You are overstating the average handset price. The 10Q clearly lists 'iPhone revenue' as the following:
Includes revenue from sales of iPhone, iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories.
Includes amortization of related revenue deferred for non-software services and embedded software upgrade rights.
It is $624 on average per handset when factoring in ALL of these other items, not just the handset.
Get serious, and stop the hairsplitting. It just shows that you may not know much about Apple's revenue stream. "iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories" likely account for no more than a very small portion of sales.
If you'd like to think differently, go ahead and do so by all means.
Apparently you can't even get past the second word in the title of the article without getting confused. The article clearly states that these numbers are for the 'smartphone' market...not ALL phones.
Apparently you can't get past the silly hype and misdirection from Samsung.
In previous reports, they have included everything but the kitchen sink in their list of 'smart phones'. Since there is no real definition, they include everything - including some feature phones and certainly many 'not so smart' phones.
Samsung's Android ecosystem is way larger than Apple's iPhone ecosystem. The iPhone 5 is 3 months late and the screen is still 4 inch. The competition's 4.5 inch phones, 7 inch tablets and smart LED TV are selling like crazy now.
Get serious, and stop the hairsplitting. It just shows that you may not know much about Apple's revenue stream. "iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories" likely account for no more than a very small portion of sales.
If you'd like to think differently, go ahead and do so by all means.
By several accounts, Apple's revenue for Apple-branded iPhone accessories comes in at over a $1billion per quarter alone. They have one of the highest 'attach rates' in the industry. There are also undisclosed amounts received from licensing iPhone connectors and other patent related items, with non-Apple components, automobiles, etc. Who other than you considers BILLIONS to be a 'very small portion of sales'???
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Apparently you can't get past the silly hype and misdirection from Samsung.
In previous reports, they have included everything but the kitchen sink in their list of 'smart phones'. Since there is no real definition, they include everything - including some feature phones and certainly many 'not so smart' phones.
This report wasn't issued by Samsung, it was issued by Juniper Research. That was clearly stated in the second sentence of the article. Would you care to make one more comment demonstrating your confusion for a third time??? Maybe you can show your confusion about the second paragraph since you have already done so with the second word in the title and the second sentence of the article.
52 million sitting in warehouse somewhere wow thats cool. This shipped argument is beyond old. Give us some hard numbers Samsung.
I have no doubt that samsung will sell a ton of sIII's but until we get actual sold numbers articles like this are pointless.
I also love articles they way they put the shipped number " samsung was "estimated to have shipped". In otherwords our foggy numbers based on someone elses foggy numbers based on some wild number we pulled out of our backside means that samsung is estimated to have shipped x amount of phones or will ship x amount of phones (there also clairvoyant they can see the future too). They should just say we think samsung is going to ship a lot of phones because we don't really know........ But I guess that is not as hit whore worthy as the title of this article.
This report wasn't issued by Samsung, it was issued by Juniper Research. That was clearly stated in the second sentence of the article. Would you care to make one more comment demonstrating your confusion for a third time??? Maybe you can show your confusion about the second paragraph since you have already done so with the second word in the title and the second sentence of the article.
So you're denying that different people can define 'smart phones' differently?
Are you also denying that, no matter what definition is used, many of these phones are not in the same league as the iPhone?
There are plenty of examples where analysts considered all sorts of phones to be smart phones - even though no one else would do so. Heck, some of them consider anything with Android to be a smart phone - which is clearly not true.
No it isn't. Samsung can't keep selling mythological phones forever. The consistent complaint is "why can't I see all these samsung phones" but that doesn't prove that the numbers are made up. Give me a good reason why and also a how, how/why could Samsung keep inventing phone sales in contempt of securities laws as well as profit motive for so long? You can't keep making and shipping phones, only to have them shipped back to you, forever. Right? Doing that costs money. While a desperate company may do that for a quarter or two, eventually the gig is up and the reality hits. Samsung is clearly selling these phones. Deal with it.
1. Apple buyers are being charged too much for their devices.
2. Apple suppliers charge too little for their parts.
3. Apple partners subsidize their customers too much.
In a perfect storm, all three will rebel to get better deals for themselves. These will in turn lower Apple's profit margin. Currently, ALL these three and android/other phone devices and their buyers are actually subsidizing Apple and its profit margin. How so? When you buy in volumes, like Apple does, you got a cheaper price for the same exact parts than other people who need to get the same parts. THAT is cross-subsidizing being done by parts' manufacturers, i.e. charging more for other buyers to cover profit/cost losses caused by the pricing they give to a big buyer.
In other words, the so-called "Apple tax", "subsidy cost", "volume pricing" or other terminologies they name it are actually all the subsidies contributing to Apple huge profit margin. Yupe..., I say it here. Apple is the vacuum that sucks other people's profit and make it its own, a cannibal if you will. BTW, this equation will not last forever because it will make a lot of people very unhappy. Since this is capitalism at its best, other people will eventually want to take a bite out of that Apple's spectacular profit margin. The quiet storm that' brewing underneath this dissatisfaction ain't gonna be this quiet forever. Murphy's law will be at work sooner or later.
Unlike Apple, Samsung can only charge premium for their newest phones, and after about 3 months [1 quarter], these phones will have their price reduced, to stay competitive with the newest and brightest Android devices that come along. Other Samsung division book losses for the quarter, notably Its LCD TV division. That too will sap on Samsung's profit margin.
Apple, on the other hand, sold their new model and keep the price tag for much longer, perhaps for 3Q or more. This tendency will continue to prop up the high profit margin it enjoys. The only positive thing about the short life of devices in Android world is the fact that android devices will have to be "reinvented" and "recharged" with new features or new hardware almost every month by many different manufactures to stay competitive, and in turn this will speed up Android's evolution. Apple, on the other hand, is so fat with profit and brimming with over-confidence, and it becomes so slow to move and lethargic. Not to worry, every company at the top of their game at their peak will be like this. Somebody else will take over that top spot, soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
Funny... Samsung "shipped" twice as many phones as Apple "sold", yet made only half the money Apple did in the same quarter. Samsung makes a lot more than just smartphones, so all of their product lines combined generated just over $5B in the most recent quarter compared to Apple's almost $9B. What that tells me is that Samsung is selling only a fraction of the units they are actually "shipping".
The iPhone 3GS was release in 2009, it has a 600Mhz processor, it cannot handle most of the new features of iOS. It is not premium, it is Apples basic model iPhone. This is a fact, their premium model would be the iPhone 4S
I can tell you exactly what average price each of the 26.03M iPhones was sold at. It's a pretty impressive number: $624 per handset (p. 26 of 10Q filed with SEC from Tuesday).
You have mastered primary school maths, great job.
I can assure you that if 3GSs were being given away and in large numbers (as you imply), the 4 and 4S must be selling for some astounding average price! But I am quite content with $624 per handset.
Where did I imply this? I said the iPhone 3GS is a basic model iPhone, it isn't a premium model, it is in the same category as the basic model Android phones sold. And like the Android manufacturers Apple is being paid for them, they don't give them away. I'm not sure why you are still getting confused with the subsidised phone model. But this has nothing to with the claim. They said Apple sold 27m premium model phones, they didn't, the iPhone 3GS isn't a premium model phone
The iPhone 3GS was release in 2009, it has a 600Mhz processor, it cannot handle most of the new features of iOS. It is not premium, it is Apples basic model iPhone. This is a fact, their premium model would be the iPhone 4S
Whoop de frick. You want to compare a single model to a single model, go right ahead. That's not what this right here is about.
When the next version of Android comes out, I better see you complaining that they're recording sales of all phones instead of recording sales of NO phones, because good luck actually getting an upgrade for the ones that are out now, making them "not premium".
If you don't understand the basics of revenue recognition -- and the seriousness that it entails by way of penalties for misrepresentation -- and the difference between that and the weasel-y notion of some consultant-generated "shipments" number, I am not even going to try to start. There is no law that says that you can't wallow in ignorance.
I will give you a hint though, if you're truly interested in learning: you want to combine the audited sales data with the "channel inventory" number that Apple always reports (or brings up in its conf call with analysts) to get at how many are actually in consumers' hands.
Excuse me, why the anger?
From Apples SEC report
"Net sales consist primarily of revenue from the sale of hardware, software, digital content and applications, peripherals, and service
and support contracts. The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred,
the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been
shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the
product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the
Company defers recognition of revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of
loss on these sales during transit. The Company recognizes revenue from the sale of hardware products, software bundled with
hardware that is essential to the functionality of the hardware, and third-party digital content sold on the iTunes Store in accordance
with general revenue recognition accounting guidance. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with industry specific
software accounting guidance for the following types of sales transactions: (i) standalone sales of software products, (ii) sales of
software upgrades and (iii) sales of software bundled with hardware not essential to the functionality of the hardware."
If you are not happy with them, please contact Apple, for they have said this, not me.
If I went and purchased a Phone from Vodafone today, Apple would have recognised that sale weeks ago when they shipped it to Brightpoint, and Brightpoint would have recognised it when they shipped it to Vodafone. Apple has no real visibility into these smaller resellers to see when it has been actually sold to a consumer, nor do they declare in the above declaration that they delay the receipt of the sale until the customer has activated the device, as they said, they recognise it when they ship it.
Whoop de frick. You want to compare a single model to a single model, go right ahead. That's not what this right here is about.
When the next version of Android comes out, I better see you complaining that they're recording sales of all phones instead of recording sales of NO phones, because good luck actually getting an upgrade for the ones that are out now, making them "not premium".
Please calm down, you seem to be getting confused/excited for no reason.
jragosta claimed Apple sold 27 million phones. This is what I am disputing. Apple, in fact no cellphone manufacturer splits sales per model. Now Apple sells three models of iPhone, if you compare these three models there is no way you could claim that the 3GS is premium model, it's age, it's features, speed etc etc stop it from being classed a premium model. And because Apple doesn't split sales between models that there is no way to claim that Apple has sold 27m premium models, when it is documented fact that they haven't.
The same goes for Samsung, Motorola, LG, Nokia etc etc etc.
As for your second point, not sure where you are going here, as I have already stated a number of times, the same thing can be said for all cellphone manufacturers, they all make a variety of different level smartphones, some premium, some budget.
jragosta claimed Apple sold 27 million phones. This is what I am disputing. Apple, in fact no cellphone manufacturer splits sales per model. Now Apple sells three models of iPhone, if you compare these three models there is no way you could claim that the 3GS is premium model, it's age, it's features, speed etc etc stop it from being classed a premium model.
And what you're saying is that Samsung put out 52 million "premium" models, I suppose.
Which is, as Solipsism so rightly puts it, [insert how he puts it here].
I actually kinda wonder why people are so obsessed with other people's money? Here in AI, for example, I see the same stupid obsession about counting other people's money. Why? It's not your money. Well, indirectly, it is if you own tons of Apple stocks. I doubt if you have tons of Apple stocks, say about 10,000 worth of it or more, you'll be wasting your time [equal money] playing in this sandbox. If you don't own that many Apple stocks then why bother? You are not going to be rich by mentioning how much money Apple has in the bank, and neither will you be getting any poorer if Samsung garners tons of profit for their devices. See, those people with tons of money, ones with tons of Apple stocks or tons of Samsung's stocks, are not bickering here over which company has more profit or which one has sold how many phones. They are out there enjoying summer and spend their tons of money.
I am shaking my head over this trippy bickering madness by Apple "f4nbo1s" and I-sh33ps over numbers, money and profit. More often than not, people who have very little of these, usually talk so much about this. I mean why you waste so much time [equal money] and effort about somebody else's money? Are you actually getting paid some handsome amount of money for every byte you are posting here by Apple? Wouldn't it be better if you spend less of your time [equal money] here and start saving the time [equal money], so that you can buy even more i-devices you so love instead?
The same goes for Samsung, Motorola, LG, Nokia etc etc etc.
As for your second point, not sure where you are going here, as I have already stated a number of times, the same thing can be said for all cellphone manufacturers, they all make a variety of different level smartphones, some premium, some budget.
No I am not saying that, in fact if you had read the message I post you would have seen that yourself, I will quote it again for you.
So… there's no way we can distinguish models, there's no way we can determine what is considered "premium", why not just take the numbers we're given and roll with it instead of trying to nitpick out Apple's (and only Apple's I might add) phones while leaving even worse models with worse software and worse compatibility alone on the other side?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
You are overstating the average handset price. The 10Q clearly lists 'iPhone revenue' as the following:
Includes revenue from sales of iPhone, iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories.
Includes amortization of related revenue deferred for non-software services and embedded software upgrade rights.
It is $624 on average per handset when factoring in ALL of these other items, not just the handset.
Get serious, and stop the hairsplitting. It just shows that you may not know much about Apple's revenue stream. "iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories" likely account for no more than a very small portion of sales.
If you'd like to think differently, go ahead and do so by all means.
Apparently you can't get past the silly hype and misdirection from Samsung.
In previous reports, they have included everything but the kitchen sink in their list of 'smart phones'. Since there is no real definition, they include everything - including some feature phones and certainly many 'not so smart' phones.
Samsung's Android ecosystem is way larger than Apple's iPhone ecosystem. The iPhone 5 is 3 months late and the screen is still 4 inch. The competition's 4.5 inch phones, 7 inch tablets and smart LED TV are selling like crazy now.
Originally Posted by peter236
Samsung's Android ecosystem is way larger than Apple's iPhone ecosystem.
Oh, they make computers and set top boxes that run their own OS? They have cloud services and acres of software specifically for their machines?
The iPhone 5 is 3 months late…
The 5th iPhone came out nine months ago, and the 6th one is slated to come out about 12 months later, just like every model before the 4S.
…the screen is still 4 inch.
The iPhone 4S has a 3.5" screen.
The competition's 4.5 inch phones, 7 inch tablets and smart LED TV are selling like crazy now.
In no universe, using no metric, and with no sense of reason or logic is that statement correct in any fashion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Get serious, and stop the hairsplitting. It just shows that you may not know much about Apple's revenue stream. "iPhone services, and Apple-branded and third-party iPhone accessories" likely account for no more than a very small portion of sales.
If you'd like to think differently, go ahead and do so by all means.
By several accounts, Apple's revenue for Apple-branded iPhone accessories comes in at over a $1billion per quarter alone. They have one of the highest 'attach rates' in the industry. There are also undisclosed amounts received from licensing iPhone connectors and other patent related items, with non-Apple components, automobiles, etc. Who other than you considers BILLIONS to be a 'very small portion of sales'???
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Apparently you can't get past the silly hype and misdirection from Samsung.
In previous reports, they have included everything but the kitchen sink in their list of 'smart phones'. Since there is no real definition, they include everything - including some feature phones and certainly many 'not so smart' phones.
This report wasn't issued by Samsung, it was issued by Juniper Research. That was clearly stated in the second sentence of the article. Would you care to make one more comment demonstrating your confusion for a third time??? Maybe you can show your confusion about the second paragraph since you have already done so with the second word in the title and the second sentence of the article.
52 million sitting in warehouse somewhere wow thats cool. This shipped argument is beyond old. Give us some hard numbers Samsung.
I have no doubt that samsung will sell a ton of sIII's but until we get actual sold numbers articles like this are pointless.
I also love articles they way they put the shipped number " samsung was "estimated to have shipped". In otherwords our foggy numbers based on someone elses foggy numbers based on some wild number we pulled out of our backside means that samsung is estimated to have shipped x amount of phones or will ship x amount of phones (there also clairvoyant they can see the future too). They should just say we think samsung is going to ship a lot of phones because we don't really know........ But I guess that is not as hit whore worthy as the title of this article.
Wow what a total waste of verbiage.
So you're denying that different people can define 'smart phones' differently?
Are you also denying that, no matter what definition is used, many of these phones are not in the same league as the iPhone?
There are plenty of examples where analysts considered all sorts of phones to be smart phones - even though no one else would do so. Heck, some of them consider anything with Android to be a smart phone - which is clearly not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
I don't see those as good reasons, especially since everybody and their brother calls it the iPhone 5.
And do any of those people actually have any input on what the 6th iPhone is actually called when it comes out? No? I'm shocked!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
It may be, but it is fact-based.
No it isn't. Samsung can't keep selling mythological phones forever. The consistent complaint is "why can't I see all these samsung phones" but that doesn't prove that the numbers are made up. Give me a good reason why and also a how, how/why could Samsung keep inventing phone sales in contempt of securities laws as well as profit motive for so long? You can't keep making and shipping phones, only to have them shipped back to you, forever. Right? Doing that costs money. While a desperate company may do that for a quarter or two, eventually the gig is up and the reality hits. Samsung is clearly selling these phones. Deal with it.
No, it actually means:
1. Apple buyers are being charged too much for their devices.
2. Apple suppliers charge too little for their parts.
3. Apple partners subsidize their customers too much.
In a perfect storm, all three will rebel to get better deals for themselves. These will in turn lower Apple's profit margin. Currently, ALL these three and android/other phone devices and their buyers are actually subsidizing Apple and its profit margin. How so? When you buy in volumes, like Apple does, you got a cheaper price for the same exact parts than other people who need to get the same parts. THAT is cross-subsidizing being done by parts' manufacturers, i.e. charging more for other buyers to cover profit/cost losses caused by the pricing they give to a big buyer.
In other words, the so-called "Apple tax", "subsidy cost", "volume pricing" or other terminologies they name it are actually all the subsidies contributing to Apple huge profit margin. Yupe..., I say it here. Apple is the vacuum that sucks other people's profit and make it its own, a cannibal if you will. BTW, this equation will not last forever because it will make a lot of people very unhappy. Since this is capitalism at its best, other people will eventually want to take a bite out of that Apple's spectacular profit margin. The quiet storm that' brewing underneath this dissatisfaction ain't gonna be this quiet forever. Murphy's law will be at work sooner or later.
Unlike Apple, Samsung can only charge premium for their newest phones, and after about 3 months [1 quarter], these phones will have their price reduced, to stay competitive with the newest and brightest Android devices that come along. Other Samsung division book losses for the quarter, notably Its LCD TV division. That too will sap on Samsung's profit margin.
Apple, on the other hand, sold their new model and keep the price tag for much longer, perhaps for 3Q or more. This tendency will continue to prop up the high profit margin it enjoys. The only positive thing about the short life of devices in Android world is the fact that android devices will have to be "reinvented" and "recharged" with new features or new hardware almost every month by many different manufactures to stay competitive, and in turn this will speed up Android's evolution. Apple, on the other hand, is so fat with profit and brimming with over-confidence, and it becomes so slow to move and lethargic. Not to worry, every company at the top of their game at their peak will be like this. Somebody else will take over that top spot, soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
Funny... Samsung "shipped" twice as many phones as Apple "sold", yet made only half the money Apple did in the same quarter. Samsung makes a lot more than just smartphones, so all of their product lines combined generated just over $5B in the most recent quarter compared to Apple's almost $9B. What that tells me is that Samsung is selling only a fraction of the units they are actually "shipping".
The iPhone 3GS was release in 2009, it has a 600Mhz processor, it cannot handle most of the new features of iOS. It is not premium, it is Apples basic model iPhone. This is a fact, their premium model would be the iPhone 4S
As no cellphone manufacturer provides sales per model please produce proof of this.
You have mastered primary school maths, great job.
Where did I imply this? I said the iPhone 3GS is a basic model iPhone, it isn't a premium model, it is in the same category as the basic model Android phones sold. And like the Android manufacturers Apple is being paid for them, they don't give them away. I'm not sure why you are still getting confused with the subsidised phone model. But this has nothing to with the claim. They said Apple sold 27m premium model phones, they didn't, the iPhone 3GS isn't a premium model phone
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
The iPhone 3GS was release in 2009, it has a 600Mhz processor, it cannot handle most of the new features of iOS. It is not premium, it is Apples basic model iPhone. This is a fact, their premium model would be the iPhone 4S
Whoop de frick. You want to compare a single model to a single model, go right ahead. That's not what this right here is about.
When the next version of Android comes out, I better see you complaining that they're recording sales of all phones instead of recording sales of NO phones, because good luck actually getting an upgrade for the ones that are out now, making them "not premium".
Excuse me, why the anger?
From Apples SEC report
"Net sales consist primarily of revenue from the sale of hardware, software, digital content and applications, peripherals, and service
and support contracts. The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred,
the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been
shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the
product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the
Company defers recognition of revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of
loss on these sales during transit. The Company recognizes revenue from the sale of hardware products, software bundled with
hardware that is essential to the functionality of the hardware, and third-party digital content sold on the iTunes Store in accordance
with general revenue recognition accounting guidance. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with industry specific
software accounting guidance for the following types of sales transactions: (i) standalone sales of software products, (ii) sales of
software upgrades and (iii) sales of software bundled with hardware not essential to the functionality of the hardware."
If you are not happy with them, please contact Apple, for they have said this, not me.
If I went and purchased a Phone from Vodafone today, Apple would have recognised that sale weeks ago when they shipped it to Brightpoint, and Brightpoint would have recognised it when they shipped it to Vodafone. Apple has no real visibility into these smaller resellers to see when it has been actually sold to a consumer, nor do they declare in the above declaration that they delay the receipt of the sale until the customer has activated the device, as they said, they recognise it when they ship it.
Please calm down, you seem to be getting confused/excited for no reason.
jragosta claimed Apple sold 27 million phones. This is what I am disputing. Apple, in fact no cellphone manufacturer splits sales per model. Now Apple sells three models of iPhone, if you compare these three models there is no way you could claim that the 3GS is premium model, it's age, it's features, speed etc etc stop it from being classed a premium model. And because Apple doesn't split sales between models that there is no way to claim that Apple has sold 27m premium models, when it is documented fact that they haven't.
The same goes for Samsung, Motorola, LG, Nokia etc etc etc.
As for your second point, not sure where you are going here, as I have already stated a number of times, the same thing can be said for all cellphone manufacturers, they all make a variety of different level smartphones, some premium, some budget.
Originally Posted by jfanning
jragosta claimed Apple sold 27 million phones. This is what I am disputing. Apple, in fact no cellphone manufacturer splits sales per model. Now Apple sells three models of iPhone, if you compare these three models there is no way you could claim that the 3GS is premium model, it's age, it's features, speed etc etc stop it from being classed a premium model.
And what you're saying is that Samsung put out 52 million "premium" models, I suppose.
Which is, as Solipsism so rightly puts it, [insert how he puts it here].
I actually kinda wonder why people are so obsessed with other people's money? Here in AI, for example, I see the same stupid obsession about counting other people's money. Why? It's not your money. Well, indirectly, it is if you own tons of Apple stocks. I doubt if you have tons of Apple stocks, say about 10,000 worth of it or more, you'll be wasting your time [equal money] playing in this sandbox. If you don't own that many Apple stocks then why bother? You are not going to be rich by mentioning how much money Apple has in the bank, and neither will you be getting any poorer if Samsung garners tons of profit for their devices. See, those people with tons of money, ones with tons of Apple stocks or tons of Samsung's stocks, are not bickering here over which company has more profit or which one has sold how many phones. They are out there enjoying summer and spend their tons of money.
I am shaking my head over this trippy bickering madness by Apple "f4nbo1s" and I-sh33ps over numbers, money and profit. More often than not, people who have very little of these, usually talk so much about this. I mean why you waste so much time [equal money] and effort about somebody else's money? Are you actually getting paid some handsome amount of money for every byte you are posting here by Apple? Wouldn't it be better if you spend less of your time [equal money] here and start saving the time [equal money], so that you can buy even more i-devices you so love instead?
No I am not saying that, in fact if you had read the message I post you would have seen that yourself, I will quote it again for you.
Originally Posted by jfanning
No I am not saying that, in fact if you had read the message I post you would have seen that yourself, I will quote it again for you.
So… there's no way we can distinguish models, there's no way we can determine what is considered "premium", why not just take the numbers we're given and roll with it instead of trying to nitpick out Apple's (and only Apple's I might add) phones while leaving even worse models with worse software and worse compatibility alone on the other side?