Otherwise known as C5
eckergus wrote: »
I agree. That's exactly right. People forget about families and how now days kids --and I literally mean kids-- and now getting cellphones from their parents. I can see kids wanting the iPhobe 5c. It's going to be an explosion I'm telling you. People are complaining about it just like they did when Apple first released the iPad, but you just wait. This phone is going to sell. You just watch!
flaneur wrote: »
I see that Constabe Odo is still confusing Apple's architectural statement in plastic and metal with Samsung's lazy use of plastic that reaembles an insect's carapace. Couldn't be more different.
nelsonx wrote: »
Lol, it's just plastic! By the way look at AAPL price! $445!!! I guess the markets doesn't like too much this "extraordinaire plastic"!
island hermit wrote: »
So, basically, Apple is willing to trade their "premium" brand status to save a few bucks.
blackbook wrote: »
The 5C is not better than the 5. It's just cheaper for you to make. The entire 5C move was to pad margins and increase profits.
Good for shareholders. I'm actually surprised the stock is down. Wall Street should be happy Tim is make a big business move like this...
No, it's half the subsidized price. You still pay approx $1200 for a 5C over 2 years on contract, and approx $1300 for a 5S.
Same as a mortgage, you put 20% down and pay for the remainder over the duration of the loan (in this case at exorbitant interest rate).
Doesn't mean you bought the house for 20% of its value.
blackbook wrote: »
The 5C is no where near as nice as the 3GS. The 3GS felt expensive in the hand and it was a delight to press the metal buttons and switches.
Although both phones are polycarbonate the 3GS looked and felt like a premium product. The 5C does not.
People seem to forget that not long ago all iPhones were plastic. I loved the 3GS. The contour of the plastic back was very ergonomic. No one called the 3G or 3GS cheap back then...
I'll give you #2 to a degree (plastic is still cheap to me regardless of the manufacturing process) but #1??!! Are you kidding??!! That is all we hear on this forum. Apple is a premium phone!! Apple is a premium phone!! You pay more because you get more!!
Maybe Apple didn't intend it, as you say (although I don't agree), but almost every Apple fan on here would agree that Apple's image is that of a "premium" phone maker.
[... and I never said that Apple based its premium status on exclusivity or high price. ]
Making lots of money, is benefit a few people will notice, I assure you.
tallest skil wrote:
Apple explicitly says otherwise. And since plastic is inherently recyclable, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Actually, that's not quite true. I can remember quite a few people who were upset that Apple had started using plastic.
Because they weren't cheap, nor was there anything wrong with them. Nor is there anything wrong with the iPhone 4, 5, 5C, 5S.
People just need something to bitch about.
LOL on the Internet I'm sure!
Are you nuts? On ATT an iPhone 5 costs effectively $1100 + $199 or $1300 when compared to an equivalent BYOD plan on t-Mobile. In other words thats how much extra you pay over 2 years for a similar data plan but with subsidized phone.
The 5C effectively costs $1200.
Nowhere near half. Methinks effective marketing has sucked you in nicely.
galore2112 wrote: »
Apple's marketing is really good. They now tout a steel frame inside the plastic shell !!!
As if other plastic phones do not have a steel frame inside. Almost all of them do. There is nothing special with Apple's steel frame inside the plastic shell
mesicorp wrote: »
The more I hear and see from Tim Cook the less impressed I get. This was an opportunity for Apple to completely capture the Chinese market for decades by launching a lower cost phone. If they had made a phone exclusively for China Mobile and priced at $450 unlocked, it would have been a game changer. They could have used cheaper components to keep margins around 25 to 30 percent and no one could use the phone elsewhere because China Mobile has a unique 4G frequency. Instead the 5C is priced over $700 in China while competitors are selling smartphones as low as $200. Apple would sacrifice a little bit of margin but be able to griw its ecosystem which is the key value driver for its share price. Instead, Apple is rapidly losing share in China to Android. The content in China is quickly moving away from iOS and once it's lost it's very hard to get back. Tim Cook seems incapable of appreciating this and I really think he needs to go. He's become a hinderence and a very high priced hinderence at that.
island hermit wrote: »
That is all we hear on this forum. Apple is a premium phone!! Apple is a premium phone!! You pay more because you get more!!