|Dec 21, 2012, 02:52 AM||#376|
4S is $600+tx, not $700+tx, and still not enough hardware differences to justify the price premium.
By "software", I imagine you mean "drivers" ? Because the software is the same between iPod Touch and iPhone, despite its previous "iPhone OS" moniker.
I also want my phone to be replete with sound apps, haul my souvenirs, take decent pics and sufficient video through my MacBook Pro, in the same ecosystem, exactly as my iPod Touch did before being stolen in broken state (!).
I can live with my songs in my iPod Shuffle, and I'm ready to
I asked very precise questions Android fans have not been able to answer clearly, which were
Here people are trying to justify the deterring price tag of the iPhone 4S or 5, and there, they're going all wild about devices without paying much attention to functionality. As much as I suspect it reflects the typical behavior from Android buyers, this doesn't answer the question.
|Dec 21, 2012, 08:57 AM||#377|
You can make the same silly argument for practically any complex product if you choose the right (or misleading) comparison.
|Dec 21, 2012, 11:32 AM||#378|
Forget about LTE. 4S is 3G, and indeed has the same screen as the latest-gen iPod Touch. Forget about the BOM, I don't give a **** about it. I'm not an Apple-buyer to have the lowest MSRP/BOM ratio, if this wasn't clear enough yet.
Price difference between those two is unexplainable by hardware alone, additional engineering alone, convenience alone. Even service could, when iPhone 4S was the latest be a reason for decreased value, actually, since iPhones were serviceable only in the country they were bought in, which is a severe restriction (now lifted). Even adding these differences hardly justify doubling the price.
Just have a look, comparison is made between the second item to the first one, and unless specified, I'm comparing base models:
iPad with Retina, WiFi: 499$+tx
iPad with Retina, WiFi + 4G: $629+tx
GPS and GLONASS
Price delta: +26,05%
MacBook Pro 13", 2.5GHz: $1199+tx
MacBook Pro 13", 2.9GHz: $1499+tx
- faster CPU
- doubled RAM
- more HDD space
Price delta: +25,02%
MacBook Pro 13", 2,5GHz: $1199+tx
MacBook Pro Retina 13", 2,5GHz: $1699+tx
- higher resolution screen
- doubling RAM
- HDMI port
- faster USB
- faster internal storage
- DVD burner
- less internal storage
- FireWire, Ethernet
Price delta: +41,7%. That's quite large for a less-capable machine. Let's put that on the additional reengineering required.
MacBook Pro 15", 2,3GHz: $1699+tx
MacBook Pro 15" with Retina, 2,3GHz: $2199+tx
(Same added & removed as the 13")
Price delta: +22,2%.
iPod Touch 4th gen, 32GB: $249+tx
iPod Touch (5th gen): $299+tx
- larger screen (ok, you got me there. It has the iPhone 5 screen with iPhone 4S guts)
- faster CPU
- better camera
- Siri, Airplay mirroring
- longer battery life
Price delta: +20,08%.
iPod Touch (5th gen): $299+tx
iPhone 4S: $599+tx
- 3G cellular chip
- proximity, light sensor
- smaller screen
- half internal storage (there's no 32GB iPhone 4S on sale from Apple)
- no 5GHz WiFi band
- lesser camera (8MP in iPod Touch, 5MP in iPhone 4S)
Price delta: +100,3%, and it's not even for roughly equivalent products.
I am used to price differences, I mean, they are a part of making business. In these six examples the delta hovers around +39,24% on average, with a standard deviation of 28,1. The iPhone 4S / iPod Touch 5th gen price delta is 2,17 times SD, which is considered significant, and that's only using a 6-products sample. From that, I put forward that the iPhone is overpriced to Apple standards.
|Dec 21, 2012, 10:06 PM||#379|
Yes, it has higher margins than other Apple hardware. To argue that it is overpriced for the market is silly as it is the number one selling smartphone in the world and captures most of the industry profits.
|Dec 24, 2012, 11:24 AM||#380|
A lot of words to defeat the "additional engineering required", "desirability" or "convenience" arguments. Cell phone market isn't free, it's skewed by carrier's practices of tying customers for 3 years at a time, in exchange for heavily subsidizing the phone's price. Other manufacturers have done it for years, artificially inflating their prices in a monopoly market. Just as an example, the beautiful but mediocre-performing Motorola KRZR had a MSRP of $400 in its time. It wasn't worth half of that. Apple promised to change the cell phone market forever, but apparently they stopped after providing one, updated, unified OS across all carriers.
In the end, consumer loses. Because in consumer, there's an implication of passivity, and there's con, which is French for dumbass. A consumer who starts thinking becomes a patron, which also means leader.
|Feb 8, 2014, 12:54 AM||#381|
Schmidt is Toht
Last edited by ryansinger; Feb 8, 2014 at 12:58 AM. Reason: images not uploaded
|Feb 10, 2014, 09:46 AM||#382|
Put Schmidt in that black hat we have a doppelgänger!
|Feb 10, 2014, 10:50 AM||#384|
So android which is a commercial software OS that is available to the entire market is winning in market share vs an OS that is strictly used by one company to push just a handfull of devices. Why is this surprising? Apple does not sell IOS to others..their business model is to use the software to sell the hardware and make money...As long as the eco-system, app/developer linup is healthy and sales are growing market share should not matter..It would matter to apple (more) if they decide to market ios to other OEM's which they have no intention of doing anytime soon...Look at it this way..Apple chooses to compete in certain markets within the mobile-industry..in cellphones, they choose to compete in the premium smartphone market..The iPhone is the highest selling smartphone in the world..Apple also in a way created the tablet market (in its current size and scope)..The Ipad family is also the best selling tablet in the world. So far IOS devices top every market in which they compete..JOB DONE for the apple software team!...I would be worried if the nexus family overtakes the iphone in sales or if the galaxy family does the same..Until then apple needen't worry unless they do a drastic U turn in strategy and enter each and every smartphone market (Budget phones, mid level phones included) and start to sell their software as a microsoft or google does...In a nutshell both GOOGLE and APPLE are extremely succesfull at their respective business models/strategies..google has made android the mass market OS (which they wanted when they created an open source - "available to all" Mobile OS) of choice, and apple has managed to be the industry leader in each and every mobile category it competes in (premium smartphones and tablets)...
Last edited by vomhorizon; Feb 10, 2014 at 11:03 AM.
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Google Chairman Eric Schmidt Posts Guide on Converting to Android from iPhone||MacRumors||iOS Blog Discussion||326||Dec 8, 2013 06:27 AM|
|Google Chairman Eric Schmidt Says Relationship with Apple 'Improving'||MacRumors||MacRumors.com News Discussion||179||Jul 21, 2013 11:23 AM|
|Google Chairman Eric Schmidt Says Apple and Google Will Resolve Issues 'the Adult Way'||MacRumors||MacRumors.com News Discussion||212||Dec 19, 2012 10:59 PM|
|Google Is Winning The Mobile War||Timzer||Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices||5||Dec 14, 2012 06:13 PM|
|Eric Schmidt: Google Hasn’t Submitted A Native Google Maps App To Apple (Yet)||mcfinch||iPhone||4||Sep 25, 2012 04:12 AM|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:27 PM.