Apple being too rigid?

BJonson · Sep 11, 2013

I posted a similar thread OP and the people here will never understand. I think most of the pro apple people here just work at Apple. I was talking about apple today over breakfast and it hit me, every apple release has been a let down for years and years. They are ALWAYS behind the curve, they never surprise. Only with the iphone and ipad have they done this. Their computers have become a disgrace, now their mobile platform is a disgrace. Apple knows you are locked into their ecosystem and they punish you for it every year by releasing substandard hardware and locking it down so you can only upgrade by buying a new machine. This is Jobs doing. He knew that by locking apple users into their hardware that they would make more money. But it can only work if apples hardware is top notch. It takes years of abuse for people to convince themselves to try something else because resisting change is human nature. This was good for apple and stock holders but bad for consumers. Every person that defends apple for their stinginess is either an aapl stock holder or an idiot. By the way apple has dropped about 5% since yesterdays F.U. to customers. Hope it drops 50% more maybe then they will get their head out of their rear and makes some stuff we want.

Apple design standards 101:

- Make it different and nice looking
- Make it so there is no upgrade path but to buy a new machine
- Make it super expensive so only the rich can afford thereby making it a status symbol.
- Create cables and parts that only we can sell to force profit our way.

None of these except the first one is to make the customer happy. You want to know why a cheap looking plastic piece of crap Galaxy phone is blowing apple marketshare out of the water? SD CARD, Removable battery, larger screens. If you say you don't want these things then you are stupid. Got rid of my wifes iphone 5, got her an LG Optimus G Pro. She just left on a trip and I gave her 4 batteries to take with her. She can sit at the airport all day, fly, go to meetings etc and never plug that damn thing in. The phone is awesome and off Contract is only $439 at AT&T. Sorry but if you can't see that the $850 iphone is ripoff and IOS sucks now compared to Android then you are just blind.

aristobrat · Sep 11, 2013

BJonson said:
Got rid of my wifes iphone 5, got her an LG Optimus G Pro. She just left on a trip and I gave her 4 batteries to take with her. She can sit at the airport all day, fly, go to meetings etc and never plug that damn thing in.

Regardless of Android or iOS, why would you waste money on extra batteries that aren't likely to fit into any future phone that you or your wife get?

Why not get her one of those battery rechargers that plugs into her phone via the normal charging port and tops off the phone's battery?

Then she doesn't have to stop what she's doing, replace the battery, wait for the phone to boot back up, and then reopen everything she was doing. That's always fun when you're on a work call and tethering at the same time.

rhett7660 · Sep 11, 2013

aristobrat said:
Regardless of Android or iOS, why would you waste money on extra batteries that aren't likely to fit into any future phone that you or your wife get?

Why not get her one of those battery rechargers that plugs into her phone via the normal charging port and tops off the phone's battery?

Then she doesn't have to stop what she's doing, replace the battery, wait for the phone to boot back up, and then reopen everything she was doing. That's always fun when you're on a work call and tethering at the same time.

Wait, according to the post above yours, that would be just foolishness if you have to plug something in!

BJonson · Sep 11, 2013

aristobrat said:
Regardless of Android or iOS, why would you waste money on extra batteries that aren't likely to fit into any future phone that you or your wife get?

Why not get her one of those battery rechargers that plugs into her phone via the normal charging port and tops off the phone's battery?

Then she doesn't have to stop what she's doing, replace the battery, wait for the phone to boot back up, and then reopen everything she was doing. That's always fun when you're on a work call and tethering at the same time.

Because that sucks. So your battery goes dead, just pop in another battery and you are at 100% immediately. No being plugged in and waiting. The freedom is great. Plus the batteries cost like $10 on amazon and she can get a whole day of use from one of them. The LG Optimus G Pro is the most power efficient phone on the market today. I have the same phone and at 100% charge which it can achieve through wireless charging on top everything will stay at 100% 8hrs later if you have not used the phone. I litterally uses no energy. I think its made at Hogwarts.

I mean just look at this phones features:

- Wireless charging
- 2gb ram
- 32gb storage plus an 64gb sd card slot
- Snapdragon 600 quad core
- 5.5" screen beautiful IPS bright
- Built in TV IR remote
- Removable 3140mah battery that lasts all day and night
- 13mp camera
- LED lights on home button
- $439 off contract.

The build quality is top notch. Feels great in the hand due to slim bezel. Slimmer than the note 3. Love this phone. That's $110 cheaper than the crappy 4" 5c with 16gb memory. Sorry apple you lose.

decafjava · Sep 11, 2013

Lithium batteries don't like being kept at 100% so swapping batteries is not the most efficient way to go. It is handy if your battery is defective or old-for those who don't care about upgrading easily swapping your battery for a new one after 2 or 3 years is a good way to get more mileage from your device.

BJonson · Sep 11, 2013

decafjava said:
Lithium batteries don't like being kept at 100% so swapping batteries is not the most efficient way to go. It is handy if your battery is defective or old-for those who don't care about upgrading easily swapping your battery for a new one after 2 or 3 years is a good way to get more mileage from your device.

Most idiotic comment ever.

Pulling my battery out of my phone at 10% and putting in a freshly charged battery and dropping that used battery into the charger and doing this every other day is no different than plugging in my phone to do the same thing.

PracticalMac · Sep 11, 2013

SwiftLives said:
Why? What purpose would this serve? Other than the fact competitors do it, what need does having more screen real estate fill? What are the compromises? Should it still fit in a pocket? (I'm not saying there isn't an answer, but these are legit questions)
(why bigger screen?) So people can read the message, see maps, whatever (without need to scroll all over place). Quite a number of my iPhone using friends wish for a bigger screen.
Ever use 640x480 screen wanting to get 800x600, then 1024x786? Same thing.

Why are you denying this simple reality, a lot of people want a bigger screen?

Why do you think they don't already do this?
(ATV for less) They don't. Component wise alone, it costs Apple <$100 to make by parts, likely <$100 as finished product.

What reason would Apple have to do this? Jailbroken phones allow people to bypass purchasing apps and music from the Apple ecosystem, which deprives them of money. So what incentive does Apple have to allow this?
To discourage piracy but allow some personal freedom with their device. I don't have numbers, but most JB to run apps and utilites Apple prohibits. After all, few Apps cost >$5, don't waste time and simply buy it.
I use term JailBrake loosely. Allow owner to run unsafe apps (at his risk) but prevent running pirated apps. I expect it will need changes in app server.

Apple already has the most popular App store. Most apps are devloped for iOS first. Why do they need additional incentives?
It is HARD to develop on iOS. You need a Mac and then pay $99/year for license. Apple does not allow for individuals to make and test on personal devices.
Android and now Microsoft offer FREE SDK and support running on PC hardware. Compared to iOS, it makes is very easy for anyone to start, and a coworker did make app for work at home in spare time. And he does not even know how program (all from kits and help from friend).

Only if Apple comes out with some very solid parental controls - which they may already have. Regardless, that shouldn't be hard to implement. I think their crackdown is more about avoiding controversy and negative press.
Possible, but the irony is nudity and sex is the #1 way to sell a product. Miley Cyrus "wrecking ball" is now the most watched music video of all time because she is nude.

Again - why? It seems that every quarter Apple is selling record numbers of their products (compared with previous quarters). What possible reason would they have to reduce their profit margins by lowering the price? If people knew a price cut was coming, why would they buy it when it first came out?
That's like saying Macintosh is the #1 selling computer (almost true), ignoring the fact Windows still runs about 85% of all computers.
Samsung recently is doing 2~3X sales increases each quarter.

Kiosks - those can pretty much be an iPad. Numerous third party companies make iPad kiosks.
Vehicles - Pretty sure they're already on this with iOS in the Car.
Military - they would need some very major security upgrades.
Kiosks need bigger screens.
Vehicles - I heard about that, waiting to see more.
Military - already uses it heavily. Would not be that difficult to make it more secure, IF Apple allows them.

See replies in green

----------

aristobrat said:
Regardless of Android or iOS, why would you waste money on extra batteries that aren't likely to fit into any future phone that you or your wife get?

Why not get her one of those battery rechargers that plugs into her phone via the normal charging port and tops off the phone's battery?

Then she doesn't have to stop what she's doing, replace the battery, wait for the phone to boot back up, and then reopen everything she was doing. That's always fun when you're on a work call and tethering at the same time.

I agree with that idea over a dedicated special purpose battery.

Get a battery pack (even one that can hold AA batteries, if the bulk not an issue) and plug it in if needed.

chloebelle'smom · Sep 12, 2013

My perspective on the iPhone vs android phone.

I got iphone 3G back in 2008. It was my first smart phone. I loved it! Upgraded to 3GS. I loved the iPhone! As a computer tech it was the most awesome gadget (PC computer tech).
Then about a year later, thanks to my then 3 year old, my 3GS took a swim in a toilet. Since I was not eligible for an upgrade and money was tight, it was cheaper to add a line. My husband talked me into a Samsung infuse 4G. It was free with a new contract, running the lates android os, ice realm sandwich and had a 5 inch screen.

As any tech i got absorbed learning the ins and outs of my device. I was not impressed with the speed and response time of apps loading. I did not benefit from the sd slot as I had a small music library. But I could see a music junkie and photo junkie needing it.

I was impressed by the volume of free apps. Then one day I downloaded a utility and got my first phone virus....that NEVER happened in the 3 years of using iphone.

My android OS crashed... Constantly. Built in apps like mail force quit constantly.

First I thought, ok, it's to to be the phone, not the OS, it is a lemon. Called AT&T and they agreed because that android os was supposed to be soooooo great and stable. I was shipped a replacement phone. I also followed advice and installed an antivirus app for my phone. Yeah, within 3 weeks it was back to the same behavior. By this point I was a year into a Samsung phone with android os and HATED IT. I did not want my phone behaving like my windows PCs did. I spent more time restarting my phone to try to keep it functioning (locking up once to twice a week) at this point I became convinced that the problem was Android.

Also by this point I did not like the 5 inch screen. It did not fit in my pocket comfortably when I was going purse free.

AT&T also at this point had done some other things to tick me off with my other services.

I broke contract, switched to Verizon and went back to iPhone. I've had my 4s for over a year now and have only had to do a hard reset 1 time. Yup, that's right I've only had the actual ios lock up 1 time. I prefer the smaller screen. The os is more stable. Apps are vetted so the risk of a malware app infecting your phone is extremely low. Apps I have rarely force quit. And if they do its usually a 3rd party app, I have not had a built in app quit on me that I can recall.

After my experience with an android cheaper phone.....my family is fully switched to apple for cellular phones and tablets. I have all my PCs I tinker around with and fix because I enjoy it and they have dominated my career for 7 years and my interest for 15 years. When it comes to a phone, give me stability of iOS over android. I want my smart phone or tablet to work without me spending hours troubleshooting it. I want to pick it up and just use it, not "fix it"

Yes I am now newly hired by apple as an iOS AHA. But long before I got hired By apple, I was a firm believe that iPhones and iOS were superior to android os on the various brands that use that for their phones.

Oh and my husband, yeah similar experience with his android phone. And when we left AT&T for Verizon was still stubbornly anti iphone. His HTC android phone he got.....was even worse with OS hangs than his previous android phone. He wound up returning after a week and getting an iPhone.

So you android champions that bash iphone and apple...that's fine, however I promise my phone crashes far less than yours and operates far smoother. Because my personal experience has already proved it. I much prefer stability to "features" that iPhone lacks.

Liquorpuki · Sep 13, 2013

My $0.01

PracticalMac said:
Make a bigger screen iPhone in parallel to smaller one and a cheap one.

Before this week it wouldn't have made sense for Apple to commoditize its own hardware but they're now putting out midrange iPhones with different colors, so why not.

The whole 5C thing with multiple colors shows a clear difference in strategy between Jobs and Cook. Jobs = one phone, one color, second color took forever to add, iPhone stays a premium brand take it or leave it (most people took it). Cook is starting to commoditize the hardware by offering different colors and cheaper models, which will increase sales but could potentially hurt the brand in the long run.

Sell AppleTV as loss-leader, incentive for more iTunes sales (like Amazon very successfully does).

Amazon's able to take the loss because they're in the retail business. Apple can't because they're in the hardware business. Set top box market is fairly undifferentiated anyway, key to AppleTV blowing up is destroying the cable companies' current business model by leveraging the internet, which nobody has been able to do. If Apple was able to do this they'd be able to charge whatever they want for their hardware, people would eat it up.

Incentives for developers, like maybe 20% cut for first 10 days new app released?

The app store is already too crowded with discovery problems. This would make things worse.

Reduce prices of all iOS devices by $20 to $40, or offer discounts half way into its release cycle.

Not gonna happen without any good reason because they're a hardware company. Rigidly maintaining those profit margins correlates directly with their strong earnings

pdjudd · Sep 13, 2013

Liquorpuki said:
Jobs = one phone, one color, second color took forever to add,

The first time the iPhone came in white was the second model of iPhone - I know because I had one. There have also been white and black iPods for years before and iPods eventually came in many colors (I remember the Mini being in many colors eventually)

All of this was in Job's lifetime. Heck I remember the first iMacs that were available in something like 4 colors.

PracticalMac · Sep 13, 2013

Liquorpuki said:
Before this week it wouldn't have made sense for Apple to commoditize its own hardware but they're now putting out midrange iPhones with different colors, so why not.

The whole 5C thing with multiple colors shows a clear difference in strategy between Jobs and Cook. Jobs = one phone, one color, second color took forever to add, iPhone stays a premium brand take it or leave it (most people took it). Cook is starting to commoditize the hardware by offering different colors and cheaper models, which will increase sales but could potentially hurt the brand in the long run.

Amazon's able to take the loss because they're in the retail business. Apple can't because they're in the hardware business. Set top box market is fairly undifferentiated anyway, key to AppleTV blowing up is destroying the cable companies' current business model by leveraging the internet, which nobody has been able to do. If Apple was able to do this they'd be able to charge whatever they want for their hardware, people would eat it up.

Not gonna happen without any good reason because they're a hardware company. Rigidly maintaining those profit margins correlates directly with their strong earnings

Apple under Jobs has diversified before.
With the huge sales numbers Apple makes for iPhone, they can have more then 3 different versions and still keep keep margins very low.

iTunes is much like Amazon eBooks.
Make the iTV cheaper, and you have more customers renting or buying iTunes content.

App store needs to be changed but getting developers more focused on iOS is still vital.

iPhone/iPad growth is slowing, Samsung is catching up. You think Samsung does not have supply problems?

Idea: $10~30 iTunes gift card with every iDevice purchase, depending.
Encourage iTunes usage and 30% still goes back to Apple (that is if they use it, otherwise its 99% Apples)

Liquorpuki · Sep 16, 2013

PracticalMac said:
Apple under Jobs has diversified before.
With the huge sales numbers Apple makes for iPhone, they can have more then 3 different versions and still keep keep margins very low.

The danger is brand dilution and commoditizing iPhones with a cheaper model and colored plastic is a step toward that. Not saying that it'll happen, but it's a risk.

iTunes is much like Amazon eBooks.
Make the iTV cheaper, and you have more customers renting or buying iTunes content.

Difference is Amazon gets most of its profit from media sales and retail goods. Hardware sales contribute very little so they can treat hardware as a complement and commoditize it to fuel content sales.

Apple is the opposite and gets most of its profit from hardware. They commoditize hardware and sell it at a loss or break even point, all their revenue disappears.

This graph is from 2012 but it explains a lot. Anything with a huge % will not be used as a loss leader

PracticalMac · Sep 21, 2013

Liquorpuki said:
Apple is the opposite and gets most of its profit from hardware. They commoditize hardware and sell it at a loss or break even point, all their revenue disappears.

I am not saying ALL Apple hardware, just the AppleTV.

Why?

Unlike everything else Apple makes which are productivity and management tools, the ATV is a CONSUMPTION device.

Do you write email with ATV?

Allard · Sep 22, 2013

Precedent is interesting to look at, but when it comes to Apple it's hardly a predictor. Different models of the same device with varying screen sizes aren't necessarily created just because there's inherent market value, but because the user stands to benefit enough for that device to exist. If you're going to look at their product history just because you want to see evidence of fragmentation, you'll find it, but you'll be missing the point.

There's a philosophical justification to every product they create, because they use their products, and if you realize that your life will be harder without them then that justification is sound. Market value simply isn't enough. Watch the Designed by Apple video.

If a 4.8 inch screen makes sense, they'll make a device with it, no matter who pioneered it. No company is going to say in their presentation "well we looked at what our competitors did and followed the curve." That's why it's important to be first, so that you have every right to brag. I wouldn't trust Apple to be first in pioneering every useful feature, but I would trust them to do it right.

I never understood why people would think Apple to indulge in their market desires. Since 1998, there hasn't really been any precedent of them doing so.

NewbieCanada · Sep 22, 2013

If you think they sell "books, music, movies, and of course web sites" that are "nothing but porn" all you've demonstrated is that you don't have the slightest idea what porn is.

chown33 · Sep 22, 2013

PracticalMac said:
Unlike everything else Apple makes which are productivity and management tools, the ATV is a CONSUMPTION device.

You've forgotten all the iPod models that aren't iPod Touch. They are purely consumption devices, not productivity nor management.

Yes, iPods are declining in sales numbers. But even when they had increasing sales, it would be silly to think that Apple should sell them at a loss.

Do you write email with ATV?

Not yet.

Spacial · Sep 22, 2013

Apples not lost one bit of their technical expertise.

Apple remains an exemplary corporation.

Apples potential is unlimited, just like their resources.

Yet Apple has become old and conservative.

They are no longer hungry imaginative and nimble.

They lead in profit but fall back via lack of a clear path despite their words.

Preferring safe choices and relying on glowing press, they're talking the easy road.

As a voracious Apple enthusiast, I hope for more.

Liquorpuki · Sep 22, 2013

PracticalMac said:
I am not saying ALL Apple hardware, just the AppleTV.

Why?

Unlike everything else Apple makes which are productivity and management tools, the ATV is a CONSUMPTION device.

Do you write email with ATV?

It's a consumption device but they do not own the IP that is consumed. What they do own is the the platform and hardware and between the two, maximizing the pricepoint of the hardware has the greatest upside and would pull in the bigger profit

PracticalMac · Sep 22, 2013

chown33 said:
You've forgotten all the iPod models that aren't iPod Touch. They are purely consumption devices, not productivity nor management.

Yes, iPods are declining in sales numbers. But even when they had increasing sales, it would be silly to think that Apple should sell them at a loss.

iPods could not retrieve content on their own.
Instead it was just gave music owners the ability to make the music on their computable portable (and owner had choice of style and size).

Key difference between iPod and Apple TV.

Liquorpuki said:
It's a consumption device but they do not own the IP that is consumed. What they do own is the the platform and hardware and between the two, maximizing the pricepoint of the hardware has the greatest upside and would pull in the bigger profit

Apple does not have to own the content!
In fact, its better for Apple NOT to own it!

Apple gets 30% for each media sold or purchased. THAT is why ATV should be sold below cost.

Still don't get it?

Apple sells ATV for $30 below costs.
Apple sells shows/movies for $15, and rents for $3.
To keep it simple, lets say Apple gets $5 for each movie sold and $1 for each show rented.
2 movies and 20 rentals later the cost difference is made up.
Music for 35 cents per song, and the $$$ rolls in.

Liquorpuki · Sep 22, 2013

PracticalMac said:
Apple gets 30% for each media sold or purchased. THAT is why ATV should be sold below cost.

Still don't get it?

Apple sells ATV for $30 below costs.
Apple sells shows/movies for $15, and rents for $3.
To keep it simple, lets say Apple gets $5 for each movie sold and $1 for each show rented.
2 movies and 20 rentals later the cost difference is made up.
Music for 35 cents per song, and the $$$ rolls in.

I get your point but it's unnecessary for them to sell below cost. Apple gets 30% profit of a $15 piece of media but if they sell hw above cost they make 40-50% profit margin off hw costing a few hundred - a few grand. And the two are not mutually exclusive - they can pull both at the same time if they disrupt the market.

Primary reason to sell below cost is, you're trying to penetrate an established or crowded market.

Smart TV market isn't established or mature because nobody has been able to leverage the internet to affect conventional TV distribution in a disruptive way. If Apple is able to do that, they'd be able to charge whatever they want and people would pay them for both the hardware with a 40-50% profit margin as well as 30% for the media.

They did this with the iPod. Used the internet to disrupt conventional music distribution (CD stores) and then drew their 30% cut off MP3 sales while simultaneously profiting off iPod sales (and that HW profit share dwarfed that amalgamated 30% distribution share). They didn't have to price the iPod below break even just to make it a success. Disruption guaranteed it was a success and people would pay a premium for it.

Moving forward, if I was Apple and wanted to catalyze disruption, I would actually do the opposite of what you suggested because the biggest obstacle to all this has been the cable companies that have more clout than the record companies did back in the day. I'd forgo my distribution profit to make it easier for the cable companies to get on board, and let them pocket that 30% while I still make 40-50% off hardware sales and enjoy being first to market with the hardware/ecosystem. Then when the old model is gone and everyone is watching TV through internet instead of coax, I'd reintroduce the 30% cut because there'd be nowhere else for the cable companies to go.

PracticalMac · Sep 23, 2013

Liquorpuki said:
Moving forward, if I was Apple and wanted to catalyze disruption, I would actually do the opposite of what you suggested because the biggest obstacle to all this has been the cable companies that have more clout than the record companies did back in the day. I'd forgo my distribution profit to make it easier for the cable companies to get on board, and let them pocket that 30% while I still make 40-50% off hardware sales and enjoy being first to market with the hardware/ecosystem. Then when the old model is gone and everyone is watching TV through internet instead of coax, I'd reintroduce the 30% cut because there'd be nowhere else for the cable companies to go.

I agree to that plan.

ATV is getting stiff competition from Roku, Chromecast, and even BR players and TV with internet connection. The tech is in flux, and becoming dominant will pay of the relatively tiny loss on each box.

Especially since ATV is already 3 years old!

(maybe when new ATV out, keep selling old one half off?)

Apple being too rigid?

macrumors 6502a

macrumors G5

macrumors G5

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 603

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68030

macrumors newbie

macrumors 68020

macrumors 601

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68020

macrumors 68030

macrumors member

macrumors 68030

Moderator

macrumors 6502

macrumors 68020

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68020

macrumors 68030

Our Staff