expenses in running the car don't affect the initial price.
post #4 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by admactanium View Post

if i buy a $60k car that requires regular unleaded or a $30k car that requires premium, the price of the car is still half. the additional expenses in running the car don't affect the initial price.

You were not "forced" to sign a contract with the car dealer to put a certain amount of petrol into your car every month now or did you?
post #5 of 30
As someone else mentioned, it could be possible to break the contract and make a saving. But given the other news about Apple going in for new secure technology to prevent hackers from unlocking iPhones, we wont know if the device is usable after being hacked. In anycase, the next six months will be interesting.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #6 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeasar View Post

You were not "forced" to sign a contract with the car dealer to put a certain amount of petrol into your car every month now or did you?

Actually "yes" some cars require premium fuel.

Also in the Uk the contract rates have remained the same, no increase to the data plans.
So in the UK the phone and the contract have fallen in price quite significantly.
In fact they have announced a cheaper contract with less minutes and SMS, BUT with unlimited data just the same as all the other tariffs.
This has no enabled people to save £170 on the cost of the 16GB iPhone and cheaper contract, £60 less a year.
So you can now own and operate an iPhone in the UK for £230 ($460) less than you could before. Quite significant I think.
Plus we are only tied to 18 month contracts.
post #7 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post

As someone else mentioned, it could be possible to break the contract and make a saving. But given the other news about Apple going in for new secure technology to prevent hackers from unlocking iPhones, we wont know if the device is usable after being hacked. In anycase, the next six months will be interesting.

What are the most creative ways of breaking the contract with at&t, yet keeping the iPhone 3G?

- Report the "death" of the phone owner

- Claiming a stolen identity or credit card

- Faking a dramatic illness

....

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #8 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

What are the most creative ways of breaking the contract with at&t, yet keeping the iPhone 3G?

- Report the "death" of the phone owner

- Claiming a stolen identity or credit card

- Faking a dramatic illness

....

Go to prison for fraud!
post #9 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

Go to prison for fraud!

Disclaimer: For the humor-impaired, these are not real suggestions.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #10 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Disclaimer: For the humor-impaired, these are not real suggestions.

I was so obviously funny - NOT
post #11 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

I was so obviously funny - NOT

We'll you're a square.

Anyways...

The only way to get out of a contact legally are:
– You're called up for military duty
– Service is not provided or very poor at your home location.
– You're moving to an area of no or limited coverage.
post #12 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

We'll you're a square.

Anyways...

The only way to get out of a contact legally are:
You're called up for military duty
Service is not provided or very poor at your home location.
You're moving to an area of no or limited coverage.

- AT&T changes the terms of the contract by raising fees (although I think they have some legalese allowances in there now).
post #13 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

Actually "yes" some cars require premium fuel.

I said a certain amount of fuel, not certain type of fuel. The phone contract has a minimum charge per month. Where as in a car, you can drive as much or as little as you see fit.

Anyways, Im still holding out on the details of the O2 pay as you go price plan. But they are probably gona sell it locked, and charges £200 as unlocking fee or something.
post #14 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeasar View Post

You were not "forced" to sign a contract with the car dealer to put a certain amount of petrol into your car every month now or did you?

no, not for fuel, but i am "forced" to have insurance for my vehicles. some vehicles have higher insurance rates than others. that doesn't mean the vehicle has a higher price because of the higher insurance rate, it just means that i have a higher total cost of ownership. the price is the same but i have to pay a monthly fee for owning that car that might be higher than the monthly fee for an alternative.

why don't we just use the proper term "total cost of ownership" rather than trying to convince people that the term "price" means something that it doesn't?
post #15 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by admactanium View Post

no, not for fuel, but i am "forced" to have insurance for my vehicles. some vehicles have higher insurance rates than others. that doesn't mean the vehicle has a higher price because of the higher insurance rate, it just means that i have a higher total cost of ownership. the price is the same but i have to pay a monthly fee for owning that car that might be higher than the monthly fee for an alternative.

why don't we just use the proper term "total cost of ownership" rather than trying to convince people that the term "price" means something that it doesn't?

Don't be silly. You are only ever forced to get minimum liability insurance. Only if you CHOOSE to get extra insurance (i.e. collision) do you have to pay more. And that makes sense. If I crash my Ford Pinto and it's totaled, that doesn't represent a very significant cost for the insurance company. Whereas if I were to crash my Bentley Continental GT, the insurance company would be shelling out a hell of a lot of money. And when I say my, I speak hypothetically as I own neither.

In addition, your car analogy fails again. A car's total cost of ownership includes many external factors such as how often you use it, how often and what breaks, etc.
post #16 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

Don't be silly. You are only ever forced to get minimum liability insurance. Only if you CHOOSE to get extra insurance (i.e. collision) do you have to pay more. And that makes sense. If I crash my Ford Pinto and it's totaled, that doesn't represent a very significant cost for the insurance company. Whereas if I were to crash my Bentley Continental GT, the insurance company would be shelling out a hell of a lot of money. And when I say my, I speak hypothetically as I own neither.

In addition, your car analogy fails again. A car's total cost of ownership includes many external factors such as how often you use it, how often and what breaks, etc.

if you're not buying a car outright you often have to buy more than minimum liability. i wasn't saying that a payment and insurance is the tco, but the tco for the iphone includes service. why call it "price" when it's really "tco". the price of the iphone is what it is. it's defined as the retail price. does it *cost* more than before? yes. but the price isn't higher.

i reckon you have it exactly backwards in your first post. it's not half the cost but it is half the price.
post #17 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

I was so obviously funny - NOT

No you weren't.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #18 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by admactanium View Post

if you're not buying a car outright you often have to buy more than minimum liability. i wasn't saying that a payment and insurance is the tco, but the tco for the iphone includes service. why call it "price" when it's really "tco". the price of the iphone is what it is. it's defined as the retail price. does it *cost* more than before? yes. but the price isn't higher.

i reckon you have it exactly backwards in your first post. it's not half the cost but it is half the price.

Cost versus price is just semantics. The fact is, if you own and iPhone in the U.S., providing you're using it according to the terms and conditions, you WILL be paying $10 per month more in data costs than with previous iPhone contracts. If I was talking about total cost of ownership, I would have factored in the entire cost of the data package and plan. But I'm talking about the cost per month increase, or rather, the amount that I'm guaranteed I'll have to pay more.
post #19 of 30
yes, and that applies to those of us in the united states. jobs said in the keynote that the price of the 8Gb iphone would be a max of $200 everywhere. i assume that also means countries that don't have carrier exclusivity. in which case, our issues with this terminology aren't valid.
post #20 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post




The disclaimer aims to buff up the speed claims rather than the price. I don't think anybody is arguing that 3G isn't twice the speed. But clearly the 3G iPhone isn't half the price if you take into account increased data plans. The disclaimer should refer to the cost, not the price. The irony :-)

Wrong, it is clearly referring to the price of the handset.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.9
Black/Space Grey iPad Air with Wi-Fi & LTE | 128GB | On 4GEE
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.9
Black/Space Grey iPad Air with Wi-Fi & LTE | 128GB | On 4GEE
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #21 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post

Wrong, it is clearly referring to the price of the handset.

Yes it is.

But it is half off in comparison with the old iPhone which did not require you to pay the extra $10 per month for service.

All they would have had to do was to asterick a note that says "with 2 year contract"... otherwise I consider this to be deceptive advertising.
post #22 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdenton42 View Post

Yes it is.

But it is half off in comparison with the old iPhone which did not require you to pay the extra $10 per month for service.

All they would have had to do was to asterick a note that says "with 2 year contract"... otherwise I consider this to be deceptive advertising.

And I would consider that position to be totally stupid. It's not deceptive at all. It's half the price. It costs you half the price to buy it. It's a factual claim in every respect. They made no claims about AT&T's service rates. They were referencing price of the set only.


Quote:
You were not "forced" to sign a contract with the car dealer to put a certain amount of petrol into your car every month now or did you?

Basically, yes. You have to put gas in the car. There is no real competition among gas companies...save perhaps a few cents at each station. Therefore you're locked in. If the price of fuel goes up, it doesn't mean the manufacturer was being deceptive when it said "half the cost of last year's model."
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #23 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Basically, yes. You have to put gas in the car. There is no real competition among gas companies...save perhaps a few cents at each station. Therefore you're locked in. If the price of fuel goes up, it doesn't mean the manufacturer was being deceptive when it said "half the cost of last year's model."

So, are you still paying $100 gas bills per month even if you are NOT DRIVING your car? In fact, you dont even need to pay insurance if you are not driving your car AT ALL. Well, in the phone contract, you still have to pay the monthly fee even if your phone's battery is DEAD during the whole period. See the difference?

Steve said in the keynote that the iphone's cost is a MAX of $199 for a 8gb model. Well, guess what, Italian Vodafone has announced that the pay as you go iphone would cost 499 (USD$772) http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=87822
I guess SJ should really keep a closer eye to his contracted partners or what he says in his keynote.
post #24 of 30
Thread Starter 
To clarify, I never claimed it was deceptive advertising and I'm not complaining. I'm just laughing about the irony of Apple Legal.
post #25 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And I would consider that position to be totally stupid. It's not deceptive at all. It's half the price. It costs you half the price to buy it. It's a factual claim in every respect. They made no claims about AT&T's service rates. They were referencing price of the set only.

And you are totally wrong. It's not "half the price"... it's "half the price with a 2 year service committment". Companies have been sued over this very thing before:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.nyc.gov/html/dca/html/pr2006/pr_041806.shtml

In the same ad, Sprint deceived consumers by advertising a "FREE" cell phone offer forcing consumers to look at the fine print footnote to find that in fact, the offer required "...a two-year Sprint PCS Advantage Agreement."

At least Sprint had a footnote... in this case there is no footnote about the 2 year service requirement at all.
post #26 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdenton42 View Post

And you are totally wrong. It's not "half the price"... it's "half the price with a 2 year service committment". Companies have been sued over this very thing before:

At least Sprint had a footnote... in this case there is no footnote about the 2 year service requirement at all.

It now has:

Requires new 2-year AT&T rate plan, sold separately.
post #27 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

It now has:

Requires new 2-year AT&T rate plan, sold separately.

Heh, cool. The "argument" lasted longer than the violation.
post #28 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

What are the most creative ways of breaking the contract with at&t, yet keeping the iPhone 3G?

- Report the "death" of the phone owner

- Claiming a stolen identity or credit card

- Faking a dramatic illness

....

The first way has a lot of extra benefits. ...Get out of iPhone contracts, marriage(s), debt(s)... LOL.
post #29 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by admactanium View Post

yes, and that applies to those of us in the united states. jobs said in the keynote that the price of the 8Gb iphone would be a max of $200 everywhere. i assume that also means countries that don't have carrier exclusivity. in which case, our issues with this terminology aren't valid.

Doesn't this mean the "equivalent of USD$200" for whatever currency?
post #30 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Doesn't this mean the "equivalent of USD$200" for whatever currency?

Yes, but it also means that you can only use the iPhone 3G with certain carriers that have agreements with Apple.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Twice the speed, half the price*