zoolook wrote: »
It's just not in Apple's DNA to build cheap crap. I have no idea what investors were expecting.
An iPhone like the 'iPod nano' or 'shuffle' just would not be possible without huge sacrifices in performance or quality and would make life difficult for devs having vastly different specs.
I think Apple nailed it.
nikon133 wrote: »
Honestly, I'd rather have last year's iPhone 5 for $100 less, than plastic version of last year's iPhone 5 for the same price.
I'd expect Apple will make a few $ more with replacing metal with plastic... but I care more about what I will get for my money than what Apple will get from my money...
Really looking forward to new iPads (if anytime soon). Seems as if my whole family have been holding on to our iPad 2s forever. Wonder if there would be a keynote for the launch though. Hoping for a pleasant surprise if there's gonna be a keynote for the iPads, just keeping fingers crossed for the content they're gonna bring up and talk about during the keynote (if any) since the main features of iOS7 have already been introduced during WWDC.
These are fantastic devices, and I'm looking forward to getting 2x 5s ones. They are substantial bumps from the ip4 's I have now. I skipped 2 cycles, and can now afford and justify this big bump. Easily. Can't wait.
Interestingly, I don't really use a TV anymore. I can easily justify an upgrade - the darn things are so cheap...but I just don't use it enough to justify it. Oh, the game is on during the weekends, and I buy a few movies a year on AppleTV. a 32" HDTV on the wall suffices for my purposes. But I can't justify even a $500 upgrade on a device I use so little. I can *easy* justify a new iPhone 5s. Huge value to me. Apple seems to be doing just fine for my needs, and I remain a loyal customer. I think they are right on target.
A cow-orker was complaining about her iPhone screen size. I pulled out my iPad mini. "But you can't make a call on it." "No. But why would you want to?" (and I actually can make a FT call.) I don't get the screen size inflation stuff. iPhone for my pocket. iPad mini for a bag. iPad to travel. Just upgraded to the MBAir from a 2004 iBook. Wow. Sure, I bought a lot of stuff from AAPL - but it is worth every dime to me. I use them. All of them. And I don't have to yell at them to get them to work. Ever. Can't say that about the annoying windows machine I am forced by my employer to use. Once a day, I say to it: "if you were my mac, I'd be done by now." It is a totally disappointing experience. Hate those damn things.
AAPL to me means value. There are few products in my life I can say that about. Oh, I'll go back to Ford for another car. The one I have now is at about 130,000mi on gas, oil, coolant, tyres, bulbs, and a battery. Not bad, and I received value. I'll go back.
YMMV. I don't get the criticism, but I have different values than others.
kevt wrote: »
Since you are interested in my history with Apple, it began in 1991 with my first computer a Mac Classic, and I've never looked back. I've owned and some brilliant technology for its day.
I am not disputing that Apple has sold lots of iPhones, whatever makes you think that?
But Apple is also losing market share worldwide. Though thankfully not in the USA, and is gaining here in the UK.
What do you mean by 'this strategy'? Apple has not tried this with an iPad mini - it's in its first model. If they had introduced a plastic version of the iPad mini, using technology a generation behind - A4 chip etc, and expected it to sell it at 85% of the cost of the current iPad mini - then they'd have pursued the 'same strategy',
I see no reason why the 5S and 5C won't sell very well - I'm particularly impressed with the 5S. They could conceivably take #1 and #2 spots. But that's not the figure I'm interested in - it's platform marketshare. The importance of this will not be lost to anyone who has been using Apple products for anything approaching a similar length of time to me, or longer.
My issue is with the pricing. (I'm not keen on the pastel shades, but that's a minor thing and tastes differ). How will keeping the same pricing structure (the Current model; Last Year's model; 2 years ago model) increase market share? Especially considering the greater growth is in less affluent markets.
In fact Apple are offering a poorer model for the same money at the middle price point. We now have: Current model; a cheaper-to-make plastic version of Last Year's model; and the 2-year old model.
What's consoling me is I don't think Apple is that far off a successful range, and could adjust.
Phase out the 4S with its antiquated connector. Drop the 5C by a $100 and the range looks attractive, sensible and appealing. Apple could surely afford this, with savings in manufacturing on the 5C. Even $50 less would pay off big time imho.
The initial runaway success of the iPhone has led Apple, and maybe Wallstreet, to expect huge margins that I don't think can be maintained long term in the middle ground. Apple could charge what they wanted when they were the only gig in town. But competition (most of it derivative and second rate) is here now. And Apple still has no real presence in the middle of the range.
philky wrote: »
Indeed I feel so frustrated with Apple that it took them one year just to come out with all these little things? Why is it so hard for them to come up with a 5" or 5.5" big iPhone? they need to drop the "one hand operation" bs as who says you can't control a 5.5" phone with one hand? I really miss Steve! Tim Cook is NOT a product or marketing guy, as Steve said.
When a 16GB iPad with A6X + Retina Display Wifi + Cellular costs 4888 HKDand 16GB iPhone 5C with A6 costs 4688 HKD then something is seriously wrong with the pricing of the 5C.
What the f*ck are you talking about.
[why haven't I put this person on the ignore list before now]
arrowspark wrote: »
Nothing particularly exciting with the iphone 5C and 5s announcements. It isn't just Apple, I haven't seen anything partiuclarly exciting from the other manufacturers like Samsung, or HTC. Overall this has been a relatively boring period for mobile devices. Nothing revolutionary, everything is just an incremental improvement in specs.
Because your prices are always higher.
Yes, because of VAT + hedging for exchange rate uncertainty + higher retail markups (because of higher total labor and distribution costs) + end-of-life disposal regulations + possible import duties + pricing-to-market.
mdriftmeyer wrote: »
Agreed and unfortunately, the paid influx of Android fanatics have turned this place into a dump zone.
asdasd wrote: »
The real problem is the new "Everything Apple Does Is Correct And Everything Else Is CrimeThink". Discussions on mac releases used to be fairly critical of management particularly if expectations were disappointed. In the New AI fanaticism seasoned posters are dismissed as trolls.
The price of the 5C is clearly a mistake. Probably they couldn't make it cheaper - but intended to, otherwise why do plastic at all. It was probably designed to replace all of the previous years models and get rid of the 32 bit connector. Except they couldn't get the margins. That's a bad call by Apple. And bad management.
I don't get why Cook is so revered. He is clearly no Jobs. More or less his tenure has been mediocre.
But then I have skin in the game - investments in options etc. this site used to be for investors. In a normal investor site a decision which causes analyst anger and stock drops causes anger at management. Here it's CrimeThought.
jungmark wrote: »
I'm an investor too and have been since 2005. Will you eat your words when the 5C becomes the #1 or #2 phone model in the next qtr?
I don't know why you hate Cook so much.
The new iPhone will be spectacular as usual and will sell in droves, and as usual all the ‘me too’ smartphone manufacturers are lining up to point out how the screen is not 6 inches or it should have medium-format megapixel camera spec or does not make the average person less of a dumbass. I am glad that Apple rarely rises to the bait. Confidence in what you bring to the plate means you can spend less time worrying about others.
And can everyone please stop droning on about how bad Tim Cook is as CEO? IMO, he has done a brilliant job in the thankless task of following in the footsteps of a legend. Can somebody seriously name ONE person who could step in at this point and do a better job without screwing around with the sacrosanct core nature of the company?
asdasd wrote: »
It's guaranteed to become the 1st or 2nd best selling phone. So would have the iPhone 5. The issue is market share outside the saturated markets in Europe and the US.
The question is counter factual. What would the 5C now sell vs the 5C were the 5C as cheap as a 4S.
I firmly believe they intended to replace the 4S. Hence Cook failed. Maps too. Obviously the original reaction was over the top but nothing much has been done to improve maps since. Cook is not lighting fires under asses.
Cook is not jobs. He is not the founder. He should generate no loyalty unless he performs.