Ugh, so you saw some people arguing on a forum so decided to write a thousand self-righteous words from a pulpit about how they're stupid? Not a good discussion piece.
It's not even really from here. This conversation is everywhere.
Silly. If you have alternatives, you are not being “robbed”.
Luxury new iPhone designed for the 1%, or this explanation from Wikipedia.... Robber baron" is a derogatory metaphor of social criticism originally applied to certain late 19th-century American businessmen who were accused of using unscrupulous methods to get rich, or expand their wealth, for example Cornelius Vanderbilt taking money from government-subsidized shippers, in order to not compete on their routes.
I'm sorry, but given Apple's direction in recent years, anything, including names and nomenclatures, lends themselves to justifying the increasingly expensive pricing.
Apple's current business model is that of luxury brands. There is no difference here whether the product is a computer, phone or a watch band.
Here's how it works: the luxury-brand companies sell a leather purse for the price of a car to people who want to imitate the rich and give the same purse to really wealthy people to consolidate status.
We saw this clearly happening at the time of the Apple Watch release. And we see today, with each product release, Apple giving influencers units for free so they can use and evangelize about the wonders and status that these products provide.
The watch was the test balloon. Bringing this expertise to Apple was the role given to Angela. And the instrumentation was done by Jony, turning the products into decorative objects (see the Butterfly keyboard and end of the utility product lines, like routers and monitors).
The next step was to stop advertising the sales volume of any product to focus solely on profit. Then we had an average 30% price increase for just about everything from products to AppleCare services. The stores have also been converted into high-end boutiques.
The transition from product company to luxury product company has been achieved. The current administration assumes this status openly and without any embarrassment.
Therefore it is important to understand that any action within Apple, including the adoption of nomenclature for products and services, nowadays will always be to reinforce and refine the luxury brand perception.
Nonsense. Nobody said you have to buy the buy the top-tier offering. They sell plenty of models for many budgets. A friend recently bought a new 7 and is happy with it. I can afford the top-tier, and with the interest-free loan payment plan, find it quite affordable -- it's the price of two beers a week. I think two beers a week is reasonable, so I think having an excellent pocket computer tool for the same price is also reasonable.
Just a bit of sarcasm and dose of satire wrapped in some social critique. I have until the new iPhones are released the "pro" model only not officially in branding.
I just had to comment on the "for the rest of us" slogan from 1984. I believe it was used as a slogan to tell the public that a simpler computer was now available for the general public. Computers in 1980's were somewhat difficult for non technical people to use and few had them. Fast forward to 2019 - If Apple does go and use a Pro name for one of the phones - it really should have unique features, not just some giant screen size. Unless it comes with such unique features, then having a Pro name is misleading. I'm not sure having such a name is a good thing regardless. But let's wait to see what they come out with.
Point 1: We don't take money from Apple, at all. This is not a marketing piece. Re-read the commenting guidelines. Further comments suggesting that it is marketing will be deleted, as per the commenting guidelines.
Point 2: This is an editorial. It is clearly labeled as such. By definition, it has opinions. if you don't want to read opinions, skip the pieces labeled "Editorial." This is a pretty easy association.
Point 3: This is not just on Apple, but it is on self-entitled users as well. The piece is pretty clear about that. Fortunately, most of you can see that. This piece is for those of you that can't, which is about a perfect overlap to the ones that start most of the fights here about it.
For me Pro would be having a Solid State battery that would provide much longer up time like 48 hrs use at less weight. triple camera is just copying Huawei and so otherwise Pro is marketing as you say but hopefully it will make the naming easier going forward.
And just so you know, Google, by using its infamous "don't be evil" mission statement, pointed its employees right toward doing evil by using the word. If they were serious about avoiding evil, they'd have used created a mission statement along the lines of "be honest, diligent, respectful, and work toward integrity".
...last time I checked the dictionary definition of 'professional' it was someone paid for the activity in reference... Pretty simple really.
So for those that use a computer to generate income (now or anticipated/invested for the future) does the term apply to many potential aspects, such as better performance, portability, creative potential or even hardware upgradability / adaptability, with justification in suit for any cost-benefit...?
The part about reading too much into a name is definitely the takeaway here.
The part about steve jobs using a lisa and still being a pro user is lame as the present date is always important when considering pro needs. Obviously s Lisa TODAY would not be a pro machine.
The pro pro name is simply Apples way of saying “hey. This here is high end hardware. You can use it for business and personal use and it will meet or exceed your needs.
The pro nsme seems pretty pretty dumb when applied to the mobile space otherwise.
A pro tsblet of phone jusy seems like you are trying too hard - unless the name is seen to mean basically that it’s top of the line in the segment - and it is.
Not sure this warranted an article. But it was an interesting time kill.
A good article in fact. Well done Mike. It is a pity that even some of the long time apple supporters are unable to comprehend the simple reason behind the naming, but android phone users like Avon B7 and myself are able to understand it easily. I guessed this Pro naming for the iPhone X 2 years ago, which didn't pan out. So it would not surprising to me at all if it happens this year (not confirmed yet by apple though).
This article uses a lot of words to point the finger at customers. That’s not where the blame for any of this lies. The blame lies on Apple and ONLY on Apple. This editorial is excusing Apple’s irrational marketing and trying to redirect the blame back at customers.
And no, the 2019 Mac Pro isn’t being criticized for lacking professional features. It’s being criticized because Apple has gone way too far with the “pro” price gouging. It’s being criticized for dramatically cutting out most of the Mac Pro’s actual existing (and historic) market and focusing only on entities like Disney studios (who, let’s face it, will probably just go for less expensive and less proprietary PC clones).
As a result, this editorial just comes off as a verbose marketing piece. Try again.
Who is pointing fingers or assigning blame? As the article says:
First, it will be expensive, and second, Apple needed a name. And that is the extent of it.
I don't know why the article went on for another thousand words after that, but that's the only point.
Silly. If you have alternatives, you are not being “robbed”.
Luxury new iPhone designed for the 1%, or this explanation from Wikipedia.... Robber baron" is a derogatory metaphor of social criticism originally applied to certain late 19th-century American businessmen who were accused of using unscrupulous methods to get rich, or expand their wealth, for example Cornelius Vanderbilt taking money from government-subsidized shippers, in order to not compete on their routes.
Oh come on. You don't see a difference between selling consumer products in a competitive market and "taking money from government-subsidized shippers, in order to not compete on their routes"?
Silly. If you have alternatives, you are not being “robbed”.
Luxury new iPhone designed for the 1%, or this explanation from Wikipedia.... Robber baron" is a derogatory metaphor of social criticism originally applied to certain late 19th-century American businessmen who were accused of using unscrupulous methods to get rich, or expand their wealth, for example Cornelius Vanderbilt taking money from government-subsidized shippers, in order to not compete on their routes.
Gee, you can define your terms. Too bad you don’t know how to make them relevant....
I'm sorry, but given Apple's direction in recent years, anything, including names and nomenclatures, lends themselves to justifying the increasingly expensive pricing.
Apple's current business model is that of luxury brands. There is no difference here whether the product is a computer, phone or a watch band.
Here's how it works: the luxury-brand companies sell a leather purse for the price of a car to people who want to imitate the rich and give the same purse to really wealthy people to consolidate status.
We saw this clearly happening at the time of the Apple Watch release. And we see today, with each product release, Apple giving influencers units for free so they can use and evangelize about the wonders and status that these products provide.
The watch was the test balloon. Bringing this expertise to Apple was the role given to Angela. And the instrumentation was done by Jony, turning the products into decorative objects (see the Butterfly keyboard and end of the utility product lines, like routers and monitors).
The next step was to stop advertising the sales volume of any product to focus solely on profit. Then we had an average 30% price increase for just about everything from products to AppleCare services. The stores have also been converted into high-end boutiques.
The transition from product company to luxury product company has been achieved. The current administration assumes this status openly and without any embarrassment.
Therefore it is important to understand that any action within Apple, including the adoption of nomenclature for products and services, nowadays will always be to reinforce and refine the luxury brand perception.
That's one person's opinion, and I don't share it. First of all, it's the wrong word. The correct word is "quality". Note that the whole connotation changes when you use "quality" rather than "luxury".
Second, you've left out "sum of the parts" (SOTP). Apple products are a combination of hardware, software, and service. For Apple, these are integrated. Far less so for Apple's competitors. The net result is that the user pays about the same for the combination regardless of whether it's Apple or one of its competitors. And that assumes the combination is even available to Apple's competitors (a classic example where it isn't available is personal privacy).
Third, Apple not only makes a range of hardware devices with fewer components and thus lower prices, they support a vibrant refurbished market which offers products with even lower prices. And because Apple spends a great deal on SOTP, older products have far more software and support than Apple's competitors. If all they cared about were the wealthy, why even bother?
Bottom line: You've written a screed, a polemic with precious little to back you up.
Still, you did start by apologizing, so apology accepted.
I appreciate this article and hope it better informs the average AppleInsider forum poster who all too often bashes other AppleInsider forum members with the tired cliché, “well, that device isn’t made for you!“ Anyone who has even the least bit of a gripe about the pricing of the new Mac Pro will be met with that cliché in this forum at some point. And no doubt when the new iPhones come out, people who complain about the price will immediately receive the reply, “well, they weren’t made for you.“ It shouldn’t be so!
The fact of the matter is these devices are made for whoever can afford them. And the crux of that is the fact that increasingly there are devices coming out from Apple that are unaffordable for The Rest of Us (the average consumer, especially Apple product fans). So it’s only fair that we consumers and Apple fans express our likes and dislikes about pricing, which has little or nothing to do with a device being marked “pro“.
In other words, the Apple products fan has every right to ask for a product that gives us more functionality for less money, without us being categorized into that cliché “it wasn’t made for you.“ If we otherwise love a particular device and see the many ways we could get use out of it, price is secondary, it was indeed made for us!
We Apple product fans are willing to pay more for Apple devices because Apple traditionally has given us more. However, there comes a point when the price becomes too high in light of the features offered, and it is then that we present our legitimate gripes and ask legitimate questions like, “couldn’t there be a model that uses slightly less expensive hardware yet still gives great performance at a price The Rest of Us can afford?”
That’s why I appreciated this article because it’s basically telling all of us that we should never categorize each other into those non-existent “it’s not made for you“ groups. There are some people who can easily afford even a fully maxed out Mac Pro. But that doesn’t mean the people who cannot afford even a baseline 2019 Mac Pro are not allowed to share gripes and make requests for a more affordable Mac Pro.
Bottom line: we need solidarity among us, not division. We need to support each other even in cases where we ourselves may not see something as being a negative when others do. Some of us find it hard to afford certain Apple products. yet we may want to buy them and we may have good use for them. “Pro” or not, those devices were made for anyone who can buy them, and we are not wrong to ask for and wish for MORE FOR LESS.
There’s a spectrum to many things in life. Take gender, for example. On the male end there are men far more masculine behaving than me; just watch Dangerous Catch about the Alaska fishermen (and women). The male end of the spectrum extends from guys like that near the far extreme to men who are somewhat less masculine than me before it extends to cover those who would consider themselves transgender and continues toward the female end of the spectrum. It’s fairly continuous from one extreme to another, not a simple binary Male/Female definition.
A spectrum could also be laid out for PCs, tablets, phones, wearables. For each device category there’s a spectrum that has casual users toward one end and power users on the other. Even with the line-up of Macs that carry the Pro designation there exists the 2019 MacBook Pro quad-core i5 through to the desktop Mac Pro with its configurations of numerous high-end processor cores. Could it even be said that the user of the base configuration MacBook Pro is less professional that the user of a higher spec MacBook Pro or iMac pro or Mac Pro? Right there we can see that the Pro label breaks down if it’s used to attempt to describe the user. And it’s not; it’s merely an arbitrary delineation that helps to divide the spectrum along which all Macs reside. A shorthand for determining which group of Mac models a consumer might wish to focus on when shopping. Somewhere along that same spectrum one could slap down the term Power User, and it would be equally incorrect in dividing the spectrum, but might be equally useful (meaning somewhat useful) in allowing consumers to identify where to begin their shopping.
Comments
Bravo or Bravo, well said or written.
Just a bit of sarcasm and dose of satire wrapped in some social critique. I have until the new iPhones are released the "pro" model only not officially in branding.
Yeah, right. Follow a company that "monetizes" its users' data (see Patrick Berlinquette's excellent takedown of Goophabet's business model beginning here in part 1 of his three part series - https://medium.com/s/story/the-complete-unauthorized-checklist-of-how-google-tracks-you-3c3abc10781d).
And just so you know, Google, by using its infamous "don't be evil" mission statement, pointed its employees right toward doing evil by using the word. If they were serious about avoiding evil, they'd have used created a mission statement along the lines of "be honest, diligent, respectful, and work toward integrity".
So for those that use a computer to generate income (now or anticipated/invested for the future) does the term apply to many potential aspects, such as better performance, portability, creative potential or even hardware upgradability / adaptability, with justification in suit for any cost-benefit...?
The part about steve jobs using a lisa and still being a pro user is lame as the present date is always important when considering pro needs. Obviously s Lisa TODAY would not be a pro machine.
The pro pro name is simply Apples way of saying “hey. This here is high end hardware. You can use it for business and personal use and it will meet or exceed your needs.
The pro nsme seems pretty pretty dumb when applied to the mobile space otherwise.
A pro tsblet of phone jusy seems like you are trying too hard - unless the name is seen to mean basically that it’s top of the line in the segment - and it is.
Not sure this warranted an article. But it was an interesting time kill.
I don't know why the article went on for another thousand words after that, but that's the only point.
Second, you've left out "sum of the parts" (SOTP). Apple products are a combination of hardware, software, and service. For Apple, these are integrated. Far less so for Apple's competitors. The net result is that the user pays about the same for the combination regardless of whether it's Apple or one of its competitors. And that assumes the combination is even available to Apple's competitors (a classic example where it isn't available is personal privacy).
Third, Apple not only makes a range of hardware devices with fewer components and thus lower prices, they support a vibrant refurbished market which offers products with even lower prices. And because Apple spends a great deal on SOTP, older products have far more software and support than Apple's competitors. If all they cared about were the wealthy, why even bother?
Bottom line: You've written a screed, a polemic with precious little to back you up.
Still, you did start by apologizing, so apology accepted.
I appreciate this article and hope it better informs the average AppleInsider forum poster who all too often bashes other AppleInsider forum members with the tired cliché, “well, that device isn’t made for you!“ Anyone who has even the least bit of a gripe about the pricing of the new Mac Pro will be met with that cliché in this forum at some point. And no doubt when the new iPhones come out, people who complain about the price will immediately receive the reply, “well, they weren’t made for you.“ It shouldn’t be so!
The fact of the matter is these devices are made for whoever can afford them. And the crux of that is the fact that increasingly there are devices coming out from Apple that are unaffordable for The Rest of Us (the average consumer, especially Apple product fans). So it’s only fair that we consumers and Apple fans express our likes and dislikes about pricing, which has little or nothing to do with a device being marked “pro“.
In other words, the Apple products fan has every right to ask for a product that gives us more functionality for less money, without us being categorized into that cliché “it wasn’t made for you.“ If we otherwise love a particular device and see the many ways we could get use out of it, price is secondary, it was indeed made for us!
We Apple product fans are willing to pay more for Apple devices because Apple traditionally has given us more. However, there comes a point when the price becomes too high in light of the features offered, and it is then that we present our legitimate gripes and ask legitimate questions like, “couldn’t there be a model that uses slightly less expensive hardware yet still gives great performance at a price The Rest of Us can afford?”
That’s why I appreciated this article because it’s basically telling all of us that we should never categorize each other into those non-existent “it’s not made for you“ groups. There are some people who can easily afford even a fully maxed out Mac Pro. But that doesn’t mean the people who cannot afford even a baseline 2019 Mac Pro are not allowed to share gripes and make requests for a more affordable Mac Pro.
Bottom line: we need solidarity among us, not division. We need to support each other even in cases where we ourselves may not see something as being a negative when others do. Some of us find it hard to afford certain Apple products. yet we may want to buy them and we may have good use for them. “Pro” or not, those devices were made for anyone who can buy them, and we are not wrong to ask for and wish for MORE FOR LESS.
A spectrum could also be laid out for PCs, tablets, phones, wearables. For each device category there’s a spectrum that has casual users toward one end and power users on the other. Even with the line-up of Macs that carry the Pro designation there exists the 2019 MacBook Pro quad-core i5 through to the desktop Mac Pro with its configurations of numerous high-end processor cores. Could it even be said that the user of the base configuration MacBook Pro is less professional that the user of a higher spec MacBook Pro or iMac pro or Mac Pro? Right there we can see that the Pro label breaks down if it’s used to attempt to describe the user. And it’s not; it’s merely an arbitrary delineation that helps to divide the spectrum along which all Macs reside. A shorthand for determining which group of Mac models a consumer might wish to focus on when shopping. Somewhere along that same spectrum one could slap down the term Power User, and it would be equally incorrect in dividing the spectrum, but might be equally useful (meaning somewhat useful) in allowing consumers to identify where to begin their shopping.