mnbob1

maciekskontakt said:

Maybe they should fix the problem with identification of messaging (SMS). i Message is propriateary Apple. People do prefer SMS (telecommunication standard across the world) over some propietary solution. Not everybody is on iMessage and not everybody wants to be on iMessage or iCloud. delivering iMessages should be to devices and not to random devices of a user in iCloud (gifted devices to family should not receive messages - mine should and it is identified by phone number not by Apple cloud ID). This problem has been for years now and people are really upset (especially those who left Apple device) See the difference? Next is fixing security fresh bug...

radarthekat said:

ireland said:

nolamacguy said:

arrogant hunger for profit?

I hold Apple to higher ideals than you do obviously. I expect more of them.

We've all heard the battery life and storage limit companints. I've nieces and nephews and cousins and it's all I ever here about. Apple as the best product company around needs to think of these issues as problems, and not one solved by comments like "just spend $100 or $200 more..." by snarky people such as yourself. No, Apple needs to protect its customers from buying products with these issues by not selling them.

If you listen to Ive he says Apple's goal is to not chase profits but to make the best products and the profits will come, but if you've been paying attention particularly in the past 4 years you'll see that while Ive may be sincere and believes what he's saying Apple's behaviour often tells a different story.

To cover your iPad mini 4 (for one example) front and rear now with Apple covers is €115. If the only argument against that is "you're not forced to buy Apple's cover" (and it is) then that's sad and speaks volumes about people such as yourself that defend this behaviour. Charging a healthy fair price is about business, but also ideals and dignity. Charging an extortionate amount for a case feels off. Apple speak about higher ideals, so it's important if they don't reach them that we hold a mirror up to them. Magic trackpad 2, Magic keyboard, have you seen those prices in the EU? Currency exchange? I'm not buying it. Greed is the motivation. Greed is the reason 16 GB iOS devices won't go away.

As a customer, you're the clueless one. You don't need to defend the richest company around, they won't go out of business if we're honest. It's fine to criticise them. They aren't a junk meaningless, vacuous, valueless company such as Samsung. They stand for certain things which is great. They just need to live up to them.

What are you talking about? Forget it, no need to reply. You're thinking lacks depth.

---

After so many posts here on AI, I think it's your thinking that lacks depth.  

The iPhone price, with 64GB of storage is $749 (I'm using U.S. currency, you're mileage by vary, but the argument I'm making remains the same).  For that you get a 64GB model of the iPhone 6S, a more capable, faster handset than you got a year earlier at the same price, and larger and faster than you got two years ago at the same price.  That's the first part of the bargain Apple has with its customers.  For years, the price of the product remains unchanged while what you get becomes more capable.  That's the bargain everyone gets in the technology space across all vendors.  Oh, and for customers who don't need as much storage, because maybe they use the cloud, there's a $100 discount off that price for a 16GB model, a phone with all the same performance and features of the 64GB model.

How quickly some have forgotten how many stand-alone products a smartphone replaces.  Single-function cell phone, video camera, still-photo camera, portable video playback system/television, computer, radio, alarm clock, calculator, the list goes on and on.  Now how much would you pay?  

These same people throw out an argument that Apple's handsets are so much more expensive than others, ignoring the fact that other vendors (Samsung, LG, HTC, etc) also sell premium handsets at similar prices.  Apple happens to sell only premium handsets; they don't also sell cheaper models like those other companies do.  

And the same people conveniently forget the resale value retained by Apple's handsets, and the usable lifespan, both of which reduce the total cost of ownership.  Apple should be able to charge premium prices across its entire line of handsets because they are the only ones on earth that can readily take an OS upgrade three or four years in-a-row after they have been introduced.  An OS that offers better security than rivals, is more tightly integrated and therefore allows better performance while sipping less juice.  Apple takes the higher ground in the form of engineering its products to be more power efficient per unit of computing performance, allowing the company to deliver decent time between charges, comparable to its competition, with a smaller battery.  That translates to less aggregate volume [mass] of batteries ending up in landfills or needing to be recycled years down the road per million phones versus the competition, and fewer tons of coal burned (or whatever fuel is used in the power plants that provide electricity to the homes of Apple's customers where iPhones are being charged during their useable life).

All of the above applies equally to Apple's iPad line.

Tell us again whose thinking lacks depth.