There is no way Apple pays even $3 for EarPods not with their volume of iPhone sales.. And equally no way including AirPods with an iPhone would not increase the price significantly.
The "for free" aspect of EPs is a matter of perspective. Including them/excluding them won't affect what we pay for the phone. Another perspective is Apple is ripping off the customer if excluding EPs and adding an extra cost to owning an iPhone. So far this is just an internet/analyst rumor.
Somebody said: Apple pays a tiny cost per unit comparatively, not $250 if they include them.
That's true but largely irrelevant. Including AirPods with a "flagship" unit it still a bad idea because it will significantly raise the price of the kit, probably by $100 at least. Not doing so would undercut trying to sell APs at their past retail levels. Right now the APs 2 are selling cheaper (still not cheap) probably because of the impending launch of the rumored APs 3.
I have a couple pairs of APs and like them. But if Apple does exclude AEs from the phones, I won't be buying more when they die. As much as I like them, they're a little pricey for a disposable item already. I'll go with somebody else's 'buds. Apple will never notice but that's ok by me.
It should ship with AirPods Pro for the top flagship models!
No. No it shouldn't. Having a $250 higher price tag to an already flagship device regardless whether you want another pair of AirPods Pro beecause you can't be bothered to pick up the headphones you want when you purchase your iPhone is a horrible idea.
You really need to think about what you're suggesting. You're saying that Apple shouldn't only not make money on their AirPods Pros, but also make dozens of millions more of them so they can be included with every iPhone, and then raise the price of the iPhone to compensate so that every iPhone buyer has to buy them even though it adds substantial cost to the package.
How about if you want AirPods Pros you buy AirPods Pros. Based on your assumption that Apple can both make and include them for "a tiny cost per unit" then Apple could do that, too, as a separate sale.
It should ship with AirPods Pro for the top flagship models!
No. No it shouldn't. Having a $250 higher price tag to an already flagship device regardless whether you want another pair of AirPods Pro beecause you can't be bothered to pick up the headphones you want when you purchase your iPhone is a horrible idea.
You really need to think about what you're suggesting. You're saying that Apple shouldn't only not make money on their AirPods Pros, but also make dozens of millions more of them so they can be included with every iPhone, and then raise the price of the iPhone to compensate so that every iPhone buyer has to buy them even though it adds substantial cost to the package.
How about if you want AirPods Pros you buy AirPods Pros. Based on your assumption that Apple can both make and include them for "a tiny cost per unit" then Apple could do that, too, as a separate sale.
People advocating this should also take into consideration that not everyone loves AirPods Pro. I see comments all the time where people say they like the regular AirPods and hate the new AirPods Pro. Most people will prefer the AirPods Pro but not everyone.
If this rumor is true, what Apple should do is either sell AirPods and AirPods Pro in special bundles or throw in a discount coupon for 10-25% off any Apple earphones.
As someone that is on phone calls 6+ hours per day AirPods are not an option. At best they last half a day. As it is I use an adapter that allows power and EarPods to be plugged in at the same time. I have no idea what I’ll do when the iPhone is totally wireless.
As someone on phone calls 6+ hours per day, you have a few options for wireless earbuds.
1- PowerBeats Pro wireless earbuds are claimed to provide 7 hours of continuous battery life. Although it may be less than that for phone calls as opposed to simple audio
2- Use a single AirPod at time, while charging the other. When one is depleted, use the other and begin charging the first. They charge more quickly than they're depleted, so this works well. My friend has been doing this for years for exactly the same reason.
3- If your budget permits, you could consider two pairs, with one pair always charging. If your budget does not permit, I get it -- no offense.
As someone whose hearing is sub par, I find AirPods vastly improve my ability to understand what's being said, and more so when compared to the speaker phone. Even when using just one.
They're also much more comfortable than holding a phone up for hours at a time
Maybe include a voucher. $30 for EarPods, or $70 towards airpods. You choose. A real up sell. it would be a sticker on the iPhone box so you can redeem voucher when purchased if you want.
I believe this is the way to go! Online/in-store coupon to offset the cost of the EarPods or applied to the AirPods. More than once, I've exchanged the wireless keyboard with a new iMac for the wired version And I got $50 to boot!
What a cheap, cynical trick. Only idiots would shell out over $100.00's to replace the naff headphones Apple currently ship with Airpods. I still have my Airpod supplied Apple ear phones bundled up and unused as they were/remain sonically inferior to a plethora of cheap earphones. I continue to use Etymotics I bought back in 2014 because I've yet to hear anything produced by Apple that comes close to the high quality of Etymotics.
Apple data reduce iTunes Music store files because the loss in sound quality compared to AIFF or Apple Lossless files is unnoticeable on their dreadful headphone offerings. Apple understands 90% of music consumers do not care an iota about the sound quality of talentless fly by night constructs moulded together by record producers whose only interest is the profit they can make from empty shells they dare to call celebrity music artists. Prefix anything with "celebrity" and you know a barrel has been scraped. The 10% who do care about the production values of their favourite musicians and composers are well aware that Apple couldn't care less about customer expectations for quality given the prices Apple charges.
It part of the plan to have Bluetooth enabled at all times. If you been alert enough over the last few years you would have observed this fact. And those that can add will know the motive behind it.
The only time I have bluetooth off is the 5 seconds between turning on Airplane mode and reenabling bluetooth.
Comments
The "for free" aspect of EPs is a matter of perspective. Including them/excluding them won't affect what we pay for the phone. Another perspective is Apple is ripping off the customer if excluding EPs and adding an extra cost to owning an iPhone. So far this is just an internet/analyst rumor.
That's true but largely irrelevant. Including AirPods with a "flagship" unit it still a bad idea because it will significantly raise the price of the kit, probably by $100 at least. Not doing so would undercut trying to sell APs at their past retail levels. Right now the APs 2 are selling cheaper (still not cheap) probably because of the impending launch of the rumored APs 3.
I have a couple pairs of APs and like them. But if Apple does exclude AEs from the phones, I won't be buying more when they die. As much as I like them, they're a little pricey for a disposable item already. I'll go with somebody else's 'buds. Apple will never notice but that's ok by me.
How about if you want AirPods Pros you buy AirPods Pros. Based on your assumption that Apple can both make and include them for "a tiny cost per unit" then Apple could do that, too, as a separate sale.
If this rumor is true, what Apple should do is either sell AirPods and AirPods Pro in special bundles or throw in a discount coupon for 10-25% off any Apple earphones.
It’s such a simple, clean solution!
Apple data reduce iTunes Music store files because the loss in sound quality compared to AIFF or Apple Lossless files is unnoticeable on their dreadful headphone offerings. Apple understands 90% of music consumers do not care an iota about the sound quality of talentless fly by night constructs moulded together by record producers whose only interest is the profit they can make from empty shells they dare to call celebrity music artists. Prefix anything with "celebrity" and you know a barrel has been scraped. The 10% who do care about the production values of their favourite musicians and composers are well aware that Apple couldn't care less about customer expectations for quality given the prices Apple charges.