Right but that’s not what was said he said the 15 was cheaper because it offered less software support.
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's Phil Schiller Initially Opposed 27% App Store Fee on External Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not sure what person or specific comments you are referring to but my point here was simply that there can be a variety of reasons why a phone is cheaper or more expensive than another including features, support, etc. Also, the "support clock" starting when a phone launches and not when purchased seems to be the industry norm.
As I previously stated, a reason the 15 has a lower retail price in year two than in year one is because it may have approximately one year less support. Reasons someone may pick the 15 over the 16e could be the better camera setup, more desirable color options, etc. and they don't care about the year or so less support.
Related to all of this, what exactly is Apple doing that is "wrong" or outside the norm here? What am I missing?
Most people look at an item and see if the item is new or used. When one buys a car does one not know what they are buying? Are you coming from the point of view consumers are idiots and need to be protected from themselves?
And by the way the iPhone 15PM is not one tech. It’s last years model, which is still new tech.
If you are talking about new 15 and new 16 phones being sold simultaneously, new in this case means not used. It doesn’t necessarily mean new as in latest.
I think/hope consumers are smart enough to know by now that the iPhone 16 is likely to have at least some "new" or "newer" tech over the year old 15.
I’m going to jump in here
The conversation was about iPhones sold on Apples website old tech packaged as new tech with less software support.
That’s all nothing to do with TV or cars
The 15PM is old tech because it’s been replaced & no longer sold on apples website brand new
The 15PM is not old tech. It’s last years’ model with relatively new tech.
Apple, for years, has been selling last years models along with this years models. The exact same as car manufacturers and TV makers.
Additionally less software support is not really proven. It’s unfounded opinion.
So the general buying public are idiots and need to protected from themselves at large?
Someone who is about to spend $$$$$ on a car or $$$ on a phone should ensure they know what they are buying.
Then it's on them for not taking the time to do a little research on what they are buying. If Apple's website (which has a "compare iPhone" section) or one of the many other phone/tech sites aren't good enough, they can ask a friend, family member or someone at a retail store.
After all these years, does Apple really have to dumb down everything for a tiny percentage of people who may not know that the iPhone 16 is newer than the iPhone 15 and can't find a way to figure it out? I sure hope not.
It is old tech because they no longer sell it brand new on the website you need to buy it from a 3rd party brand new
There is a difference between a car & tv
than an iPhone
yeah it actually is proven in regards to software support.
Yeah people are actually like that when it comes to buying iPhones
As I have seen it myself
Are they any more obligated to design their mobile devices around that model either? Isn't their answer "no problem – go buy an Android device"?
No it’s not old tech. It’s last years model. There’s a difference. There is little difference to the way sales of last years consumer devices are handled for tv, cars and mobile phone makers. And additionally you don’t know how long last years model will be supported in the future.
Anyway thanks for the civil discourse.
It’s on the person then. Apple is not obligated to dumb down to the 10% that can’t figure things out.
Not nearly enough to justify the criticism here which is why all of the major phone makers, carriers, etc. for years and years have sold new older/previous model phones.
Anyone that ignorant about iPhones or phones in general should at least be smart enough to go online or ask a friend, family member or someone at a store for assistance. If they don't do that then it's on them for not using the many online or offline resources available.
In my experience when most people come into buy an iPhone they look at price point
There is a difference when buying a car & a tv to buying a smartphone.
Your now making things up because most people look at price point
Price can be a fine starting point but if they are really that ignorant about models, features, etc. then they should at least be smart enough to do their own research and/or ask someone. If they really care about these things and don’t do any of that, it's on them. I don't see a reason to criticize Apple (or Samsung or Google, etc.) for this.
Apple's financial reports are available for anyone to read. Based on what's in them the only way you can argue that Apple isn't greedy is if you argue no corporation is greedy. Their margins relative to the rest of the industry are what they are. Apple's corporate greed is a proven fact. It's not a belief or feeling. Those are things you're basing your opinions on (specifically: denial).
More-so the processor the phone shipped with imo. Despite launching more than a year earlier, the 15 Pro (A17 Pro) probably gets dropped at the same time as the 16e (binned A18), while the 15 (A16) will get dropped earlier.
Introduction date matters for Apple's minimum 5 year support length, but support past 5 years depends on what hardware is in the phone.
Not sure why many are in denial that all business attempt to charge market price for the products and services. And it’s up to the consumer to purchase those products and services for their own reasons based on the price of the products and services.
You can argue apple is greedy, which is certainly subjective, but to the tune of hundreds of billions a quarter apple customers purchase their products and services.
It’s not the Apple product price or services
It’s the additional cost for example
YouTube premium costs 11.99 a month if you subscribe on website
But if you use the YouTube app it costs 16.99 a month
How is that fair
It’s fair in that you have an option where to pay. That YouTube (if these figures are even accurate) decides their pricing based on the platform is no different than the way physical businesses operate. And then again, if the price to value ratio is not there don’t purchase the products.