AirPods and Apple Watch Called 'Underpriced' to Bring New Users Into Apple Ecosystem

[MagnusVonMagnum]

So much money being spent on devices (wireless headphones) that most people use to listen to horribly compressed, terrible sounding 256/320 kbps music. Seems to me that money would be better spent buying great home systems and physical music which isn't compressed and void of all it's resolution.

Well, there's two separate issues here. One is the SAD state of recorded music these days (it IS way over-compressed and I mean by that dynamic range). The other is lossy compression (e.g. 256/320kbps) and the latter I'd have to disagree. I think I've got pretty good ears and a $5000+ system based on Carver ribbons and the difference between lossless (e.g. Apple Lossless) and an AAC encode at 256kbps is negligible if at all audible. The real reason most albums on the "iTunes Store" sound ridiculous is that they're even more compressed than the freaking CDs and those are already compressed to hell in dynamic range!

I don't know what you mean by "physical" music, though. I have an LP system and I have a CD system and I have a digital media player and I have them in a home theater 6.1 system and a high-end 2-channel system that lately has had an outboard surround addition (for surround music and occasional TV/Movies in that room). I also have whole house capability with Klipsch speakers in bedrooms, guest rooms, workout rooms and other rooms. I can sync it all or play individually or someone can listen to the digital library (which has a lossless version and an AAC version available) through their own headphones here.

But the idea I shouldn't listen to music in my car because it's not as good as my home system would be ludicrous. Music <> recording quality. Music is mathematics. Some people can hear a song in their head just reading musical notation (a certain famous composer was well known for this). I've been to some pretty awful live concerts before too. Just because it's "real" doesn't mean it's pleasant (ask any parent who has a kid learning to play an instrument).

These would cost $50, really? Like most of the commenters here on MR, you don't understand simple economics or feature sets.

And you don't understand how much they're actually worth.

Wow. It must really hurt you not being able to afford AirPods to end up in this kind of rant.

Yeah, that's it. I went on a 5 week vacation to Europe last year (including Hamburg, Paris, London and Bruges among several other stops) because I can't afford $159 headphones (I didn't fly coach on the way back either and I took a Cruise ship across the ocean on the way there with a suite.) I took noise canceling headphones (nice on the balcony) and a Bluetooth speaker to use with the Macbook Pro in the room (for in room media playback not dependent on their cheap TV speakers) with me. Yes, I'm practically downright destitute.

What really hurts is trying to keep earpods in my ears (they tend to fall out a lot, but then I can wiggle my ears so I may inadvertently be moving them in ways never intended) and find that they sound awful either way (and the looser the fit, the worse the bass response sounds).

 

[lordofthereef]

Cost aside, do we really think a Watch or earbuds are what are going to get people to buy iPhones, iPads, and macs? I don't know the answer to that, but I'd be surprised if that's how the average consumer brain worked.
[doublepost=1489795179][/doublepost]

This literally makes zero sense. Anyone buying an Watch or AirPods is already in the ecosystem. An Watch doesn't work without an Phone (which is what the iPhone should be renamed to).

And this is an even better point that I didn't even think of.

 

[Michael Goff]

Both require an iPhone for use. If you get someone hooked on the Apple Watch or AirPods, you don't have to worry about them leaving for Android as it's simply not an option. Small price to pay to keep people using their phones where they make far more money.

AirPods don't require an iPhone to use.

 

[Abazigal]

Don’t be discouraged. Most of the “troll” comments are actually from long-time Apple fanboys like myself. Some of us have been using Apple products and preaching their gospel longer than some customers have been out of diapers. If anything, we’ve demonstrated our loyalty unquestionably. When someone embraces an institution’s mantra, they are justified in criticizing it when it strays from its core values. Unfortunately, that has been the case since Cook took the helm. Jobs wanted to succeed by leading the market in innovation and sophistication. Cook, the VP’s, and Apple’s shareholders are content to pander to the lowest consumer expectations and novelties if it will make them richer—and it has.

it was reported that Jobs, as he was dying, gave Cook his blessing to “run the company as Cook saw fit, and not as they imagine Jobs would.” I’m skeptical that Jobs uttered those words.

This trend of fanboys bashing the products and decisions of the company they loved, is not unique to this forum. Most of the other fanboy sites are experiencing similar discourse. We’re too invested in Apple’s ecosystem and history to abandon it. You’ll have to wait for us to die. If it’s puppies and roses that you want to hear, perhaps you should switch to a competing brand.

That is just too bad then.

Just last year, I bought a 9.7" iPad Pro, Apple Pencil, Apple Watch and Airpods, and I enjoy using them very much.

While many tech-oriented individuals question Apple's current strategy and long-term sustainability, the truth of the matter is that the Apple brand has never been stronger in the eyes of consumers buying the products. We can go even further to say that the Apple brand is so strong these days, consumers are not shocked or surprised to hear rumors about Apple entering new industries like cars. Meanwhile, the old guard here still can't get their hands around the idea of Apple designing its own car. Does no one that so utterly hilarious and ironic?

This is but the start of Apple's ascent all the way to the top. And you can either choose to embrace what Apple is doing here and partake in this new world order which is being shaped by Apple even as we speak, or you can continue to stay here and whine about not having 32 gb of ram in your MacBooks and now the Mac Pro hadn't been updated in years, and miss out on all these great products and experiences.

But it looks like you have already drawn your line in the sand. Pity. That is your loss, not mine.

 

[profets]

And you don't understand how much they're actually worth.

I understand clearly what they're worth. They're worth what someone is willing to pay. What the market can bear. And if at $159 they can't keep up with demand then maybe they're not priced high enough?

Yeah, that's it. I went on a 5 week vacation to Europe last year (including Hamburg, Paris, London and Bruges among several other stops) because I can't afford $159 headphones (I didn't fly coach on the way back either and I took a Cruise ship across the ocean on the way there with a suite.) I took noise canceling headphones (nice on the balcony) and a Bluetooth speaker to use with the Macbook Pro in the room (for in room media playback not dependent on their cheap TV speakers) with me. Yes, I'm practically downright destitute.

What really hurts is trying to keep earpods in my ears (they tend to fall out a lot, but then I can wiggle my ears so I may inadvertently be moving them in ways never intended) and find that they sound awful either way (and the looser the fit, the worse the bass response sounds).

Ok, we get it, you're debt free and can live an extravagant life. But still, for someone reason, something about the AirPods bothers you so much you have to rant on forever about them.

Hey, they're not for everyone. If they don't fit well then they don't fit well. Move on.

 

[jblagden]

umm...you can use airpods with android.

This is true. The AirPods case has a pairing button on the back. I’m glad they put that in. When they first unvelled the AirPods, I was very concerned that they might make AirPods only work with Apple devices. Fortunately, the were practical enough to add a pairing button so you’re not stuck using them with only Apple devices.

 

[LordVic]

I don't think we disagree really. Noted above that each has their own strengths and uses. For casual listening wired is clearly the better choice. My observation above was with running. It's great not to have to manage the cable on runs or get your arms caught up in it. Of course the downside is batteries. And I saw where some BT headphones with Li-ion batteries exploded while in use on a plane and burned the user, so def. will not be using them on planes, but didn't anyway.

I think you're right. And at the end of the day, I don't think that anyone dissagres that the concept of Wireless over Wired is amazing and what we all want.

We're just not there yet, because of the drawbacks of current technology. I don't begrudge anyone company for trying. we're getting close where many uses it really is nicer.

but, they still haven't made the technology quite good enough to replace all use cases just yet. there are still those times, where wired, is just going to be better.

 

[MacBH928]

I think everyone who wants in the Apple ecosystem is already there. There is no room for growth, there is such a thing as market saturation.

That is unless the increase the pie size, and people from the 3rd world start joining the digital age

 

[Abazigal]

I think everyone who wants in the Apple ecosystem is already there. There is no room for growth, there is such a thing as market saturation.

That is unless the increase the pie size, and people from the 3rd world start joining the digital age

Isn't that precisely what Apple is doing by selling more iPhones and expanding the Apple ecosystem around the iPhone to make it a more integral aspect of its users' lives? And with more iPhones sold, you are in a better position to sell more apps, services and accessories.

Makes more sense to me than focusing on Macs, if we really want to go there.

 

[Fozziebear71]

Don’t be discouraged. Most of the “troll” comments are actually from long-time Apple fanboys like myself. Some of us have been using Apple products and preaching their gospel longer than some customers have been out of diapers. If anything, we’ve demonstrated our loyalty unquestionably. When someone embraces an institution’s mantra, they are justified in criticizing it when it strays from its core values. Unfortunately, that has been the case since Cook took the helm. Jobs wanted to succeed by leading the market in innovation and sophistication. Cook, the VP’s, and Apple’s shareholders are content to pander to the lowest consumer expectations and novelties if it will make them richer—and it has.

it was reported that Jobs, as he was dying, gave Cook his blessing to “run the company as Cook saw fit, and not as they imagine Jobs would.” I’m skeptical that Jobs uttered those words.

This trend of fanboys bashing the products and decisions of the company they loved, is not unique to this forum. Most of the other fanboy sites are experiencing similar discourse. We’re too invested in Apple’s ecosystem and history to abandon it. You’ll have to wait for us to die. If it’s puppies and roses that you want to hear, perhaps you should switch to a competing brand.

Somebody's level of self-importance is strong.

 

[Tech198]

Well then thank goodness they are under priced because after the they'd be more extensive here in Australia, or other countries.

 

[Shanghaichica]

Both require an iPhone for use. If you get someone hooked on the Apple Watch or AirPods, you don't have to worry about them leaving for Android as it's simply not an option. Small price to pay to keep people using their phones where they make far more money.

You don't need an iPhone to use the airpods or even an Apple device. They just loose the benefits of the W1 chip pairing/ features and can be paired in the traditional way with non Apple devices.

 

[admob71]

Have to agree with the article, AirPods are an incredible bargain in this space. And Apple Watch is probably $200-$300 underpriced across all the different models.

So true, the logic of this can simply not be argued with.....

 

[jblagden]

Unlike Apple earbuds. LOL.



I already used the lack of logic argument. Copying shows desperation.

I get what you're saying, though. You want UTILITY. That's OK if that's what you're looking for, but I just don't think utility should cost over $200, especially when the base model ear pod was something Apple gave away for free with iPods. If these were say $50, they'd make sense since you're basically just paying for the wireless utility. I don't think apple is anywhere NEAR taking a loss on these things at that price.

The problem is the Forbes guy is saying they're under-priced and at that sound quality level, that's simply a joke to me. Earphones are priced higher traditionally by quality, not utility. I've got a $15 pair of in-the-ear canal headphones I picked up at Heathrow airport awhile back because I forgot and packed my noise-canceling JVC headphones in my suitcase. They had more or less the same utility (although voices get blocked out more by in-the-ear, which isn't a bad thing on an airplane flight), but cost a LOT less and the JVCs cost a lot less than the Bose equivalent but sound just as good. Now those cheap ear-canal phones were great for utility. It costs less; it does the same without the fancy tech and I wasn't worried about sound quality (I figured anything would be better than those crappy ones they give out in economy plus), but I was pleasantly surprised. It turns out it doesn't take much of a driver to make good sound in the ear canal.



I don't blame Apple for charging that much. I blame people for being willing to pay it. These would cost $50 at most if people weren't jumping all over themselves to get a pair (thanks in part to Apple dumping the headphone jack making wired an extra pain in the butt). Just look at those custom paint versions a reseller is offering. They're insanely expensive to put a paint job on something that is mostly invisible in your ear. But I bet they get a lot of takers none-the-less.

Most people seem to me to have more cash than they have brains and that's really saying something given how poor most people are. I know people where I work making 1/3 of what I make and they have top of the line iPhones and eat out all the time. They're crazy. They live paycheck to paycheck for the most part. I have zero debt except my mortgage and I can pay that off at any time. But why would I want to when I get most of my interest back in tax deductions each year? I'm better off investing somewhere else. The point is you don't just throw your money away because you have it or you'll find even the richest people can go bankrupt in short order once something happens (e.g. look at MC Hammer's story and a quick way to blow $6-7 million irresponsibly). You should still expect value for your money and this isn't it. I had good reasons for buying my last two Macs (finding less to buy another one every day, sadly), but even if I needed wireless headphones, I'd look elsewhere.

Sadly, there are social circles where names like "Apple" mean something and I find it sad that it does. It's just tech. But then I never did understand how a pair of women's shoes can cost $3000. They're fracking shoes for god's sake. I'm afraid Apple is ever more fashion than function and I blame Tim Cook. But I can see why the shareholders don't care if the tech means jack these days. As long as you have people willing to buy it anyway, WTF do they care?



Sure.

Sound Quality: 2
Wireless Capability: 8
Chance of losing them: 8
Value Including Price: 4
Looking cool around Apple Fanatics: PRICELESS

Reminds me of the CEO of when he said "Everything is worth what people are ready to pay".

For those of you who don't know, Luxottica is nearly a monopoly in the eyewear space. They own most of the luxury brands (i.e. Ray-Ban & Oakley) and also a number eyewear outlets, like Target Optical, Pearle Vision, LensCrafters, and Sears Optical.

And that's pretty much where Apple is. Apple is the only company who makes Macs and iPhones, so if you want one, you have to go through Apple.

 

[The Game 161]

You don't need an iPhone to use the airpods or even an Apple device. They just loose the benefits of the W1 chip pairing/ features and can be paired in the traditional way with non Apple devices.

Yeah i mean if you don't have an apple watch you just change songs like you do now if you don't use siri

 

[Apple 26.2]

Just now seeing this post... for a second, I thought I was the only one laughing.

 

[scaramoosh]

I bought mine as I bicycle to work, they were terrible until a firmware update fixed them, I was so close to returning them. Sadly however I went over a bump the other day and they both fell out of my ears and got run over by a car.

So that's annoying, one still works but they're mangled.. I thought about replacing them but no one has them in stock.. so I guess I'm just buy the Sony MDR1000X's I wanted since you can turn off ANC.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

How so? There are plenty of people that have sold their Apple Watches. And we still don't know if people will buy more of them when their originals wear out. It's a cool gadget for sure - I love the fitness stuff but I'm sure I could get by with a Fitbit or Garmin. Then again I may keep both and be bi-OS'ed.

And for the Airpods, I've only seen one pair in person and they made the hot woman wearing them look like a dork.

This Assistant nonsense is going to be like VR - a cute party trick but not something most use. Even the most diehard Google people I know gave up on "OK Google" as they looked like a fool.

But dork is cool, sexy even...
[doublepost=1489847397][/doublepost]

I bought mine as I bicycle to work, they were terrible until a firmware update fixed them, I was so close to returning them. Sadly however I went over a bump the other day and they both fell out of my ears and got run over by a car.

So that's annoying, one still works but they're mangled.. I thought about replacing them but no one has them in stock.. so I guess I'm just buy the Sony MDR1000X's I wanted since you can turn off ANC.

I'm sure biking with those is going to be so comfortable.

What bugs me is that the Airpods aren't 'life proof'. I was going to use them for working out, but my ears sweat a lot. That could get expensive. But they are pretty amazing, none the less...

 

[scaramoosh]

But dork is cool, sexy even...
[doublepost=1489847397][/doublepost]

I'm sure biking with those is going to be so comfortable.

What bugs me is that the Airpods aren't 'life proof'. I was going to use them for working out, but my ears sweat a lot. That could get expensive. But they are pretty amazing, none the less...

For me they just keep coming out, I can't jump with them or wear a hoodie or have anything near my ears. I have longish hair and that causes them to fall out too.

The sound quality was rather meh though, so I'm probably just gonna spend a few hundred on proper headphones.

 

[Suckfest 9001]

Well, there's two separate issues here. One is the SAD state of recorded music these days (it IS way over-compressed and I mean by that dynamic range). The other is lossy compression (e.g. 256/320kbps) and the latter I'd have to disagree. I think I've got pretty good ears and a $5000+ system based on Carver ribbons and the difference between lossless (e.g. Apple Lossless) and an AAC encode at 256kbps is negligible if at all audible. The real reason most albums on the "iTunes Store" sound ridiculous is that they're even more compressed than the freaking CDs and those are already compressed to hell in dynamic range!

I don't know what you mean by "physical" music, though. I have an LP system and I have a CD system and I have a digital media player and I have them in a home theater 6.1 system and a high-end 2-channel system that lately has had an outboard surround addition (for surround music and occasional TV/Movies in that room). I also have whole house capability with Klipsch speakers in bedrooms, guest rooms, workout rooms and other rooms. I can sync it all or play individually or someone can listen to the digital library (which has a lossless version and an AAC version available) through their own headphones here.

But the idea I shouldn't listen to music in my car because it's not as good as my home system would be ludicrous. Music <> recording quality. Music is mathematics. Some people can hear a song in their head just reading musical notation (a certain famous composer was well known for this). I've been to some pretty awful live concerts before too. Just because it's "real" doesn't mean it's pleasant (ask any parent who has a kid learning to play an instrument).



And you don't understand how much they're actually worth.



Yeah, that's it. I went on a 5 week vacation to Europe last year (including Hamburg, Paris, London and Bruges among several other stops) because I can't afford $159 headphones (I didn't fly coach on the way back either and I took a Cruise ship across the ocean on the way there with a suite.) I took noise canceling headphones (nice on the balcony) and a Bluetooth speaker to use with the Macbook Pro in the room (for in room media playback not dependent on their cheap TV speakers) with me. Yes, I'm practically downright destitute.

What really hurts is trying to keep earpods in my ears (they tend to fall out a lot, but then I can wiggle my ears so I may inadvertently be moving them in ways never intended) and find that they sound awful either way (and the looser the fit, the worse the bass response sounds).

you just love to brag, dont you

 

[admob71]

Well, there's two separate issues here. One is the SAD state of recorded music these days (it IS way over-compressed and I mean by that dynamic range). The other is lossy compression (e.g. 256/320kbps) and the latter I'd have to disagree. I think I've got pretty good ears and a $5000+ system based on Carver ribbons and the difference between lossless (e.g. Apple Lossless) and an AAC encode at 256kbps is negligible if at all audible. The real reason most albums on the "iTunes Store" sound ridiculous is that they're even more compressed than the freaking CDs and those are already compressed to hell in dynamic range!

I don't know what you mean by "physical" music, though. I have an LP system and I have a CD system and I have a digital media player and I have them in a home theater 6.1 system and a high-end 2-channel system that lately has had an outboard surround addition (for surround music and occasional TV/Movies in that room). I also have whole house capability with Klipsch speakers in bedrooms, guest rooms, workout rooms and other rooms. I can sync it all or play individually or someone can listen to the digital library (which has a lossless version and an AAC version available) through their own headphones here.

But the idea I shouldn't listen to music in my car because it's not as good as my home system would be ludicrous. Music <> recording quality. Music is mathematics. Some people can hear a song in their head just reading musical notation (a certain famous composer was well known for this). I've been to some pretty awful live concerts before too. Just because it's "real" doesn't mean it's pleasant (ask any parent who has a kid learning to play an instrument).



And you don't understand how much they're actually worth.



Yeah, that's it. I went on a 5 week vacation to Europe last year (including Hamburg, Paris, London and Bruges among several other stops) because I can't afford $159 headphones (I didn't fly coach on the way back either and I took a Cruise ship across the ocean on the way there with a suite.) I took noise canceling headphones (nice on the balcony) and a Bluetooth speaker to use with the Macbook Pro in the room (for in room media playback not dependent on their cheap TV speakers) with me. Yes, I'm practically downright destitute.

What really hurts is trying to keep earpods in my ears (they tend to fall out a lot, but then I can wiggle my ears so I may inadvertently be moving them in ways never intended) and find that they sound awful either way (and the looser the fit, the worse the bass response sounds).

Modesty doesn't really exist in your life now does it fella..?

Ps, I Bought a bugatti last week. It's not bad, but not as good as my Lambo.. see how easy it is to spew all sorts of tales......

 

[bruinsrme]

I understand clearly what they're worth. They're worth what someone is willing to pay. What the market can bear. And if at $159 they can't keep up with demand then maybe they're not priced high enough?



Ok, we get it, you're debt free and can live an extravagant life. But still, for someone reason, something about the AirPods bothers you so much you have to rant on forever about them.

Hey, they're not for everyone. If they don't fit well then they don't fit well. Move on.

The "short supply" is mere marketing brilliance. If it's a manufacturing issue prices causing the short supply the price could easily be jacked up.

Think about zero shelf live for an item is the dream of any reseller.

I have a pair, for $159 they sound like crap and the fit is horrible. The fit surely plays into the sound quality. IMO they are about $140 overpriced. However if they fit well in your ear then I am sure your opinion in fit and sound quality will definitely differ.
with that said, the integration with the iPhone is flawless, the charging case is excellent.

 

[Glideslope]

Isn't that precisely what Apple is doing by selling more iPhones and expanding the Apple ecosystem around the iPhone to make it a more integral aspect of its users' lives? And with more iPhones sold, you are in a better position to sell more apps, services and accessories.

Makes more sense to me than focusing on Macs, if we really want to go there.

Well, looks like you've drawn your line in the sand with Macs, eh?

 

[Defthand]

Somebody's level of self-importance is strong.

Yes it is. It's a trait that Apple's earliest disciples shared with Apple's maverick CEO. If not for his demanding tastes and standards—and customers who understood it—the Apple brand would be indistinguishable from the Windows computers that it competed with. The indifferent masses, like yourself, bought what was popular—as they continue to today. The only difference is that Apple is the popular kid on the block today.

 

[Michael Goff]

Yes it is. It's a trait that Apple's earliest disciples shared with Apple's maverick CEO. If not for his demanding tastes and standards—and customers who understood it—the Apple brand would be indistinguishable from the Windows computers that it competed with. The indifferent masses, like yourself, bought what was popular—as they continue to today. The only difference is that Apple is the popular kid on the block today.

Somebody's irrational sense of superiority is being fanned by buying certain things.