True, but as long as they can evoke the desire in us to own their stuff, they will be able to make a profit.
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 4S Component Costs Once Again Begin at About $188
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True, but as long as they can evoke the desire in us to own their stuff, they will be able to make a profit.
It's not a 1-to-1 comparison. SD memory is not as fast as NAND. Also, it's not possible to reach 64GB with a phone unless it comes with 32GB already (very few phones do) as microSDHC does not go beyond 32GB. If you want a fast 32GB micro SDHC card, you're looking at $60 and still not to the size of the 64GB iPhone.
Plus, there's definitely an added inconvenience of carrying and/or swapping cards.
Finally, many of the premium android phones are now being sold for $300 rather than $200 due to the inclusion of LTE. These phones don't come with more than 16GB built-in unless you count the Galaxy Nexus (not out yet). In regards to an LTE iPhone, when it comes, I don't think Apple will bump the price to $300. I would be most curious if it forces Verizon to price other LTE phones at $200 to compete.
I'm not saying $100 for each additional storage double is a 'good' deal, it's just not a clear loser to the replaceable card strategy. You have also to remember that WP7 phones don't even support SD cards. You get what is in the phone, that's it. That's usually only 16GB.
Last edited:
I'v always feel iphone is a much higher profit product compare to other lines, say ipad 2 probably cost them around $300 to produce because the cost of the larger screen, heck, even HP touchpad components cost around $300. So iphone is cheaper to build than ipad but priced more than an ipad.
If an ipod touch can be had for $200, why can't an iphone to be had for about $300 or so without a contract.
If an ipod touch can be had for $200, why can't an iphone to be had for about $300 or so without a contract.
If people accepted it things would go smoother for sure. ALL their products have a premium. People make lots of excuses and basically try to say they make very little after R&D, storage costs, manufacturing costs etc.. Truth is one day if they get pushed in the premium PC market and the iDevices start to not sell well, the truth will come straight out.
Their stuff never sits on shelves for long though so any company in their position would do the same thing.
Defend that Mac Pro price and 17' MBP as well guys
Those cases must cost a thousand bucks in your head.Oh and the 3GS is $400 still....please.
Last edited:
Free? You mean $450, which is the amount AT&T is subsidizing which goes straight to Apple? 450 is too much for a 2.5 year old phone. I won't blame Apple, I'll blame the retarded system you guys have there in the States.
Whoever is buying an iPhone 3GS right now from AT&T and thinking that it's free is an idiot.
they might hype CPU speed but they always go cheap somewhere else. the BOM's are similar across all the phones
Is it? The new android phones just announced are $299 with contract, probably similar component costs.
That's the big question for me. Compared to the tech and cost of the touch, having even the 3GS at $375 unlocked seems out of wack.
Nobody wants that much internal storage. SD card does the exact same thing for a fraction of price. 16GB costs $200 on contract which is reasonable. $400 for 64GB is twice the cost of 16GB which is too much.
Did you even read the post I was responding to? I was disputing the notion that Apple doesn't drop prices.
3GS is now free WITH CONTRACT. When it first shipped how much did it cost WITH CONTRACT?
3GS is now $375 without contract. When it first shipped how much did it cost without contract?
Either comparison proves my point, you just need to have the same with/without contract on both ends so it's an apples to apples comparison.
I think I'll let the market speak rather than take your opinion of what the market wants.
The phones that are $200+ with contract are their high end model, with the latest and greatest components for a phone.
re: Wow
Wow, people exist who still haven't realized that the iPhones don't have sockets for memory upgrades?
Yes, we're well AWARE that the additional memory isn't worth the higher prices of the larger-capacity iPhones (or iPads for that matter) -- but the usefulness of having that extra storage capacity often makes it worth buying, since there's no other feasible option. (Or do YOU offer a very inexpensive service where we can mail in our iPhones or iPads to have upgraded RAM soldered in?)
Wow, people exist who still haven't realized that the iPhones don't have sockets for memory upgrades?
Yes, we're well AWARE that the additional memory isn't worth the higher prices of the larger-capacity iPhones (or iPads for that matter) -- but the usefulness of having that extra storage capacity often makes it worth buying, since there's no other feasible option. (Or do YOU offer a very inexpensive service where we can mail in our iPhones or iPads to have upgraded RAM soldered in?)
.
Wow, people who buy 32gb and especially 64gb are not smart. They pay $100 or $200 more for same phone but extra memory only cost like $10. These peoples not good at math apparently and buy rip off model. Ha.
Lol they don't pay their employees anything.
----------
This actually wouldn't be that hard.
re: Android
Yep... and on top of that? Android phones often have apps which refuse to allow storing/running them entirely from the SD card, so they HAVE to occupy some of that limited 16GB of RAM they usually come with.
Right now, I've got an HTC Evo 4G sitting here with a "low storage space" warning constantly on the display for this very reason. The SD card in it still has about 8GB of free space, but I can't install another app because there's not even enough free internal RAM to download/uncompress another app before it copies to the SD card - even IF it's an app that will ultimately run from one.
Yep... and on top of that? Android phones often have apps which refuse to allow storing/running them entirely from the SD card, so they HAVE to occupy some of that limited 16GB of RAM they usually come with.
Right now, I've got an HTC Evo 4G sitting here with a "low storage space" warning constantly on the display for this very reason. The SD card in it still has about 8GB of free space, but I can't install another app because there's not even enough free internal RAM to download/uncompress another app before it copies to the SD card - even IF it's an app that will ultimately run from one.
Well that doesn't make the articles ridiculous. They say that they're explicitly looking at the cost of the hardware components themselves, nothing more and nothing less, so it isn't like they're misrepresenting anything here. These articles are interesting, and useful providing you understand what they represent and (as you point out) what they do not.
The authors of those articles don't pretend for one moment that the cost of the components is what the cost of the phone should be. Only stupid people think that.
If that is true (64GB pricing) I see no reason for AT&T to say I still owe them money on a phone I paid $650. I still needed a 2-year contract to cover cost of the phone to them from Apple. Even if I doubled the price of the cost of the phone@$254, that's still $508 and I paid $650. Someone is lying when it comes to subsidy(sp) pricing.
I took the people who buy 32gb and 64gb are not smart as an insult too so it was a tongue in cheek comment. There are hundreds of other products in the marketplace that follow this pricing strategy. I could say people who buy fully loaded version of a car over a base model are not smart. To each is own and what is important to one is not important to another.
It is called perceived value. The market determines the price.
Because the iPad cannot be subsidized by carriers and has a different usage model (few want a contract with a tablet). Phones are subsidized because the manufacturers can get carriers to do it. Clearly, carriers need good phones in order for their network to succeed, not just a reliable network and good customer service. Phone manufacturers know that and carriers are happy to get customers in a contract by subsidizing phone costs to mitigate customer churn.
When you look at iPad numbers, apple clearly has a healthy margin there too, but when you look at iPhone numbers and just how much of Apple's profit it makes up, it becomes apparent they are an extremely high margin product.