Because it makes it sound ancient, even though it’s got the same processor, cellular and WiFi specs as the iPhone 11.
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.
iFixit Details Which Parts Can Be Swapped Between the iPhone 8 and iPhone SE
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A few points:
- The X was more expensive due to new tech in the phone. As I commented on old tech is less expensive new tech isn't. OLED hasn't come down in price. Cars have been around for 100 years and still the price of cars usually go up from year to year. The fact that OLED is on other phones prior to the iphone is irrelevant in terms of cost.
- Overpriced is subjective. The word expensive, less subjective. Overpriced products rarely sell, so with last quarters revenue of $91B, people are buying. How many monitors are oled vs how many aren't. Are the $43,000 monitors OLED? No they aren't.
- Dividends is a skewed way of looking at this entire profits before customers thing. Apple has to be able to sell it's products. Apple is able to sell it's products to generate revenue. The sales demonstrate the buying public disagrees with your opinion. "great products" are subjective. IMO, apple designs great products.
- Comparison with previous generations are easy. Just need to hit the compare button to see the differences. 5 to 5s was a significant upgrade. 6 to 6s was a significant upgrade. x to xs was significant and rumor has it 11 to 12 is significant. 4 to 4s not so significant.
- Not every upgrade has to be significant to everybody and is subjective. Always on display for the watch is significant to some, no doubt. The updates to the ipad pro are more than skin deep.
- As far as the cost of a laptop vs an iphone. Try to take the laptop out in the field for a full day without charging and pay for your transit, purchases, make phone calls, facetime, use a gps program, remote start your car and feed audio into your cars' entertainment system. If the iphone is too expensive there are android phones that are less expensive, which cheap, is the opposite of overpriced and you will get what you pay for.
The trashcan Mac Pro did receive one 'price cut' in its lifetime by offering higher-specced versions at the price of previously lower-specced versions. Apple also didn't make much profit with the Mac Pro and the Mac Mini in their later design years because sales were pretty low compared to their main product line. The reason Apple doesn't cut the price of existing products [that have not gotten a successor] is to maintain price point expectations. Apple rather has low sales and a bad image than having to explain why it raised the price when it updates, eg, the Mac Mini.
Apple's overall gross margin has been around 38% over the last couple of years. That is gross profit before development (incl. software), marketing and other such 'fixed' costs (as in costs independent from the number of products sold). Apple probably could cut its prices by 20% and still be quite profitable. But already cutting them by a third would leave them with little profit.
For once I referred to the OLED models. The LCD FaceID iPhone, the Xr, has not been discontinued. But it has followed the model of all previous iPhones: It gets cheaper by about $100 a year, but it started higher than the iPhone 6/7/8, and it remains more expensive than those were in their second year.
And that is based on what? That a laptop can do more things, can do things faster and better? Sure, some things. But in regard to others, the smartphone is way ahead. When you are sitting at a desk, a laptop can do more, but outside a smartphone can do a lot of things a laptop cannot. And you are much more likely to have your smartphone with you than your laptop.
[automerge]1588063162[/automerge]
Are you sure about the 'currently' aspect? Because Apple's profit margin hasn't really moved much over the last seven years. It increased noticeably when the iPhone took off in 2008 and 2009, spiked in 2012 but apart from that has been fairly stable over the last ten years.
Last edited:
The iPhone 8 used
- The only 'new' tech on the X was Face ID, which uses the technology from Xbox Kinect which was around since 2010 so its not new it was 7 year old tech by then. The only thing they did was shrink it down. The fact OLED was on other phones is very relevant because Samsung had it on the very first Galaxy S and all their phone have been cheaper than Apple iPhones. Samsung were also the suppliers for the OLED screens used in the X. All phones are pretty much manufactured the same way these days using the same materials, so Apple charging such ridiculous prices is starting to show how much they are overcharging.
In addition to the high price, the quality has dropped. I usually have to return any Apple item at least 3-5 times minimum before an acceptable one reaches me. The ten iPhone 11 Pro Max models I received had scratched glass, glue blobs running down the side, scuffs on the stainless steel band, dust behind the camera glass, sharp plastic edge surround the glass which had not been cut properly. I haven't bothered ordering an eleventh one to try yet.
- People are actually buying less iPhones. Thats one of the reasons they raised prices across all products. The $91B you quote is actually through selling less iPhones but because they raised prices the earnings remained stable. However this is risky strategy because they cannot keep raising prices forever. There will come a point when people will refuse to pay it. I cannot imagine many people will want to spend £2000 on an iPhone.
Also the iPhone 11 Pro, XS Max and X models which are the most overpriced make up a tiny portion of their sales. The vast majority of their sales, probably around 80%, I have read come from the lower end models such as the iPhone 11 and below which cost less than £870.
They are struggling to crack China and India which are very price sensitive and massive markets tap into which is where their strategy for the future lies. If they fail the sales numbers will continue to slowly decline as the smartphone market is basically at full saturation.
In addition if iPhones sell so well why did they stop sharing sales figures for them. You don't withhold data which they have shared for 10 years unless you have something to hide. Hiding the data in turn protects shareholders because markets will react less to Apple's declining iPhone sales, which means their share price and dividends are more protected.
Furthermore Apple is protective of the iPhone because it earns nearly 50% of the whole company profit. Sales in other new areas like the HomePod have been poor, the accessories such as AirPods whilst very successful don't bring in massive revenue for them. They have been basically plodding along since 2012 each product a tiny evolution on previous generations but with massive price hikes which don't match the product they are putting out. They do not deign great products like they did before.
- Having to yourself click on a separate page and do the comparison yourself they know very few people will do, also its a tech spec comparison. Its not a benchmark comparison. I am referring to the main product page of a new product when they quote 2X faster than so and so. Why don't they put like for like comparisons in your face like they do with the carefully curated functions they want you to see. I mean the iPhone 11 Pro product page is 75% about the camera. At the end of the day it takes great pictures, you don't need to talk about it for three quarters of the product page.
S models are never significant upgrades they are fillers and refined models of the original. 4-5, 5-6 I would say were good upgrades. 7-X was a good upgrade except for the £450 price increase which was unwarranted. X-XS was insignificant and so is the XS to 11 Pro. From rumours the 12 looks like it will be a good upgrade.
- The Apple Watch Series 5, the always on display was the only new feature. The CPU even though they named it the S5 is identical to the S4 chip in Series 4. Take away the always on display and it is the Series 4 as many reviewers have said.
The iPad Pro upgrades were 1 extra core on the same identical CPU chip as the previous generation, extra 2GB of RAM and the camera upgrade. The fact rumours are circulating that they are producing another iPad Pro for later in the year shows greed again. The only reason they are doing it is so they can call it iPad something else and charge more than they are currently charging for iPad Pro. What happened to producing the best products they possibly can? They are knowingly holding back tech to put in another model later in the year. They could have just waited and released one iPad Pro later in the year and that it the new iPad Pro. Not have the current iPad Pro and then the iPad 'Pro Pro' which will likely cost £1000 as a starting price.
- You do all those things you mentioned on your iPhone and it will last less than the 10 hours+ battery on a laptop. I consider myself a light user on the iPhone and I have to charge my phone in the middle of the day.
Also all those things won't earn you money, they are mere convenience. On a laptop or desktop is where you get serious work done which is why I value the Mac more than the iPhone.
- I use everything Apple so the iPhone fits into the ecosystem which is why I do not wish to switch to Android. I have purchased every iPhone to date since the original in 2007. Fortunately, I get discount on all Apple products so I never pay the full price Apple charges. But what I do pay is still more than I should be for what I'm getting.
Just because you think Apple products should be cheaper doesn’t mean you are right.
I think people would understand a price cut on old technology and for a new model to be higher priced. Alternatively get a new model out quicker. It took them 7 years to realise people wanted an upgradeable tower design like the G5 Mac Pro. I mean the new Mac Pro is basically them reverting to an identical G5 tower design with a fancy new lattice pattern. Pretty sure the coolling system is similar too. I find it hard to believe it took 7 years for them to come up with that.
I think Apple are increasing their own costs with so much product fragmentation leading to higher costs in all departments. They need to go back to basics and just have a really streamlined product line up.
The XR was already a 'budget' model when the XS Max was released. My issue is them not keeping the direct previous generation around in the lineup once the new model comes out. Apple should have released the iPhone 11 Pro and then reduced the price on the XS model by £200. The lineup should be iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max, XS and XS Max and the new iPhone SE that's it. They would have saved money by not having research, develop, manufacture etc the iPhone 11 and the lineup would make sense and be clean and non fragmented. High end, middle and budget.
Alot of the things a smartphone can do a laptop cannot like pay for things, stream music to the car etc are more convenience and non essential.
Where are you getting data for Apples profit margins? They don't publish those figures. I'm sure their profit margins have spiked since the release of the iPhone X. The iPhone prices jumped £450 overnight from the 7 to the X for a phone which included an OLED screen which had been around for the previous 7 years on every other phone, so they cannot claim increased costs for that particular part. The other addition was the Face ID which was borrowed from Xbox Kinect so the majority of research had been done there already.
Apple has had to boost profit margins in recent years due to declining markets and the need to keep looking like sales are not declining. Recent earnings are similar to previous years due to the higher prices they are charging. But the money is actually coming from fewer iPhone sales. So they must be making larger profit margins on each iPhone to cover the lower sales.
Going by the logic of "not new", phones should cost 30 cents as there is virtually no new tech in phones from the perspective it's copied or licensed. That hyperbole aside, it's new tech to apple, new R&D, new manufacturing processes and a price increase seems to be justified. OLED has been around since 1988 when Kodak invented it.
"All phones are manufactured the same way". As all cars are manufactured the same way using the same materials. (sic) That seemingly is a bit of an oversimplification. As far as the quality, all of my Apple purchases since 2010 (save one iphone), never had to be returned and I have been very happy with their manufacturing quality. One anecdotal opinion vs another anecdotal opinion. Although there is no magic bullet when hundreds of millions of phones are being manufactured. There will be a small percentage that doesn't pass quality tests.
People are buying less phones period. Certain Samsung phones are starting at $999. But speculation on why a phone goes up in price is just that, it's just an opinion. My opinion is new tech gets a price increase. It's worth noting the XR was the single best selling phone, selling more than the cheapo androids. It should be no secret the more expensive models have less sales volume than the less expensive models. Toyota Camry outsells Mercedes AMG S Class by a huge margin.
Not sure what this has to do with what is being discussed especially in light of the thread title.
Because Apple didn't want fixation on the sales and wanted the overall picture looked at without bias? In addition, the competition doesn't report sales. And what does it matter what the unit sales are. If you are a shareholder and are concerned, you dump the stock. If you are a consumer, why would you care about sales? It's a win-win for everybody, except those who criticize Apple for it online.
"Great" is a subjective word. The estimated meager sales of the homepod would be welcome revenue to many companies. It's about expanding the ecosystem. I don't even know what being protective of the iphone means. Are they hypnotizing the masses to buy an iphone instead of the competition? Finally I do think they design great products.
How do you know how many people go for the comparison? You can't know. Of course they curate the website, are you suggesting Apple won't advertise and highlight their products in the best way possible. Are you suggesting they lie on the website? Cameras are the hottest areas on cell phones, why wouldn't apple devote a bit of space to it?
S models are leaps and bounds ahead of the model they replace. 6S compared to 6. 5S compared to 5. Xs compared to X, etc.
Apple Watch - Compare Models
Compare specs for the latest Apple Watch models: Apple Watch Ultra 2, Apple Watch Series 10, and Apple Watch SE.
www.apple.com
The significance of the upgrades is left to the buyer of the products who votes with their wallet. Not to those who don't.
Again, subjective about the "best possible product". The proof is in the pudding about reaching $1T, the only objective measure. Apple always holds back tech and nobody is forcing anybody to buy their products, yet as I said, they reached $1T in valuation.
A small easily carried battery pack solves that issue, if in fact that really is the problem.
I earn money by being accessible to my clientele for the an iphone is the best device for my use case. For follow-up work, sure windows desktop tethered to my phone.
So, it's overpriced, but I pay the price anyway? There are a lot in your boat, and that is why Apple reached $1T.
Just because you disagree with me and believe everything Apple tells you at face value doesn't mean you are right.
Going by the logic of "not new", phones should cost 30 cents as there is virtually no new tech in phones from the perspective it's copied or licensed. That hyperbole aside, it's new tech to apple, new R&D, new manufacturing processes and a price increase seems to be justified. OLED has been around since 1988 when Kodak invented it.
"All phones are manufactured the same way". As all cars are manufactured the same way using the same materials. (sic) That seemingly is a bit of an oversimplification. As far as the quality, all of my Apple purchases since 2010 (save one iphone), never had to be returned and I have been very happy with their manufacturing quality. One anecdotal opinion vs another anecdotal opinion. Although there is no magic bullet when hundreds of millions of phones are being manufactured. There will be a small percentage that doesn't pass quality tests.
People are buying less phones period. Certain Samsung phones are starting at $999. But speculation on why a phone goes up in price is just that, it's just an opinion. My opinion is new tech gets a price increase. It's worth noting the XR was the single best selling phone, selling more than the cheapo androids. It should be no secret the more expensive models have less sales volume than the less expensive models. Toyota Camry outsells Mercedes AMG S Class by a huge margin.
Not sure what this has to do with what is being discussed especially in light of the thread title.
Because Apple didn't want fixation on the sales and wanted the overall picture looked at without bias? In addition, the competition doesn't report sales. And what does it matter what the unit sales are. If you are a shareholder and are concerned, you dump the stock. If you are a consumer, why would you care about sales? It's a win-win for everybody, except those who criticize Apple for it online.
"Great" is a subjective word. The estimated meager sales of the homepod would be welcome revenue to many companies. It's about expanding the ecosystem. I don't even know what being protective of the iphone means. Are they hypnotizing the masses to buy an iphone instead of the competition? Finally I do think they design great products.
How do you know how many people go for the comparison? You can't know. Of course they curate the website, are you suggesting Apple won't advertise and highlight their products in the best way possible. Are you suggesting they lie on the website? Cameras are the hottest areas on cell phones, why wouldn't apple devote a bit of space to it?
S models are leaps and bounds ahead of the model they replace. 6S compared to 6. 5S compared to 5. Xs compared to X, etc.
Apple Watch - Compare Models
Compare specs for the latest Apple Watch models: Apple Watch Ultra 2, Apple Watch Series 10, and Apple Watch SE.www.apple.com
The significance of the upgrades is left to the buyer of the products who votes with their wallet. Not to those who don't.
Again, subjective about the "best possible product". The proof is in the pudding about reaching $1T, the only objective measure. Apple always holds back tech and nobody is forcing anybody to buy their products, yet as I said, they reached $1T in valuation.
A small easily carried battery pack solves that issue, if in fact that really is the problem.
I earn money by being accessible to my clientele for the an iphone is the best device for my use case. For follow-up work, sure windows desktop tethered to my phone.
So, it's overpriced, but I pay the price anyway? There are a lot in your boat, and that is why Apple reached $1T.
During Steve Jobs time in charge new iPhones were equal in price or cheaper than the previous generation. It's only in recent times Apple have got greedy and increased prices year on year. Look for the interview with Steve Jobs where he states companies should be making reasonable profits and not overcharging on products. They say Apple hasn't changed since his death but the whole philosophy of the company has to be all about making money instead of focusing on the product. If they focused on that they wouldn't need to increase prices to cover sales shortfalls.
My point regarding China and India is that two of the biggest counties regard the iPhones as overpriced which his why sales are low in those countries.
Funny how they timed the removal of sales figures when iPhone sales started to decline. If iPhone sales dropped significantly that would make huge dent on their bottom line. That is why they are hiding sales figures and increasing prices on them to cover sales shortfalls. The tech inside won't increase the price by £450 like they did then they went from 7 to X.
There is devoting time and space to the camera, but 75% of the product page is ridiculous.
How much money a company makes doesn't always means they make the best products or provide the best services. Look at Amazon, they make just as much money as Apple yet their customer service is terrible and some of products they make are unreliable. I use Amazon Echo and it fails to understand even basic commands at times and is full of glitches.
What both companies benefit from is scale and size. They are so well known now that the general public automatically gravitate to them for product purchases. Not everybody is techie so when looking for a new phone they will just see alot people have Apple or Samsung so they just purchase a product from those brands without knowing much about it.
"Try to take the laptop out in the field for a full day without charging" Wasn't your comparison to laptops saying that the phone would last longer. If you need to carry a battery pack to to charge the phone then that point is mute. A laptop can also be charged via a battery pack in the field.
Exactly for all your points about how much a smartphone can do over a laptop at the end of the day you still tether it to a Windows machine. You may talk to your clients and get what they need over the phone but you will still need to complete the work on a desktop of laptop.
I can purchase products from Apple and still be critical of them. They make some good products that are easy to use. Its their business ethics by overcharging customers I'm questioning.
When I purchase an iPhone 11 Pro Max 256GB. I pay around £1040 compared to the £1299 regular price. I would say that's still £140 overpriced.
Last edited:
Want to address two points because the remainder of the post are opinions and opinions about opinions, which can be debated until the cows come home.
I don't tether my smartphone to my laptop it's the other way around. So I can use the dang laptop "in the field" where there is no wifi. My laptop needs my phone more than my phone needs my laptop. But I can always wait until I get home to complete work as that is mostly offline on a well equipped desktop.
If your laptop is more important, leave home without your phone.
The first point is patently false. The only reason the iphone 2 was cheaper than the iphone 1 was the iphone 1 in 2007 was released with a ridiculous price. Other than that up through iphone 5, the msrp of phones went up, hidden by cellular companies two year contracts.
Not opinion when its facts, but we can agree to disagree and move on.
If you're saying the laptop needs the phone more than the other way around you shouldn't need to use any form of laptop or desktop to complete your work at all. 100% smartphone only.
The iPhone to iPhone 3GS were only available on contract here in the UK if I remember correctly. When iPhone 4 launched it remained the exact same price as the 3GS here and the jump from 3GS to 4 was big.
Prices increased from 4S onwards coincidently when Tim Cook was in charge as Steve Jobs was on his deathbed. Ever since prices have been going up culminating in the ridiculous prices you see today.
So if iPhone 12 launches and costs £3000 for 64GB you'd say that's good value for money?
They do publish them every quarter when they report their financial results, eg, here, see the linked PDF in there for more details. Other people then create graphs of them over time.
Well, they barely moved at all, if anything they declined very slightly. Maybe there are things you shouldn't be so sure about without checking first.
Last edited:
It's a fact that the msrp of phones increased:
iPhone prices from the original to iPhone X
It’s official: The iPhone X is the most expensive iPhone to date. Starting at $999, the iPhone X is basically the price of two original iPhones. Smartphone prices have been on the rise for years, and Apple’s announcements today are merely the latest example of this trend. There are a variety of...
- Phone (4GB): $499
- iPhone 3G (8GB): $599
- iPhone 3GS (16GB): $599
- iPhone 4 (16GB): $599
- iPhone 4S (16GB): $649
- iPhone 5 (16GB): $649
- iPhone 5s (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6 (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6 Plus (16GB): $749
- iPhone 6s (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6s Plus (16GB): $749
- iPhone 7 (32GB): $649
- iPhone 7 Plus (32GB): $769
- iPhone 8 (64GB): $699
- iPhone 8 Plus (64GB): $799
- iPhone X (64GB): $999
You said that not me. I prioritize one over the other. I'll leave the house without a laptop, will you leave the house without a smartphone?
The above doesn't jive with your "facts". My opinion of an iphone 12 costing 3000 is irrelevant. It's what the masses think.
I stand corrected, they do publish them.
In terms of the figures themselves they could still maintain a large profit by dropping to 30% for example.
Also I don't always trust official figures from large corporations, they can be doctored and fluffed up to make them look better or to hide certain aspects. Apple has recently been in trouble for not paying taxes and had to pay back billions in Irish tax.
Sarbanes-Oxley
Citation please. They have paid all the taxes they have been legally required to pay.
It's a fact that the msrp of phones increased:
iPhone prices from the original to iPhone X
It’s official: The iPhone X is the most expensive iPhone to date. Starting at $999, the iPhone X is basically the price of two original iPhones. Smartphone prices have been on the rise for years, and Apple’s announcements today are merely the latest example of this trend. There are a variety of...venturebeat.com
- Phone (4GB): $499
- iPhone 3G (8GB): $599
- iPhone 3GS (16GB): $599
- iPhone 4 (16GB): $599
- iPhone 4S (16GB): $649
- iPhone 5 (16GB): $649
- iPhone 5s (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6 (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6 Plus (16GB): $749
- iPhone 6s (16GB): $649
- iPhone 6s Plus (16GB): $749
- iPhone 7 (32GB): $649
- iPhone 7 Plus (32GB): $769
- iPhone 8 (64GB): $699
- iPhone 8 Plus (64GB): $799
- iPhone X (64GB): $999
You said that not me. I prioritize one over the other. I'll leave the house without a laptop, will you leave the house without a smartphone?
The above doesn't jive with your "facts". My opinion of an iphone 12 costing 3000 is irrelevant. It's what the masses think.
What you just showed me proves my point, more stable pricing until the X when Tim Cook went for the jugular on price increases. I understand modest price increases, my annoyance is with the X onwards mainly. Increases here and there and some stability is ok, not like in recent years when not only the iPhones have jumped massively in price but everything in the line up with no compelling reason.
iPhone 3G - 4 identical pricing despite big leaps in technology. iPhone 4S through to 6 same pricing for 4 years on the trot despite increase in screen sizes and technology. Price drop between the 6-6S an S generation upgrade you deem to be massive upgrades. How do you explain new technology and a price drop when prices are supposed to rise for new tech?
I do leave the house on occasion without any technology at all. Sometimes I take just a laptop others just a phone. When on holiday I can go a few days without using my phone at all.
You are one of the masses so your opinion would be relevant. If iPhone 12 launches for £3000/$3000 for 64GB you would say that's ok because its new and acceptable?
[automerge]1588108353[/automerge]
If you believe everything a big corporation feeds you then you are naive. Every company in the world is supposed to follow rules and laws yet many are constantly found in violation of them. If companies want to be truly transparent they should disclose everything, R&D costs, wages, complete breakdown of sales etc. Prove to the customer you're not trying to rob them with high prices.
Google it, it was all over the news. They were ordered by the court to pay back £11bn plus additional interest in unpaid Irish taxes from 2004-2014.
With its cash reserves and revenue its nothing but greed driving exorbitant price increases of late.
Last edited:
What the list proves is that Steve didn't keep prices flat and the proportional increase under Tim is constant. There was no massive price increase.
I wouldn't buy an iphone 12 for that price, and I wouldn't buy a Galaxy Note for $1500 either.
I don’t see these “exorbitant price increases of late”. What I mostly see is price decreases, driven in large part by a drop in component costs. (Just as price increases are caused by higher costs.)
To some extent, the recent cost decreases are also driven by higher profits in Apple’s services category. That has allowed Apple to drop their gross margin for hardware down into the 32% range.
Steve Jobs kept a price constant from 3G to 4. 4S-6 was still under Steve Jobs contingency plans so Tim probably didn't want to rock the boat of their most successful product and biggest revenue earner which is why he probably kept the same price.
Once that 5 year plan was over nothing new was in the pipeline so prices went up again. I said those modest increases were acceptable. Its from the X onwards that prices have gone crazy. I paid £819 for my iPhone 7 Plus. The following year the X came out for £1149 a £330 increase.
Your picking and choosing. Price from iPhone 1 to iPhone 5 went up. There is no merit to your argument. And with the SE 2020, it’s at a nice price point.
£5499 for a Mac Pro, £4599 for a monitor without a stand which costs £1000 extra. This item alone is exorbitant pricing. £1499 for an iPhone 11 Pro Max 512GB. None of these items are worth the price.
That is true Apple is making more profits in its services category, hopefully they will cause hardwire prices to fall back across more lines. At the moment the only decreases I have seen are in the lower end iPhones and the MacBook Air.
Too much product fragmentation exists. It was much better when there were only 2 iPhone models, 2 iPads etc and that's it. More phones means they can target the lower end of the market but also gives them an opportunity to make the 'Pro' range of products which I see just as an excuse to charge more money. For instance instead of AirPods Pro just have one set of Airpods and the AirPods Pro is now the only set you can buy and each iteration replaces the other at those price points with modest fluctuation here and there.
Another example is the iPhone 11 and 11 Pro. There was no need for two 11 lines. Just put everything used in the Pro and call it just the iPhone 11.
Prices increased moderately and stabilised for a few years before maybe moving up or decreasing as the case was with the 6-6S. In the UK this translated to roughly £50 increase per year up until the X which increased £330. From £50 increase to £330. Prices should have stayed constant for the XS and 11 Pro at least after such a big leap since there were no significant upgrades in that time.
Theres plenty of merit to my argument, its you who chooses and cherry picks which of my points you respond to having ignored the majority of them, probably because they were all correct.
The SE is an ok price point considering they recycled a 3 year old phones parts. What would have been better is if they turned the XR into the SE and sold it at £419.
You are cherry-picking “facts” to make the discussion. iPhone 1 through iPhone 5: $499 to $649. iPhone 5s through iPhone X: $649 through $999. 13 years in total. Steve Jobs 6 years , Tim Cook 7 years. Price increases through both, except for the SE 2020, which has all new electronics, save for the display and some other parts.
As far as the differences since the X there were substantial upgrades that merited price increases. The definition of what constitutes “substantial “ is personal and subjective, so we won’t agree.
Wow you’re all over the place.
1) The Mac Pro is mostly for professionals. It’s built for a certain target market that is willing to pay for its features. Its existence isn’t relevant to the 98-99% who don’t need it. Same applies to the XDR display. “Not worth the price” is your value judgment, and not relevant to those who buy it.
2) Price decreases were seen in the 16” MBP and recently the mini as well, not just MacBook Air.
3) There is not too much “fragmentation”, by which it seems you mean choice of models. It was not better when there was only one or two models to choose from. Prices at lower and higher prices than a “mainstream” model (e.g. iPhone 11 or iPad Air) is ideal. One size doesn’t fit all.
The Mac suffers from only having two tiers instead of three in both the MacBook (Air vs. Pro, no mid tier) and desktop (Mac mini vs. Mac Pro) lineup.
4) Why would you want the mainstream iPhone 11 discontinued? Then we’d be left with an entry level $400 SE and a $1,000+ iPhone Pro. That’s too big a gap. The $700 mid-tier is a critical price point, and is where most customers buy.
Last edited:
iPhone 1-5 increased the price by £50-100 in the UK over 6 years. iPhone 5S through to the 7 was around £50-£100 price increase bar the 6S which went down slightly. 7-X £330 price increase in one generation. The beginning of the exorbitant pricing strategy as iPhone sales decline.
Not just my opinion most reviews out there said if you have a XS or X don't buy the iPhone 11 Pro there's hardly any difference bar the one extra wide angle camera. Cant even say its a special camera it a bog standard wide angle lens. Nothing to justify another price increase from Apple here in the UK over the XS Max pricing which itself didn't justify a price increase over the X.