Nobody ever said it had to be premium. Motorola was able to make a positively reviewed device that sells for $199 retail which is perfect for those people that use smartphones as glorified feature phones. Many analysts see what Motorola was able to accomplish and ask "why can’t Apple do that?". I'm not suggesting that they do, just pointing out the mindset out there.
If I remember correctly, the Moto X and G phones were initially priced higher. Due to failures with sales, Motorola/Google decreased the prices of the phones and began to spin tales of cheaper phones with good builds.
The X was decreased in price three times I will search for the earlier prices then update this post.
Update...
The Moto X price was decreased by $150 to $399 off contract. As far as I know, the device is still not selling in noticeable numbers
I have refresh my memory of the phone specs, but I think the Moto G phone contains slightly less than current parts. M/G pushed the price of this phone down to $99, but as with the Moto X, the G is not selling well either.
Analysts are praising the phones while dinging Apple on cost. The analysts ignore the facts that the phones were more expensive and only got lower prices in failed attempts to break Apple. Instead the phones are just showing M/G have less respect for their customers dollars than Apple. The customers are showing their disdain by not purchasing the phones.
On an LG G 2 note, I saw one today and the owner praised the phone and loved having the buttons on the back of the phone. I actually liked the double-tap on the display to activate the phone. It reminded me how smart Apple was to integrate its fingerprint sensor in the home button of the iPhone 5S.
Since his death apple has started to do things that Steve said they never would (larger Iphone, smaller Ipad) and I can't help but think I can see the writing on the wall.
If I remember correctly, the Moto X and G phones were initially priced higher. Due to failures with sales, Motorola/Google decreased the prices of the phones and began to spin tales of cheaper phones with good builds.
The X was decreased in price three times I will search for the earlier prices then update this post.
You are correct the devices have experienced price reductions. The moto x in Europe however, is releasing with a mind blowing price of 429 euros.
I wonder if the same "shameless copying" comments will apply when Apple makes an iPhone with a bigger screen. Pretty much falls under the same category.
Do you really believe this? If you do, please run as fast as you can to the closest hospital and stay there.
So, if I suck at everything related with design and engineering, and sell every high quality "small screen" i can make to other companies, can't make powerful normal sized smartphones, can't make normal sized smartphones because their battery life is very short.... and end up making a big phone, I'm an innovator?
That's what happened to samsung, pal.
If they could, they would've made a smaller flagship years before they made the first phablet.
When Apple goes that route, it won't be for the same reasons, so it won't be copying.You have diferent screens sizes on every category.
Yes you definitely seem to understand what I mean, I hope your predictions are right. Steven Jobs died at the end of 2011 and I hope that the innovation and brilliance he personified didn't die with him. Since his death apple has started to do things that Steve said they never would (larger Iphone, smaller Ipad) and I can't help but think I can see the writing on the wall. Steve Jobs was apple and now without him they will die a slow slow death over the next 5 or 10 years. Apple makes the best looking products on the market, but I feel like the bigger iphone and smaller ipad mini were me too products that steve wouldn't have made. The same goes for the 5C, I think it degrades the brand personally but I understand that some disagree.
What a stupid post.
For Apple to die in 10 years, they must starting to lose 2 billion dollars per quarter as of now.
If I remember correctly, the Moto X and G phones were initially priced higher. Due to failures with sales, Motorola/Google decreased the prices of the phones and began to spin tales of cheaper phones with good builds.
The X was decreased in price three times I will search for the earlier prices then update this post.
The X was offered for less just before Christmas and then permanently kept that price, the G just went on sale, the GSM unlocked version is $180-200 and the Verizon prepaid version in $99. The G lacks LTE but I doubt most that buy the device won't be heavy data users. The one big plus about the Moto G is that it will get timely updates versus the other similarly priced phones that are running Gingerbread (2.3). I don't know why Google isn't putting up the money to promote these 2 devices, I think that they're a much better choice than what Samsung has to offer.
And if you had a brain, and since Apple is having their best year ever, you would realize that those things (that are out of context, btw) are proof that Apple's true core and talent are still there. Steve was vital to bring those guys together, but he wasn't vital anymore, just the face.
These are incremental upgrades I was talking about innovation. Every single hardware manufacture in the world gets thinner more power devices every year. This is true for samsung, apple, motorolla, lg and everyone else. This is not a big deal overall. The design upgrades to the internals are great but again everyone is doing similar things. Intel, apple, samsung, NVIDIA etc.
The ones you mentioned got thinner at the expense of size, they also got larger to the point of becoming unwieldy for one handed use.
The ignorant continue to press this as an indispensable innovation.
I gave them credit for this. What's your point? presumably many if not all processor manufacturers have been working on similar technology. 64Bit computer processors have been out for years. I am impressed with the A7 as I already stated.
For Apple to die in 10 years, they must starting to lose 2 billion dollars per quarter as of now.
You will die first.
I dint't mean they would have no money at all I mean they could become a shell of their current self. For example Nintendo who has tens of billions of dollars in the bank but is never the less dying in front of our eyes.
AGAIN, where did Jobs say they would never do this. He commented on making phones you can't get your hands around them. Can you get your hands around the iPhone 4? Why do you think that is? He comments on the Android tablets using iPhone apps and being DoA. He wasn't wrong.
But even if Jobs directly and specifically stated that Apple will never do more than a 3.5" 3:2 iPhone or make an 8" 4:3 iPad your original point is both foolish and contradictory in that it either shows Apple is clearly innovating past Jobs, but you seem to have this notion that anything that appeared after Jobs death he couldn't have been involved with. Let me let you in a little secret: Jobs died in October 2011. The iPhone 5 with a 4" display on an entirely new HW design and rewritten OS, apps and SDK to support the new resolution and aspect ratio was not all slapped together in under a year. It was all being designed under Jobs.
No they screen size is not directly related to the thinness. Also last time I looked the iphone 5 is also larger.
Yes it is, Android and the beefed up processors and excessive RAM required to make that sluggish OS function with a halfway acceptable level of lag, required larger batteries to get through a day.
Apple led the way on thinness, the only way to keep up was to extend the other two dimensions.
Increased bezel size was not really an option, ergo larger screens were the incremental result.
AGAIN, where did Jobs say they would never do this. He commented on making phones you can't get your hands around them. Can you get your hands around the iPhone 4? Why do you think that is? He comments on the Android tablets using iPhone apps and being DoA. He wasn't wrong.
But even if Jobs directly and specifically stated that Apple will never do more than a 3.5" 3:2 iPhone or make an 8" 4:3 iPad your original point is both foolish and contradictory in that it either shows Apple is clearly innovating past Jobs, but you seem to have this notion that anything that appeared after Jobs death he couldn't have been involved with. Let me let you in a little secret: Jobs died in October 2011. The iPhone 5 with a 4" display on an entirely new HW design and rewritten OS, apps and SDK to support the new resolution and aspect ratio was not all slapped together in under a year. It was all being designed under Jobs.
My post was simply a statement that I feel Jobs was much more important then you obviously do. Only time will tell who is right. And making an Ipad smaller is not innovation. The Ipad Mini did not use any new technologies at all, how is making a screen smaller, but not as small as the phone innovation. If dell comes out with a 9 inch display then a 8 inch then 7 is that innovation?
Apple followed the crowd on the mini and the bigger iphone screen. Following =/= innovating
Yes it is, Android and the beefed up processors and excessive RAM required to make that sluggish OS function with a halfway acceptable level of lag, required larger batteries to get through a day.
Apple led the way on thinness, the only way to keep up was to extend the other two dimensions.
Increased bezel size was not really an option, ergo larger screens were the incremental result.
Customers wanted bigger screens, that why everyone including apple made bigger screens. The 3.5 inch screen in the iphone 4S is to small in most peoples opinion. Android manufactures got it right and apple got it wrong. Thus the iphone 5 has a larger display, and rumors of even larger displays being tested get thousands of hits within minutes.
Edit and to be honest I think the thinness obsession is a mistake. I would much rather have a phone as thick as the iphone 4 that gets an extra hour or two of battery life. making a phone 1mm thinner doesn't do much after a certain point. Adding 1mm to the overall battery thickness probably would.
Comments
If I remember correctly, the Moto X and G phones were initially priced higher. Due to failures with sales, Motorola/Google decreased the prices of the phones and began to spin tales of cheaper phones with good builds.
The X was decreased in price three times I will search for the earlier prices then update this post.
Update...
The Moto X price was decreased by $150 to $399 off contract. As far as I know, the device is still not selling in noticeable numbers
I have refresh my memory of the phone specs, but I think the Moto G phone contains slightly less than current parts. M/G pushed the price of this phone down to $99, but as with the Moto X, the G is not selling well either.
Analysts are praising the phones while dinging Apple on cost. The analysts ignore the facts that the phones were more expensive and only got lower prices in failed attempts to break Apple. Instead the phones are just showing M/G have less respect for their customers dollars than Apple. The customers are showing their disdain by not purchasing the phones.
On an LG G 2 note, I saw one today and the owner praised the phone and loved having the buttons on the back of the phone. I actually liked the double-tap on the display to activate the phone. It reminded me how smart Apple was to integrate its fingerprint sensor in the home button of the iPhone 5S.
Again, you don't know what innovation means if you are now interchanging the term invent in weird context with innovating.
Steve never said either of those things.
If I remember correctly, the Moto X and G phones were initially priced higher. Due to failures with sales, Motorola/Google decreased the prices of the phones and began to spin tales of cheaper phones with good builds.
The X was decreased in price three times I will search for the earlier prices then update this post.
You are correct the devices have experienced price reductions. The moto x in Europe however, is releasing with a mind blowing price of 429 euros.
I wonder if the same "shameless copying" comments will apply when Apple makes an iPhone with a bigger screen. Pretty much falls under the same category.
Do you really believe this? If you do, please run as fast as you can to the closest hospital and stay there.
So, if I suck at everything related with design and engineering, and sell every high quality "small screen" i can make to other companies, can't make powerful normal sized smartphones, can't make normal sized smartphones because their battery life is very short.... and end up making a big phone, I'm an innovator?
That's what happened to samsung, pal.
If they could, they would've made a smaller flagship years before they made the first phablet.
When Apple goes that route, it won't be for the same reasons, so it won't be copying.You have diferent screens sizes on every category.
blah, blah, blah
blech
Apple also makes the first and only 64bit phone.
Again, you don't know what innovation means if you are now interchanging the term invent in weird context with innovating.
Steve never said either of those things.
This is him saying no one will ever buy a phone that's bigger then the 3.5 inch iPhone 4
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/jobs-no-ones-going-to-buy-a-big-phone/
Here he is saying smaller tablet are not a good idea
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/04/17/ipad-mini/
Originally Posted by 2385amh
Yes you definitely seem to understand what I mean, I hope your predictions are right. Steven Jobs died at the end of 2011 and I hope that the innovation and brilliance he personified didn't die with him. Since his death apple has started to do things that Steve said they never would (larger Iphone, smaller Ipad) and I can't help but think I can see the writing on the wall. Steve Jobs was apple and now without him they will die a slow slow death over the next 5 or 10 years. Apple makes the best looking products on the market, but I feel like the bigger iphone and smaller ipad mini were me too products that steve wouldn't have made. The same goes for the 5C, I think it degrades the brand personally but I understand that some disagree.
What a stupid post.
For Apple to die in 10 years, they must starting to lose 2 billion dollars per quarter as of now.
You will die first.
The X was offered for less just before Christmas and then permanently kept that price, the G just went on sale, the GSM unlocked version is $180-200 and the Verizon prepaid version in $99. The G lacks LTE but I doubt most that buy the device won't be heavy data users. The one big plus about the Moto G is that it will get timely updates versus the other similarly priced phones that are running Gingerbread (2.3). I don't know why Google isn't putting up the money to promote these 2 devices, I think that they're a much better choice than what Samsung has to offer.
This is him saying no one will ever buy a phone that's bigger then the 3.5 inch iPhone 4
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/jobs-no-ones-going-to-buy-a-big-phone/
Here he is saying smaller tablet are not a good idea
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/04/17/ipad-mini/
And if you had a brain, and since Apple is having their best year ever, you would realize that those things (that are out of context, btw) are proof that Apple's true core and talent are still there. Steve was vital to bring those guys together, but he wasn't vital anymore, just the face.
These are incremental upgrades I was talking about innovation. Every single hardware manufacture in the world gets thinner more power devices every year. This is true for samsung, apple, motorolla, lg and everyone else. This is not a big deal overall. The design upgrades to the internals are great but again everyone is doing similar things. Intel, apple, samsung, NVIDIA etc.
The ones you mentioned got thinner at the expense of size, they also got larger to the point of becoming unwieldy for one handed use.
The ignorant continue to press this as an indispensable innovation.
Apple also makes the first and only 64bit phone
I gave them credit for this. What's your point? presumably many if not all processor manufacturers have been working on similar technology. 64Bit computer processors have been out for years. I am impressed with the A7 as I already stated.
What a stupid post.
For Apple to die in 10 years, they must starting to lose 2 billion dollars per quarter as of now.
You will die first.
I dint't mean they would have no money at all I mean they could become a shell of their current self. For example Nintendo who has tens of billions of dollars in the bank but is never the less dying in front of our eyes.
Another bunch of predictable comments.
30/08/2013
Samsung may be changing its design for its next mobile phone by switching its classic polycarbonate covers for metal cases in the Samsung Galaxy S5.According to Korean site ETNews, the next Galaxy flagship handset will have an all-metal chassis
You know Samsung had a retina class screen on a phone long before Apple did?
Same thing happened when the Galaxy Pro tablet was announced - Samsung was just copying what Apple was yet to do.
The ones you mentioned got thinner at the expense of size, they also got larger to the point of becoming unwieldy for one handed use.
The ignorant continue to press this as an indispensable innovation.
No they screen size is not directly related to the thinness. Also last time I looked the iphone 5 is also larger.
AGAIN, where did Jobs say they would never do this. He commented on making phones you can't get your hands around them. Can you get your hands around the iPhone 4? Why do you think that is? He comments on the Android tablets using iPhone apps and being DoA. He wasn't wrong.
But even if Jobs directly and specifically stated that Apple will never do more than a 3.5" 3:2 iPhone or make an 8" 4:3 iPad your original point is both foolish and contradictory in that it either shows Apple is clearly innovating past Jobs, but you seem to have this notion that anything that appeared after Jobs death he couldn't have been involved with. Let me let you in a little secret: Jobs died in October 2011. The iPhone 5 with a 4" display on an entirely new HW design and rewritten OS, apps and SDK to support the new resolution and aspect ratio was not all slapped together in under a year. It was all being designed under Jobs.
No they screen size is not directly related to the thinness. Also last time I looked the iphone 5 is also larger.
Yes it is, Android and the beefed up processors and excessive RAM required to make that sluggish OS function with a halfway acceptable level of lag, required larger batteries to get through a day.
Apple led the way on thinness, the only way to keep up was to extend the other two dimensions.
Increased bezel size was not really an option, ergo larger screens were the incremental result.
AGAIN, where did Jobs say they would never do this. He commented on making phones you can't get your hands around them. Can you get your hands around the iPhone 4? Why do you think that is? He comments on the Android tablets using iPhone apps and being DoA. He wasn't wrong.
But even if Jobs directly and specifically stated that Apple will never do more than a 3.5" 3:2 iPhone or make an 8" 4:3 iPad your original point is both foolish and contradictory in that it either shows Apple is clearly innovating past Jobs, but you seem to have this notion that anything that appeared after Jobs death he couldn't have been involved with. Let me let you in a little secret: Jobs died in October 2011. The iPhone 5 with a 4" display on an entirely new HW design and rewritten OS, apps and SDK to support the new resolution and aspect ratio was not all slapped together in under a year. It was all being designed under Jobs.
My post was simply a statement that I feel Jobs was much more important then you obviously do. Only time will tell who is right. And making an Ipad smaller is not innovation. The Ipad Mini did not use any new technologies at all, how is making a screen smaller, but not as small as the phone innovation. If dell comes out with a 9 inch display then a 8 inch then 7 is that innovation?
Apple followed the crowd on the mini and the bigger iphone screen. Following =/= innovating
1) Yes it did, but like you're inability to comprehend the clear words from Jobs you missed what is right there in front of you.
2) Now it's "new technologies" and not "innovation" within current technologies? Do you know how unreasonable you sound?
Yes it is, Android and the beefed up processors and excessive RAM required to make that sluggish OS function with a halfway acceptable level of lag, required larger batteries to get through a day.
Apple led the way on thinness, the only way to keep up was to extend the other two dimensions.
Increased bezel size was not really an option, ergo larger screens were the incremental result.
Customers wanted bigger screens, that why everyone including apple made bigger screens. The 3.5 inch screen in the iphone 4S is to small in most peoples opinion. Android manufactures got it right and apple got it wrong. Thus the iphone 5 has a larger display, and rumors of even larger displays being tested get thousands of hits within minutes.
Edit and to be honest I think the thinness obsession is a mistake. I would much rather have a phone as thick as the iphone 4 that gets an extra hour or two of battery life. making a phone 1mm thinner doesn't do much after a certain point. Adding 1mm to the overall battery thickness probably would.