More disastrous analysis from DED. Fodder for the groupthink ditto heads.
[I]Apple did not design the 5c to destroy its own profitability, or to make the 5s look really expensive in comparison. That would have been really stupid[/i]
If that was stupid then the iPad mini was stupid. Apple has continuously said it is prepared to cannibalise itself.
You could take every paragraph of DEDs pieces and year them apart. I detest this buffoon. iOS 7 can't be criticised in the press or we get ten pages of badly argued cant.
The sales of the 5C can't be analysed negatively or ten more pages of cant, mostly irrelevant whataboutay about the surface of the xBox, none of which matters a shit.
If Apple ever has real problems AI will be nothing else but apologist articles by this idiot.
This is supposed to be an investor, rumour and consumer site. If Apple miscalculated sales of the 5C then it should be discussed rationally. If iOS 7 is not as bug free as previous versions, rational discussion is needed. Dear Leader Cook should be criticisable.
Instead everything has to be explained away in execrable gaseous prose which nobody reads to the end, and a good percentage dont even read at all. Missing the "sarcasm" in the title. ( Since sarcasm has to be read in context rather than a title this is understandable).
Lets get back to rumours and reviews and send the "editorials" to whatever ditto head cess pool of the Internet this character crawled in from.
All of the excuses are bunk , btw, if the results next week show higher "forward looking inventory" than expected. ( aplogies for the technical verbiage on an investor site). That would mean that Apple had in fact miscalculated sales to begin with and now needed to refactor.
Not that that miscalculation is a big deal as they can either change their production ratios or reduce prices post christmas, but it is what it is, they did or they didn't. People who can rationally discuss that would be more in the tradition of this site. DED has a blog we can avoid.
Many, perhaps all, of these nattering nabobs of negativism have not made their affiliations with Android vendors transparent enough. Remove those analysts who work for firms representing Android vendors and then those bloggers who are simply echoing (citing) that analysis for page views and you've pretty much silenced the iPhone 5C-is-a-flop chorus.
Spend a few minutes in an Apple store and watch the customers that are actually shopping phones. Picking them up, comparing to what they may already have in their pocket, etc. They will pickup and 'heft' the C, but if they make a purchase, it's the 5S, OR a 4S.
In my fogey world we think money, as well as the product tech.
Since none of us are privy to sales figures what are you basing this on? And what figure would not be lowered standards?
1. Basing what on?
2. Your question doesn't quite make sense. Almost... but not quite. I'll try and unravel it for you by asking... 'With everything you have read so far do you think that Apple has exceeded its expectations with the 5c?'
The iPhone 5c will be part of the Apple lineup for years to come. It will eventually be the "free" phone, but for now Apple is able and should maximize their profit. As people upgrade, the iPhone 5c will become available has the "previously-owned" phone, assuming the plastic back wears well or is refurbishable or replaceable.
My daughter, 21, has to get things like phones wih her own money. She got a 5c and it's her 3rd iphone so she has a definite reference point. She loves it, and for what they both do she had no convincing argument for going for a 5s. In fact, without it as an option she might not have bothered to stay with an Apple phone.
If there is a failure among iPhones it is the iPhone 5. An analysis of Apple's performance during iPhone 5's tenure clearly shows this to be the case.
Comparing the iPhone 5C to anything other than the iPhone 5 is a big mistake. The point of the iPhone 5C is to replace the iPhone 5 as the #2 iPhone in Apple's lineup. It does this with a lower COGS, while expanding its geographic marketability by including LTE frequencies the iPhone 5 did not.
I expect Apple to sell more than 64 million iPhones during the December quarter. Had Apple not replaced the iPhone 5 with the 5C sales would be about 10% lower.
The iPhone 5C was not hired to compete with the iPhone 5S, it was hired to appeal to more low priced buyers than the iPhone 5 would have. It is doing that, ergo, the iPhone 5C is a success.
2. 'With everything you have read so far do you think that Apple has exceeded its expectations with the 5c?'
I do. The 5C is not intended to be adored by those seeking iPhone 5S power/performance/functionality. Its purpose is to replace the iPhone 5, which did not adequately address the world's LTE networks. The iPhone 5C does and costs less to produce. Doing what it is intended to, (replace the iPhone 5, not compete with the iPhone 5S), the iPhone 5C is a resounding success.
Those that disagree are still smarting over the fact that Apple did not address the sub $400 market (one that Apple isn't interested in), and continue to worship at the altar of market share as the holy grail.
2. Colors - looks cheap. I don't mind having colored sets, but these hues are cheap looking on these plastic bodies. They should have chosen slightly different hues to make them look more expensive. Steve Jobs would never have allowed these atrocious colors.
Also, I expect that if there were a 5SC--with all the 5S specs, the 5S price, in a 5C plastic case--it would be a huge seller. Not everyone prefers metal+glass to colored plastic.
I think that this would have been a great idea, especially if the could have done some customization and final assembly of the 5Sc in USA. Throw in the color bumper too and many people would think its a great deal.
Comments
[I]Apple did not design the 5c to destroy its own profitability, or to make the 5s look really expensive in comparison. That would have been really stupid[/i]
If that was stupid then the iPad mini was stupid. Apple has continuously said it is prepared to cannibalise itself.
You could take every paragraph of DEDs pieces and year them apart. I detest this buffoon. iOS 7 can't be criticised in the press or we get ten pages of badly argued cant.
The sales of the 5C can't be analysed negatively or ten more pages of cant, mostly irrelevant whataboutay about the surface of the xBox, none of which matters a shit.
If Apple ever has real problems AI will be nothing else but apologist articles by this idiot.
This is supposed to be an investor, rumour and consumer site. If Apple miscalculated sales of the 5C then it should be discussed rationally. If iOS 7 is not as bug free as previous versions, rational discussion is needed. Dear Leader Cook should be criticisable.
Instead everything has to be explained away in execrable gaseous prose which nobody reads to the end, and a good percentage dont even read at all. Missing the "sarcasm" in the title. ( Since sarcasm has to be read in context rather than a title this is understandable).
Lets get back to rumours and reviews and send the "editorials" to whatever ditto head cess pool of the Internet this character crawled in from.
All of the excuses are bunk , btw, if the results next week show higher "forward looking inventory" than expected. ( aplogies for the technical verbiage on an investor site). That would mean that Apple had in fact miscalculated sales to begin with and now needed to refactor.
Not that that miscalculation is a big deal as they can either change their production ratios or reduce prices post christmas, but it is what it is, they did or they didn't. People who can rationally discuss that would be more in the tradition of this site. DED has a blog we can avoid.
You may not like the 5C and I rather have the 5S, but we aren't the target audience for it.
You may not like the 5C and I rather have the 5S, but we aren't the target audience for it.
That's what you got from my post?
lol
MS Surface ad: Twats dancing and clicking covers.
Apple 5C ad: Twats saying "Mr Mojito" and "Miow".
Them's the target audience...
In my fogey world we think money, as well as the product tech.
Since none of us are privy to sales figures what are you basing this on? And what figure would not be lowered standards?
1. Basing what on?
2. Your question doesn't quite make sense. Almost... but not quite. I'll try and unravel it for you by asking... 'With everything you have read so far do you think that Apple has exceeded its expectations with the 5c?'
The iPhone 5c will be part of the Apple lineup for years to come. It will eventually be the "free" phone, but for now Apple is able and should maximize their profit. As people upgrade, the iPhone 5c will become available has the "previously-owned" phone, assuming the plastic back wears well or is refurbishable or replaceable.
Well I guess that is what we come to expect for the anti-Apple, pro-Anything-but-Apple 'anal ysts'.
Comparing the iPhone 5C to anything other than the iPhone 5 is a big mistake. The point of the iPhone 5C is to replace the iPhone 5 as the #2 iPhone in Apple's lineup. It does this with a lower COGS, while expanding its geographic marketability by including LTE frequencies the iPhone 5 did not.
I expect Apple to sell more than 64 million iPhones during the December quarter. Had Apple not replaced the iPhone 5 with the 5C sales would be about 10% lower.
The iPhone 5C was not hired to compete with the iPhone 5S, it was hired to appeal to more low priced buyers than the iPhone 5 would have. It is doing that, ergo, the iPhone 5C is a success.
2. 'With everything you have read so far do you think that Apple has exceeded its expectations with the 5c?'
I do. The 5C is not intended to be adored by those seeking iPhone 5S power/performance/functionality. Its purpose is to replace the iPhone 5, which did not adequately address the world's LTE networks. The iPhone 5C does and costs less to produce. Doing what it is intended to, (replace the iPhone 5, not compete with the iPhone 5S), the iPhone 5C is a resounding success.
Those that disagree are still smarting over the fact that Apple did not address the sub $400 market (one that Apple isn't interested in), and continue to worship at the altar of market share as the holy grail.
1. Price - Should have been free, or $49 at most.
2. Colors - looks cheap. I don't mind having colored sets, but these hues are cheap looking on these plastic bodies. They should have chosen slightly different hues to make them look more expensive. Steve Jobs would never have allowed these atrocious colors.
The (C)rappy version isn't successful? Shocker...since Apple is known for (C)heap.
If that was stupid then the iPad mini was stupid.
The iPad mini was Apple's answer for the buying interest shifting to smaller tablets.
BTT:
I think the level of success of the 5C is dwarfed by the higher than expected level of success of the 5S.
It's a perception problem, not a real one.
you forgot "/s" tag.
Apple is known for cheap? you mean samsung and google
I think that this would have been a great idea, especially if the could have done some customization and final assembly of the 5Sc in USA. Throw in the color bumper too and many people would think its a great deal.