Apple is a premium brand. I don't know how else to put it so you understand. If you want a mid tier or cheap product, there is Samsung, Nokia, and others who will meet your needs. But you want the performance of a Ferrari in a Chrysler shell. I hope that does not happen.
OK, so you don't understand Apple's strategy, marketing, or the mobile phone industry at all.
OK, so you don't understand Apple's strategy, marketing, or the mobile phone industry at all.
What else don't you understand?
what is there not to understand? Apple has moved all its desktop and handheld products away from plastic, why assume they are going back? Why are people hung up on plastic? Why not as I suggested in the bottom half of my post you quoted?
Dodge Viper, not Chrysler. And how can you compare a noisy, uncomfortable, hot ride in the Viper to a Ferrari (California).
Aside from that, you pick which industry I can use as an analogy. I like cars because that is usually something most can relate to.
I never suggested Apple to not sell a less expensive phone, and they do, the 4 and 4s. I have only suggested not to go plastic as that would cheapen the brand. Premium is not only price, but quality. Samsung can be argued as being expensive, not premium. I've always said they use a less expensive manufacturing process vs cheaper components. I've also asked several time what would be take from the current iPhone lineup to make a phone cheaper and all anyone has said is plastic case. I've even suggested to model the iPod touch but with 8GB. Still using metal, in colors and should get at or below the $400 price tag. What is wrong with that?
I hope you realize Dodge is owned by Chrysler.
I honestly do not see how a plastic phone would cheapen the brand one iota especially since the iPhone 3 and 3GS were plastic. I have no idea why Apple chose to go this route and like you can only speculate. I would guess that their research might have shown people don't want a new "old" phone and instead want a new "new" phone. Perhaps they will also save money vs. continuing to make so many different configurations if the 4, 4S, and 5 with one single model to replace them all. They will also standardize on lightning and a 4" display. Perhaps it will also get a Qualcomm universal radio front-end 360 that will allow far fewer SKU's further saving money which would require a new phone as well. maybe it will mostly resemble the iPhone 5 internally with a few key changes. Who knows. As consumers all we can do is vote with out wallet. Personally I prefer plastic since it is far more durable and practical for day to day use. I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily if possible and I like the idea of not needing to buy a case. making it waterproof is also something I would love to see Apple include. The only reason I will not opt for a 5C is I prefer to have the latest components like a faster CPU/GPU, better camera and other features probably reserved for the 5S and not because I give a hoot about aluminum. It will go in a case on day one just like my 4S and 5 did from the time I took them out of the box and a plastic case I might add like millions of other iPhone users.
Dodge Viper, not Chrysler. And how can you compare a noisy, uncomfortable, hot ride in the Viper to a Ferrari (California).
Aside from that, you pick which industry I can use as an analogy. I like cars because that is usually something most can relate to.
I never suggested Apple to not sell a less expensive phone, and they do, the 4 and 4s. I have only suggested not to go plastic as that would cheapen the brand. Premium is not only price, but quality. Samsung can be argued as being expensive, not premium. I've always said they use a less expensive manufacturing process vs cheaper components. I've also asked several time what would be take from the current iPhone lineup to make a phone cheaper and all anyone has said is plastic case. I've even suggested to model the iPod touch but with 8GB. Still using metal, in colors and should get at or below the $400 price tag. What is wrong with that?
Here is a car analogy for you:
Lexus makes premium cars.
Lexus is owned by Toyota.
Toyota makes entry level and mid tier cars.
So is Lexus no longer premium because Toyota also makes cars in other categories?!? Does it cheapen the brand of Lexus because the basic engine and chassis are the same as an entry level Toyota?
Apple can do premium and entry level and be successful in both areas.
what is there not to understand? Apple has moved all its desktop and handheld products away from plastic, why assume they are going back? Why are people hung up on plastic? Why not as I suggested in the bottom half of my post you quoted?
Here's the deal. Apple uses plastic when it's appropriate, metal when it's appropriate. They are not doctrinaire about either. Why should you allow yourself to be? On their behalf, when clearly they don't want to be?
I honestly do not see how a plastic phone would cheapen the brand one iota especially since the iPhone 3 and 3GS were plastic. I have no idea why Apple chose to go this route and like you can only speculate. I would guess that their research might have shown people don't want a new "old" phone and instead want a new "new" phone. Perhaps they will also save money vs. continuing to make so many different configurations if the 4, 4S, and 5 with one single model to replace them all. They will also standardize on lightning and a 4" display. Perhaps it will also get a Qualcomm universal radio front-end 360 that will allow far fewer SKU's further saving money which would require a new phone as well. maybe it will mostly resemble the iPhone 5 internally with a few key changes. Who knows. As consumers all we can do is vote with out wallet. Personally I prefer plastic since it is far more durable and practical for day to day use. I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily if possible and I like the idea of not needing to buy a case. making it waterproof is also something I would love to see Apple include. The only reason I will not opt for a 5C is I prefer to have the latest components like a faster CPU/GPU, better camera and other features probably reserved for the 5S and not because I give a hoot about aluminum. It will go in a case on day one just like my 4S and 5 did from the time I took them out of the box and a plastic case I might add like millions of other iPhone users.
Yes, as a different brand. So are you suggesting Apple spin up a different brand to offer a cheaper phone?
I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily
What would scratch matter if you don't spend time admiring your phone?
I only hope Apple does not lower its standards. Thanks for the chat...
Here's the deal. Apple uses plastic when it's appropriate, metal when it's appropriate. They are not doctrinaire about either. Why should you allow yourself to be? On their behalf, when clearly they don't want to be?
here is the deal. Apple has moved away from plastic in all of its desktop and handheld devices. If Apple like plastic for its cheapness, why is the iPod shuffle not plastic?
So is Lexus no longer premium because Toyota also makes cars in other categories?!? Does it cheapen the brand of Lexus because the basic engine and chassis are the same as an entry level Toyota?
Apple can do premium and entry level and be successful in both areas.
Here is the reality for you. Are you saying Apple should spin up another brand to support a lower end model? To your point, what makes Lexus a Lexus? Is it not the materials, fit, finish and performance of the vehicle? To your point. As Apple does, both phones will share components to save cost when it makes sense and does not sacrifice the quality of the brand.
To your point, if Lexus was made out of everything a Toyota was made from, just faster, it would then be consider a cheap, but fast car.
I really don't know why people are hung up on plastic. More so, I don't know why I bother to debate it. So I wont further. Thanks for the chat!
Yes, as a different brand. So are you suggesting Apple spin up a different brand to offer a cheaper phone?
I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily
What would scratch matter if you don't spend time admiring your phone?
I only hope Apple does not lower its standards. Thanks for the chat...
It matters because I will get a lot more money every time I sell them to buy a new iPhone if they are in like new condition. So for that reason alone it is a very important consideration. Secondly the case is not just about protecting from scratches it is about protecting it from serious damage if dropped. I don't know anyone who spends time admiring their phone beyond possibly the first few minutes after you take it out of the box.
Apple should compare to Porsche more fit than Ferrari. Porsche sell 911 model and then sell Boxster - the small sport car with lower price . In lower price than 911, Boxster still have good quality and mid engine flat six installed, just smaller and less power. People say the real Porsche is only 911 but Porsche can sell a lot of Boxster and now recover their strength.
Exactly. Add to that students, athletes, seniors, clumsy people ... The "glass sandwich" that was the iPhone 4/S was a step backward from the 3G/S in my mind. Everything that was beautiful and "wow" about that design was destroyed by the ridiculous Apple colored bumper or any number of clunky aftermarket cases -- most of which were plastic and essentially turned the 4/S into a 3G/S.
This. My iPhone 4 is a wonderful piece of design which has been hidden in an awful bumper for all its life.
here is the deal. Apple has moved away from plastic in all of its desktop and handheld devices. If Apple like plastic for its cheapness, why is the iPod shuffle not plastic?
Because plastic was not the right material for that product in their estimation. What you don't get is that 'plastic' doesn't necessarily mean 'cheap'. There are some extremely high quality plastics. In fact, there are plastics that cost a good bit more than silver - maybe more than gold. Apple has some amazing engineers - and they excel at using the right material for the right application. If they decide to sell a phone with a plastic case, they will undoubtedly choose a good quality plastic and design it well.
Here is the reality for you. Are you saying Apple should spin up another brand to support a lower end model? To your point, what makes Lexus a Lexus? Is it not the materials, fit, finish and performance of the vehicle? To your point. As Apple does, both phones will share components to save cost when it makes sense and does not sacrifice the quality of the brand.
To your point, if Lexus was made out of everything a Toyota was made from, just faster, it would then be consider a cheap, but fast car.
Toyota/Lexus isn't a good example. Take Chevrolet, for example.
Should Chevy not sell the Cruze or Sonic since they sell the Corvette? And if they want to sell the ZR1 or Z06 or Stingray, should they stop selling the base Corvette?
In reality, companies realize that they can sell different products that target different niches without ruining their market position. While I agree that it would be a mistake for Apple to sell a true crapware $50 phone, there's absolutely no sign that they're doing that. While all the whiner and Apple haters are running around in circles screaming about how Apple is ruining the brand, there's no evidence to back that claim. Given Apple's history, if they do introduce a 5C, it is likely to be a product of very high quality for its price. And it will almost certainly not be a bargain basement phone, nor will it use crappy materials.
Wrong. Using plastic on a $700 phone is the problem like what Samdung is doing. Using plastic on a $400 phone is expected. There is no way you can make a metal phone with a good OS, fast processor, decent margins, and nice screen for $400.
A poster earlier claimed it cost at most a couple of dollars for an aluminum shell (think it was Jragosta). If true then whether plastic or metal was used can't be that different cost-wise. If Apple has decided to use a plastic shell, and apparently they have, perhaps it's as much for the color options as anything else.
Wrong. Using plastic on a $700 phone is the problem like what Samdung is doing. Using plastic on a $400 phone is expected. There is no way you can make a metal phone with a good OS, fast processor, decent margins, and nice screen for $400.
Then why wasn't it a problem with the 3G/3GS? Those phones were $650 and up.
A poster earlier claimed it cost at most a couple of dollars for an aluminum shell (think it was Jragosta). If true then whether plastic or metal was used can't be that different cost-wise. If Apple has decided to use a plastic shell, and apparently they have, perhaps it's as much for the color options as anything else.
So you're going to throw your usual spanners into the works based on another poster's speculation?
There are three obvious advantages to using plastic, to a reasonable person who is also using his whole brain.
1. Durability, necessary for a peoples' world phone. This group can include teenage girls.
2. Cost.
3. Aesthetics, as long as you're using plastic, including feel (warmth, flat back and rounded shoulders) and color.
Color is no more important than any of the other considerations, in my view.
Note to jragosta: Maybe you should rethink your estimate on the iPhone back, since you can see here how any little discrepancy can be turned into a bone of contention. When the iPad mini came out someone, maybe at iSupply, said the case cost Apple as much as the display. Full disclosure: once, for effect, I tried to exaggerate in the other direction, but nobody picked up on it.
So you're going to throw your usual spanners into the works based on another poster's speculation?
There are three obvious advantages to using plastic, to a reasonable person who is also using his whole brain.
1. Durability, necessary for a peoples' world phone. This group can include teenage girls.
2. Cost.
3. Aesthetics, as long as you're using plastic, including feel (warmth, flat back and rounded shoulders) and color.
Color is no more important than any of the other considerations, in my view.
Note to jragosta: Maybe you should rethink your estimate on the iPhone back, since you can see here how any little discrepancy can be turned into a bone of contention. When the iPad mini came out someone, maybe at iSupply, said the case cost Apple as much as the display. Full disclosure: once, for effect, I tried to exaggerate in the other direction, but nobody picked up on it.
So you translated "perhaps as much for" into "absolutely only for"? We said exactly the same thing sir. I just didn't bother listing any other equally important reasons.
Then why wasn't it a problem with the 3G/3GS? Those phones were $650 and up.
That was then, this is now. The bar has been raised by Apple's CNC metal sculpture. Now they're going to shape their plastic backs like they did their aluminum backs.
And it was the glass back that set the new functional design aesthetic used for the aluminum back. You end up with two flat, parallel surfaces front and back that give the phone its precision, camera-like feel. It also makes it possible to make simple tripod mounts and to use the phone as a camera on flat surfaces.
I don't think they'll ever return to the slippery shape of the 3G/3GS, where Samsung is stuck, notice.
That was then, this is now. The bar has been raised by Apple's CNC metal sculpture. Now they're going to shape their plastic backs like they did their aluminum backs.
And it was the glass back that set the new functional design aesthetic used for the aluminum back. You end up with two flat, parallel surfaces front and back that give the phone its precision, camera-like feel. It also makes it possible to make simple tripod mounts and to use the phone as a camera on flat surfaces.
I don't think they'll ever return to the slippery shape of the 3G/3GS, where Samsung is stuck, notice.
What was there was no aluminum back then? It was probably cheaper back then than it is now. Why would one go under the bar that they raised? Btw the back of the 3G/3GS was ergonomically designed as are competitor's devices.
Comments
OK, so you don't understand Apple's strategy, marketing, or the mobile phone industry at all.
What else don't you understand?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
OK, so you don't understand Apple's strategy, marketing, or the mobile phone industry at all.
What else don't you understand?
what is there not to understand? Apple has moved all its desktop and handheld products away from plastic, why assume they are going back? Why are people hung up on plastic? Why not as I suggested in the bottom half of my post you quoted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
Dodge Viper, not Chrysler. And how can you compare a noisy, uncomfortable, hot ride in the Viper to a Ferrari (California).
Aside from that, you pick which industry I can use as an analogy. I like cars because that is usually something most can relate to.
I never suggested Apple to not sell a less expensive phone, and they do, the 4 and 4s. I have only suggested not to go plastic as that would cheapen the brand. Premium is not only price, but quality. Samsung can be argued as being expensive, not premium. I've always said they use a less expensive manufacturing process vs cheaper components. I've also asked several time what would be take from the current iPhone lineup to make a phone cheaper and all anyone has said is plastic case. I've even suggested to model the iPod touch but with 8GB. Still using metal, in colors and should get at or below the $400 price tag. What is wrong with that?
I hope you realize Dodge is owned by Chrysler.
I honestly do not see how a plastic phone would cheapen the brand one iota especially since the iPhone 3 and 3GS were plastic. I have no idea why Apple chose to go this route and like you can only speculate. I would guess that their research might have shown people don't want a new "old" phone and instead want a new "new" phone. Perhaps they will also save money vs. continuing to make so many different configurations if the 4, 4S, and 5 with one single model to replace them all. They will also standardize on lightning and a 4" display. Perhaps it will also get a Qualcomm universal radio front-end 360 that will allow far fewer SKU's further saving money which would require a new phone as well. maybe it will mostly resemble the iPhone 5 internally with a few key changes. Who knows. As consumers all we can do is vote with out wallet. Personally I prefer plastic since it is far more durable and practical for day to day use. I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily if possible and I like the idea of not needing to buy a case. making it waterproof is also something I would love to see Apple include. The only reason I will not opt for a 5C is I prefer to have the latest components like a faster CPU/GPU, better camera and other features probably reserved for the 5S and not because I give a hoot about aluminum. It will go in a case on day one just like my 4S and 5 did from the time I took them out of the box and a plastic case I might add like millions of other iPhone users.
Here is a car analogy for you:
Lexus makes premium cars.
Lexus is owned by Toyota.
Toyota makes entry level and mid tier cars.
So is Lexus no longer premium because Toyota also makes cars in other categories?!? Does it cheapen the brand of Lexus because the basic engine and chassis are the same as an entry level Toyota?
Apple can do premium and entry level and be successful in both areas.
Here's the deal. Apple uses plastic when it's appropriate, metal when it's appropriate. They are not doctrinaire about either. Why should you allow yourself to be? On their behalf, when clearly they don't want to be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
I hope you realize Dodge is owned by Chrysler.
I honestly do not see how a plastic phone would cheapen the brand one iota especially since the iPhone 3 and 3GS were plastic. I have no idea why Apple chose to go this route and like you can only speculate. I would guess that their research might have shown people don't want a new "old" phone and instead want a new "new" phone. Perhaps they will also save money vs. continuing to make so many different configurations if the 4, 4S, and 5 with one single model to replace them all. They will also standardize on lightning and a 4" display. Perhaps it will also get a Qualcomm universal radio front-end 360 that will allow far fewer SKU's further saving money which would require a new phone as well. maybe it will mostly resemble the iPhone 5 internally with a few key changes. Who knows. As consumers all we can do is vote with out wallet. Personally I prefer plastic since it is far more durable and practical for day to day use. I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily if possible and I like the idea of not needing to buy a case. making it waterproof is also something I would love to see Apple include. The only reason I will not opt for a 5C is I prefer to have the latest components like a faster CPU/GPU, better camera and other features probably reserved for the 5S and not because I give a hoot about aluminum. It will go in a case on day one just like my 4S and 5 did from the time I took them out of the box and a plastic case I might add like millions of other iPhone users.
Yes, as a different brand. So are you suggesting Apple spin up a different brand to offer a cheaper phone?
I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily
What would scratch matter if you don't spend time admiring your phone?
I only hope Apple does not lower its standards. Thanks for the chat...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Here's the deal. Apple uses plastic when it's appropriate, metal when it's appropriate. They are not doctrinaire about either. Why should you allow yourself to be? On their behalf, when clearly they don't want to be?
here is the deal. Apple has moved away from plastic in all of its desktop and handheld devices. If Apple like plastic for its cheapness, why is the iPod shuffle not plastic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbit
Here is a car analogy for you:
Lexus makes premium cars.
Lexus is owned by Toyota.
Toyota makes entry level and mid tier cars.
So is Lexus no longer premium because Toyota also makes cars in other categories?!? Does it cheapen the brand of Lexus because the basic engine and chassis are the same as an entry level Toyota?
Apple can do premium and entry level and be successful in both areas.
Here is the reality for you. Are you saying Apple should spin up another brand to support a lower end model? To your point, what makes Lexus a Lexus? Is it not the materials, fit, finish and performance of the vehicle? To your point. As Apple does, both phones will share components to save cost when it makes sense and does not sacrifice the quality of the brand.
To your point, if Lexus was made out of everything a Toyota was made from, just faster, it would then be consider a cheap, but fast car.
I really don't know why people are hung up on plastic. More so, I don't know why I bother to debate it. So I wont further. Thanks for the chat!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
Yes, as a different brand. So are you suggesting Apple spin up a different brand to offer a cheaper phone?
I don't spend time admiring how my phone looks. I want it to work well and not scratch easily
What would scratch matter if you don't spend time admiring your phone?
I only hope Apple does not lower its standards. Thanks for the chat...
It matters because I will get a lot more money every time I sell them to buy a new iPhone if they are in like new condition. So for that reason alone it is a very important consideration. Secondly the case is not just about protecting from scratches it is about protecting it from serious damage if dropped. I don't know anyone who spends time admiring their phone beyond possibly the first few minutes after you take it out of the box.
Apple should compare to Porsche more fit than Ferrari. Porsche sell 911 model and then sell Boxster - the small sport car with lower price . In lower price than 911, Boxster still have good quality and mid engine flat six installed, just smaller and less power. People say the real Porsche is only 911 but Porsche can sell a lot of Boxster and now recover their strength.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
Exactly. Add to that students, athletes, seniors, clumsy people ... The "glass sandwich" that was the iPhone 4/S was a step backward from the 3G/S in my mind. Everything that was beautiful and "wow" about that design was destroyed by the ridiculous Apple colored bumper or any number of clunky aftermarket cases -- most of which were plastic and essentially turned the 4/S into a 3G/S.
This. My iPhone 4 is a wonderful piece of design which has been hidden in an awful bumper for all its life.
Because plastic was not the right material for that product in their estimation. What you don't get is that 'plastic' doesn't necessarily mean 'cheap'. There are some extremely high quality plastics. In fact, there are plastics that cost a good bit more than silver - maybe more than gold. Apple has some amazing engineers - and they excel at using the right material for the right application. If they decide to sell a phone with a plastic case, they will undoubtedly choose a good quality plastic and design it well.
Toyota/Lexus isn't a good example. Take Chevrolet, for example.
Should Chevy not sell the Cruze or Sonic since they sell the Corvette? And if they want to sell the ZR1 or Z06 or Stingray, should they stop selling the base Corvette?
In reality, companies realize that they can sell different products that target different niches without ruining their market position. While I agree that it would be a mistake for Apple to sell a true crapware $50 phone, there's absolutely no sign that they're doing that. While all the whiner and Apple haters are running around in circles screaming about how Apple is ruining the brand, there's no evidence to back that claim. Given Apple's history, if they do introduce a 5C, it is likely to be a product of very high quality for its price. And it will almost certainly not be a bargain basement phone, nor will it use crappy materials.
A poster earlier claimed it cost at most a couple of dollars for an aluminum shell (think it was Jragosta). If true then whether plastic or metal was used can't be that different cost-wise. If Apple has decided to use a plastic shell, and apparently they have, perhaps it's as much for the color options as anything else.
Then why wasn't it a problem with the 3G/3GS? Those phones were $650 and up.
So you're going to throw your usual spanners into the works based on another poster's speculation?
There are three obvious advantages to using plastic, to a reasonable person who is also using his whole brain.
1. Durability, necessary for a peoples' world phone. This group can include teenage girls.
2. Cost.
3. Aesthetics, as long as you're using plastic, including feel (warmth, flat back and rounded shoulders) and color.
Color is no more important than any of the other considerations, in my view.
Note to jragosta: Maybe you should rethink your estimate on the iPhone back, since you can see here how any little discrepancy can be turned into a bone of contention. When the iPad mini came out someone, maybe at iSupply, said the case cost Apple as much as the display. Full disclosure: once, for effect, I tried to exaggerate in the other direction, but nobody picked up on it.
So you translated "perhaps as much for" into "absolutely only for"? We said exactly the same thing sir. I just didn't bother listing any other equally important reasons.
That was then, this is now. The bar has been raised by Apple's CNC metal sculpture. Now they're going to shape their plastic backs like they did their aluminum backs.
And it was the glass back that set the new functional design aesthetic used for the aluminum back. You end up with two flat, parallel surfaces front and back that give the phone its precision, camera-like feel. It also makes it possible to make simple tripod mounts and to use the phone as a camera on flat surfaces.
I don't think they'll ever return to the slippery shape of the 3G/3GS, where Samsung is stuck, notice.
What was there was no aluminum back then? It was probably cheaper back then than it is now. Why would one go under the bar that they raised? Btw the back of the 3G/3GS was ergonomically designed as are competitor's devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
1 existing only in the imagination:
If you meant "rumoured" that would be a clearer way to put it.
But by reading your other posts and your response to mine, I'm done with you. Ignore.