djsherly

titantiger said:

ElCapitan said:

inplainview said:

Trying so hard to be excited. It’s just not “magical” anymore. Loads of meh...

The sticker shock adds to the meh. Outside the US the prices including VAT, tariffs and whatnot make these new phones out of reach for a large segment of potential customers.  Even if they still keep the 7 and 8 models, those will feel like the big middle finger to many. 

Here the top model Xs Max will sell for the equivalent of about $2000. 

The Xs is the same price as the X was last year.  The Xr is $150 less than that and the Xs Max is just $100 more.  All US prices of course, but if this price point didn't hurt them last year, why would it suddenly do so now?

titantiger said:

ElCapitan said:

inplainview said:

Trying so hard to be excited. It’s just not “magical” anymore. Loads of meh...

The sticker shock adds to the meh. Outside the US the prices including VAT, tariffs and whatnot make these new phones out of reach for a large segment of potential customers.  Even if they still keep the 7 and 8 models, those will feel like the big middle finger to many. 

Here the top model Xs Max will sell for the equivalent of about $2000. 

The Xs is the same price as the X was last year.  The Xr is $150 less than that and the Xs Max is just $100 more.  All US prices of course, but if this price point didn't hurt them last year, why would it suddenly do so now?

Because our exchange rate hit the shitter. At the same price point in the US, the new base phone is 150 dollarydoos more expensive than last years model (noting theyve kept the same price in USD) and it only goes up from there, obviously. 

Same with apple watch, its about 100 more expensive but i will probably spring for it because of the ECG feature. (Assuming its switched on in the firmware in Australia)

Edit: before anybody stands on my tits, the base phone difference is a little smaller than 150, maybe more like 100, perhaps less.

ericthehalfbee said:

You know, a lot of software people use is already under a subscription model. Instead of calling it a subscription it’s called an upgrade. And instead of paying monthly/yearly you paid every couple years for the latest version. Yet when you change the wording suddenly it’s bad?

I always bring up Office 365. There’s a reason Office 365 is so successful - because they offer a lot of value for what you pay. More than what you used to get by upgrading Office every few years. Developers need to offer compelling subscriptions. Simply converting your App price from one-time to subscription isn’t going to be enough.

Honestly, that is a bit of a stretch. If you chose not to upgrade the product under the first model, what you have will continue to work.

If you don't pay the subscription.... well thanks for coming, the door's that way.

I see value in the subscription model for things like entertainment (and I admit I subscribe to Office365), but the idea in general of subscriptions, I'm not a fan.

This to me is just as much about Apple producing their own income stream as that of a developer's. In my view, it's kind of user hostile and does not place a strong incentive on the developer to continue to improve their product. Yes, subscriptions will fall away if the product is not improved, but once it's locked in as a recurring and more or less invisible line item in someone's Apple ID account, a lot of people will simply forget they have paid for something. That's preying on people's apathy and not on the merits of the thing that has been subscribed to.

Ethically, that might be OK for some, but it's not really OK by me. 

The broadsheet, once it has been read is put down. To get more information, you have to go and get another newspaper.

Devices can feed you endless streams of information, it is easy to disengage from the world. Almost by design they're addictive.

There's already acknowledgment of this and management of screen time is baked into iOS 12, and before that Android version-whatever-it-is-and-unlikely-to-be-on-many-phones-anyway.

So just because you disagree with my thesis, makes your data point v my data point and probably not a whole lot more than that.

I think if mobile OS vendors are building in time management to their offerings tells you that there is at least an implicit acknowledgment of a what is perceived to be a problem. Their telemetry means then have more insight into this then you or I ever will.

StrangeDays said:

djsherly said:

XS MAX PLUS

If Apple really did name their product this, this is absolutely boneheaded, even if it is one or the other of MAX or PLUS.  No-one I know calls it the iPhone ten. It's an iPhone ex. 

excess max/plus does have a deliciously ironic ring to it though. maybe this is the thing that will make people realise how ridiculous dropping more than a grand on a phone is. like peak iPhone/we've jumped the shark.

I skipped last year because I just couldn't do it. I had the money but $2000 is a lot of groceries.

At this point I feel have Stockholm syndrome with Apple products. The alternatives in my view aren't that great. And Apple is making bank because of people like me.

Nah, $1000 for your most used computing device isn’t ridiculous. As superstar investor Warren Buffett said, based on the value received it’s perhaps underpriced. Considering the X is their top-selling new offering, it seems plenty of consumers feel the same. I doubt most will be replacing it annually, btw. 

I guess value is subjective. All I see are zombies staring at rectangular bricks in their hands. Everywhere. Occasionally I am one of them. Simply because it's most-used doesn't make it valuable.

sflocal said:

avon b7 said:

Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.

FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.

nonsense.  Most Android users care about one thing only.  Price.  What phone can I get for $40.  Period.  You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.

I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models.  Big difference.  Again, you're sugarcoating it.

sflocal said:

avon b7 said:

Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.

FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.

nonsense.  Most Android users care about one thing only.  Price.  What phone can I get for $40.  Period.  You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.

I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models.  Big difference.  Again, you're sugarcoating it.

Dude, the article is about market share by units. Price, r&d have nothing to do with it. Who has sold the most devices? That’s all the article talks about. 

Fwiw, that $40 piece of shit represents a weeks income or more for a significant part of the worlds population. I am sure that most of them would love an iPhone, if they could afford to dump 6 months salary into it.

If 40 bucks gets them a smart phone who are we to judge that choice.