I own a 16GB iPhone4 and I barely use 10GB and most of my storage space is taken by music. This wouldn't be different with a newer model. Different people - different needs. But I assume for most people 16GB is plenty.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Screwing its Customers Re: 16 GB
- Thread starter sillywabbit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I actually prefer the Apple starts at 16GB especially for the older models.
This allows Apple to keep entry level prices lower because the competition is often starting at 16GB as well. And if you go for the 64GB it boosts the resale value of the higher GB models as well while keeping the resale value of the 16GB models the same. If Apple releases a 32GB iPhone 5 as the entry level your 32GB iPhone that you bought last year for a $100 premium would lose $100, so this not only keeps the $100 premium in your pocket but gives you a profit. In fact Apple's storage schemes mean it is actually cheaper in the long run to have the 64GB model as you get more than $100 of resale value on the back end.
So really what Apple has done is given you 64GB for negative $50 dollars.
Negative dollars, for more storage. That's a good deal.
And on top of that the 16GB model still has a low price for those that want the lowest price.
That's the proper way to price a product for the benefit of customers.
This allows Apple to keep entry level prices lower because the competition is often starting at 16GB as well. And if you go for the 64GB it boosts the resale value of the higher GB models as well while keeping the resale value of the 16GB models the same. If Apple releases a 32GB iPhone 5 as the entry level your 32GB iPhone that you bought last year for a $100 premium would lose $100, so this not only keeps the $100 premium in your pocket but gives you a profit. In fact Apple's storage schemes mean it is actually cheaper in the long run to have the 64GB model as you get more than $100 of resale value on the back end.
So really what Apple has done is given you 64GB for negative $50 dollars.
Negative dollars, for more storage. That's a good deal.
And on top of that the 16GB model still has a low price for those that want the lowest price.
That's the proper way to price a product for the benefit of customers.
Last edited:
If you truly wish to understand, I'd recommend some basic economics and business learning.
Exactly!!! Economics dictates that demand and price are inversely related. Frankly, apple shouldn't be selling many phones with the current competition. I think their entire business model is driven by the fact that the people that buy their products do it almost uncritically.
I am inclined to agree that 16 GB is too small, and yet there are a significant number of posters here who still use phones that size successfully. I see the brilliance from Apple, as more end users will likely buy the 64 GB, spending more money.
lmao!! WHAT??? You do understand that apple is padding their bottom line AT YOUR EXPENSE, right? But I agree, they're brilliant. It can't be an easy thing to get consumers to pay so much more than the competition for lesser product.
Or seen another way, you wanted Apple to drop the price of the 32GB by $100.
Last year the prices were:
$499 16GB
$599 32GB
$699 64GB
$799 128GB
This year:
$499 16GB
$599 64GB
$699 128GB
You're paying the same amount as last year and getting DOUBLE THE STORAGE.
Apple is a business just like Samsung or Google are. This just shows that Apple don't care about their fans and would rather make a quick buck than giving the people what they want.
That's why only a loser would worship any company, I look out for my interest first, I have no devotion to Apple or Google, I get whatever works for me and if they don't deliver on what I want, I go somewhere else.
That's why only a loser would worship any company, I look out for my interest first, I have no devotion to Apple or Google, I get whatever works for me and if they don't deliver on what I want, I go somewhere else.
Of course they are. The difference in price between 16, 32, 64, 128 devices is minimal. But they have always done that. The idea that they are making it worse now is wrong, as I paid the price of a 32 GB 5S and got a 64 GB 6.
This is the attitude of a rational consumer, and it's a basis of our economic theory. How apple defies this basic tenet really is amazing.
You made it even more clear than I have. All the manufacturers are using models which increase device price by storage. Apple is actually "screwing us over" less now then they previously were.
----------
This forum needs to establish a sarcasm color.
Put it this way. If you owned a business and had a product that millions of people were willing to buy for $10, would you sell it for less if it only cost you $1 to make?
If so you aren't a good businessman.
If so you aren't a good businessman.
Of course not. But at the same time I wouldn't expect to sell very many if the guy down the street was selling a better product for less.
Funny, i've always had 16GB yet never had storage issues. I don't play too many games though, and always back everything up or use companys' cloud services, such as spotify for music or dropbox for my photos.
I also use the device for my own applications and testing.. perhaps i'm just good at clearing space - something i imagine the common user not being so anal on..
I do feel however that 32GB should be the default option by now, or at least subsidise it so you get more iCloud storage (as mentioned in another lengthy thread).
I also use the device for my own applications and testing.. perhaps i'm just good at clearing space - something i imagine the common user not being so anal on..
I do feel however that 32GB should be the default option by now, or at least subsidise it so you get more iCloud storage (as mentioned in another lengthy thread).
But that point is moot because millions of people are willing to pay the $10. How or why is moot.
I think what Mr Gruber failed to realize is that, in the long term, it doesn't make a difference either.
Theres nothing not smart about it.
Short term or long term.
What he forgot about was the phenomenon of Premium/Designer appeal. The brand.
Apple is just plain expensive.
At our most basic human condition, it means something that these items are so expensive. It makes us see them as more precious, exclusive, and enjoy them more.
Its a status symbol, duh.
So how can Gruber act like any significant group of people care in terms of dollar for dollar value. If anything, those people buying in at 499$ feel LUCKY to have an item that is usually more like 1K. It also implies that Apple makes no average products so that make EVERY Apple item valuable exponentially through branding. Both the quality of product, and the price of the product convince the masses that these items are the best. Its a double edged sales pitch that has been massively potent.
It makes a shinier item even shinier.
It sucks that they cost that much, but once you finally get a golden ticket and get one, you feel even more special about it because of the cost of entry. It implies even more quality and status than there already is because it cost a lot of income to get one.
What if Gruber went into the Prada store and started itemizing the belts, saying the dollar to value ratio in one vs the other doesn't add up...
This 16/32GB thing falls under the umbrella of premium business models and it does nothing to affect the master thesis.
He says its good in the small picture, but bad in the big picture, but there is an even bigger picture than that.
Theres nothing not smart about it.
Short term or long term.
What he forgot about was the phenomenon of Premium/Designer appeal. The brand.
Apple is just plain expensive.
At our most basic human condition, it means something that these items are so expensive. It makes us see them as more precious, exclusive, and enjoy them more.
Its a status symbol, duh.
So how can Gruber act like any significant group of people care in terms of dollar for dollar value. If anything, those people buying in at 499$ feel LUCKY to have an item that is usually more like 1K. It also implies that Apple makes no average products so that make EVERY Apple item valuable exponentially through branding. Both the quality of product, and the price of the product convince the masses that these items are the best. Its a double edged sales pitch that has been massively potent.
It makes a shinier item even shinier.
It sucks that they cost that much, but once you finally get a golden ticket and get one, you feel even more special about it because of the cost of entry. It implies even more quality and status than there already is because it cost a lot of income to get one.
What if Gruber went into the Prada store and started itemizing the belts, saying the dollar to value ratio in one vs the other doesn't add up...
This 16/32GB thing falls under the umbrella of premium business models and it does nothing to affect the master thesis.
He says its good in the small picture, but bad in the big picture, but there is an even bigger picture than that.
Last edited:
It does not need 4 gig free to upgrade the OS. Just upgrade with iTunes and you're fine. 16 gigs is just fine for lot's of people. Stream, don't store. Or by 128 gigs and store don't stream. It's all up to you.
I think what the poster you were quoting is talking in general.
A competing device with a much larger screen, higher PPI, more RAM, larger battery, stereo speakers, etc etc cost the same as an iPhone or near the same. Hence Apple charging more for less.
I'm just assuming that is what that poster meant. I'm of varying opinions on that subject because I place value in other things.
Right. Actually often times the competing device costs significantly less. I just bought the Z3 and it completely kills the iphone in terms of hardware and a 32GB model sells for less than a 16GB iphone 6.
So why ever make anything better? Apple has enough recognition that they could literally put a turd in a nice box and sell it for a few hundred bucks.
As gruber said, there is value in creating good will and making the customer experience better. It would have cost Apple pretty much nothing in the near term, but would have created a lot less frustration. Already people are having trouble updating to iOS8; when iOS 9 comes around, adoption will be even less
As do I, and most people. I have no "loyalty" or allegiance to any brand or manufacturer and will jump ship when something else better fits my requirements and/or provides a better value.
Define "better"... Your definition appears to be centered around hardware capabilities. Same for many propellerheads. Much of the general population doesn't really care about the propellerhead details of cpus and so forth, they're concerned with the usability and interface and the product ecosystem.
That phone runs android tho.
Android has a terrible reputation for crappy software that doesn't utilize the battery and hardware efficiently.
So its not like you're getting something more for your money.
The problem is content is taking more space these days. Photos, Music, Video, so they shouldnt offer the 16gb anymore. The Social apps like FB, TW, IG can balloon up to 800mb even...so 16GB fills up quite quickly without people noticing. Games can take 1-2GB even.
It would be like if they had macs with 40GB still since "thats all most people use". 16GB for a phone isn't quite low these days, just look at the iOS8 upgrade problem.
It would be like if they had macs with 40GB still since "thats all most people use". 16GB for a phone isn't quite low these days, just look at the iOS8 upgrade problem.
Which then sullies that reputation and allows the competition to get a foothold. Even when you have a great reputation you have to keep pushing forward because there's a bunch of others who are aiming for your spot.
Microsoft would be a good example, especially Vista. MS has a lot of smart people, but they've been afraid of making a break from the past where it made sense. Legacy support has been dragging down Windows from what it could be for a long time and continues even now.
Look at IBM and their sale of the PC business to Lenovo to get out of that business when they saw the increasing commoditization of Windows PCs. As lesson HP took several more years to figure out.