No decision have been taken yet, but I’m hearing an emergency board meeting has been scheduled. The loss of $1099 in sales would be a hammer blow for AAPL investors.
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.
iPhone 15 Pro Max Likely to Start at $1,199 to $1,299, Says Analyst
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No decision have been taken yet, but I’m hearing an emergency board meeting has been scheduled. The loss of $1099 in sales would be a hammer blow for AAPL investors.
Wait is that a thing the the EU requires? First time I hear this, where did you get that info from?
4 years in my case! Used to have the urge to update every year. Now I will hold onto to my iPhone 12 Pro Max for yet another year. 16 PM sounds more promising.
Hardware is not even the main reason for me to upgrade honestly. Back in the day you would need the latest iPhone to take advantage of the latest and greatest iOS features (Siri being 4S exclusive for example) but now its like eh it really does not matter if I use iOS 17 on my iPhone 12 Pro Max or 14
I can see the cable going from the box as soon as the iPhone goes USBC. The EU certainly want the cable gone.
I doubt they would do that for a few generations. They already have to get some iPhone users used to USB-C on iPhone 15 and I am sure this will already piss off enough people as it is and many people will not have a USB-C cable yet (only lighting from previous iPhones).
Apple will simply offer the USBC cable as an extra when users purchase the phone (the same way they do with the charging brick at present).
This is a symptom of the keeping up with the Jones' mentality. My advice: change their environment and social circle, if that's what it takes.
Some of the protestations here are right out of Looney Town.
Last edited:
It’s completely alien to me the idea of buying a product just because a company has made it and released it and then complaining about how much it costs and what it does/doesn’t do!
If a product doesn’t do what I want or costs more than I can afford/want to spend, I simply won’t get it.
No, you didn’t explain anything. You are just naming random things and then saying “causes costs to go up.” It’s fantasy land but oh well.
IP68 with X meters submerged for Y hours etc. SIM is already integrated into the PCB, as is wireless charging. The result: build quality now is on another level completely, as is the support.It's crazy to think how many items you used to get when purchasing an iPhone back in the day. Fast forward to today, and you get less than half of the stuff you see in the photo below. Half of the asking price too!
How times have changed!
As a metric, compare the iPhone with the Android models: they just can't compete on build quality, experience, support, privacy, longevity.
If pro max starts at 256GB the 200 increase sounds about right.
Let's assume this does cost extra. So what? iPhone is already more expensive than most competition. $800 iPhone 14 is beaten by $500 Pixel 7 in almost every aspect including repairability. Shouldn't that $300 price difference warrant all the extras already, including access to parts and no restrictions on their installation?
Google Play still accounts for roughly third of mobile spending revenues. All the giant companies like King, Blizzard, Microsoft, EA etc. are still there; even Apple is there, and it's possible to subscribe for Apple Music using Google Play billing.
Sure, Epic left the stores; they also lost all the advantages of being showcased in the default platform store, seamless billing, updates, etc. It's their choice and I'm glad they have it on Android. Just like it's my choice to ignore Fortnite because I'm too lazy to go to their website or whatever (and because I'm more of a Nintendo kind of person
).Google Play and App Store screw over customers like me & you by being the default and the only; they must have at least possibility of competition in order to stay sane, relevant, and, well, competitive.
Another point to think of: I don't really care what Xbox is up to, but their flagship console is priced at $500, which means that Sony should also strive for $500 price point, otherwise they'd lose the market. It's fine to dislike the competitors of your favourite products; but you have to appreciate their existence in the first place. Same with potential mobile stores, I guess.
But of course, it does. Both Windows & macOS have to account for third-party software as a norm. That's why they have immense security measures in place, like more advanced permission model, sandboxing, core isolation, memory integrity checks, notarisation process, secure booting, etc. Desktop operating systems are secure by design, and not because they are restricted to run software from a single store with people personally checking every application submitted.
iPhone that's designed with sideloading in mind will benefit from enhanced security measures to accommodate third-party apps, that's not debatable.
Oh, and people came up with perfect solution to distribute software from multiple sources decades ago. Ever heard of package management on Linux and the idea of repositories? If your first thought about sideloading is «it would be inconvenient to have multiple stores», then you're simply used to Apple delivering barely working and conceptually flawed software.
I think it would be cool if Apple included MagSafe cable with every iPhone, especially since it's an industry standard nowadays. But axing charging cable altogether — no thank you. That effectively raises the price of the phone by another $50; robbery in plain sight.
Speed is a concern; Wi-Fi 6E is around three times slower than a decade-old USB 3.0 interface. And AirDrop is incompatible with Windows machines, so it's useless anyway; we can continue this part of the discussion after Apple, Google, and Microsoft create an interoperable file exchange standard, which they inevitably will.
Apple did USB 3.0 for the host device, but there's still no way to transfer files to PC at reasonable speeds; there never was a Lightning to USB 3 cable. And they have no excuse when $500 Pixel 7 supports USB-C at 3.0 speeds.
Something that even latest Beats headphones have. Basically, a way to transmit digital lossless audio; it's supported by most modern speakers, headphones, DACs, etc. iPhone is the only device on the market which can't take advantage of that.
Last edited:
Apple want to position the Pro Max as the iPhone 'Ultra' so $1299 is not as unlikely as you may think.
I always think of this when prices go up....
The value of a 2007 iPhone in today's money would have been about $1,030.07. Imagine Ballmer with this price!!!
The value of a 2007 iPhone in today's money would have been about $1,030.07. Imagine Ballmer with this price!!!
I miss the $599 iPhones. I have no desire to drop $1300 for a new iPhone. I don't even need a new iPhone.
was thinking exactly that, while sure it sucks, a 10% increase at the end of a 6 years streak is definitely under inflation.
I mean, eggs, chips and bananas have gone many times fold that in just over a year around where I live! And there totally is less product in packaged goods.
I think Apple already test those prices in Europe with the iPhone 14 line. Inflation, exchange rate bla bla bla. It was all about this, testing how the market could answer and then implement it in the US.
The original iPhone’s build quality is second to none. Also, the support you could argue, was better back then.
Honestly, if you can’t add an improvement without increasing the price, then just don’t add it. $50 for parts for a short-range periscope len? And for what? To save a few steps forward? The camera will default to a digital-zoomed main lens anyway with even mildly low light so what’s the point
Yep. People love to whinge about Apple's pricing but conveniently factor out inflation when they do so.