For myself, advising a friend, part of the trouble is the "Memory gap": Where it jumps from 64Gb @ $700 to 256Gb @ $850.
The 64Gb is too small for her. The 256Gb is too expensive for her.
So, she keeps using the iPhone 5 I gave her when her iPhone 6 was stolen.
That’s just silly. The 8 is so far beyond the 5. If she doesn’t want an 8 why not an SE. same dimensions as the 5 too.
Everyone waiting for an X will be sadly disappointed. Both in the wait time (they’ll never get one for xmas) and version 1 of a new device. I’m grabbing an 8 in a few days.
Ridiculous comment about the X and how people will be “sadly disappointed” because it’s V1 of a new device, so you are going with the 8. HELLO! The 8 is also a new device! Where did you people get your education?
We've seen that superficial thinking since the iPhone 3GS (at least with the iPhone line) and I'm sure we'll see more of it as I think the exterior look will change even less as the Qi charging and nearly edge-to-edge(2x) display will dictate the appearance of the device even more.
That said, in this case there is a case to be made by spliff monkey as there's more than just evolution as there are lateral shifts in major display technologies, a usage concern with the removal of Touch ID, and a potential usage and security issue with Face ID (especially if you have a twin), and even an issue of desire with curved display corners and a notch which some people have clearly rallied against (just as Blackberry users, for example, couldn't wrap their head around a smartphone without a physical QWERTY keyboard).
The chance of having identical twins is about 1 in 350. So that doesn’t reduce the market for the X by all that much. Within the population of identical twins you still need the circumstance where your twin is likely to get hold of your iPhone, and that would reduce the population of adult identical twins where this is a problem because many likely live apart; it would in those cases be about as likely an identical twin gets hold of his/her sibling’s phone as it is for any brother or sister getting hold of a sibling’s phone who lives distant from him/her. Even when I visit my siblings a don’t recall ever touching their phone. I just don’t think the identical twin problem is much of an issue. It’s worth Apple mentioning as it defines a parameter of the limits of FaceID security and is worthy of consideration for that population, but as a factor in overall potential market size of the X, it’s not really meaningful.
Apple seems to have too many phones for the average non tech person to choose between at the moment: X (available soon) and 8 using A11 chips, 7 using A10, 6S and SE using A9. For base models the lowest price is 349 and the highest 999. It might be slightly easier if the models were renames by the chip, then there would only be three model ranges. but then new tech with the X might not be so obvious. There such a broad range now that the new model 8 may not stand out so much as in the past. Could this contribute to less demand for the 8?
While I think that its great that Apple is offering so many options, I can also see that causing "Paralysis of Analysis" for many. ... "Well, this one would be good. But this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage.... Oh, I'll think about this later...."
How does anyone ever make a purchase decision in the Android universe? No. I don’t think Apple has too many models. Samsung might.
For myself, advising a friend, part of the trouble is the "Memory gap": Where it jumps from 64Gb @ $700 to 256Gb @ $850.
The 64Gb is too small for her. The 256Gb is too expensive for her.
So, she keeps using the iPhone 5 I gave her when her iPhone 6 was stolen.
1) She bought an iPhone 6 so we can assume that if she didn't get hers stolen and you give her a hand-me-down she's be using it for 3 years, going on 4 now. Rounding down to 3 years that's only $50 per year to get the capacity that she needs to support her excessive data use, which I assume is a bunch of music she can't possibly listen to.
2) So instead of Apple's previous solution of $100 for doubling the capacity they double it twice for twice the cost, which comes out to being a substantially lower cost at only 78¢ per GB, whereas she's willing to pay double that at $1.56 per GB. And that's before we consider that Apple could've kept the entry-level at 32GB and made 128GB an upper tier which would've cost her even more had NAND prices not been where they are for this release, which shows that it's a psychological issue, not a financial one.
3) Considering points 1 and 2 that means in 3 years time she's only spending $50 more what she's willing to pay, which is under $17 a year, or $1.38 per month. Is that really worth sticking with an iPhone that's over 5 year old? Personally, that sounds like a ridiculous line in the sand to draw.
Statistics don't change facts -- just justify arguments. ... You're argument is she should buy an 8 and you justified/rationalized that. ... The fact is, she doesn't want to spend that much on an iPhone.
Sorry, facts win.
Facts do win, hence my calculations on the matter. Her not wanting to pay an extra $50 for another 128GB for another whatever her likely duration is an entirely different matter to which she has every right to make sophistic decisions, but it's not "facts" that are keeping her from buying, it's psychology. If you don't think so then you need to look into why products—which include nearly everything Apple sells—end in a 9 instead of being rounded to the nearest dollar -or- you can argue why $1 is a deal breaker for and 99¢ is perfectly reasonable.
Sorry... You site statistics The FACT is, she doesn't want to pay that much.
yes, he’s stating facts about what the actual cost is. you’re stating she doesn’t care about facts. so let’s cut to the chase - so what?? what is so noteworthy about your friend not wanting to study the actual facts of the cost of these devices and instead doing something largely irrational? why share this?
She is only irrational by YOUR definition -- which is pretty one sided. Because you have different priorities for your money doesn't make her priorities incorrect. And besides, even if you were correct, there is no requirement that an Apple customer has to be "rational" (Meaning they make their decisions based upon the criteria that you set).
So: Why did I share it? Because I suspect that she is a much more typical customer than you are.
BTW, I have some beach front property in Puerto Rico to sell. It's half off -- and you would be irrational not to buy it. Why? Because it's half off and, by my definition, you would be irrational not to buy it.
The facts are about the actual cost. The silliness is to say that $50 over 3 years is such an unwieldily price jump for someone in the market for a brand new, top of the line iPhone that they'd continue using an iPhone into it's 6th year. The irrationality is claiming that you need a minimum of 128GB when we know there current iPhone has less than half that space for user storage, a point I didn't even pick on. The insanity is ignoring the facts, pooh-poohing Apple for not offering an exact size jump only because they used to offer it, and then defending this poor psychology.
I suspect the problem is not one of ignoring the facts, but simply not recognizing them. If she were presented the facts as you stated them in your original comment on this matter, highlighting the fact that the bump in cost to the higher storage capacity model is really not that significant when considering the likely period of ownership, and maybe comparing the annual cost to the proverbial daily cup of joe, she might easily come around. Toss in the trade-in value after the three years of ownership to clinch the deal, which is a factor I suspect few ever consider when confronted with the sticker shock of a retail price, on any product, not just iPhones. Facts do matter, but often must be laid out plainly for consideration.
For myself, advising a friend, part of the trouble is the "Memory gap": Where it jumps from 64Gb @ $700 to 256Gb @ $850.
The 64Gb is too small for her. The 256Gb is too expensive for her.
So, she keeps using the iPhone 5 I gave her when her iPhone 6 was stolen.
That’s just silly. The 8 is so far beyond the 5. If she doesn’t want an 8 why not an SE. same dimensions as the 5 too.
Everyone waiting for an X will be sadly disappointed. Both in the wait time (they’ll never get one for xmas) and version 1 of a new device. I’m grabbing an 8 in a few days.
Ridiculous comment about the X and how people will be “sadly disappointed” because it’s V1 of a new device, so you are going with the 8. HELLO! The 8 is also a new device! Where did you people get your education?
We've seen that superficial thinking since the iPhone 3GS (at least with the iPhone line) and I'm sure we'll see more of it as I think the exterior look will change even less as the Qi charging and nearly edge-to-edge(2x) display will dictate the appearance of the device even more.
That said, in this case there is a case to be made by spliff monkey as there's more than just evolution as there are lateral shifts in major display technologies, a usage concern with the removal of Touch ID, and a potential usage and security issue with Face ID (especially if you have a twin), and even an issue of desire with curved display corners and a notch which some people have clearly rallied against (just as Blackberry users, for example, couldn't wrap their head around a smartphone without a physical QWERTY keyboard).
The chance of having identical twins is about 1 in 350. So that doesn’t reduce the market for the X by all that much. Within the population of identical twins you still need the circumstance where your twin is likely to get hold of your iPhone, and that would reduce the population of adult identical twins where this is a problem because many likely live apart; it would in those cases be about as likely an identical twin gets hold of his/her sibling’s phone as it is for any brother or sister getting hold of a sibling’s phone who lives distant from him/her. Even when I visit my siblings a don’t recall ever touching their phone. I just don’t think the identical twin problem is much of an issue. It’s worth Apple mentioning as it defines a parameter of the limits of FaceID security and is worthy of consideration for that population, but as a factor in overall potential market size of the X, it’s not really meaningful.
That misses the point. A point that Apple literally brought up during the event as being a potential for bypassing the convenience feature of Face ID. A point that they tried to "joke" about and then said that you'd then use a PIN instead of FaceID is that happens. Why do you think they'd say all that If it's, as you put it, "not an issue." As for reducing the market, that has to do with Apple developing and releasing this feature when we're talking about why someone may not want the iPhone X or why they want to hold off on buying the iPhone X so they can see how it performs.
For myself, advising a friend, part of the trouble is the "Memory gap": Where it jumps from 64Gb @ $700 to 256Gb @ $850.
The 64Gb is too small for her. The 256Gb is too expensive for her.
So, she keeps using the iPhone 5 I gave her when her iPhone 6 was stolen.
That’s just silly. The 8 is so far beyond the 5. If she doesn’t want an 8 why not an SE. same dimensions as the 5 too.
Everyone waiting for an X will be sadly disappointed. Both in the wait time (they’ll never get one for xmas) and version 1 of a new device. I’m grabbing an 8 in a few days.
Ridiculous comment about the X and how people will be “sadly disappointed” because it’s V1 of a new device, so you are going with the 8. HELLO! The 8 is also a new device! Where did you people get your education?
We've seen that superficial thinking since the iPhone 3GS (at least with the iPhone line) and I'm sure we'll see more of it as I think the exterior look will change even less as the Qi charging and nearly edge-to-edge(2x) display will dictate the appearance of the device even more.
That said, in this case there is a case to be made by spliff monkey as there's more than just evolution as there are lateral shifts in major display technologies, a usage concern with the removal of Touch ID, and a potential usage and security issue with Face ID (especially if you have a twin), and even an issue of desire with curved display corners and a notch which some people have clearly rallied against (just as Blackberry users, for example, couldn't wrap their head around a smartphone without a physical QWERTY keyboard).
The chance of having identical twins is about 1 in 350. So that doesn’t reduce the market for the X by all that much. Within the population of identical twins you still need the circumstance where your twin is likely to get hold of your iPhone, and that would reduce the population of adult identical twins where this is a problem because many likely live apart; it would in those cases be about as likely an identical twin gets hold of his/her sibling’s phone as it is for any brother or sister getting hold of a sibling’s phone who lives distant from him/her. Even when I visit my siblings a don’t recall ever touching their phone. I just don’t think the identical twin problem is much of an issue. It’s worth Apple mentioning as it defines a parameter of the limits of FaceID security and is worthy of consideration for that population, but as a factor in overall potential market size of the X, it’s not really meaningful.
That misses the point. A point that Apple literally brought up during the event as being a potential for bypassing the convenience feature of Face ID. A point that they tried to "joke" about and then said that you'd then use a PIN instead of FaceID is that happens. Why do you think they'd say all that If it's, as you put it, "not an issue." As for reducing the market, that has to do with Apple developing and releasing this feature when we're talking about why someone may not want the iPhone X or why they want to hold off on buying the iPhone X so they can see how it performs.
If you read back my comment I think you’ll clearly see that I said it’s not an issue in terms of market size, not that it’s not an issue for those affected.
i think you’ll also see that I said that it was worth Apple mentioning because it helped to define the parameters of FaceID security. It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
radarthekat said: It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
They did present twins, as Spock and his evil twin with a goatee (or was that van dike?). Regardless, they pointed it out in a social fashion to obfuscate that this is a real issue they can't get around. I bet they did test very identical twins and possible family members that they found had such similar features that Face ID's security measure was bypassed. We can call that an "extreme circumstance" for the overwhelming majority as it doesn't apply to me—unless Brad Pitt is hanging around for some reason :rimshot:—but for those that do have twins that percentage is going to drop remarkably, hence their comments about disabling that feature. This is where Touch ID may be more useful for those users that want convenience with security.
But it's really a moot point as we're surely to get copious amounts of independent testing to see just how sensitive and secure Face ID under these extreme, atypical conditions. I expect the results to fall inline with what Apple said, but we have to remember that 1:1,000,000 doesn't mean that your twin will have a 1:1,000,000 chance of bypassing it like he's guessing a random 6-digit PIN. The same goes for Touch ID. Biometrics simply do not work that way.
You could take the Man in the iron Mask against his twin and it would't authenticate… but that's because having an iron mask pressed against your face for years is going to do some really awful things to your face. I never could get past that part of the story. I'm hoping that Evil Spock couldn't be able to successful authenticate with Face ID if the original Spock is clean shaven and very little time (i.e.: not enough time to have grown that much facial hair) has passed between checking the device, but we'll have to wait and see if the system is intelligent enough to understand such things.
radarthekat said: It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
They did present twins, as Spock and his evil twin with a goatee (or was that van dike?). Regardless, they pointed it out in a social fashion to obfuscate that this is a real issue they can't get around. I bet they did test very identical twins and possible family members that they found had such similar features that Face ID's security measure was bypassed. We can call that an "extreme circumstance" for the overwhelming majority as it doesn't apply to me—unless Brad Pitt is hanging around for some reason :rimshot:—but for those that do have twins that percentage is going to drop remarkably, hence their comments about disabling that feature. This is where Touch ID may be more useful for those users that want convenience with security.
But it's really a moot point as we're surely to get copious amounts of independent testing to see just how sensitive and secure Face ID under these extreme, atypical conditions. I expect the results to fall inline with what Apple said, but we have to remember that 1:1,000,000 doesn't mean that your twin will have a 1:1,000,000 chance of bypassing it like he's guessing a random 6-digit PIN. The same goes for Touch ID. Biometrics simply do not work that way.
You could take the Man in the iron Mask against his twin and it would't authenticate… but that's because having an iron mask pressed against your face for years is going to do some really awful things to your face. I never could get past that part of the story. I'm hoping that Evil Spock couldn't be able to successful authenticate with Face ID if the original Spock is clean shaven and very little time (i.e.: not enough time to have grown that much facial hair) has passed between checking the device, but we'll have to wait and see if the system is intelligent enough to understand such things.
A fairly simple fix to the identical twin problem could be implemented if Apple so chose. For that subset of a subset who have an identical twin and the twin resides with the iPhone owner or is otherwise frequently proximate to him/her and where the iPhone owner is concerned that the twin might get hold of his/her iPhone, Apple could implement a mode whereby an additional step is required to unlock the phone. A swipe type gesture could be presented after the user’s face is recognized as the owner, or a three digit passcode with a lock out to the full passcode after one or two failed attempts, or even a certain ‘wiggle’ gesture that utilizes the phone’s motion tracking capability. I’m sure Apple could come up with something less onerous than requiring the user to simply disable FaceID and always use the full password. So there are possible enhancements to deal with the identical twin issue; it’s just a matter of deciding to implement something.
radarthekat said: It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
They did present twins, as Spock and his evil twin with a goatee (or was that van dike?). Regardless, they pointed it out in a social fashion to obfuscate that this is a real issue they can't get around. I bet they did test very identical twins and possible family members that they found had such similar features that Face ID's security measure was bypassed. We can call that an "extreme circumstance" for the overwhelming majority as it doesn't apply to me—unless Brad Pitt is hanging around for some reason :rimshot:—but for those that do have twins that percentage is going to drop remarkably, hence their comments about disabling that feature. This is where Touch ID may be more useful for those users that want convenience with security.
But it's really a moot point as we're surely to get copious amounts of independent testing to see just how sensitive and secure Face ID under these extreme, atypical conditions. I expect the results to fall inline with what Apple said, but we have to remember that 1:1,000,000 doesn't mean that your twin will have a 1:1,000,000 chance of bypassing it like he's guessing a random 6-digit PIN. The same goes for Touch ID. Biometrics simply do not work that way.
You could take the Man in the iron Mask against his twin and it would't authenticate… but that's because having an iron mask pressed against your face for years is going to do some really awful things to your face. I never could get past that part of the story. I'm hoping that Evil Spock couldn't be able to successful authenticate with Face ID if the original Spock is clean shaven and very little time (i.e.: not enough time to have grown that much facial hair) has passed between checking the device, but we'll have to wait and see if the system is intelligent enough to understand such things.
A fairly simple fix to the identical twin problem could be implemented if Apple so chose. For that subset of a subset who have an identical twin and the twin resides with the iPhone owner or is otherwise frequently proximate to him/her and where the iPhone owner is concerned that the twin might get hold of his/her iPhone, Apple could implement a mode whereby an additional step is required to unlock the phone. A swipe type gesture could be presented after the user’s face is recognized as the owner, or a three digit passcode with a lock out to the full passcode after one or two failed attempts, or even a certain ‘wiggle’ gesture that utilizes the phone’s motion tracking capability. I’m sure Apple could come up with something less onerous than requiring the user to simply disable FaceID and always use the full password. So there are possible enhancements to deal with the identical twin issue; it’s just a matter of deciding to implement something.
Or even the Apple Watch having a very strong BT presence to the device (which isn't much difference in principle from what I've been wanting with the Mac and iPhone auto-locking for security reasons when you get too far away).
radarthekat said: It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
They did present twins, as Spock and his evil twin with a goatee (or was that van dike?). Regardless, they pointed it out in a social fashion to obfuscate that this is a real issue they can't get around. I bet they did test very identical twins and possible family members that they found had such similar features that Face ID's security measure was bypassed. We can call that an "extreme circumstance" for the overwhelming majority as it doesn't apply to me—unless Brad Pitt is hanging around for some reason :rimshot:—but for those that do have twins that percentage is going to drop remarkably, hence their comments about disabling that feature. This is where Touch ID may be more useful for those users that want convenience with security.
But it's really a moot point as we're surely to get copious amounts of independent testing to see just how sensitive and secure Face ID under these extreme, atypical conditions. I expect the results to fall inline with what Apple said, but we have to remember that 1:1,000,000 doesn't mean that your twin will have a 1:1,000,000 chance of bypassing it like he's guessing a random 6-digit PIN. The same goes for Touch ID. Biometrics simply do not work that way.
You could take the Man in the iron Mask against his twin and it would't authenticate… but that's because having an iron mask pressed against your face for years is going to do some really awful things to your face. I never could get past that part of the story. I'm hoping that Evil Spock couldn't be able to successful authenticate with Face ID if the original Spock is clean shaven and very little time (i.e.: not enough time to have grown that much facial hair) has passed between checking the device, but we'll have to wait and see if the system is intelligent enough to understand such things.
A fairly simple fix to the identical twin problem could be implemented if Apple so chose. For that subset of a subset who have an identical twin and the twin resides with the iPhone owner or is otherwise frequently proximate to him/her and where the iPhone owner is concerned that the twin might get hold of his/her iPhone, Apple could implement a mode whereby an additional step is required to unlock the phone. A swipe type gesture could be presented after the user’s face is recognized as the owner, or a three digit passcode with a lock out to the full passcode after one or two failed attempts, or even a certain ‘wiggle’ gesture that utilizes the phone’s motion tracking capability. I’m sure Apple could come up with something less onerous than requiring the user to simply disable FaceID and always use the full password. So there are possible enhancements to deal with the identical twin issue; it’s just a matter of deciding to implement something.
The issue is not limited to twins only, siblings too must be considered. Brother or sister may unlock your X if they look like you.
https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf "The probability of a false match is different for twins and siblings
that look like you as well as among children under the age of 13, because their distinct facial features may not have fully developed. If you're concerned about
this, we recommend using a passcode to authenticate."
Apple seems to have too many phones for the average non tech person to choose between at the moment: X (available soon) and 8 using A11 chips, 7 using A10, 6S and SE using A9. For base models the lowest price is 349 and the highest 999. It might be slightly easier if the models were renames by the chip, then there would only be three model ranges. but then new tech with the X might not be so obvious. There such a broad range now that the new model 8 may not stand out so much as in the past. Could this contribute to less demand for the 8?
While I think that its great that Apple is offering so many options, I can also see that causing "Paralysis of Analysis" for many.
Oy, vey! You've just been going on about Apple needing to offer a 128GB model of the iPhone 7! That's another model per display size per cellular radio, which is at least 8 more SKUs for the US market alone! Apple can't win even when they drop the price of NAND upgrades considerably.
This isn't unlike people bitching about gasoline going up by a penny or stores charging a 10¢ bag fee while out a bar drink drinking a $14 Moscow mule or at dinner with an $80 bottle of wine. If was really about pinching pennies then you wouldn't be in those environments just as she wouldn't be considering a brand new iPhone with a capacity tier that far exceeds what's she's currently using.
Your REALLY good at complaining. Less good at reading and logic. Actually, you're not very good at all in those things. Well, actually, you stink.
Apple seems to have too many phones for the average non tech person to choose between at the moment: X (available soon) and 8 using A11 chips, 7 using A10, 6S and SE using A9. For base models the lowest price is 349 and the highest 999. It might be slightly easier if the models were renames by the chip, then there would only be three model ranges. but then new tech with the X might not be so obvious. There such a broad range now that the new model 8 may not stand out so much as in the past. Could this contribute to less demand for the 8?
While I think that its great that Apple is offering so many options, I can also see that causing "Paralysis of Analysis" for many. ... "Well, this one would be good. But this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage.... Oh, I'll think about this later...."
How does anyone ever make a purchase decision in the Android universe? No. I don’t think Apple has too many models. Samsung might.
I wasn't complaining that Apple has "too many models". You read that into my statement. Neither did I compare Apple to Android. You read that into my statement too.
What I DID say was that with so many new phones available with overlapping capacities and functionalities as well as overlapping prices, that some buyers could become locked into 'paralysis of analysis' - and not be able to decide. Or decide that its easier not to decide.
Should Apple pull models out of their lineup? (As you seem to think I said). NO! That number of options has distinct advantages. But, it also creates complications that weren't there previously. Originally, you had one choice. Then they added multiple storage capacities. Then they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes. Now they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes and with (increasingly) multiple model years.
Apple is increasingly getting into trade-offs. Like the earphone jack: getting rid of it provided advantages but it also provided drawbacks. Not everything Apple does can be clean and pure and all goodness. The world doesn't work that way.
Some on this forum mistakenly seem to think that pointing out an issue is criticizing Apple. In this case, I am very sure that Apple thought through the disadvantages of offering so many overlapping options and decided it was worth it. I agree with them. I think the flexibility it provides is good. But that doesn't change the fact that that flexibility also made things more complicated.
Apple seems to have too many phones for the average non tech person to choose between at the moment: X (available soon) and 8 using A11 chips, 7 using A10, 6S and SE using A9. For base models the lowest price is 349 and the highest 999. It might be slightly easier if the models were renames by the chip, then there would only be three model ranges. but then new tech with the X might not be so obvious. There such a broad range now that the new model 8 may not stand out so much as in the past. Could this contribute to less demand for the 8?
While I think that its great that Apple is offering so many options, I can also see that causing "Paralysis of Analysis" for many. ... "Well, this one would be good. But this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage.... Oh, I'll think about this later...."
How does anyone ever make a purchase decision in the Android universe? No. I don’t think Apple has too many models. Samsung might.
I wasn't complaining that Apple has "too many models". You read that into my statement. Neither did I compare Apple to Android. You read that into my statement too.
What I DID say was that with so many new phones available with overlapping capacities and functionalities as well as overlapping prices, that some buyers could become locked into 'paralysis of analysis' - and not be able to decide. Or decide that its easier not to decide.
Should Apple pull models out of their lineup? (As you seem to think I said). NO! That number of options has distinct advantages. But, it also creates complications that weren't there previously. Originally, you had one choice. Then they added multiple storage capacities. Then they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes. Now they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes and with (increasingly) multiple model years.
Apple is increasingly getting into trade-offs. Like the earphone jack: getting rid of it provided advantages but it also provided drawbacks. Not everything Apple does can be clean and pure and all goodness. The world doesn't work that way.
Some on this forum mistakenly seem to think that pointing out an issue is criticizing Apple. In this case, I am very sure that Apple thought through the disadvantages of offering so many overlapping options and decided it was worth it. I agree with them. I think the flexibility it provides is good. But that doesn't change the fact that that flexibility also made things more complicated.
Storage capacity is not a differentiator, it is just an option. The differentiator is the CPU, and there are no overlapping / confusing models there. There are three CPUs, A9, A10, A11. And three corresponding iPhone ranges. 6s/SE, 7 and 8/X. Low-end, mid-range and high-end. For a buying decision one must consider basic models first, then think about options. When you introduce options, some overlapping may arise but think of it as a clue to the buyer to evaluate how reasonable her choice of basic model was.
Apple seems to have too many phones for the average non tech person to choose between at the moment: X (available soon) and 8 using A11 chips, 7 using A10, 6S and SE using A9. For base models the lowest price is 349 and the highest 999. It might be slightly easier if the models were renames by the chip, then there would only be three model ranges. but then new tech with the X might not be so obvious. There such a broad range now that the new model 8 may not stand out so much as in the past. Could this contribute to less demand for the 8?
While I think that its great that Apple is offering so many options, I can also see that causing "Paralysis of Analysis" for many. ... "Well, this one would be good. But this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage. And this one has this advantage.... Oh, I'll think about this later...."
How does anyone ever make a purchase decision in the Android universe? No. I don’t think Apple has too many models. Samsung might.
I wasn't complaining that Apple has "too many models". You read that into my statement. Neither did I compare Apple to Android. You read that into my statement too.
What I DID say was that with so many new phones available with overlapping capacities and functionalities as well as overlapping prices, that some buyers could become locked into 'paralysis of analysis' - and not be able to decide. Or decide that its easier not to decide.
Should Apple pull models out of their lineup? (As you seem to think I said). NO! That number of options has distinct advantages. But, it also creates complications that weren't there previously. Originally, you had one choice. Then they added multiple storage capacities. Then they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes. Now they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes and with (increasingly) multiple model years.
Apple is increasingly getting into trade-offs. Like the earphone jack: getting rid of it provided advantages but it also provided drawbacks. Not everything Apple does can be clean and pure and all goodness. The world doesn't work that way.
Some on this forum mistakenly seem to think that pointing out an issue is criticizing Apple. In this case, I am very sure that Apple thought through the disadvantages of offering so many overlapping options and decided it was worth it. I agree with them. I think the flexibility it provides is good. But that doesn't change the fact that that flexibility also made things more complicated.
Storage capacity is not a differentiator, it is just an option. The differentiator is the CPU, and there are no overlapping / confusing models there. There are three CPUs, A9, A10, A11. And three corresponding iPhone ranges. 6s/SE, 7 and 8/X. Low-end, mid-range and high-end. For a buying decision one must consider basic models first, then think about options. When you introduce options, some overlapping may arise but think of it as a clue to the buyer to evaluate how reasonable her choice of basic model was.
I included that in the multiple model year options (which incorporates more than just CPU upgrades).
¿Cut to 50 percent of WHAT?
It is entirely possible that initial production levels of iPhone 8 were originally set 'stupidly HIGH' -- to hedge the possibility that NO iPhone X units would be available before Christmas.
This iPhone 8 cut could be really good news -- it could mean iPhone X is no longer in trouble. Apple could be cancelling its 'stupidly high' hedge of massive numbers of iPhone 8 and going with "regular" production amounts.
Comments
I suspect the problem is not one of ignoring the facts, but simply not recognizing them. If she were presented the facts as you stated them in your original comment on this matter, highlighting the fact that the bump in cost to the higher storage capacity model is really not that significant when considering the likely period of ownership, and maybe comparing the annual cost to the proverbial daily cup of joe, she might easily come around. Toss in the trade-in value after the three years of ownership to clinch the deal, which is a factor I suspect few ever consider when confronted with the sticker shock of a retail price, on any product, not just iPhones. Facts do matter, but often must be laid out plainly for consideration.
i think you’ll also see that I said that it was worth Apple mentioning because it helped to define the parameters of FaceID security. It was mentioned with fewer words than the fact that the Hollywood mask makers could not fool FaceID, and with no images of any twins presented behind the speaker. Apple mentioned this specifically in context of FaceID’s level of security. To point out that it takes a fairly extreme circumstance to fool it, and yes, to inform those relatively few who find themselves subject to that circumstance. Watch back that section of the keynote, listen to the speaker’s words and intonation and the context in which it was discussed and you’ll see what I’m saying.
But it's really a moot point as we're surely to get copious amounts of independent testing to see just how sensitive and secure Face ID under these extreme, atypical conditions. I expect the results to fall inline with what Apple said, but we have to remember that 1:1,000,000 doesn't mean that your twin will have a 1:1,000,000 chance of bypassing it like he's guessing a random 6-digit PIN. The same goes for Touch ID. Biometrics simply do not work that way.
You could take the Man in the iron Mask against his twin and it would't authenticate… but that's because having an iron mask pressed against your face for years is going to do some really awful things to your face. I never could get past that part of the story. I'm hoping that Evil Spock couldn't be able to successful authenticate with Face ID if the original Spock is clean shaven and very little time (i.e.: not enough time to have grown that much facial hair) has passed between checking the device, but we'll have to wait and see if the system is intelligent enough to understand such things.
A fairly simple fix to the identical twin problem could be implemented if Apple so chose. For that subset of a subset who have an identical twin and the twin resides with the iPhone owner or is otherwise frequently proximate to him/her and where the iPhone owner is concerned that the twin might get hold of his/her iPhone, Apple could implement a mode whereby an additional step is required to unlock the phone. A swipe type gesture could be presented after the user’s face is recognized as the owner, or a three digit passcode with a lock out to the full passcode after one or two failed attempts, or even a certain ‘wiggle’ gesture that utilizes the phone’s motion tracking capability. I’m sure Apple could come up with something less onerous than requiring the user to simply disable FaceID and always use the full password. So there are possible enhancements to deal with the identical twin issue; it’s just a matter of deciding to implement something.
https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf
"The probability of a false match is different for twins and siblings that look like you as well as among children under the age of 13, because their distinct facial features may not have fully developed. If you're concerned about this, we recommend using a passcode to authenticate."
Less good at reading and logic. Actually, you're not very good at all in those things. Well, actually, you stink.
Neither did I compare Apple to Android. You read that into my statement too.
What I DID say was that with so many new phones available with overlapping capacities and functionalities as well as overlapping prices, that some buyers could become locked into 'paralysis of analysis' - and not be able to decide. Or decide that its easier not to decide.
Should Apple pull models out of their lineup? (As you seem to think I said). NO!
That number of options has distinct advantages. But, it also creates complications that weren't there previously.
Originally, you had one choice.
Then they added multiple storage capacities.
Then they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes.
Now they added multiple storage capacities in multiple sizes and with (increasingly) multiple model years.
Apple is increasingly getting into trade-offs. Like the earphone jack: getting rid of it provided advantages but it also provided drawbacks. Not everything Apple does can be clean and pure and all goodness. The world doesn't work that way.
Some on this forum mistakenly seem to think that pointing out an issue is criticizing Apple. In this case, I am very sure that Apple thought through the disadvantages of offering so many overlapping options and decided it was worth it. I agree with them. I think the flexibility it provides is good. But that doesn't change the fact that that flexibility also made things more complicated.