I'd love to see data on how many people use these supposedly essential features such as 3G and MMS... My guess is very, very few. It's totally possible to send multimedia messages on the iPhone, using email - and because it's email, it's free...
I have a 3G phone, every person I know has a 3G phone, do we use 3G? Do we hell! The phones that implement it are so badly designed it makes 3G worthless.
Nobody cares for video conferencing.
The browser on everything bar the iPhone is utter crap.
it would be nice to send images and movies online via 3G, but its soo poorly implemented most people just dont bother.
I'm yet to find a killer app for 3G that currently exists and is implemented well.
T-Mobile said it will begin offering the unlocked iPhone, which can function on other wireless networks, for 999 euros ($1,470). It will also continue to sell a version tied to its own network with a two year service contract for 399 euros ($590).
Heh heh toot toot...... in the first story on this from two days ago, I said:
"Why can't Apple just offer a no-contract phone for 1500 Euros, agree to split the difference of any such purchases with their local service provider in Europe, and just get on with it........"
How do you know ?1000 isn't a fair price, with the rest being covered by subsidies (or a percentage of monthly subscription fees.)? Wishful thinking and comparison with completely different products isn't proof.
No wishful thinking at alll
I am basing my conclusions on the price of the iPod touch which is, GSM/EDGE hardware excluded, a similar device. After all the iPhone was the best iPod they ever made...
By taking the price of a 8GB touch and then adding some bits and bobs for the GSM and EDGE stack (fair to assume that this costs < 100$ else Nokia could not manufactor GSM/EDGE phone for that price....), I would say that 399 Euro is indeed a reasonable price where no subsidies are paid.
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
But 399 when scaled seems about right. Look as well at the bill of goods that a teardown shows. isuppli guestimates 265$ to make the thing and that is 178 Euro...
The browser on everything bar the iPhone is utter crap.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
I just don't understand why the iPhone is the only phone out there that people insist on including the price of a 2-year contract when quoting the ownerships costs.
That should be figured into the cost of owning others as well, but it should be included because it's far less useful without the service. iPhone is more useless without the service because it can't be used at all without the service, even the non-phone features.
Keep in mind that even though iPhone service is relative bargain in the US compared to using other devices, it's not the same in Europe. Your anecdote sounds like a US example, DE, UK and FR plan pricing looks to be considerably higher than competing plans.
If I bought an iPhone, it would increase my monthly costs by 50%, but that's because I don't use internet on a phone right now. I don't mind the extra cost, but I can't just leave that out of the equation.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
It's the users experience that counts, not the underlying architecture.
I am basing my conclusions on the price of the iPod touch which is, GSM/EDGE hardware excluded, a similar device. After all the iPhone was the best iPod they ever made...
By taking the price of a 8GB touch and then adding some bits and bobs for the GSM and EDGE stack (fair to assume that this costs < 100$ else Nokia could not manufactor GSM/EDGE phone for that price....), I would say that 399 Euro is indeed a reasonable price where no subsidies are paid.
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
But 399 when scaled seems about right. Look as well at the bill of goods that a teardown shows. isuppli guestimates 265$ to make the thing and that is 178 Euro...
I leave the maths to you....
You've left out part of the equation - the wireless company's investment to enable current and future iPhone unique services. I'll leave the math to you....
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
I leave the maths to you....
Perhaps you should look up the definition of "kickback."
yet everyone wants to run up the ownership cost figures on the iPhone. What's the agenda.
(a) it's a product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
(b) it's a desirable product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
(c) it's a desirable product that comes the USA which is supposed to be cheap as in Big Mac that chucks their traditional contracts out the window.
So now the country that puts torture, tax returns, and driving exams into the same category-o-fun is having an uberfit over a fucking phone (seriously - if you want German comedy - take a driving test. Comedy GOLD. Learning to fly a LEM takes less time and effort.).
I've never been more proud to be an American. I had no idea that the price of MY (mere) phone included watching the entire planet throw temper tantrums and hurl themselves into the courts and the halls of govt every 2 weeks. How many counties are we up to and how many left to go?
what will happen if unlocked iPhone offered in US for $999???
It's not that useful in the US because the only other major GSM provider has far worse coverage. It would need to be CDMA capable to run on several US carriers. It would be better for the person that often goes overseas though, being able to swap sims on demand.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
Thats all well and good, but i could put a ferrari engine in my moped, and it would still be crap.
Its no good having features if they are so badly implemented its worthless!
The pricepoint of 999 for the phone is -however- quite insulting (as everyone knows that part of the deal was "no subsidies".
How would everyone know that? Do you have a copy of their contract with Apple?
It is well established in the US that Apple is receiving a percentage of monthly fees, so it would not be surprising if this occurs elsewhere.
As for 'insulting', all the stupid lawsuits from people who want everything without paying for it are even more insulting. Apple had a business deal with T-mobile and Vodaphone didn't like it. T-mobile gave Vodaphone exactly what they requested. So what's the beef (other than the usual whining from people who refuse to accept the free market)?
The Iphone is overpriced and under delivers paying ?999 is ridiculous but also riculous is signing up to a 2 year contract and STILL having to pay ?399.
The thing is overpriced. Best wait till next year when no doubt the version 2 will come out with all the features europeans are used to like 3g, mms etc.
Then don't buy one and stop whining.
Lots of people like it and are willing to pay the price. The fact that you won't pay it doesn't mean it's overpriced.
I just don't understand why the iPhone is the only phone out there that people insist on including the price of a 2-year contract when quoting the ownerships costs.
When I bought a Palm Tre0 700P, with subsidy and mandatory 2-year contract on Verizon, the out of pocket cost on the phone itself was $399, and the 900 minute, unlimited data plan was $119 per month. I never once read an article, review, or forum post complaining about that.
My iPhone, post-credit/rebate was $499, and the 900 minute, unlimited data plan is $79.99 per month. I spent $100 more upfront, and am saving $30 per month ($720 over contract), yet everyone wants to run up the ownership cost figures on the iPhone. What's the agenda.
The agenda is the same as Apple has had to face for decades. The media doesn't like them and wants to make them look bad every chance they get. 'Analysts' are even worse.
My favorite was a little scheme I exposed about 10 years ago. Every quarter, there were huge headlines about sales of Mac software declining. When I dug into the matter, I found that this was based on estimates. When the final figures came out, they showed that Apple's software sales had, in reality, increased every quarter. Yet the 'declining' reports make front page headlines in the computer mags while they NEVER published the reports on the final figures. This happened quarter after quarter for at least the 3 years I tracked it.
Cranking the price up to 999 euros is consumer rape. Seems more like a sidestep around the ruling, so they can say they are complying without taking any actual hit to their market share. For all practical purposes, you still have to go with their contract, unless you've got enough money that you just don't care. So the masses stay with T-Mobile.
Ought to be illegal. Illegal not because it's a crappy thing to do, but because they've done it in an apparent effort to side-step the court order. That's just f-ing dishonest.
C
They did exactly what the court told them to do. How is that dishonest?
Any company is free to price their product any way they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, they lower the price or stop selling it.
I really don't get this attitude where people think that they're free to dictate how companies should price their product. If you want to do that, take Steve Jobs' job. Until then, your only option is to buy or not to by (or to whine as seems to be popular around here).
Oh? I thought this little court visit was about Apple and their contract with T-Mobile and how it differs from other phones and providers.
Silly fucking me.
If you really did mean something about the contract between Apple and T-Mobile, and not between the user and provider, then I don't see what that has to do with us.
Comments
I'd love to see data on how many people use these supposedly essential features such as 3G and MMS... My guess is very, very few. It's totally possible to send multimedia messages on the iPhone, using email - and because it's email, it's free...
I have a 3G phone, every person I know has a 3G phone, do we use 3G? Do we hell! The phones that implement it are so badly designed it makes 3G worthless.
Nobody cares for video conferencing.
The browser on everything bar the iPhone is utter crap.
it would be nice to send images and movies online via 3G, but its soo poorly implemented most people just dont bother.
I'm yet to find a killer app for 3G that currently exists and is implemented well.
T-Mobile said it will begin offering the unlocked iPhone, which can function on other wireless networks, for 999 euros ($1,470). It will also continue to sell a version tied to its own network with a two year service contract for 399 euros ($590).
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Heh heh toot toot...... in the first story on this from two days ago, I said:
"Why can't Apple just offer a no-contract phone for 1500 Euros, agree to split the difference of any such purchases with their local service provider in Europe, and just get on with it........"
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...11#post1174711
Looks like I got the currency wrong!
PS: Of course, it's possible that I was not the only one to have said it....... but still....
Absolutely correct.
How do you know ?1000 isn't a fair price, with the rest being covered by subsidies (or a percentage of monthly subscription fees.)? Wishful thinking and comparison with completely different products isn't proof.
No wishful thinking at alll
I am basing my conclusions on the price of the iPod touch which is, GSM/EDGE hardware excluded, a similar device. After all the iPhone was the best iPod they ever made...
By taking the price of a 8GB touch and then adding some bits and bobs for the GSM and EDGE stack (fair to assume that this costs < 100$ else Nokia could not manufactor GSM/EDGE phone for that price....), I would say that 399 Euro is indeed a reasonable price where no subsidies are paid.
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
But 399 when scaled seems about right. Look as well at the bill of goods that a teardown shows. isuppli guestimates 265$ to make the thing and that is 178 Euro...
I leave the maths to you....
The browser on everything bar the iPhone is utter crap.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
I just don't understand why the iPhone is the only phone out there that people insist on including the price of a 2-year contract when quoting the ownerships costs.
That should be figured into the cost of owning others as well, but it should be included because it's far less useful without the service. iPhone is more useless without the service because it can't be used at all without the service, even the non-phone features.
Keep in mind that even though iPhone service is relative bargain in the US compared to using other devices, it's not the same in Europe. Your anecdote sounds like a US example, DE, UK and FR plan pricing looks to be considerably higher than competing plans.
If I bought an iPhone, it would increase my monthly costs by 50%, but that's because I don't use internet on a phone right now. I don't mind the extra cost, but I can't just leave that out of the equation.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
It's the users experience that counts, not the underlying architecture.
No wishful thinking at alll
I am basing my conclusions on the price of the iPod touch which is, GSM/EDGE hardware excluded, a similar device. After all the iPhone was the best iPod they ever made...
By taking the price of a 8GB touch and then adding some bits and bobs for the GSM and EDGE stack (fair to assume that this costs < 100$ else Nokia could not manufactor GSM/EDGE phone for that price....), I would say that 399 Euro is indeed a reasonable price where no subsidies are paid.
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
But 399 when scaled seems about right. Look as well at the bill of goods that a teardown shows. isuppli guestimates 265$ to make the thing and that is 178 Euro...
I leave the maths to you....
You've left out part of the equation - the wireless company's investment to enable current and future iPhone unique services. I'll leave the math to you....
The other reason is the operator kick back Apple gets of the airtime. The amount they get as a kick back equates to some extend to the amount they pay other retailers for a new customer. OK sometimes they pay more - else you would not get a N95 for 1 Euro (and a hefty 24 month contract).
I leave the maths to you....
Perhaps you should look up the definition of "kickback."
Perhaps you should look up the definition of "kickback."
I really don't see the problem here. Do you have a suggestion for a better word to use?
yet everyone wants to run up the ownership cost figures on the iPhone. What's the agenda.
(a) it's a product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
(b) it's a desirable product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
(c) it's a desirable product that comes the USA which is supposed to be cheap as in Big Mac that chucks their traditional contracts out the window.
So now the country that puts torture, tax returns, and driving exams into the same category-o-fun is having an uberfit over a fucking phone (seriously - if you want German comedy - take a driving test. Comedy GOLD. Learning to fly a LEM takes less time and effort.).
I've never been more proud to be an American. I had no idea that the price of MY (mere) phone included watching the entire planet throw temper tantrums and hurl themselves into the courts and the halls of govt every 2 weeks. How many counties are we up to and how many left to go?
What a deal! CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
what will happen if unlocked iPhone offered in US for $999???
It's not that useful in the US because the only other major GSM provider has far worse coverage. It would need to be CDMA capable to run on several US carriers. It would be better for the person that often goes overseas though, being able to swap sims on demand.
Ehem - Nokia uses WebKit in their latest series 60 phones. Would you really call WebKit crap ? What other browser uses the same framework ? Was that Safari by any chance ?
Thats all well and good, but i could put a ferrari engine in my moped, and it would still be crap.
Its no good having features if they are so badly implemented its worthless!
The pricepoint of 999 for the phone is -however- quite insulting (as everyone knows that part of the deal was "no subsidies".
How would everyone know that? Do you have a copy of their contract with Apple?
It is well established in the US that Apple is receiving a percentage of monthly fees, so it would not be surprising if this occurs elsewhere.
As for 'insulting', all the stupid lawsuits from people who want everything without paying for it are even more insulting. Apple had a business deal with T-mobile and Vodaphone didn't like it. T-mobile gave Vodaphone exactly what they requested. So what's the beef (other than the usual whining from people who refuse to accept the free market)?
The Iphone is overpriced and under delivers paying ?999 is ridiculous but also riculous is signing up to a 2 year contract and STILL having to pay ?399.
The thing is overpriced. Best wait till next year when no doubt the version 2 will come out with all the features europeans are used to like 3g, mms etc.
Then don't buy one and stop whining.
Lots of people like it and are willing to pay the price. The fact that you won't pay it doesn't mean it's overpriced.
I just don't understand why the iPhone is the only phone out there that people insist on including the price of a 2-year contract when quoting the ownerships costs.
When I bought a Palm Tre0 700P, with subsidy and mandatory 2-year contract on Verizon, the out of pocket cost on the phone itself was $399, and the 900 minute, unlimited data plan was $119 per month. I never once read an article, review, or forum post complaining about that.
My iPhone, post-credit/rebate was $499, and the 900 minute, unlimited data plan is $79.99 per month. I spent $100 more upfront, and am saving $30 per month ($720 over contract), yet everyone wants to run up the ownership cost figures on the iPhone. What's the agenda.
The agenda is the same as Apple has had to face for decades. The media doesn't like them and wants to make them look bad every chance they get. 'Analysts' are even worse.
My favorite was a little scheme I exposed about 10 years ago. Every quarter, there were huge headlines about sales of Mac software declining. When I dug into the matter, I found that this was based on estimates. When the final figures came out, they showed that Apple's software sales had, in reality, increased every quarter. Yet the 'declining' reports make front page headlines in the computer mags while they NEVER published the reports on the final figures. This happened quarter after quarter for at least the 3 years I tracked it.
Face it, bad news about Apple sells.
(a) it's a product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
(b) it's a desirable product that chucks traditional contracts out the window
What? The contract is almost imperceptibly different, far from being chucked out the window.
Cranking the price up to 999 euros is consumer rape. Seems more like a sidestep around the ruling, so they can say they are complying without taking any actual hit to their market share. For all practical purposes, you still have to go with their contract, unless you've got enough money that you just don't care. So the masses stay with T-Mobile.
Ought to be illegal. Illegal not because it's a crappy thing to do, but because they've done it in an apparent effort to side-step the court order. That's just f-ing dishonest.
C
They did exactly what the court told them to do. How is that dishonest?
Any company is free to price their product any way they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, they lower the price or stop selling it.
I really don't get this attitude where people think that they're free to dictate how companies should price their product. If you want to do that, take Steve Jobs' job. Until then, your only option is to buy or not to by (or to whine as seems to be popular around here).
What? The contract is almost imperceptibly different, far from being chucked out the window.
Oh? I thought this little court visit was about Apple and their contract with T-Mobile and how it differs from other phones and providers.
Silly fucking me.
Oh? I thought this little court visit was about Apple and their contract with T-Mobile and how it differs from other phones and providers.
Silly fucking me.
If you really did mean something about the contract between Apple and T-Mobile, and not between the user and provider, then I don't see what that has to do with us.