And one phone has extremely limited quantities around the world; the other one? I don't live in Europe, so I don't know how hard it is to get an N8, but I'd be very surprised if there's a serious shortage of them.
I don't live there either, but considering they only started shipping them yesterday, I don't think anyone could really say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemikeb
The more restricted the supply, the higher the price. It's simple supply and demand. I'm not surprised at such a high iPhone 4 price, at this time. In time, if iPhone 4 availability eases, its Finnish price should go down. We shall see.
This is Apple we are talking about, they usually only change the prices on large currency rate changes. I doubt the iPhone 4 prices will change until the next model is released/announced.
That wasn't the point was it? One poster seemed to question the 700USD price tag of the iPhone, when jfanning said not everyone can afford a 700USD phone.
Following the original point, these users wouldn't afford the Galaxy S or N8 either, but they could possibly afford the "plasticky Nokia" 5230 (Nuron in the US) touch smartphone for example. Or the even cheaper non-touch phones.
The 700USD phones are nice for us priviledged, not so nice for the rest. Hundreds of millions of people are very thankful for the creaky plasticky phone's. That has nothing to do with competitive pricing, but a lot more with the target markets and the reasons why plasticky phones exist alongside metal and glass phones.
Regs, Jarkko
If you look at the original post, jfanning's response was condescending and gratuitous.
jfanning reworded the OP's post to say what jfanning wanted hin to have said so he could publish the response that he did.
The OP made no reference to cost or affordability -- only the cheapness of the products manufactured, and the difficulty of the UIs. Cheap != low cost!
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126
AOL, Yahoo, Google, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, HP, MS, Palm, Nokia, Verizon and Sony had their chance and they chose to sell 'cheap' plastic, creaky, crap with crappy OS's.
Thanks, Apple and thanks to Stevo for making the nerdy engineer produce something usable and worthwhile...
Apparently, jfanning has an agenda because he replied:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
So, what you are saying is, people that can't afford US$700 for a phone, don't deserve to own one?
The appropriate answer to jfanning would be:
No, jfanning-- that's what you are saying!
... notice now that was done without rewording his post!
If you look at the original post, jfanning's response was condescending and gratuitous.
no it wasn't, it is you interpretation that it is, if you interpretated it that way, then sorry, you have made a mistake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
jfanning reworded the OP's post to say what jfanning wanted hin to have said so he could publish the response that he did.
I didn't reword something in the way you are saying, I read something, made an interpretation, then preceeded to ask if that is what they meant. Now there has been several replies to my question, yet none from the person I actually asked, they are the only one than confirm or deny if I have interpretated correctly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Apparently, jfanning has an agenda because he replied:
No agenda, the OP made a statement, I wanted confirmation on that statement, confirmation from the person who made it. Yet they haven't replied, but you did. How can you know what the person meant, unless you have an agenda....
See, two can play at that game.
I was taught at school, at university, and at work, if I was wanting confirmation that I understand something correctly, to reword it how I understand it and ask for confirmation. So what is the issue? Why do you have such agenda against me wanting clarification on something? What is you issue with this situation?
no it wasn't, it is you interpretation that it is, if you interpretated it that way, then sorry, you have made a mistake.
I didn't reword something in the way you are saying, I read something, made an interpretation, then preceeded to ask if that is what they meant. Now there has been several replies to my question, yet none from the person I actually asked, they are the only one than confirm or deny if I have interpretated correctly.
No agenda, the OP made a statement, I wanted confirmation on that statement, confirmation from the person who made it. Yet they haven't replied, but you did. How can you know what the person meant, unless you have an agenda....
See, two can play at that game.
I was taught at school, at university, and at work, if I was wanting confirmation that I understand something correctly, to reword it how I understand it and ask for confirmation. So what is the issue? Why do you have such agenda against me wanting clarification on something? What is you issue with this situation?
It's quite a mental leap from the OP:
--Criticizing manufacturers for the quality and complexity of their products
to your assumption:
--That he said that people who can't afford a luxury phone don't deserve a phone.
Why go there?
Why do it in such a way as to challenge rather than to confirm?
You didn't reword his statement, you rewrote it -- changing the topic and meaning.
Something like:
-- What should people who can't afford a $700 phone do?
would be more tactful and appropriate for reasoned discussion.
Instead of "asking for confirmation" you were "telling him a different question"!
I don't really have an agenda, except I am retired, enjoy Apple products, am an AAPL shareholder, admire the company, and generally (not always) promote Apple solutions. All of this because I think they are the best solutions available!
I come to these forums to participate in reasoned discussions about the things that interest me.
When someone makes a rude or distracting post, such as yours, I usually ignore it, and move on.
In this case, others were using your post to build upon-- creating further animosity and straying from the topic of this thread:
"Apple will use baseband from CDMA giant for iPhone 5 and iPad 2 - report".
Because of that, I decided to weigh in with my opinion.
--Criticizing manufacturers for the quality and complexity of their products
to your assumption:
--That he said that people who can't afford a luxury phone don't deserve a phone.
Why go there?
So if someone "goes there", no one else can?
The reason the phones are "cheaper" in quality is due to them being sold cheaper, for people that can't, or don't want to afford expensive phones. If you can't understand that, then that is your issue, so you can get off your high horse now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I don't really have an agenda, except I am retired, enjoy Apple products, am an AAPL shareholder, admire the company, and generally (not always) promote Apple solutions. All of this because I think they are the best solutions available!
Actually the second you mentioned you were a shareholder you raised your agenda. I don't care what products you own, or recommend to people, but don't claim you are unbiased, when it is clear you are not.
Comments
Competitiveness depends on the individual's criterias for what fueature's and functionalities they value and by how muchI guess.
very true
And one phone has extremely limited quantities around the world; the other one? I don't live in Europe, so I don't know how hard it is to get an N8, but I'd be very surprised if there's a serious shortage of them.
I don't live there either, but considering they only started shipping them yesterday, I don't think anyone could really say.
The more restricted the supply, the higher the price. It's simple supply and demand. I'm not surprised at such a high iPhone 4 price, at this time. In time, if iPhone 4 availability eases, its Finnish price should go down. We shall see.
This is Apple we are talking about, they usually only change the prices on large currency rate changes. I doubt the iPhone 4 prices will change until the next model is released/announced.
That wasn't the point was it? One poster seemed to question the 700USD price tag of the iPhone, when jfanning said not everyone can afford a 700USD phone.
Following the original point, these users wouldn't afford the Galaxy S or N8 either, but they could possibly afford the "plasticky Nokia" 5230 (Nuron in the US) touch smartphone for example. Or the even cheaper non-touch phones.
The 700USD phones are nice for us priviledged, not so nice for the rest. Hundreds of millions of people are very thankful for the creaky plasticky phone's. That has nothing to do with competitive pricing, but a lot more with the target markets and the reasons why plasticky phones exist alongside metal and glass phones.
Regs, Jarkko
If you look at the original post, jfanning's response was condescending and gratuitous.
jfanning reworded the OP's post to say what jfanning wanted hin to have said so he could publish the response that he did.
The OP made no reference to cost or affordability -- only the cheapness of the products manufactured, and the difficulty of the UIs. Cheap != low cost!
AOL, Yahoo, Google, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, HP, MS, Palm, Nokia, Verizon and Sony had their chance and they chose to sell 'cheap' plastic, creaky, crap with crappy OS's.
Thanks, Apple and thanks to Stevo for making the nerdy engineer produce something usable and worthwhile...
Apparently, jfanning has an agenda because he replied:
So, what you are saying is, people that can't afford US$700 for a phone, don't deserve to own one?
The appropriate answer to jfanning would be:
No, jfanning-- that's what you are saying!
... notice now that was done without rewording his post!
.
If you look at the original post, jfanning's response was condescending and gratuitous.
no it wasn't, it is you interpretation that it is, if you interpretated it that way, then sorry, you have made a mistake.
jfanning reworded the OP's post to say what jfanning wanted hin to have said so he could publish the response that he did.
I didn't reword something in the way you are saying, I read something, made an interpretation, then preceeded to ask if that is what they meant. Now there has been several replies to my question, yet none from the person I actually asked, they are the only one than confirm or deny if I have interpretated correctly.
Apparently, jfanning has an agenda because he replied:
No agenda, the OP made a statement, I wanted confirmation on that statement, confirmation from the person who made it. Yet they haven't replied, but you did. How can you know what the person meant, unless you have an agenda....
See, two can play at that game.
I was taught at school, at university, and at work, if I was wanting confirmation that I understand something correctly, to reword it how I understand it and ask for confirmation. So what is the issue? Why do you have such agenda against me wanting clarification on something? What is you issue with this situation?
no it wasn't, it is you interpretation that it is, if you interpretated it that way, then sorry, you have made a mistake.
I didn't reword something in the way you are saying, I read something, made an interpretation, then preceeded to ask if that is what they meant. Now there has been several replies to my question, yet none from the person I actually asked, they are the only one than confirm or deny if I have interpretated correctly.
No agenda, the OP made a statement, I wanted confirmation on that statement, confirmation from the person who made it. Yet they haven't replied, but you did. How can you know what the person meant, unless you have an agenda....
See, two can play at that game.
I was taught at school, at university, and at work, if I was wanting confirmation that I understand something correctly, to reword it how I understand it and ask for confirmation. So what is the issue? Why do you have such agenda against me wanting clarification on something? What is you issue with this situation?
It's quite a mental leap from the OP:
--Criticizing manufacturers for the quality and complexity of their products
to your assumption:
--That he said that people who can't afford a luxury phone don't deserve a phone.
Why go there?
Why do it in such a way as to challenge rather than to confirm?
You didn't reword his statement, you rewrote it -- changing the topic and meaning.
Something like:
-- What should people who can't afford a $700 phone do?
would be more tactful and appropriate for reasoned discussion.
Instead of "asking for confirmation" you were "telling him a different question"!
I don't really have an agenda, except I am retired, enjoy Apple products, am an AAPL shareholder, admire the company, and generally (not always) promote Apple solutions. All of this because I think they are the best solutions available!
I come to these forums to participate in reasoned discussions about the things that interest me.
When someone makes a rude or distracting post, such as yours, I usually ignore it, and move on.
In this case, others were using your post to build upon-- creating further animosity and straying from the topic of this thread:
"Apple will use baseband from CDMA giant for iPhone 5 and iPad 2 - report".
Because of that, I decided to weigh in with my opinion.
.
C.
It's quite a mental leap from the OP:
--Criticizing manufacturers for the quality and complexity of their products
to your assumption:
--That he said that people who can't afford a luxury phone don't deserve a phone.
Why go there?
So if someone "goes there", no one else can?
The reason the phones are "cheaper" in quality is due to them being sold cheaper, for people that can't, or don't want to afford expensive phones. If you can't understand that, then that is your issue, so you can get off your high horse now.
I don't really have an agenda, except I am retired, enjoy Apple products, am an AAPL shareholder, admire the company, and generally (not always) promote Apple solutions. All of this because I think they are the best solutions available!
Actually the second you mentioned you were a shareholder you raised your agenda. I don't care what products you own, or recommend to people, but don't claim you are unbiased, when it is clear you are not.
The ignore list is a truly wonderful invention.
C.
Especially if you are too childish to enage in a conversion without absuing everyone.