nht

SpamSandwich said:

nht said:

SpamSandwich said:

supadav03 said:

I kind of have mixed feelings on this one. While I don’t need/want more government involvement in these types of things, it’s very frustrating to download an app for my kids just to see it’s an ad-fest. I’m not concerned about them buying stuff since my password is required for all purchases and I have IAP turned off on their iPads, but it makes for an awful experience. Every few seconds they are whisked out of the app & into the App Store to buy something or download a related app. Then they come to me “I don’t know what happened. Can you get me back to the game?” it’s garbage. Feels sleazy, especially when it’s something supposedly made for pre-schoolers. Wouldn’t mind something being done. 

Or you could give the kids some pencils and a stack of blank papers and let their imaginations go to work instead? Just an idea.

Do you have kids?  Just an idea.

I WAS a kid. It’s what I had when I grew up and it helped me use my imagination instead of relying on pre-imagined content from others.

So you have no idea what it's like to be a parent and all of your "advice" and "conclusions" on this subject is theoretical...and in my opinion completely worthless.

The opinions of former parents that raised their kids in a different era (before iPhones) is only mostly worthless on the subject of digital access and control.  

Its a lot different than when there was only 1 TV in the house that got 3 channels.  Or even 100 channels from cable.  To not have a smartphone by high or even middle school puts your child at a disadvantage both socially and academically but it's a two edged sword that can cut deeply.

lorin schultz said:

nht said:

In your case case you might decide iPhones are worth it but not MBPs

I thought about that, but wonder if there's enough benefit to iPhones to justify either paying more or accepting an older version if we didn't have Macs. Without the ecosystem, what's the point? We might as well just use droids.

My use of Macs and iPhones are distantly related...almost everything I used to manage via a Mac is now done directly in iOS or tvOS.  

After that it's a question of what apps you use for photo and video management.  If I didn't use FCPX I wouldn't need a Mac.  I prefer one but I wouldn't need one.

The two ecosystems are complementary but not directly related for me.  YMMV but I just prefer Apple vs Amazon for where I buy apps, games, songs and movies and I have a sufficiently large collection that the iOS ecosystem is sticky on its own.

I'm also still using a 6S whereas all of the Android phones purchased for my kids are long dead and even if still alive would be stuck in a 2 year old OS.  While iOS 11 was a little sluggish on my old 6, iOS 12 works well enough that one of my kids has it.

I dunno what you do on the Mac that really really impacts what you do on the iPhone.  Backups?  Media management?  Still should be fine on Windows 10.

I'd rather have a 1-2 year old iPhone than a mid-grade Android having owned both.  The TCO just ended up being lower on the iPhones because if you get one of those mid-tier flagship killers from Huawei (I preferred ZTE) you find that screen replacement is more hit and miss in terms of availability than with the far more popular Samsung or iPhone.  Top tier android flagships aren't that much cheaper than the iPhone either.  Plus, the advantages of the A-series chips and iOS efficiency means that there is often processor parity between a 1 year old iPhone and a current Android flagship.  Certainly you get longer iOS updates than you get with most Android brands.  

What is best for you may vary from the norm but it is false to say that Apple is priced too high for the average individual in 2018.  Yes, it's priced higher than Dell or Huawei but the TCO is often lower depending on the useful life expectancy of the devices.

Finally, my phone is the device I most interact with.  If I'm going to splurge anywhere, its going to be on the device I use the most.

lorin schultz said:

nht said:
[...] Apple, like all premium brands, has always been a luxury

That's a realization that's slowly sinking in for me. One of the obvious reasons we prefer Apple products in our house is the ecosystem. Things like Airplay, Handoff, automatic sync between devices via iCloud... those are things we like so we've resisted the temptation to go back to Windows, even though it would be a lot easier to find devices that match our particular preferences because of the much wider selection.

But maybe the things that have kept us on board really are luxuries we can live without. There are lots of things I'd like to have but can't justify at my income level. Maybe Apple product is one of those things.

nht said:
[...]  that folks of all economic levels can buy into at different levels of the product line

Perhaps true, but only with some pretty significant compromises. When it comes to portable Macs, screen size is the big one. At lower prices there's no option for anything but a tiny screen. Storage is another. The only choices are "inadequate" or "expensive." I haven't looked into it, but I'm confident if I look outside Apple I can find something with a larger screen that trades some storage speed for increased capacity at any given price point. I can't do that with Apple. That doesn't mean that Apple is "doing it wrong" but it may mean that Apple isn't the best supplier for our particular needs.

Definitely you will find better hardware options for less elsewhere.

I would use the analogy of the difference between the menu from mid-grade chain restaurant to that of a higher end restaurant.  

Lots more choices for less money but, presumably you have a nicer dining experience at they high end restaurant.

Apples product menu is like the menu of a high end restaurant.  Limited, pricey but presumably worthwhile for many...even us middle class folks that watch our budget. 

In your case case you might decide iPhones are worth it but not MBPs...just like i don’t eat at a high end restaurant every day. 

AI_lias said:

fastasleep said:

AI_lias said:

simply258 said:

I just compared a Xs Max 512GB $1449 to a Note 9 512GB $1249, Apple’s premium is 16%. For that you get premium material (all glass, stainless steel), superior security, processor, screen among others. Noting that Samsung supply themselves with the display so it costs them less. Why doesn’t Samsung get some of this criticism?

Because Samsung is raising their prices piggybacking on Apple. It still cold comfort to people who don’t care that much for those premium materials at those prices. Some people are on tight budgets. It’s Apple’s prerogative to move upmarket, but not everyone wants BMWs and Mercedeses, even if they could afford them. Then, there’s the perception issue too. If people feel like they get ripped off, even if they’re not, you’ve got a problem. At the end of the day, this is grumbling while some people realize that going forward, if they want the latest Apple tech, they either have to borrow to buy it, or buy used or refurbished, and hold on longer to it. So Apple is just dropping the “affordable” from “affordable luxury”. 

You can get a top end iPhone and pay it off over 24 months with zero interest. Or you can get last year’s model for half the price and do the same thing. Now figure how many cups of coffee you could make at home instead of buying at a coffee shop per month to afford one. I’ll wait. 

The phone still costs the same even if you spread it over 2 years with no interest. This makes it easier for some people, but still costs the same. And for last year’s model, not sure where you get it for 1/2 off, except maybe carrier specials with strings attached. But this just proves my point: Apple’s tech is becoming a thing of luxury for people who don’t look at money, and makes regular people need to jump through all kind of hoops How many people reading this can just go to an Apple store and buy a laptop at the price they ask for? I would guess less and less people do that, instead looking for deals. And I was not only talking about iPhone, but everything they sell. I bought my laptop, refurbished with a Barclay card with introductory interest and paid it off early. This is the new Apple reality. And thanks for waiting: I make my coffee at home,and only occasionally splurge on outside coffee. Should I stop buying coffee beans for stretches of time so I can afford a new iPhone X? Is this the marketing message you want Apple to use going forward: which foods will you give up, to own Apple stuff?

It’s amazing to me that folks would have the lack of awareness to claim that Apple products in 2007, during the financial crisis where folks were losing their jobs and homes, was somehow more affordable for “regular people” then than today after 10 years of economic recovery, growth and low unemployment.

Pretty much every price point that existed in 2007 still exists today in Apple product lines.  They may not be the top product but you can buy them new with warranty.  That’s ignoring the viability of used devices given Apples ongoing support for them.

As a note, the 2006 mini was $799.  When they updated the mid-2007 they went to $599.  The current mini price is in line with historical mini prices from that period as this is a large spec bump much like the 2006 mini going core 2 duo in the entry model over the core solo.

If Apple wasn’t a “luxury” when everyone’s 401K cratered, was worried about losing their job and home during an economic crisis I have no idea why they are a “luxury” today.  The answer is that Apple, like all premium brands, has always been a luxury that folks of all economic levels can buy into at different levels of the product line...just like branded sneakers, handbags, cars, jewelry, etc.

rogifan_new said:

radarthekat said:

rogifan_new said:

radarthekat said:

rogifan_new said:

radarthekat said:

rogifan_new said:

Is this report talking about gross margins or profit margins? Do you have a comparison of average selling prices over time?

Meaningless to to this discussion.  When Dodge started selling the 12-cylinder Viper it would have had a positive effect on ASPs.   But it offered a lot more power and sportiness.  Apples latest iPhones offer a lot more performance and capabilities versus previous generations.  You’d expect ASPs to climb.  Gross margins is where the comparison should lay, and this article does a good job pointing out how they have not significantly moved during Cook’s tenure.

The 2010 MBA had more performance and capabilities than the 2008 model but it was cheaper. Same with the $329 iPad compared to the original. Anyone who doesn’t see that Apple is offsetting slower/flat unit sales growth with price increases is blind. New flagship iPhones used to start at $649, now they’re $999. Now you can argue the XS is $350 better than 6 was, that’s obviously subjective but it’s still more expensive. Take the new Mac mini. Starts at $799. The previous entry point was $499. Again, one can argue that the new mini is way better and deserves the $300 price increase but the bottom line is you used to be able to get into the Mac ecosystem for $499 and now the cheapest entry point is $799. The previous entry point to iPhone was the $399 SE. Now the cheapest entry point is the $499 7. And the cheapest iPad used to be $259; now it’s $329. In the past you could get an Apple TV for $99; now it’s $179. It costs more to get into the Apple ecosystem that’s just a fact.

It’s not appropriate to cast the comparison the way you have.  Like saying the entry level cancer cure in 1950 was les expensive than today’s entry level cancer cure.  These are different things you are comparing.  I use an extreme example to illustrate my point.  

As for being blind, I could accuse those who aren’t willing to acknowledge that Apple could certainly juice units sales year after year by simply designing and developing iPhone models spanning lower price tiers, as other vendors have done.  How popular would be a 6” OLED iPhone priced at $400?  Pretty popular, but Apple would make no margins on such a model.  So it’s not that Apple is reacting to slower/flat unit sales.  It’s quite the opposite; Apple has deliberately decided to go farther up market in capabilities, performance, etc, and at significantly higher prices.  Slower/flattening unit sales is a result of that strategy, not the reason for the strategy.  You see, those who aren’t blind can see that it’s acually the opposite of your characterization.  

I don’t agree, or at least don’t agree that it can only be one or the other. I highly doubt that Apple would intentionally try to slow unit growth. Going “up market” allows Apple to still post record financials even when sales have flatlined. But for how long? How long can they keep increasing prices to offset flat to declining sales?

Again, missing the point.  Of course Apple hasn’t intentionally slowed sales.  The company has intentionally continued to outpace competitors in technology, performance, etc, and is charging prices appropriate to those accomplishments.  Knowing that that might flatten unit volumes is different than intending for it to do so.   

Outside of their A-series chips where is Apple outpacing the competition? iOS vs Android is subjective but hardware wise most of the competition is right up there with Apple. And no one would claim Apple is top of the pack when it comes to ML/AI.

Other than that did you enjoy the show Mrs Lincoln?

The A-series is enough of a lead.  Then there was Touch ID, Face ID, security, speed of iOS upgrades, etc.  iOS vs Android adoption rates isn’t subjective but a function of engineering design and execution.  Whether the latest Android might have software parity with the latest iOS is immaterial when the vast majority of iOS devices gets them while the vast majority of Android devices don’t.