gregg thurman

ElCapitan said:

International pricing is also an issue when a moderately configured 2016 MBP 15" set you back over $3700, that is also not very good. 

International pricing is not just a currency exchange rate thing.  Most countries (if not all) outside the US employ a national sales tax (in varying degrees) known as VAT (Value Added Tax).  It is the lack of a national sales tax in the US that makes buying a Toyota/Mercedes in the US cheaper than it does in Japan/Germany.

Unlike the US where the price of an item is advertised WITHOUT sales tax, outside of the US the advertised price INCLUDES the national sales tax.  If you were to deduct the national sales tax and convert local currency to US$, you will find pricing to be quite close to each other.

DED, If I understand you correctly (and I think I do) then Apple is moving towards building a single product with multiple variants that all sync/integrate with each other, enabling one to access the best of each variant for use by any of the other variants, doing so in a typically Apple easy to use manner.

The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Brilliant.

sycamoregrad said:

Plus, the original iPhone wasn’t “shipped to customers” on launch day. You could only buy it, in person, at an Apple Store or AT&T. It wasn’t like today where you can preorder to receive it on launch day.

I stooid in line for 4 hours to get mine at an ATT store in Spokane WA.  The entire time I was in line it drizzled rain.  I can't remember being so happy to get a product as I was then.  Several iPhones since and I'm still very happy.

Soli said:

1) Samsung smartphone OLEDs are also subpar compared to the Samsung-made OLED display on the iPhone X so I wonder if this is more about effort and costs over expertise. If there's a technical consideration I'd think it's more likely geared toward total capacity over total quality.

Exactly.  Apple developed a better OLED display and contracted Samsung to produce that better OLED display.  Samsung is producing to Apple's specifications, not off the shelf Samsung specifications.

It will be no different if and when LG produces OLEDs for Apple.

As to Apple's investment in LG, LG didn't have the resources to expand OLED production capacity to meet Apple's needs.  Apple and LG negotiated an OLED display prepayment that permitted LG to expand OLED production, this after LG demonstrated that it could meet Apple's quality specifications.

The issue now is whether LG has completed enough expansion to become a supplier. I personally didn't/don't think LG will become a supplier until the 2020 model year.  There just wasn't enough time, when the deal was negotiated, to get through the permitting process, construct the expansion (new factory) and commence production in time for the 2019 model.  In a Bloomberg report filed today, LG is still waiting for government approval (expected to be granted) to construct a display factory in Guangzhou.  If that factory is designated to produce OLED displays there isn't anywhere near enough time to start/complete construction AND supply Apple by July 2018 when 2019 models begin to ramp.

melgross said:

 My concern involves the fact that so far, LG’s displays are really subpar. From what we’ve seen with Google’s phone which uses them, and LG’s own phones that use them, these are truly terrible displays.

i would rather Samsung continue overcharging Apple for OLEDs that use Apple’s technology, as the current display is, than Apple having more controversy as to which phone you get, because of the display used. This wouldn’t be the first time that Apple used more than one display vendor where one display was better than the other. Apple really doesn’t need that nonsense right now.

If and when LG produces OLED displays for Apple, it will produce using technology/specifications determined/developed by Apple.  Apple wouldn't have it any other way.  Ergo, when LG supplies Apple with OLED displays they will be every bit as good as Samsung displays.