- Last Active
I think that both this article and the analysts missed some important points:This article states that the X is not the first or only $1,000 phone. That's true -- I paid close to that (with Apple Care and tax) for my 6+. But, it is the first iPhone where $1,000 was the STARTING point, the low end price.Conversely the analysts focus on the X as being "THE" new iPhone. They missed the point that Apple greatly expanded the newer marketing strategy they've been dabbling their toes in: Market a high end device at a premium price while offering lower end and/or older technology at "consumer" prices.So yes, the X is a premium device at a premium price and, as such, it WILL have a more limited market share. But, Apple has covered that in every increment all the way down to the SE. Specifically, Apple's base prices for its phones are:X $9998 $6997 $5496S $449SE $349That's a 300% spread in the price range. The X costs (nearly) 3 times that of the SE.It seems (to me) that, IF there was any hesitancy to go for the X it was less due to its actual price than the $300/43% leap from the 8 because, while the 8 lacks some of the bells and whistles it sports the same power train and, for many, makes for a better buy. So any lack of sales of the X were made up for by the 8 (or lower).So, all in all, any analyst who focuses on a single iPhone model is presenting a flawed analysis because Apple has left that single iPhone marketing strategy in the dust. You now have to look at the entire line-up. Looking at iPhone X sales is no more accurate than looking at SE sales.
We fought this battle back in the 70's & 80's trying to protect American Steel... Now the Mon river is lined with beautiful trees instead of ugly steel mills... Well, there are a few ghettos along the way: Homestead, Braddock, McKeesport, Dravosburg, Clairiton.... Globalization & free trade did not kill those mills, it was a response to their death after they were killed by foreign competition -- and it was a key part in rejuvenating a failing economy.
Protectionism didn't work then. It won't work now no matter how loud we chant USA! USA! USA!...
boltsfan17 said:mobird said:This isn't just a Apple problem, this is a USA problem...Today there was an article about former American intelligence agents pulling in $200-$400K salaries for spying on America for the UAE using American spy techinques.But, yeh, let's blame the Chinese! It's the politically correct thing to do. It distracts from Russia
Yes, as I have said several times previously -- that has been my experience:-- Poorly trained staff: "Ask five people -- get five different answers-- An emphasis on sales over service-- Being pushed to make online appointments for service -- which the Apple store essentially ignored (You got treated the same whether you had an appointment or just walked in)And, I think what most bothered me was, even while buying products, about 50% of the time I knew more about the product than the employee did.I am happy for both myself and Apple to see this era gone and a return to a service oriented store that also sells product
tallest skil said:StrangeDays said:Stop trying to blame everything you dont like in life on imagined boogeymen....the right-wingers... ...FakeNews and Alternative Facts their belief system is founded on...
Fox isn’t right wing and it isn’t 2002 anymore. That canard will get you nowhere. Try harder.FoxNews
brian green said:This comparison reminds me of the days when Phil would do a speed test on stage with the latest and greatest PC versus the Mac, and the Mac would always win. It was a smack down.
I think the best thing we can do as a computer community is show Apple that they persistently come up short, and that engineers ought to actually focus on the best specs possible, rather than settling for average or bare minimum for a premium price point.
I'd love to see Phil out there again with a MacBook Pro trouncing the competition like they did in the old days. Sadly, when all of the components are off the shelf compatible to every other manufacturer, Apple would have to make the conscious decision to spec out a laptop with that specifically in mind, and it's my opinion that Apple engineers have no plans to be the best in regard to performance.
I am aware that a critical component to functionality is the OS itself and Windows 10 has made significant improvements in stability from what I've read. MacOS is stable, and functional, while I believe we're well past the days of seeing significant improvements and speed increases from one version of the OS to another. Most of us run the latest version and it "just works", much to our daily contentment. I feel the significant disparity is revealed in speed of workflow throughput. We've seen 4k become the standard for video, and HEVC has proved a significant space saver while remaining visibly lossless to the average user, yet creating more work to be done by the CPU and GPU. I have not seen a noticeable speed improvement with the change of filesystem to APFS either. When we're seeing other laptops outperforming the MacBook Pro, it's not only a loss of pride in the brand we choose to spend our hard earned money on, it's also taking more time because the laptops we're offered by Apple Engineers are less capable than those by other manufacturers.
It has been my opinion, for several generations of Mac products, that Apple Engineers have cared significantly less about performance, and more about esthetics. While Apple laptops look nice, they fall short in providing the best performance for their Prosumer users, which is truly unfortunate for those of us who refuse to leave the Mac ecosystem. When the components of laptops are largely from the same vendors and assembled by other manufacturers, it's harder to differentiate them. While I hope Apple persists in incorporating more of their own chips into their products, I am finding it difficult to imagine the day when Phil will be back out on that stage showing us the Mac trouncing the PC once again. At least the Mac will look nice though.
And too: Don't forget the entire Apple Ecosystem that simply doesn't exist in the world of Windows. I love how my Apple Watch unlocks my MacBook and how my messages flow between my Watch, my phone and my MacBook - etc, etc, etc,....
And, even on the strictly hardware basis: Apple tends to provide products that go beyond simple glitzy technical features and instead fit the needs of the user. It's what set Steve apart: The blend of technical guru and artsy/humanities genius where he could blend the two to come up a product that was greater than the sum of its parts. Apple continues to do it on their other products but has been falling off lately on their Mac line. I have confidence that they'll get the mojo back (even if they stick to off the shelf components).
StrangeDays said:Johan42 said:Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
Mike Wuerthele said:Mike Wuerthele said:
Rather I was challenging the article's allegation that it's chairman's offer to sell/license its modems to Apple (and only Apple) was as the the article put it " a loud PR move" rather than a legitimate, honest offer to a U.S. company in trouble. And, yes. their CEO did clarify the offer the next day saying that it was strictly an offer -- that they were not in talks with Apple. If it was purely a " a loud PR move".as the article alleges, they would not have had the honesty and decency to clarify it without any prompting.
1) The DOD has a block on Huawei assets going back to the previous administration in 2012. Maybe earlier, I forget at the moment.
2) The federal government as a whole has a newer block.
3) The US Federal government has been in Apple's top 10 buyer's list for 15 years, and possibly a lot longer.
4) Should Apple go with Huawei for a modem, products with it will get put on a no-buy list.
5) Huawei knows this.
Conclude what you want.
(As for the years old stuff (#1) -- it was "if's" and "maybe's" and "possibly in the future"... Which, being the only so called "evidence", is why the EU is calling bull. They don't want their networks set back by his nationalist, protectionist nonsense)