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 Models Rumored to Be More Expensive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not really. When I am done with my iPhone it gets handed down to someone in the family, same with all my 'old' tech. If batteries need to be replaced after 3-5 years, so be it but at least I/we own it.
Perpetually paying for something you will never ever own and must return is idiotic, especially for personal tech.
I feel the same. And yet people do it with cars and music too. It’s madness to me. Pay to rent something forever instead of buying to keep and saving money.
It's not that straightforward. There are tradeoffs. My key ones are noted here:
If you own it
- PLUS lower total cost of ownership
- NEGATIVE cranky ass phone that the vendor doesn't care about after 3 years (that happens with iOS as well)
- NEGATIVE moment AppleCare is gone you are on the hook for all repairs / problems, if you even decide to pay for that up front.
- NEGATIVE immediate cash flow impact when you need to buy/replace it.
- PLUS New phone every 2 years
- PLUS Always under AppleCare which limits risk exposure.
- NEGATIVE more expensive
Maybe, but thing is, everything has an end. Resources are finite, world is changing very fast, more and more people worldwide are struggling even for basic needs, and there is no viable solution in sight at the moment.
I'm not saying this is going to happen tomorrow, but you can't squeeze a dry lemon indefinitely. At some moment it's got to stop, that vicious circle of heavy consumerism and stretching beyond real financial limits (for consumers), and keeping insane profit margins (for companies).
There needs to be a distinction between Apple Care and Apple Care Plus. One is an extended warranty and the other is an insurance policy.
The extended warranty is of dubious value in both scenarios because a) there are statutory consumer protections that trump any warranty and b) if a device works after a year, it’ll likely continue working, especially if it has few mechanical parts.
Poverty will go up, demand will fall, prices will go down, poverty will go down, demand will go up, prices will rise. Rinse and repeat.
It's too early to tell whether Amazon made the right choice in acquiring MGM, and Youtube with NFL. And too often, people conflate innovation with big, flashy acquisitions or shiny new tech designed to grab headlines more than provide a great user experience.
I also don't think those companies add much to Apple's overall strategy. Not saying that Apple's strategy is necessarily the right one, but suffice to say that Apple does have a long term roadmap, and they remain disciplined enough to not be distracted by huge flashy acquisitions that don't contribute to this strategy.
Take video streaming for instance. I believe the goal of TV+ is to get people to use the TV app. In this context, a back catalogue isn't useful (the purpose is more to retain existing subscribers, while Apple wants to grow its subscriber base, and it has Apple One to increase stickiness).
What Apple has opted to do is continue to bet on quality content, one of which has already won an Oscars. The only thing that would have been of value to Apple would be MGM's IP (which Apple can use to launch new shows in order to attract more subs), but given that MGM was intent on bundling the back catalogue in the deal, $10 billion was likely far more than what Apple was willing to shell out. And at the end of the day, you don't necessarily need to leverage on someone else's IP in order to tell a good story.
Same with Activision, where their gaming library wouldn't have made sense given the thrust and focus of Apple Arcade, which in their own words, "is designed to appeal to people who like videogames but aren’t likely to play console or desktop games and who would rather pay a monthly fee than be interrupted by ads or In-App Purchases."
Apple Arcade Has Carved Out a Unique Niche in the Videogame Market, but Is It Sustainable?
With the introduction of the App Store, mobile gaming took off, quickly becoming the number one driver of revenue for the store. By the time Apple Arcade was released, more than a decade later, mobile games were dominated by free-to-play titles supported with ads or In-App-Purchases, virtual...www.macstories.net
With live sports, I view Apple losing NFL Sunday Ticket rights by remaining disciplined as to its demands is a positive development. It would be worrying if Apple were to suddenly start throwing around large sums of money for live sports programming (which they would likely never make back) while compromising on ways to stand out in the marketplace. I believe this will become even more crucial as bidding wars for live sports look to become even more intense so Apple doesn't end up paying more than they should because of FOMO.
A lot of what Apple does makes sense when we first start with Apple, then look outwards.
Nah. They are way too conservative. They get into markets make a big song a dance about them and then dabble while the competition leave them behind.
They were clearly interested in Sunday ticket but they were outflanked by companies who are serious about being in live TV streaming.
Looking forward to how that is received. A 3k device in the current economy in a market that the average person isn't remotely interested in. Could be interesting.
If Apple believe in the younger generation, they wouldn’t be increasing the prices of their devices to the levels they are. You need to have a significant disposable income to warrant paying £1200+ for a phone these days and I don’t know many teens or twenty-somethings that spend that type of money. Most of the people in their 20’s and 30’s I know are using older devices. It’s the people in their late 30’s, 40’s+ who seem to be the Pro users in my part of the World. The younger consumers have grown up with smartphones and are savvy enough to know you don’t need to spend over a grand to get a phone that does essentially the same thing as every other smartphone in essence.
Except Apple didn’t lower prices when
you are right. People are speaking about inflation, but only Apple is raising prices that way.
Yeah they would likely be very happy with an iPhone SE, or second hand older generation phone. But that’a the beauty of having products at different price points, to cover all scenarios.
Eur/USD rate changed over the year but Apple didn’t lower the price.
I think the argument though is there is a significant market for people who are happy to pay £700-£1000 for an iPhone, but Apple are not committed to producing an attractive product in this segment any longer. Old hardware, recycled aesthetics and the expectation these people will just be satisfied when the market has other attractive alternatives. Why would people buy an old dual camera design iPhone for £849+ when carriers can give you an Android device that competes against an iPhone Pro on specs for £100 cheaper and with less upfront cost? That’s the reality of the market right now and why we are seeing Android becoming popular amongst iPhone users. This might not be the case in America, but certainly here in Europe.
Every year Apple squeeze a bit more, and they will continue to do so until demand starts to fall. They are pushing consumers into spending practically their life savings on products, and that will continue until consumers wise up finally decide to stick with older tech as long as it does what they need, rather then upgrade for the sake of having the newest model (which is only a minor upgrade from the previous year and hardly worth the extra cost). You can't blame Apple for pushing and making huge profits though, it's business after all and they have investors to please.
I am fortunate enough to have disposable income, so I could change my phone every year outright, yet the price to upgrade ratio is just so low now that I really do not see the point. I'm sticking with my 13 Pro Max for another year, until an upgrade actually feels like an upgrade.
I am fortunate enough to have disposable income, so I could change my phone every year outright, yet the price to upgrade ratio is just so low now that I really do not see the point. I'm sticking with my 13 Pro Max for another year, until an upgrade actually feels like an upgrade.
The prices should go up for a "Pro" phone. All those "pro" phone calls will sound better and all those "pro" photographers will finally be able to ditch their DSLR's. Now when surfing the web I can load "pro" websites better on top of "pro" texting and "pro" emailing. You gotta pay big so you can be a real pro on your phone.
Is android becoming more popular amongst iPhone owners? We do occasionally get European smartphone market figures and I don’t recall a story to that effect recently (in fact the last one I read in January 2022 was that Apple’s market share hit new highs in Europe).
Buyers consider more than just the price of the physical hardware when purchasing a product.
Apple do have products in the £700-£1000 range. We will likely see them as the most popular devices after the pro models.
That's wrong on both accounts.
Firstly AppleCare is an enhanced warranty that gets you prioritised service and reduced price accidental damage repairs. Also in some jurisdictions with poor consumer protection (US in particular) it acts as a warranty extension. As always it's a hedge against other probabilistic outcomes.
Secondly, that isn't even remotely true. There is a bathtub curve on failures. That doesn't magically hit zero and stay there, just decrease in probability for a period of time. And you don't know what the curve looks like until the entire line of devices is out on the market. Look at the whole butterfly keyboard debacle for example.
The issue in the UK with that £700-£1000 range is that you used to be able to get into the flagships models for those prices. Now it only gets you a standard device. Other EU countries have it even worse.
Yep, we have a very high rate of inflation in the UK. The iPhone 7 Plus was released at £669 in 2016, which is now £835. The iPhone X was released in 2017 at £999, which is now £1216. The iPhone 5 was released in 2012 at £529, which is now £695.
The 7 plus price now gets you an iPhone 14, the X price gets you an iPhone 14 Pro Max and 5 price gets you a 13 mini.
It’s quite clever what Apple have done. The flagship product from one year has always been replaced by a better product the following year with the equivalent price. But Apple occasionally add another even higher end product at a new higher price.
Last edited:
All of which wouldn't be as much of an issue if wages actually rose in line with inflation.
That’s a problem between you and your employer
Whilst true it's also a problem across a lot of job sectors. You've only got to look at the news to see the strikes by NHS and Rail workers. When someone working in the NHS or the care sector can earn more working on a till in Aldi it shows the system doesn't work.
As an NHS worker, I have taken pay cuts over the years, effectively.