I just spend a bunch on a iPad Pro 12.9". Do I really need to upgrade my iPhone 6? Upgrade or go for a 4th year? I have the original Apple Watch. Do I upgrade or hold on? LTE I could really care less. The times I have only my watch on my and not my phone and they're not both connected onto the same Wifi Network is pretty slim. I'm not going to pay a monthly charge on a watch. Not worth it.
There's also no way Apple is going to release new phones that are a iPhone 7S, 7S Plus and iPhone 8. That's not happening. Apple would have just outdated their new iPhone 7S and 7S Plus phones right from launch. Already OLD as the iPhone 8 is there also. That's beyond dumb. Apple will do what they have done with the iPad. Get rid of numbers all together. Then it's just the iPhone, iPhone Plus and iPhone Pro. Possibly a updated iPhone SE. Apple doesn't even number the iPhone SE as it is. These will just be the 2017 models.
Will I upgrade? I'll wait for real facts from Apple, so I'll make up my mind after Apple's press conference on what I'll do.
I wonder if the iPhone " Edition " will go with a USB C connector?. i know, probably not, but seeing as it is kind of an outlier model, maybe the first to transition.
On the device or PSU? If you mean on the device then I wouldn't hold your breath.
Don't hold your breath about the other end of the cable either. If you want one? Buy one. Nothing stopping you, if you value that cable so much.
The iPhone market as a whole does not value that cable at all, which is why it does not (and will not) come with the product. USB-A is still far, far more appropriate.
Again, nothing stopping you from buying that USB-C cable if you see fit.
I bought a USB C to Lightning cable when I got my 2017 MBP. I use it for iTunes syncing the four iOS devices we currently have.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Neil Cybart over at Above Avalon agrees with your take and if you subscribe to his newsletter, he does make a compelling case. It would definitely help Apple expand its user base. Also, if the SE will be the so-called low tier, I'd love for Apple to at least upgrade the SE with at least an A10 SoC, and 2nd generation TouchID.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Strong statements.
I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499. That would capture an even bigger market.
The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.
The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?
And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.
Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Neil Cybart over at Above Avalon agrees with your take and if you subscribe to his newsletter, he does make a compelling case. It would definitely help Apple expand its user base. Also, if the SE will be the so-called low tier, I'd love for Apple to at least upgrade the SE with at least an A10 SoC, and 2nd generation TouchID.
A9 is damn fast, as it is. A10 would never be required for the low resolution display that SE has, for the current iOS functionality!!! There is no compelling upgrade to be done to SE, right now. Once new use cases get added to iOS, Apple would upgrade the SE. A9 is capable of running even ARKit, so not sure what that new functionality would be that would require an A10 or A11.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Strong statements.
I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499. That would capture an even bigger market.
The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.
The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?
And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.
Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
I wonder if the iPhone " Edition " will go with a USB C connector?. i know, probably not, but seeing as it is kind of an outlier model, maybe the first to transition.
On the device or PSU? If you mean on the device then I wouldn't hold your breath.
Don't hold your breath about the other end of the cable either. If you want one? Buy one. Nothing stopping you, if you value that cable so much.
The iPhone market as a whole does not value that cable at all, which is why it does not (and will not) come with the product. USB-A is still far, far more appropriate.
Again, nothing stopping you from buying that USB-C cable if you see fit.
I bought a USB C to Lightning cable when I got my 2017 MBP. I use it for iTunes syncing the four iOS devices we currently have.
That's fine, as one of the few million owners of a new MBP, you can buy that cable. No reason it give it away to hundreds of millions that don't have that computer, or any USB-C computer, or any USB-C device or port at all.
If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.
i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.
the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.
but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.
i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.
what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
So who's more clueless?
Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?
Give me a break. Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro. You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
I’d love the apologists here to explain the engineering reason behind not shipping 29W charger with 12.9” iPad Pro. I use one to charge my Pro all the time zero problems.
If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.
i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
Could it have to do with the wireless charging systems in vehicles? I seem to remember the standards covering automotive charging have yet to be finalized but not entirely certain.
All this sounds great...but i'm also hoping for an ipad mini pro to be announced. The mini hasn't seen an update for 2 yrs when the mini 4 was announced at the iphone event. So ya never know.
A9 is damn fast, as it is. A10 would never be required for the low resolution display that SE has, for the current iOS functionality!!! There is no compelling upgrade to be done to SE, right now. Once new use cases get added to iOS, Apple would upgrade the SE. A9 is capable of running even ARKit, so not sure what that new functionality would be that would require an A10 or A11.
One could make the same argument to prove that the 7S series will still have A10 processors. Totally ridiculous.
Apple's pattern with iPhones is to introduce a new device and sell it for two years. A phone bought toward the end of that cycle is expected to have another two years of useful life (e.g. a 7 bought today shouldn't be a worthless piece of crap in summer 2019). Ergo, the notion that Apple will still be selling A9 iPhone SEs this summer, and expecting an A9 to still be adequate in 2019 when they're releasing an OS for A13 chips, is pretty unlikely.
(and yes, I'm on the beta and ARkit works great with the A9; it's about long-term usefulness. Remember the calamity for developers needing to support the iPad 2 for all those years?)
Either Apple will refresh the SE line this spring with A11 processors, or it's the end of the line for phones that fit in human-sized hands.
If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.
i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.
the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.
but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.
i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.
what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.,
I flagged you for calling him a fanboy. That’s a stupid ad hominem fallacy/attack. Didnt you used to be a mod here? And you’re going to call people fanboys?
Read his post again. He did not call him a fanboy.
IMO you're being too touchy and unnecessarily aggressive. I completely understand the succinct point Mel was making but that you might be missing even if I might personally have worded it differently. Read the post he was replying to before accusing Mel of initiating a personal attack.
I’d love the apologists here to explain the engineering reason behind not shipping 29W charger with 12.9” iPad Pro. I use one to charge my Pro all the time zero problems.
1) Why a 29W charger? Does it actually use the full 29W of the 12” MB PSU or is it because it’s the only USB-C option offered by Apple?
2) I’ve seen your previous statement about how it’s just a money grab from a nefarious corpporation that knot cares about nuckle-and-dining customers. If that’s the case then why include any of the accessories with their device? Not including any would mean their packaging could be much smaller therefore reducing direct costs and increasing economies of scale for storage and shipping. They’d also likely get more customers to buy the USB 3.0 cable and larger (and likely I’ll-suited) PSU than the majority that are fine with the “good enough” that’s included right now. Most already have these components at home and Apple can easily spin this as being better for the environment, which I’m sure you’d then jump on as being greedy and evil.
3) The reason is obvious once you drop your agenda. Apple also doesn’t include an iPad PSU with the iPhone. If you understand why that is then there’s nothing I can say that will help you see the forest for the trees.
4) Maybe we’ll soon find out, if the rumors of Apple including a 7.5W charger are true. If they include it then you concede your conspiracy theory, and if they make customers buy the 7.5W PSU separately I’ll concede that Apple is nickle-and-dining customers.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Strong statements.
I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499. That would capture an even bigger market.
The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.
The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?
And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.
Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
I would like to disagree with your statement. Apple has to plan for long-term future, not just the current year 2017-18 when super-cycle occurs. Post super-cycle, Apple has to plan for countering the possibility of reduction in sales. The best way forward is to reduce the entry level prices.
Just a question to you - If Apple is able to sell only 200 million iPhones in 2018-19 with the current high prices as against 230 million for 2017-18, would you be satisfied? Even assuming Yes to it, would Apple be satisfied with that? Apple DOES have pressure to achieve "goal" of X billion in sales. Just by increasing ASP and selling less iPhones, Apple cannot achieve those goals - NOT in the long-term EVERY YEAR, particularly in non-super cycle years. To expand or to even retain parity in the long-term, the entry level prices have to come down eventually.
Apple desires to maintain or increase the ASP of iPhones.
The only way that Apple will decrease prices on an entry level model is if at the same time ASP stays the same (indexed to inflation) or increases. That requires that sales of the Pro takes off and the other models sustain sales. What you ask may happen, but not because you think that it is a good idea to expand sales.
These data sets belie the importance of iPhone super cycles in the long term, so no, I don't give much credence to calls for "lower price" or "mid range" models if is doesn't meet the current ASP standard, which also requires stable margins.
I’d love the apologists here to explain the engineering reason behind not shipping 29W charger with 12.9” iPad Pro. I use one to charge my Pro all the time zero problems.
Why charge the 95% extra for something they don't need?
Apple does that all the time. What percentage of their user base uses VPN? I’d guess less than 5% and yet this is built into iOS and macOS. Most notebook uses don’t use an external monitor but that option has always been there and will likely never go away, especially now that USB-C and TB are in the mix. It all comes do to the cost-benefit ratio, not percentage. This why the people saying that 4K is stupid and will nevrr come to the Apple TV, or that USB-C or inductive charging will never happen at Apple (despite both existing already) are almost assuredly wrong.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Strong statements.
I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499. That would capture an even bigger market.
The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.
The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?
And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.
Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
Yep pretty sure. Not much in their behavior over the last few decades says they are willing to compromise their internal standards or corporate processes just to get more market share. That just becomes commoditization and they have always shunned that concept. If, and it's a big if, they could get larger share and still make similar profits, without compromising their standards of quality, then sure - they would do it. So far, they have not leaned that direction, but things change.
Prediction: Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier. Just like they did for iPad
iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB
iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB
Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+. The low tier will be the SE.
iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
Strong statements.
I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499. That would capture an even bigger market.
The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.
The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?
And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.
Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
Yep pretty sure. Not much in their behavior over the last few decades says they are willing to compromise their internal standards or corporate processes just to get more market share. That just becomes commoditization and they have always shunned that concept. If, and it's a big if, they could get larger share and still make similar profits, without compromising their standards of quality, then sure - they would do it. So far, they have not leaned that direction, but things change.
I don’t think that’s true based on their history. I wouldn’t conflate focusing solely or primary on marketshare with a comprehensive understanding that a certain marketshare may be required to make the product category feasible. IBookstore is one such example where Apple clearly sought to obtain marketshare from what I consider an illegal monopoly.
If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.
i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.
the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.
but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.
i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.
what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
So who's more clueless?
Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?
Give me a break. Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro. You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
I beg to differ.
I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis. Since 2013. When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right. And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG. If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013. And again in 2016 when the stock was $90. I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY. Now its up more than 70% since then. Again I was right.
There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.
I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?
And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).
The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.
i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.
the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.
but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.
i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.
what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
So who's more clueless?
Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?
Give me a break. Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro. You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
I beg to differ.
I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis. Since 2013. When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right. And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG. If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013. And again in 2016 when the stock was $90. I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY. Now its up more than 70% since then. Again I was right.
There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.
I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?
And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).
The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes. More recently he claimed to have sold ALL his stock, every single share, and because he saw no chance of making any more on his investment in the near term IIRC. I think he even blamed that on Mr. Cook's terrible management of Apple (something he currently makes fun of others doing). Now it's become some of his shares were sold, and he's always been bearish on Apple.
Comments
There's also no way Apple is going to release new phones that are a iPhone 7S, 7S Plus and iPhone 8. That's not happening. Apple would have just outdated their new iPhone 7S and 7S Plus phones right from launch. Already OLD as the iPhone 8 is there also. That's beyond dumb. Apple will do what they have done with the iPad. Get rid of numbers all together. Then it's just the iPhone, iPhone Plus and iPhone Pro. Possibly a updated iPhone SE. Apple doesn't even number the iPhone SE as it is. These will just be the 2017 models.
Will I upgrade? I'll wait for real facts from Apple, so I'll make up my mind after Apple's press conference on what I'll do.
Apple's pattern with iPhones is to introduce a new device and sell it for two years. A phone bought toward the end of that cycle is expected to have another two years of useful life (e.g. a 7 bought today shouldn't be a worthless piece of crap in summer 2019). Ergo, the notion that Apple will still be selling A9 iPhone SEs this summer, and expecting an A9 to still be adequate in 2019 when they're releasing an OS for A13 chips, is pretty unlikely.
(and yes, I'm on the beta and ARkit works great with the A9; it's about long-term usefulness. Remember the calamity for developers needing to support the iPad 2 for all those years?)
Either Apple will refresh the SE line this spring with A11 processors, or it's the end of the line for phones that fit in human-sized hands.
IMO you're being too touchy and unnecessarily aggressive. I completely understand the succinct point Mel was making but that you might be missing even if I might personally have worded it differently. Read the post he was replying to before accusing Mel of initiating a personal attack.
2) I’ve seen your previous statement about how it’s just a money grab from a nefarious corpporation that knot cares about nuckle-and-dining customers. If that’s the case then why include any of the accessories with their device? Not including any would mean their packaging could be
much smaller therefore reducing direct costs and increasing economies of scale for storage and shipping. They’d also likely get more customers to buy the USB 3.0 cable and larger (and likely I’ll-suited) PSU than the majority that are fine with the “good enough” that’s included right now. Most already have these components at home and Apple can easily spin this as being better for the environment, which I’m sure you’d then jump on as being greedy and evil.
3) The reason is obvious once you drop your agenda. Apple also doesn’t include an iPad PSU with the iPhone. If you understand why that is then there’s nothing I can say that will help you see the forest for the trees.
4) Maybe we’ll soon find out, if the rumors of Apple including a 7.5W charger are true. If they include it then you concede your conspiracy theory, and if they make customers buy the 7.5W PSU separately I’ll concede that Apple is nickle-and-dining customers.
http://www.asymco.com/2017/07/31/how-much-will-the-new-iphone-cost/
The only way that Apple will decrease prices on an entry level model is if at the same time ASP stays the same (indexed to inflation) or increases. That requires that sales of the Pro takes off and the other models sustain sales. What you ask may happen, but not because you think that it is a good idea to expand sales.
I'll throw this in as well;
https://qz.com/1045972/apple-aapl-has-made-as-much-as-microsoft-msft-and-alphabet-goog-combined-since-the-iphone-launched/
These data sets belie the importance of iPhone super cycles in the long term, so no, I don't give much credence to calls for "lower price" or "mid range" models if is doesn't meet the current ASP standard, which also requires stable margins.
nevrr come to the Apple TV, or that USB-C or inductive charging will never happen at Apple (despite both existing already) are almost assuredly wrong.
And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).
The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...