It is very sucky indeed, but it's the mobile phone market, very different from iPods and computers. Prices nose dive quickly.
WHY o WHY can apple/at&t OPEN THIS TO BUSINESS CUSTOMERS?!!
And add TRUE Exchange SUPPORT...not IMAP.
They NEED to add the business support!!!
Well since I am one of the idiots all you a**es are makinf fun of (lets see if you would be mad if you paid $200 more for a product just 3 weeks before the price dropped) Apple better make the thing PERFECT. I will call them every day that I have even the slightest problem...which I can assure you will be EVERY DAY! The damn thing locks up. It will ring but I cannot answer calls. It acts like a $400 phone...oh wait! I expected it to act like a $600 phone! Maybe BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT I PAID FOR IT! I better get the best F'in service in the world!
It is very sucky indeed, but it's the mobile phone market, very different from iPods and computers. Prices nose dive quickly.
Looking at the price points, Apple needed to decrease the price of the iPhone to stay competitive with their other offerings
every business has plans to decrease their products AHEAD OF TIME at a certain date. are all businesses ripoffs? apple introduces a new imac knowing full well that they plan to reduce the price somewhere down the road. are the imacs ripoffs? did apple rip me off because they knew in advance that they would be reducing the price on the imac?
it seems there are two main things troubling people: 1. the timing of the price reduction and 2. the amount of the price reduction. in the first matter, i do not know when the best time to decrease the price would be...6 months later? 9 months? sure, apple has waited X amount of days or months on average with many of their computers. but the iphone is a very new and, i argue, a very different business plan than the macs and even the ipods. though surprising, i don't feel as though it's worthy of condemnation. we're surprised b/c it's new, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
on the second point, would people be less irate if the price reduction were $50? how about $100? so is it the fact that it was reduced AT ALL, or just the size of the reduction? from what i've been reading, it's the latter. once again, it's a business decision. the iphones had to be closer in price to the new ipod touch or it would have been more difficult to persuade people that the iphone was a good deal.
i'm not saying people shouldn't feel upset that they spent $200 more...i'd love to spend $200 less on anything any chance i get. what bothers me is that people feel like they got "ripped off" by apple and that they can't trust apple and that they deserve something from apple. come on. stop whining!
Now that would be an interesting development.Perhaps they have now created room for next gen 3G IPhone with GPS coming in at $499 price point?
This reminds me of asking the US Iphone community whether purchasing the Iphone from an Apple store can be purchased outright without AT & T activation. I am aware of the potential limited use in Australia(at this point) Please advise.
Roman
It may be different in the US but in the UK you pay top money for the latest phone, 3 months later everyone else is getting it for free with a new contract or for £50 on a PAYG tariff. People gave up worring and moaning about it years ago, it happens every time!
every business has plans to decrease their products AHEAD OF TIME at a certain date. are all businesses ripoffs? apple introduces a new imac knowing full well that they plan to reduce the price somewhere down the road. are the imacs ripoffs? did apple rip me off because they knew in advance that they would be reducing the price on the imac?
it seems there are two main things troubling people: 1. the timing of the price reduction and 2. the amount of the price reduction. in the first matter, i do not know when the best time to decrease the price would be...6 months later? 9 months? sure, apple has waited X amount of days or months on average with many of their computers. but the iphone is a very new and, i argue, a very different business plan than the macs and even the ipods. though surprising, i don't feel as though it's worthy of condemnation. we're surprised b/c it's new, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
on the second point, would people be less irate if the price reduction were $50? how about $100? so is it the fact that it was reduced AT ALL, or just the size of the reduction? from what i've been reading, it's the latter. once again, it's a business decision. the iphones had to be closer in price to the new ipod touch or it would have been more difficult to persuade people that the iphone was a good deal.
i'm not saying people shouldn't feel upset that they spent $200 more...i'd love to spend $200 less on anything any chance i get. what bothers me is that people feel like they got "ripped off" by apple and that they can't trust apple and that they deserve something from apple. come on. stop whining!
But I also think that Apple's decision not to provide early adopters with some sort of compensation is a bad business decision.
Judging by what I've seen online since yesterday, the magnitude of the backlash is going to be greater than what Apple expected, and will have a negative halo effect.
The situation isn't helped by Steve Jobs' statement "If they bought it a month ago, well, that's what happens in technology." Apple's apparently inconsistent response to people who call for refunds only adds to the confusion and frustration. Jobs' may be technically correct, but it's sure not "thinking different."
I have no quarrel with Apple reducing the price of the iPhone by $200 if it's in line with reduced manufacturing costs and/or lets them meet their aggressive sales projections.
But I also think that Apple's decision not to provide early adopters with some sort of compensation is a bad business decision.
Well said!Couple of points, the first.. obviously business reasons why Apple made this price change:
<big snip>
Yep, that's how it works.Apple's plan was:
1. Introduce it at a high price and get the early adopters big bucks.
2. Drop the price/increase storage and sell more.
3. Introduce V2 with MORE features and sell even more!
This is not rocket science. . it is how product development/sales works.
No kidding!Life is too short to get this pissed off over $200.
Lots of anger in this thread. I don't think Apple should give money back per se. I think they should maybe offer a gift card to either iTunes or the Apple store. That way the money comes back to them anyways, and people get the warm fuzzy that Apple "cares".
I didn't intend to "slam" you, sorry if it came off too strong. Actually I picked your post to respond to because it was one of the more rational ones.
Eh, there could be some of that. But it seems to be heavily outweighed by those who are outraged after apparently just now discovering that Apple is a profit-seeking entity.
I just don't see it. What Apple's doing is a form of price discrimination, and there's nothing "unfair" about that any more than when buyers shop around for the best price.
Why should they?
Should Apple give refunds to Macbook Pro owners who bought their machine 2 months before a new Macbook Pro refresh?
Where does it end? Apple is a business and doesn't owe its customers anything. iPhone owners knew the price was $599 and where quite happy to buy at that price.
Apple has a 30 day policy, for this very reason... 30 days is adequate.