I bought my spouse the XR as she is far less techie than me and won’t notice the subtle differences. It surprised me how much larger and wider it was the my X. Screen is different but to be honest, it is very difficult to tell especially when they are not next to each other.
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it? Apple removed forced touch, which in fairness is hardly used, although, you can use life photos and get same force touch Taptic feedback, so I wonder if this is a soft omission like the removal of bokeh on objects. However, is the removal of bokeh on objects really removed to drive sales of the more expensive iphones for photograph buffs? It is these glowing unnecessary omissions that tars what is a great company and product, and that fogs the view that they are customer focused, less about profits and more about providing great technology, kind of says the opposite, in my own opinion. Disappointing Apple as a huge Apple fan.
Other than that, the phone is terrific albeit, I would haven purchased it for myself simply due to the bulkiness of the edges compared to my X.
I bought my spouse the XR as she is far less techie than me and won’t notice the subtle differences. It surprised me how much larger and wider it was the my X. Screen is different but to be honest, it is very difficult to tell especially when they are not next to each other.
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it? Apple removed forced touch, which in fairness is hardly used, although, you can use life photos and get same force touch Taptic feedback, so I wonder if this is a soft omission like the removal of bokeh on objects. However, is the removal of bokeh on objects really removed to drive sales of the more expensive iphones for photograph buffs? It is these glowing unnecessary omissions that tars what is a great company and product, and that fogs the view that they are customer focused, less about profits and more about providing great technology, kind of says the opposite, in my own opinion. Disappointing Apple as a huge Apple fan.
Other than that, the phone is terrific albeit, I would haven purchased it for myself simply due to the bulkiness of the edges compared to my X.
Feel free to return the phone and get a more expensive model if you want to remain in the Apple ecosystem. Otherwise, I understand the Google phone that just came out does some pretty nice tricks with their computational photography.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Mike great review ... but it leaves me with more questions than answers, I really like my iPhone 7 Plus and wonder if this is worth an upgrade? Cost isn't an issue I just don't buy things I don't need and all I do is read Safari and Mail when in waiting rooms or use it as a phone (quaint eh? lol) although truth be told I use my Watch more for that these days and an Watch v4 is on the way. The iPhone's man use for me is wirelessly pairing and enabling my Car Play to be honest. Now, on the other hand, a new Mac Pro is a definite yes. I carry my Sony A7 III most everywhere so I'm not worried about camera features on a phone either. So ... I am trying hard to think of a reason to go for a newer model iPhone. I suspect once it can't run the lastest iOS that will be my trigger.
You write: For a start, the resolution of 1,792 by 828 pixels is a lot lower than the Super Retina versions in the XS and Max. This also brings the pixel density down to 326 pixels per inch versus the 458ppi of the other two variants, which may seem disappointing.
You can’t fairly compare pixel resolution between the two technologies. The OLED is pentile which means the resolution only applies to the green color and those green sub-pixels share very, very low resolution red and blue sub-pixels.
In fact, the lower resolution LCD display on the XR has MORE sub-pixels per inch (978) than the Super Retina Displays on the XS and XS Max. (916)
Above 150-200 pixels per inch, the human eye cannot discern the difference, unless a person has 1-inch thick reading glasses, I wouldn't worry about it.
Well I can certainly see the difference between my XS screen and the wife’s 7 . It’s night and day in terms of how good text looks on the XS compared to the 7’s 326ppi LCD. Just go to the store and look. Stating academic fact means nothing when the difference is literally staring you in the eyes. It’s even noticeable on the 7 plus at 401ppi compared to the 7. Stating otherwise is just simply incorrect... otherwise Apple wouldn’t bother with anything greater than 200ppi if you were right.
I have a 4K smart TV that cost me about half what I paid for my first flat screen TV. Apple’s iPhone are more expensive because they can be. Apple knows most people aren’t buying the phone outright but paying over time. Adding $200 to the price of the phone doesn’t add that much to a monthly payment.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Actually, that two year old 32 GB iPhone starts at €539 here. But I’m clearly talking about new iPhones continually increasing in price. And the reality is at a certain point value doesn’t depends on who’s asking. €50 toilet roll is €50 toilet roll, and a new LCD phone that starts at almost €900 starts at almost €900. Shareholders, apologists, people with a lot of money and Apple bloggers—very few other people defend these price increases. It’s telling that Apple execs are all multi-millionaires. I’m not denying Apple make good hardware, I’m just pointing an awareness to the reality of new iPhones continually increasing in price.
Instead of crying into your cup about how expensive some things are, why don’t you just buy a lower-priced iphone model that fits your budget?
Or even better, get an Android, as your constant expressions of dissatisfaction show how clearly unhappy you are. Don’t you want to be happy? What are you waiting for?
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Actually, that two year old 32 GB iPhone starts at €539 here. But I’m clearly talking about new iPhones continually increasing in price. And the reality is at a certain point value doesn’t depends on who’s asking. €50 toilet roll is €50 toilet roll, and a new LCD phone that starts at almost €900 starts at almost €900. Shareholders, apologists, people with a lot of money and Apple bloggers—very few other people defend these price increases. It’s telling that Apple execs are all multi-millionaires. I’m not denying Apple make good hardware, I’m just pointing an awareness to the reality of new iPhones continually increasing in price.
I feel your pain. It's a legitimate complaint.
But, there is (as always) another side to that story: The iPhone has become so potent and powerful that it has, for many replaced the need for separate cameras, landlines and even desktops and laptops (or at least pushed them into to background).
So, yes! That's a ridiculous amount of money for s stupid, damn phone -- until you realize how much it's saving you!
Or until you realize it’s not a phone. It can do phone jobs, but these are computers, cameras, scanners, etc. Should be pretty obvious by now.
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
If gas was $6 a gallon, bread was $4 a loaf, and milk cost $6 a gallon right now, you would have a valid comparison. Unlike those commodity goods, consumer electronics typically go down in price over time. Cameras, televisions, hard disks, even drones just get getting cheaper and cheaper. Only Apple seems to be able to buck this trend. It will probably work for a few more years. But with higher prices you get more intense competition. It will be interesting to see where Apple is in 4-8 years when iPhone are more like the commodity goods you listed.
"A cell phone used to be just a wireless telephone. No longer. They are our ever-present personal computers. They are also our most important cameras (and often our only cameras). A decade ago, point-and-shoot cameras ran $200-400, easily. It’s your watch, it’s your alarm clock, it’s your Walkman, it’s your map and GPS. It’s your wallet full of photos of your family and friends. It’s also, increasing, your actual wallet.
If you took an iPhone XR back to 2006 people would be amazed. If you told them they could buy one for $750 they’d think you were lying.
On a related note, I would argue that iPhone prices aren’t really going up. Last year’s X and this year’s XS models are a new premium tier. The iPhone XR is the phone at the previous “regular” top-of-the-line tier. New top-tier iPhones used to cost $600-650, yes, and the iPhone XR starts at $750. But when you account for inflation that starting price is about the same. The iPhone 4 was introduced in June 2010 starting at $600. $600 in June 2010 dollars is about $700 today. That $600 got you a 16 GB iPhone in 2010. The 32 GB model cost $700. That’s about $810 in today’s dollars — $10 more than the price of a 128 GB iPhone XR, which I think is the sweet spot in the lineup for most people. Inflation adjusted, the iPhone XR is right in line with the iPhone 4 prices from 2010.
Considering how much more capable an iPhone XR is compared to an iPhone 4, I’d say $750 is an amazing bargain."
You have been drinking too much of the apple kool aid. The X range is not a super class tier at all. I have the Xs. It’s a great device but no better in real terms than my old 7 Plus was when that was released either in its flagship clothes. Its what I expect from apple’s best iPhone , as always. It’s not like it’s made of a special rare alloy or something. Hardwire wise , there is nothing that unique about it. Spec wise, many android phones come with as good sceeens and not memory for much less cost. It’s a solid device that Apple could have sold for a lot cheaper and still made a ton of money. But can’t really fault apple here if mugs like me are willing to spend a grand on it lol. Technology tends to get cheaper as the years go by not more expensive. (Think how DVD players got better and cheaper over the years). The iPhone is doing the opposite. That’s not good for us consumers. And whilst we could keep the device for 4 years , we probably won’t when we see what Apple releases in in the next two years (starting at just $1200 for the top tier!)
And, while the Xr is a very reasonably priced offering, it's TOO BIG!
I'm tired of carrying one of these plus sized phones.
Now that Apple has reasonably priced iPads, I am more than happy to carry a smaller phone and use an iPad or iPad Mini while at home -- it makes for an all around better experience: The iPad is easier to use, to see and to type on while I'm not burdened with huge chunk of something in my pocket.
This is my complaint and position as well. I thought the XR would be just what I was looking for, then see that it's bigger than the XS. Less tech but bigger ? WTF.
I would expect it’s bigger in order to wrap the display so there is no forehead or chin. This is more difficult with LCD screens which is why the knockoffs haven’t done it yet.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Actually, that two year old 32 GB iPhone starts at €539 here. But I’m clearly talking about new iPhones continually increasing in price. And the reality is at a certain point value doesn’t depends on who’s asking. €50 toilet roll is €50 toilet roll, and a new LCD phone that starts at almost €900 starts at almost €900. Shareholders, apologists, people with a lot of money and Apple bloggers—very few other people defend these price increases. It’s telling that Apple execs are all multi-millionaires. I’m not denying Apple make good hardware, I’m just pointing an awareness to the reality of new iPhones continually increasing in price.
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
That they do, but inflation is around 2-3% per year, the cheapest iPhone goes up by around $100/£10 per year. The once flagship 64GB iPhone 6 was £619 when it was released here in 2015, now the flagship is £1000. That's 40% more expensive. The SE was just £399 on release, now the cheapest current phone Apple has to offer is £749. That's almost doubled in price.
As Ireland says, it's only Apple bloggers and rich kids that defend this, I am as much an Apple fan as the next guy but I don't defend these prices. Apple is once again becoming out of touch with its users on the value front, and I fear the history of the Mac will be repeated; a tipping point will be hit where developers start leaving due to lack of marketshare, and then users leave due to lack of apps. We're a long way off that, but I really don't want that to happen again.
I would like a new iPhone to replace my 6s, and previous to it I upgraded to every new S version. I'm now 4 generations behind purely because the cost of new iPhones is extortionate. If the price was more reasonable I would likely have upgraded twice in the same period, and Apple would have made more money than me upgrading once. And even more than my current situation of not upgrading at all. Android phones can do 90% of what iPhones can do for half the cost. People will pay a premium for Apple gear, but they won't pay double.
Oh look, it’s the “But Apple is out of touch!” trope. Cute. Sorry but that’s nonsense. I am neither a blogger nor a rich kid, just a working professional and I have no problem paying for the tools I use. It’s much cheaper than the hardware tools my carpenter friends buy for their shops.
Get yourself a knockoff and stopping whining, clearly you’ll be happier. Meanwhile, Apple’s sales prove your claims are the opposite of what’s actually happening.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
So when will you finally be leaving the platform for cheaper pastures? Inquiring minds want to know.
Your arrogance doesn't help anything, If Apple fans are saying Apple devices are too expensive, the general public will be even more inclined to think they're too expensive. Apple is losing sales due to attitudes like yours, and sticking your head in the sand isn't a solution.
Man, I hope Cook figures it out before it’s too late! Do us a solid and pen him a memo? They need your help, save them!
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Apple's obligation is to its shareholders (i.e., its owners). It makes no sense to criticize a company for benefiting its shareholders. More logical, if accurate, would be a criticism that price increases hurt shareholders by reducing profits.
Appel is a typical corporation, yes. My criticism is of the word "value" used in the title of the article. It's a very expensive phone.
Another person who doesn’t know the difference between “value” and “cheap”. What’s in the water where you live?
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
If gas was $6 a gallon, bread was $4 a loaf, and milk cost $6 a gallon right now, you would have a valid comparison. Unlike those commodity goods, consumer electronics typically go down in price over time. Cameras, televisions, hard disks, even drones just get getting cheaper and cheaper. Only Apple seems to be able to buck this trend. It will probably work for a few more years. But with higher prices you get more intense competition. It will be interesting to see where Apple is in 4-8 years when iPhone are more like the commodity goods you listed.
Ah the “But technology is a commodity so Apple will fail!” trope.
Yeah man, don’t let the fact that you folks have been saying this about Apple since the 1980s stop you... Funny that doom is always 5 years out, but never now.
I bought my spouse the XR as she is far less techie than me and won’t notice the subtle differences. It surprised me how much larger and wider it was the my X. Screen is different but to be honest, it is very difficult to tell especially when they are not next to each other.
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it? Apple removed forced touch, which in fairness is hardly used, although, you can use life photos and get same force touch Taptic feedback, so I wonder if this is a soft omission like the removal of bokeh on objects. However, is the removal of bokeh on objects really removed to drive sales of the more expensive iphones for photograph buffs? It is these glowing unnecessary omissions that tars what is a great company and product, and that fogs the view that they are customer focused, less about profits and more about providing great technology, kind of says the opposite, in my own opinion. Disappointing Apple as a huge Apple fan.
Other than that, the phone is terrific albeit, I would haven purchased it for myself simply due to the bulkiness of the edges compared to my X.
No it’s not baffling, you’re just ignorant about why. The XS has two cameras and can do a depth map on objects in the foreground. The XR has one camera and can’t, but they programmed it to recognize what a face is and let you apply it for those.
I have a 4K smart TV that cost me about half what I paid for my first flat screen TV. Apple’s iPhone are more expensive because they can be. Apple knows most people aren’t buying the phone outright but paying over time. Adding $200 to the price of the phone doesn’t add that much to a monthly payment.
Oh man that’s so boneheaded. You must not work with technology... A TV is way less complicated than a minuturized computer. Most TVs are the same commodity panels and little more, while iphones have tons of tech and new layers and things every year.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Actually, that two year old 32 GB iPhone starts at €539 here. But I’m clearly talking about new iPhones continually increasing in price. And the reality is at a certain point value doesn’t depends on who’s asking. €50 toilet roll is €50 toilet roll, and a new LCD phone that starts at almost €900 starts at almost €900. Shareholders, apologists, people with a lot of money and Apple bloggers—very few other people defend these price increases. It’s telling that Apple execs are all multi-millionaires. I’m not denying Apple make good hardware, I’m just pointing an awareness to the reality of new iPhones continually increasing in price.
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
That they do, but inflation is around 2-3% per year, the cheapest iPhone goes up by around $100/£10 per year. The once flagship 64GB iPhone 6 was £619 when it was released here in 2015, now the flagship is £1000. That's 40% more expensive. The SE was just £399 on release, now the cheapest current phone Apple has to offer is £749. That's almost doubled in price.
As Ireland says, it's only Apple bloggers and rich kids that defend this, I am as much an Apple fan as the next guy but I don't defend these prices. Apple is once again becoming out of touch with its users on the value front, and I fear the history of the Mac will be repeated; a tipping point will be hit where developers start leaving due to lack of marketshare, and then users leave due to lack of apps. We're a long way off that, but I really don't want that to happen again.
I would like a new iPhone to replace my 6s, and previous to it I upgraded to every new S version. I'm now 4 generations behind purely because the cost of new iPhones is extortionate. If the price was more reasonable I would likely have upgraded twice in the same period, and Apple would have made more money than me upgrading once. And even more than my current situation of not upgrading at all. Android phones can do 90% of what iPhones can do for half the cost. People will pay a premium for Apple gear, but they won't pay double.
You are not comparing like with like there. There used to be only one model of iPhone per year and that was the flagship. However Apple have created a new category which is a better level of device which is now the flagship, but the equivalent phone to the 6S is the XR. Most people don't buy the top level anything, try work out how much more expensive a tricked out MacBook is compared to the standard purchase.
you got doubling by comparing a year when the SE was new.
Not really, the flagship is defined as the top of the range. Even comparing with the not-flagship Xr, the price has still gone up £130 to £749. I compared with the base models, comparing with a "tricked out" phone would be like comparing with the 256gb Xr.
you got doubling by comparing a year when the SE was new.
Uh, yeah, comparing the then new SE with the now new Xr.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
So when will you finally be leaving the platform for cheaper pastures? Inquiring minds want to know.
Your arrogance doesn't help anything, If Apple fans are saying Apple devices are too expensive, the general public will be even more inclined to think they're too expensive. Apple is losing sales due to attitudes like yours, and sticking your head in the sand isn't a solution.
If they were too expensive, Apple wouldn't be selling record numbers of them every year.
Losing sales? Where did you pull this from?
I said they were losing sales, not that sales were reducing YoY. Sales are flat, but as I said, they're losing prospective sales because of the prices. I've held off upgrading my 6s because of cost. Lost sale. I've seriously considered going Hackintosh because of the awful stale Mac lineup. That'd be a lost sale. Several of my friends have either switched to Android or held off upgrading. There's more lost sales. Remember each lost sale is zero cash to Apple and another £500 or so spent in the Android or MS world, and shouldn't be dismissed. Once someone switches, it's hard to get them back. A high profit margin is great, but if it starts eating into sales it becomes a drag on them, and means the balance is wrong.
At €879 for a 64 GB LCD iPhone, I'm going to say it does not bring value. What it does however it bring the price of iPhones higher than last year. Higher and higher. What Apple has actually done in the past two years is of benefit mostly to shareholders. And the spoiled kids of rich people.
Good news! The iPhone 7 is what, $499? "Value" very much depends on who's making the assessment.
Actually, that two year old 32 GB iPhone starts at €539 here. But I’m clearly talking about new iPhones continually increasing in price. And the reality is at a certain point value doesn’t depends on who’s asking. €50 toilet roll is €50 toilet roll, and a new LCD phone that starts at almost €900 starts at almost €900. Shareholders, apologists, people with a lot of money and Apple bloggers—very few other people defend these price increases. It’s telling that Apple execs are all multi-millionaires. I’m not denying Apple make good hardware, I’m just pointing an awareness to the reality of new iPhones continually increasing in price.
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
That they do, but inflation is around 2-3% per year, the cheapest iPhone goes up by around $100/£10 per year. The once flagship 64GB iPhone 6 was £619 when it was released here in 2015, now the flagship is £1000. That's 40% more expensive. The SE was just £399 on release, now the cheapest current phone Apple has to offer is £749. That's almost doubled in price.
As Ireland says, it's only Apple bloggers and rich kids that defend this, I am as much an Apple fan as the next guy but I don't defend these prices. Apple is once again becoming out of touch with its users on the value front, and I fear the history of the Mac will be repeated; a tipping point will be hit where developers start leaving due to lack of marketshare, and then users leave due to lack of apps. We're a long way off that, but I really don't want that to happen again.
I would like a new iPhone to replace my 6s, and previous to it I upgraded to every new S version. I'm now 4 generations behind purely because the cost of new iPhones is extortionate. If the price was more reasonable I would likely have upgraded twice in the same period, and Apple would have made more money than me upgrading once. And even more than my current situation of not upgrading at all. Android phones can do 90% of what iPhones can do for half the cost. People will pay a premium for Apple gear, but they won't pay double.
Oh look, it’s the “But Apple is out of touch!” trope. Cute. Sorry but that’s nonsense. I am neither a blogger nor a rich kid, just a working professional and I have no problem paying for the tools I use. It’s much cheaper than the hardware tools my carpenter friends buy for their shops.
Get yourself a knockoff and stopping whining, clearly you’ll be happier. Meanwhile, Apple’s sales prove your claims are the opposite of what’s actually happening.
It's pretty obvious that they are out of touch with their declining Mac sales, their rejected by the professionals Mac Pro and flat sales on phones. You sticking fingers in your ears and ignoring your customers is what Apple did in the 1990's, and look where that left them. As I've repeated ad-nauseam, I don't want Apple to be in that boat again.
I could get tools for my profession that cost 10x more than the ones I have, and I could get ones that are 10x less. I judge the value of the mid-range tools to be better value than getting a cheap shitty Chinese knockoffs which won't last a week, and better value than paying out for the top tier tool that's only a tiny bit better than the mid-range ones. Apple was always high end, but good value. Now Apple is heading toward the realm of poor value due to the cost. Fine, a £400 Android phone might not last as long, but it'll have to only live half as long as an Xr to make it worthwhile - and most are at least half as good.
Why should I get a knockoff? I like Apple's phones, I like Apple's ecosystem, I like the privacy, I like the quality. I don't like Apple's cash hoard, it makes them a target for patent trolls and is a result of their high prices. I am perfectly within my rights to add my voice to the many Apple fans - ones who are not blind with their head up their ass like a few here - that Apple's prices are getting too high. If it was just one or two people complaining I'd agree with you, some people are never happy - but it's not. A _lot_ of people are complaining about the cost of Apple's phones. These people you are desperately trying to dismiss, but oddly enough as with many a genuine concern, they aren't going to go away no matter how hard you try.
I bought my spouse the XR as she is far less techie than me and won’t notice the subtle differences. It surprised me how much larger and wider it was the my X. Screen is different but to be honest, it is very difficult to tell especially when they are not next to each other.
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it? Apple removed forced touch, which in fairness is hardly used, although, you can use life photos and get same force touch Taptic feedback, so I wonder if this is a soft omission like the removal of bokeh on objects. However, is the removal of bokeh on objects really removed to drive sales of the more expensive iphones for photograph buffs? It is these glowing unnecessary omissions that tars what is a great company and product, and that fogs the view that they are customer focused, less about profits and more about providing great technology, kind of says the opposite, in my own opinion. Disappointing Apple as a huge Apple fan.
Other than that, the phone is terrific albeit, I would haven purchased it for myself simply due to the bulkiness of the edges compared to my X.
No it’s not baffling, you’re just ignorant about why. The XS has two cameras and can do a depth map on objects in the foreground. The XR has one camera and can’t, but they programmed it to recognize what a face is and let you apply it for those.
Crazy corporate greed, huh? What a silly post.
Here I agree with you, the OP obviously thinks technical limitations are all due to corporate greed, which is rubbish. Some are of course - soldered RAM on a desktop comes to mind, but the Xr bokeh limitations aren't.
I have a 4K smart TV that cost me about half what I paid for my first flat screen TV. Apple’s iPhone are more expensive because they can be. Apple knows most people aren’t buying the phone outright but paying over time. Adding $200 to the price of the phone doesn’t add that much to a monthly payment.
Oh man that’s so boneheaded. You must not work with technology... A TV is way less complicated than a minuturized computer. Most TVs are the same commodity panels and little more, while iphones have tons of tech and new layers and things every year.
iPhones also have 35% profit margin, TVs have basically none.
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it?
iPhone achieves bokeh effect on the X/Xs through the use of the telephoto lens to isolate a subject from its background thus allowing the SoC to apply optical bokeh that is accurate and natural.
The Xr uses part of that system through AI assisted recognition of human faces and uses that information to identify what is a face and what isn't, hence allowing it to apply a convincing software bokeh effect on just the background but not the face. Such system naturally wouldn't work on non-human objects as the AI wouldn't be able to decide where does the object's outline really ends.
Although it is true that there are other phones that has features that applies bokeh on photos while using a single lens, we have to remember that
1. That is not the method Apple is going with
2. I reckon it does not offer the same degree of "realism" the iPhone method does, there is a caveat to this though as I'd think that those phone would be capable of very good and convincing software bokeh if the subject in focus has high contrast, but would likely give issues when its low contrast
So my guess would be that Apple prefers the consistency of the user experience, they might not like the situation of a customer using the Xr to take a portrait mode photo of a low-contrast subject and getting disappointed with the bad software bokeh, they'd rather implement a feature that works consistently without needing caveats
I'm not one to say which way of doing things is better for any specific consumer but I can understand their rationale for I, as a business-owner strive for consistency in customer experience, even if that means it comes at the expense of omitting certain features that aren't "perfect"
Inflation is a thing. You know gas, bread, milk, etc all cost more each year as well.
If gas was $6 a gallon, bread was $4 a loaf, and milk cost $6 a gallon right now, you would have a valid comparison. Unlike those commodity goods, consumer electronics typically go down in price over time. Cameras, televisions, hard disks, even drones just get getting cheaper and cheaper. Only Apple seems to be able to buck this trend. It will probably work for a few more years. But with higher prices you get more intense competition. It will be interesting to see where Apple is in 4-8 years when iPhone are more like the commodity goods you listed.
"A cell phone used to be just a wireless telephone. No longer. They are our ever-present personal computers. They are also our most important cameras (and often our only cameras). A decade ago, point-and-shoot cameras ran $200-400, easily. It’s your watch, it’s your alarm clock, it’s your Walkman, it’s your map and GPS. It’s your wallet full of photos of your family and friends. It’s also, increasing, your actual wallet.
If you took an iPhone XR back to 2006 people would be amazed. If you told them they could buy one for $750 they’d think you were lying.
On a related note, I would argue that iPhone prices aren’t really going up. Last year’s X and this year’s XS models are a new premium tier. The iPhone XR is the phone at the previous “regular” top-of-the-line tier. New top-tier iPhones used to cost $600-650, yes, and the iPhone XR starts at $750. But when you account for inflation that starting price is about the same. The iPhone 4 was introduced in June 2010 starting at $600. $600 in June 2010 dollars is about $700 today. That $600 got you a 16 GB iPhone in 2010. The 32 GB model cost $700. That’s about $810 in today’s dollars — $10 more than the price of a 128 GB iPhone XR, which I think is the sweet spot in the lineup for most people. Inflation adjusted, the iPhone XR is right in line with the iPhone 4 prices from 2010.
Considering how much more capable an iPhone XR is compared to an iPhone 4, I’d say $750 is an amazing bargain."
You have been drinking too much of the apple kool aid. The X range is not a super class tier at all. I have the Xs. It’s a great device but no better in real terms than my old 7 Plus was when that was released either in its flagship clothes. Its what I expect from apple’s best iPhone , as always. It’s not like it’s made of a special rare alloy or something. Hardwire wise , there is nothing that unique about it. Spec wise, many android phones come with as good sceeens and not memory for much less cost. It’s a solid device that Apple could have sold for a lot cheaper and still made a ton of money. But can’t really fault apple here if mugs like me are willing to spend a grand on it lol. Technology tends to get cheaper as the years go by not more expensive. (Think how DVD players got better and cheaper over the years). The iPhone is doing the opposite. That’s not good for us consumers. And whilst we could keep the device for 4 years , we probably won’t when we see what Apple releases in in the next two years (starting at just $1200 for the top tier!)
The issue at hand here is that you're placing an unreasonable criteria on Apple for determining value, there are no phones out there that satisfies your criteria of value as none of them possesses the attributes you've described e.g special rare alloy
Although it is true that you can find cheaper Android phones with good specifications, you ought to also understand that things cannot be compared that way, you can't isolate a specific component and compare that and extrapolate it, a phone is a highly integrated product and one needs to compare the entirety of the phone for any constructive discussion and that also means elements that aren't purely on spec sheets.
The concept of value is by nature highly subjective, someone can say that a Porsche is of bad value because you can find another car with similar horsepower for a fraction of the price; a michelin restaurant is of bad value because you can find another cafe that also serves foie gras; a designer label shirt is bad value because you can find a shirt in a discount shop that also uses 100% cotton; you possess bad value in your job because out there somewhere in the world there is someone who can do what you do for cheaper.
But you do understand why those comparisons are utterly disingenuous because for most of us iPhone users, the specs are just one element of the product and how we determine value isn't based entirely on the spec sheets.
I can't speak for the rest but I personally enjoy iOS's UX more than Android's and I certainly do appreciate the design/engineering details that goes into an iPhone, take for example the rounded corners of the Xr screen, for someone who doesn't care much about engineering, it would likely mean nothing to them but the display is impressive because of what Apple did (adjusting pixel size to make it possible for an LCD display to have a rounded corner with no light leak) or X/Xs's equal-bezel display, where they used a display larger than the dimensions of the phone and folded it onto itself in order to place the display controller behind the display instead of above/below the display in all other phones (hence the existence of a top/bottom bezel in android phones) ; So even though there are cheaper phones with similar specs on the spec sheets, it is cheaper exactly because those phones does not care as much about the design/engineering and UX.
Technology does not get cheaper, stagnant/old technology does e.g your DVD player analogy, and we can all agree that the iPhone Xr packs a punch, its FaceID is undoubtedly the best in the market by a huge margin, its 7nm A12 processor beats out all other competition in the flagship phone space, its camera & ISP is one of the best in the market, I'd agree that the iPhone Xr is a rip-off if it uses last gen components but thats obviously not the case.
Hence my point simply is that to each their own, we as humans are intrinsically different, we have our own value system and its important to respect the differences of each and everyone of us, what you deem as the sole measure of value to you isn't the same as that to another person and that is perfectly fine.
Comments
The omission of the bokeh effect on objects other than people is simply baffling, and to be honest, it stinks of a profit driven corporate decision. Clearly, it can do it on objects but why omit it? Apple removed forced touch, which in fairness is hardly used, although, you can use life photos and get same force touch Taptic feedback, so I wonder if this is a soft omission like the removal of bokeh on objects. However, is the removal of bokeh on objects really removed to drive sales of the more expensive iphones for photograph buffs? It is these glowing unnecessary omissions that tars what is a great company and product, and that fogs the view that they are customer focused, less about profits and more about providing great technology, kind of says the opposite, in my own opinion. Disappointing Apple as a huge Apple fan.
Other than that, the phone is terrific albeit, I would haven purchased it for myself simply due to the bulkiness of the edges compared to my X.
Stating otherwise is just simply incorrect... otherwise Apple wouldn’t bother with anything greater than 200ppi if you were right.
Or even better, get an Android, as your constant expressions of dissatisfaction show how clearly unhappy you are. Don’t you want to be happy? What are you waiting for?
Or until you realize it’s not a phone. It can do phone jobs, but these are computers, cameras, scanners, etc. Should be pretty obvious by now.
The X range is not a super class tier at all. I have the Xs. It’s a great device but no better in real terms than my old 7 Plus was when that was released either in its flagship clothes. Its what I expect from apple’s best iPhone , as always. It’s not like it’s made of a special rare alloy or something. Hardwire wise , there is nothing that unique about it. Spec wise, many android phones come with as good sceeens and not memory for much less cost. It’s a solid device that Apple could have sold for a lot cheaper and still made a ton of money. But can’t really fault apple here if mugs like me are willing to spend a grand on it lol.
Technology tends to get cheaper as the years go by not more expensive. (Think how DVD players got better and cheaper over the years). The iPhone is doing the opposite. That’s not good for us consumers. And whilst we could keep the device for 4 years , we probably won’t when we see what Apple releases in in the next two years (starting at just $1200 for the top tier!)
I would expect it’s bigger in order to wrap the display so there is no forehead or chin. This is more difficult with LCD screens which is why the knockoffs haven’t done it yet.
Get yourself a knockoff and stopping whining, clearly you’ll be happier. Meanwhile, Apple’s sales prove your claims are the opposite of what’s actually happening.
The word you’re thinking of is “cheap”, which was not in his description.
Another person who doesn’t know the difference between “value” and “cheap”. What’s in the water where you live?
Yeah man, don’t let the fact that you folks have been saying this about Apple since the 1980s stop you... Funny that doom is always 5 years out, but never now.
Crazy corporate greed, huh? What a silly post.
Uh, yeah, comparing the then new SE with the now new Xr.
I said they were losing sales, not that sales were reducing YoY. Sales are flat, but as I said, they're losing prospective sales because of the prices. I've held off upgrading my 6s because of cost. Lost sale. I've seriously considered going Hackintosh because of the awful stale Mac lineup. That'd be a lost sale. Several of my friends have either switched to Android or held off upgrading. There's more lost sales. Remember each lost sale is zero cash to Apple and another £500 or so spent in the Android or MS world, and shouldn't be dismissed. Once someone switches, it's hard to get them back. A high profit margin is great, but if it starts eating into sales it becomes a drag on them, and means the balance is wrong.
It's pretty obvious that they are out of touch with their declining Mac sales, their rejected by the professionals Mac Pro and flat sales on phones. You sticking fingers in your ears and ignoring your customers is what Apple did in the 1990's, and look where that left them. As I've repeated ad-nauseam, I don't want Apple to be in that boat again.
I could get tools for my profession that cost 10x more than the ones I have, and I could get ones that are 10x less. I judge the value of the mid-range tools to be better value than getting a cheap shitty Chinese knockoffs which won't last a week, and better value than paying out for the top tier tool that's only a tiny bit better than the mid-range ones. Apple was always high end, but good value. Now Apple is heading toward the realm of poor value due to the cost. Fine, a £400 Android phone might not last as long, but it'll have to only live half as long as an Xr to make it worthwhile - and most are at least half as good.
Why should I get a knockoff? I like Apple's phones, I like Apple's ecosystem, I like the privacy, I like the quality. I don't like Apple's cash hoard, it makes them a target for patent trolls and is a result of their high prices. I am perfectly within my rights to add my voice to the many Apple fans - ones who are not blind with their head up their ass like a few here - that Apple's prices are getting too high. If it was just one or two people complaining I'd agree with you, some people are never happy - but it's not. A _lot_ of people are complaining about the cost of Apple's phones. These people you are desperately trying to dismiss, but oddly enough as with many a genuine concern, they aren't going to go away no matter how hard you try.
Here I agree with you, the OP obviously thinks technical limitations are all due to corporate greed, which is rubbish. Some are of course - soldered RAM on a desktop comes to mind, but the Xr bokeh limitations aren't. iPhones also have 35% profit margin, TVs have basically none.
iPhone achieves bokeh effect on the X/Xs through the use of the telephoto lens to isolate a subject from its background thus allowing the SoC to apply optical bokeh that is accurate and natural.
The Xr uses part of that system through AI assisted recognition of human faces and uses that information to identify what is a face and what isn't, hence allowing it to apply a convincing software bokeh effect on just the background but not the face. Such system naturally wouldn't work on non-human objects as the AI wouldn't be able to decide where does the object's outline really ends.
Although it is true that there are other phones that has features that applies bokeh on photos while using a single lens, we have to remember that
1. That is not the method Apple is going with
2. I reckon it does not offer the same degree of "realism" the iPhone method does, there is a caveat to this though as I'd think that those phone would be capable of very good and convincing software bokeh if the subject in focus has high contrast, but would likely give issues when its low contrast
So my guess would be that Apple prefers the consistency of the user experience, they might not like the situation of a customer using the Xr to take a portrait mode photo of a low-contrast subject and getting disappointed with the bad software bokeh, they'd rather implement a feature that works consistently without needing caveats
I'm not one to say which way of doing things is better for any specific consumer but I can understand their rationale for I, as a business-owner strive for consistency in customer experience, even if that means it comes at the expense of omitting certain features that aren't "perfect"
The issue at hand here is that you're placing an unreasonable criteria on Apple for determining value, there are no phones out there that satisfies your criteria of value as none of them possesses the attributes you've described e.g special rare alloy
Although it is true that you can find cheaper Android phones with good specifications, you ought to also understand that things cannot be compared that way, you can't isolate a specific component and compare that and extrapolate it, a phone is a highly integrated product and one needs to compare the entirety of the phone for any constructive discussion and that also means elements that aren't purely on spec sheets.
The concept of value is by nature highly subjective, someone can say that a Porsche is of bad value because you can find another car with similar horsepower for a fraction of the price; a michelin restaurant is of bad value because you can find another cafe that also serves foie gras; a designer label shirt is bad value because you can find a shirt in a discount shop that also uses 100% cotton; you possess bad value in your job because out there somewhere in the world there is someone who can do what you do for cheaper.
But you do understand why those comparisons are utterly disingenuous because for most of us iPhone users, the specs are just one element of the product and how we determine value isn't based entirely on the spec sheets.
I can't speak for the rest but I personally enjoy iOS's UX more than Android's and I certainly do appreciate the design/engineering details that goes into an iPhone, take for example the rounded corners of the Xr screen, for someone who doesn't care much about engineering, it would likely mean nothing to them but the display is impressive because of what Apple did (adjusting pixel size to make it possible for an LCD display to have a rounded corner with no light leak) or X/Xs's equal-bezel display, where they used a display larger than the dimensions of the phone and folded it onto itself in order to place the display controller behind the display instead of above/below the display in all other phones (hence the existence of a top/bottom bezel in android phones) ; So even though there are cheaper phones with similar specs on the spec sheets, it is cheaper exactly because those phones does not care as much about the design/engineering and UX.
Technology does not get cheaper, stagnant/old technology does e.g your DVD player analogy, and we can all agree that the iPhone Xr packs a punch, its FaceID is undoubtedly the best in the market by a huge margin, its 7nm A12 processor beats out all other competition in the flagship phone space, its camera & ISP is one of the best in the market, I'd agree that the iPhone Xr is a rip-off if it uses last gen components but thats obviously not the case.
Hence my point simply is that to each their own, we as humans are intrinsically different, we have our own value system and its important to respect the differences of each and everyone of us, what you deem as the sole measure of value to you isn't the same as that to another person and that is perfectly fine.