CarmB

About

Username
CarmB
Joined
Visits
56
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
344
Badges
1
Posts
123

Reactions

212Like23Dislike11Informative

  • Processor cost could drive prices of the iPhone 18 range up

    CarmBCarmB
    melgross said:
    CarmB said:
    That's a problem mainly because the speed of existing processors is more than sufficient to meet the needs of the vast majority of users. Really fast upgraded to faster still, in real-world use, adds up to no discernible upgrade. Asking consumers who already are facing substantial price increases to pay more for essentially nothing doesn't appear to be a good grasp of what will best serve consumers. In the end, the key to success does lie in making your customers happy. Charging more with nothing to show for it is not how you do that. As the price of acquiring the latest and greatest goes up, it motivates consumers to think hard about upgrading from a working iPhone. So if Apple goes to a higher price point with its iPhone line, it will not end well for Apple. The only way this would work would be if there was compelling functionality added to the iPhone experience as a result of a processor upgrade. Current processors are so capable that it seems unlikely this will happen. 
    I can’t really agree with that. With many, if not most phone users playing games that need more and more performance, every boost is a good thing. Additionally, for image processing and other performance intensive apps, better chips are always going to be needed.

    There’s no point in saying that things are good enough, because they never are. I remember when it was said that the new IBM 286 computer, with that chip, was all that business needed. Then later, that the single core, because that was what everything was back then, 486 was as fast and anyone needed. We hear people saying this over and again, and they’re always wrong. It’s wrong here as well.
    There was a time when advancements in processor power really mattered. We are no longer living in that time. The advancements impacted just about everybody who used a computer. Now, not so much. There are uses that can take advantage of even incremental performance enhancements but these days they represent a niche element. For the vast majority of the tasks that we use our iPhones, Macs, and iPads to perform, processor performance is more than adequate. Weighing that against increasing the price tag and clearly the price hike is far more consequential from the perspective of the typical consumer. 
    muthuk_vanalingamM68000randominternetpersonwilliamlondonspliff monkeydanox

  • Processor cost could drive prices of the iPhone 18 range up

    CarmBCarmB
    That's a problem mainly because the speed of existing processors is more than sufficient to meet the needs of the vast majority of users. Really fast upgraded to faster still, in real-world use, adds up to no discernible upgrade. Asking consumers who already are facing substantial price increases to pay more for essentially nothing doesn't appear to be a good grasp of what will best serve consumers. In the end, the key to success does lie in making your customers happy. Charging more with nothing to show for it is not how you do that. As the price of acquiring the latest and greatest goes up, it motivates consumers to think hard about upgrading from a working iPhone. So if Apple goes to a higher price point with its iPhone line, it will not end well for Apple. The only way this would work would be if there was compelling functionality added to the iPhone experience as a result of a processor upgrade. Current processors are so capable that it seems unlikely this will happen. 
    randominternetperson9secondkox2jas99pulseimagesgatorguywilliamlondonchiatmaywatto_cobra

  • iPhone Fold screen resolutions surfaced by a second leaker

    CarmBCarmB
    It just doesn't make sense to have an insanely expensive portable device that would allow for a bigger screen on the go. At 6.9 inches for the biggest iPhone, it's large enough to be useful as a pocketable portable device. Additionally tablets and laptops are viable for those who want something they can use out in the field, so to speak. It's not that surprising that Apple has not been in any hurry to launch a foldable iPhone. Even if one is launched, it will be very much a niche item. 
    watto_cobra

  • iPhone 17 Pro predicted to cost over $2000 because of Trump tariffs

    CarmBCarmB
    slickdealer said:
    The most likely scenario remains that China lowers tariffs on US goods and our reciprocal tariffs automatically adjust.  

    Why all of these articles fail to mention how reciprocal tariffs work baffles me. 
    Or in the spirit of reciprocity, other countries respond to having tariffs arbitrarily imposed by the US by imposing comparable tariffs in return. That's how you wind up with a tariff war. It is problematic when fairness is determined by Trump based on whatever he feels like basing it on, on any given day. Fairness isn't something that can legitimately be based on whatever Trump says it is. Otherwise what you get is akin to Trump declaring, "I'm bigger than you are, so give me what I want."
    12Strangersradarthekat

  • Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs hit every one of Apple's international manufacturing part...

    CarmBCarmB
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    CarmB said:
    Maybe Apple could decontent the versions of their products sold in the United States and continue business as usual everywhere else. Also, their profit margin is such that a bit of decontenting combined with a hit to those margins in the US market might just do the trick. Whatever taxes the US government collects off of Apple, it will be less considering those lower profit margins. So some of that fabulous tariff income Trump and the Gang are counting on will be eaten away by that development. In addition, if inflation is one of the side effects of waging a tariff war, buying power will be diminished. That also means less money in government coffers. Trump simplifies enormously and in terms of gaining votes, that's effective. Yet if you oversimplify that which is exceedingly complex when governing, bad things happen. When running for office, Trump pushed the notion that if he were elected, life would go back to where it was pre-COVID. He has always claimed to love tariffs but he didn't run on the notion of using them to thoroughly remake the global economy and expecting initial pain in the process. He didn't because clearly not enough voters would have endorsed that approach. Folks just wanted it to go back to where it was in the earlier years of Trump's first term. He suggested this is what they'd get. Now he's pulled off something of a bait and switch. I suspect he has such faith in his ability to sell voters on whatever he wants to do, that he thinks they will stick with him. Some will but many will not. They've been had and some of them will clue in, especially, when there is direct impact on their lives. If what Trump has in mind is something akin to, impose tariffs, production returns to the US, badda bing, badda boom, this is going to be an epic fail. Is he capable of such massive mismanagement? Absolutely. He has the bankruptcies and mismanaged projects in his past to suggest he could blow it. He's not Midas even though some foolishly imagine him to be. He's brilliant at marketing himself. That doesn't mean he's brilliant at pulling off the major restructuring he apparently has embarked on. Nor was he elected with a clear mandate to embark on such a path. He would have had to run on doing that and he definitely did not. In any case, Apple is better positioned to manage this mess than some others like, for instance, the auto industry. The biggest issue for Apple will be making money during a recession which we surely are headed for. 
    Paragraphs would be great.
    It is quite an imposing block of text.
    watto_cobra