Abazigal
Contributor
Because under the old 16/32/64 arrangement, you would have been spending the extra $100 anyways. How are you any worse off now?
'iPhone 6s' Logic Board Suggests 16GB Base Model and Updated NFC Hardware
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think people buy the price point. Apple creates a product that fits that price point and their margin profile. If they offered 16GB or 32GB at the same price point, sales would be the same. But there is a percentage of people that sees the value of spending $100 more for 48GB more storage and is willing to stretch to make it happen.
That extra $100 has helped increase ASPs for Apple in the iPhone 6 cycle.
sunking101
macrumors 604
That's all well and good. I own a 64GB 6+ And had a 32GB iPhone 5 before this but I can still complain that Apple have been using 16GB of storage and 1GB of RAM for years!
We all know that Apple are greedy and they can continue to be greedy as long as people buy their products....but they still need to kit their 'premium' devices out with 2015 specs. Otherwise they're just selling outdated kit designed for previous generations. Slapping a fast processor in and Touch ID doesn't a cutting edge device make. We shouldn't have to pay extra in order to upgrade storage to 2015 specs. Don't get me started on RAM...
sunking101
macrumors 604
Because we're in mid-2015 now and tech has moved on. The base level of storage for a premium smartphone is now 32GB.
cfedu
Suspended
Appple will still sell it if not one person buys the 16 gb iPhone. As long as people are willing to pay an extra 100$ for the 64gb iPhone, they will still make the 16gb. Apple wants money an d the average selling price of iphones are at an all time high. If people stop buying iphones apple will stop making the 16 gb iphones.
Abazigal
Contributor
Even if I agree with you that Apple is technically "selling outdated kit designed for previous generations", so what? Is there some law stating the minimum specs a smartphone should have in 2015?
Why can't you all just pretend that the 16gb model doesn't exist and that the 64gb iPhone is the new entry level model at $299? A 2gb ram / 64 gb storage iPhone 6S sounds about premium by 2015 standards. If you need only 32gb of storage, then why don't you start changing your usage habits and start experimenting with how you might want to start making use of all that extra space? This is the most ironic thing I have seen all day - everybody wants someone else to change (to suit their own needs and wants), yet nobody wants to change themselves.
I would love for Apple to stop making the 16gb iPhone and make 64gb the new entry level model. Wouldn't that be the perfect way to both stop the criticism about iPhones not having sufficient base storage, and serve as a slap in the face of all the critics whining for a cheaper 32gb base model?
I know I am probably being snide and rude here, but there's just something about the way people are whining about the base 16gb model which simply rubs me the wrong way. Like the way people complained when Apple gave away free apps during Christmas and those weren't the apps and songs they wanted. Let's face it - Yes, Apple is probably "greedy" in the sense that they know such a pricing scheme will entice more people to purchase the 64gb model and increase the profit margins. I don't deny that and I still continue using and purchasing their products because for me, the utility I get have paid for themselves many times over. But how are the people clamouring for a base 32gb version any more "righteous"? At the end of the day, their motivation is simply that they want to save some money as well. What is that, if not greed as well?
There's less of a justification to spend an extra $100.
Before, I would have felt confident that my $100 was being put to good use. The benefit of the extra space was enough to warrant the extra $100.
However, I don't need 4 times the space. I barely need 2 times, so having to pay $100 to go from 16 to 64 just doesn't seem worth it to me. I'd rather save a $100 and manage then feel like I'm wasting it, since a majority of that 64 isn't going to be used anyways. It's a better deal on the surface, but the even better deal is to just make 32GB the standard.
Not only, if they had the 32GB model before, then there's no reason they CAN'T make that the entry level model.
Because first off it does, and secondly, a $199 model is exactly what gets people to buy the iPhone. Most people I know buy the $199 because they see it and go "ooh! I have that money! I can get an iPhone!". If you were to eliminate a $199 price point entirely:
1) Sales would go down - there are plenty of Android phones that already are objectively more powerful and diverse for less, and many of the flagships start at $199 as well.
2) The amount of complaining (which irks you so much) would SKYROCKET.
Secondly, consumers should be forced to adapt to the business, the business should adapt to the customer. They are providing the products and services, so what matters is customer feedback. If the majority of customers are saying they want x, logically the response should be "We appreciate the feedback, we'll see what we can do" not "nah, you just change your habits!" It's one thing if they can't, due to lack of resources, interest, cost, or so forth, but I really doubt in this case that's true.
Why are you so against making a 32GB entry level model, may I ask? It has no negative effects on anybody (except the people who bought a 16GB model the day before).
Last edited:
sunking101
macrumors 604
Wanting what ALL the other competitors spec their phones with is not greed. Apple charge top dollar for their phones and they market them as being the best. So with all that in mind, I expect sufficient storage space and reasonable multitasking capabilities at least similar to the competition. The best phone should be at least similar to the competition, no? It should of course be better but even allowing for marketing BS, it should be as good as the rest. 16GB base level storage and 1GB of RAM is pathetic even for a mid-range smartphone these days. As for the $299 pricing for a 64GB model, my 6+ in the UK cost me £699 (1082$). The 'upgrade' to 64GB cost me 152$ by itself and I'm sorry but now that iOS is every bit as buggy as Android and seeing how the 6+ can't multitask for poop, all this expense is just seeming foolish now. Apple need to step up their game before they go the way they did before Jobs' second coming.
Abazigal
Contributor
Then it seems the issue here is not so much Apple's current pricing model, but your own inability to change your own mindset.
I agree that there is no reason Apple can't make 32gb the entry level model. As as there is technically nothing stopping Apple from giving away free icloud storage equal to the internal storage of their iOS devices, or bundling a free iPad with every iPhone purchase, or make Apple Music free forever, or suddenly offering a 50% discount on all their hardware, or a dozen other things that Apple theoretically could do because they have all that billions in the bank.
The point here is that Apple doesn't need to do anything of these things. The world is not going to suddenly stop spinning on its axis if the next iPhone still starts out at 16 gb, the company is not going to collapse (and will likely continue to rake in record profits).
EricTheHalfBee
Suspended
Says who? You? You speak for the entire industry?
Considering Apple sells more than twice as many premium phones as Samsung, HTC, LG and Motorola COMBINED, then I'd say the industry standard right now is 16/64/128, which is what Apple sells.
sunking101
macrumors 604
Why do you defend it so? It seems like you actively enjoy being ripped off and having to pay extra for things you can get inclusive elsewhere. I see Samsung, SONY, HTC and LG etc moving with the times and staying on the cusp of new tech. Thus they are defining the industry standards in my book. They may not sell as many phones as Apple but there are many different phone models out there that have a more modern spec.
The power of the Apple logo.
Abazigal
Contributor
Yes, because Apple never sold any under specced products under Steve Job's watch? The 2011 MBA came with just 2gb of ram for the entry level model (while the other variants had 4gb across the board). The first gen iPad had just 256mb of ram.
It's not that I get some perverse pleasure out of being ripped off, it simply doesn't irritate me (or at least not enough to get me all riled up into a rant here on this forums). I am not getting ripped off either; I never go with less than 64gb and Apple's current offering is every bit to my benefit (because I save $100 compared to before) and nowhere to my detriment.
The iPhone has always been a package deal. It's specs will never, pound-for-pound, match what the rest of the competition is offering. You are never going to be getting 4gb of ram, or a 20 MP camera, or 8 processor cores, or some niche feature like a rotating camera or an inbuilt projector anytime soon. The consolation is that iOS generally runs better on lesser hardware (this was less true for iOS 8, which was clearly rushed out to support the launch of the Apple Watch, though I expect iOS 9 to fix many of those issues), and Apple's tight-knit and closely integrated ecosystem is virtually unmatched if you are deeply invested enough.
And on the flip side, all those specs don't necessarily result in a better user experience for Android smartphones either. The HTC M9's camera still sucks despite having a higher-MP camera. The G4 is prone to excessive heat / throttling. Software issues continue to plague the S6. You will be hard-pressed to find a phone that is superior to the iPhone in every conceivable aspect, because every area the OEM chooses to emphasise on in turn means one area that they invariable have to compromise on. How are you defining industry standards when apps aren't even optimised for that many cores, or merchants refuse to support NFC payments?
And if it is more specs you want, then switch to an Android smartphone. Maybe you will be happier then, and I will be happy that you get a phone that you enjoy using as well. Apple has always marched to its own beat while not caring 2 hoots about what the rest of the competition is doing, and that is always what I have admired about them.
I would love for Apple to stop making the 16gb iPhone and make 64gb the new entry level model. Wouldn't that be the perfect way to both stop the criticism about iPhones not having sufficient base storage, and serve as a slap in the face of all the critics whining for a cheaper 32gb base model?
I know I am probably being snide and rude here, but there's just something about the way people are whining about the base 16gb model which simply rubs me the wrong way. Like the way people complained when Apple gave away free apps during Christmas and those weren't the apps and songs they wanted. Let's face it - Yes, Apple is probably "greedy" in the sense that they know such a pricing scheme will entice more people to purchase the 64gb model and increase the profit margins. I don't deny that and I still continue using and purchasing their products because for me, the utility I get have paid for themselves many times over. But how are the people clamouring for a base 32gb version any more "righteous"? At the end of the day, their motivation is simply that they want to save some money as well. What is that, if not greed as well?[/QUOTE]
I shouldn't be required to cater to a company. Like I said, the status of a healthy company is one that caters to the needs of its consumers.
It's ridiculous that you should tell me I need to "change my mindset". Why should I do that? Should I just start taking pictures of everything I don't want to? Should I start downloading apps I don't want to use?
Like I said, 16GB is barely anything for me, or many others to get by, and at the same time, a $100 increase to 64GB isn't enough to justify the purchase, giving us either the choice of 16GB or a different device.
Another thing, your argument is completely invalid. In the most literal sense, yes, they could bundle a free iPad with every phone, but that scenario doesn't equate at all to changing storage configurations. It's not about "Apple should do it because they have millions", it's about "Apple should do it because its in the consumers best interest with little to no damage to our company". Apple would see insane profit drops from bundling a free iPad with every purchase or matching iCloud storage to the device storage, and record labels would prevent them from Making Apple Music free forever. However, there's very little financial damage to making 32GB the default configuration. In fact, that could BOOST iPhone sales, as people who want more space but can't justify spending $299, so they go to a cheaper Android phone with more storage (plus expandable mind you) will now have a reason to consider the iPhone again.
Nobody ever said they needed to, people are just saying they should. It's in the consumers best interest (even more so when you consider the fact that competitors have already been doing this for years).
Just because someone doesn't NEED to do something, doesn't mean it's not a good idea to.
I know I am probably being snide and rude here, but there's just something about the way people are whining about the base 16gb model which simply rubs me the wrong way. Like the way people complained when Apple gave away free apps during Christmas and those weren't the apps and songs they wanted. Let's face it - Yes, Apple is probably "greedy" in the sense that they know such a pricing scheme will entice more people to purchase the 64gb model and increase the profit margins. I don't deny that and I still continue using and purchasing their products because for me, the utility I get have paid for themselves many times over. But how are the people clamouring for a base 32gb version any more "righteous"? At the end of the day, their motivation is simply that they want to save some money as well. What is that, if not greed as well?[/QUOTE]
I shouldn't be required to cater to a company. Like I said, the status of a healthy company is one that caters to the needs of its consumers.
It's ridiculous that you should tell me I need to "change my mindset". Why should I do that? Should I just start taking pictures of everything I don't want to? Should I start downloading apps I don't want to use?
Like I said, 16GB is barely anything for me, or many others to get by, and at the same time, a $100 increase to 64GB isn't enough to justify the purchase, giving us either the choice of 16GB or a different device.
Another thing, your argument is completely invalid. In the most literal sense, yes, they could bundle a free iPad with every phone, but that scenario doesn't equate at all to changing storage configurations. It's not about "Apple should do it because they have millions", it's about "Apple should do it because its in the consumers best interest with little to no damage to our company". Apple would see insane profit drops from bundling a free iPad with every purchase or matching iCloud storage to the device storage, and record labels would prevent them from Making Apple Music free forever. However, there's very little financial damage to making 32GB the default configuration. In fact, that could BOOST iPhone sales, as people who want more space but can't justify spending $299, so they go to a cheaper Android phone with more storage (plus expandable mind you) will now have a reason to consider the iPhone again.
Nobody ever said they needed to, people are just saying they should. It's in the consumers best interest (even more so when you consider the fact that competitors have already been doing this for years).
Just because someone doesn't NEED to do something, doesn't mean it's not a good idea to.
EricTheHalfBee
Suspended
Why do you criticize it so? Because you have a narrow minded view of tech and anything outside your opinion is to be ridiculed? All I've seen you do is bash Apple, including some outrageous claims. For example, "every bit as buggy as Android and can't multitask for poop."
First off, I multitask regularly with my 6+ as do my kids. Not sure how you could make such a ridiculous statement.
Second, where is your source for iOS being as buggy as Android? Or do you like to make things up to support your point of view?
There's nothing wrong with criticizing a product that has a shortcoming. But listening to you the 6/6+ are the biggest POS phones ever made and are so full of issues they're barely usable. You don't appear to be in this discussion to actually have a discussion, rather you're behaving like a concern troll.
BTW, how am I getting ripped off exactly? My iPhone 6+ does more than any Ther smartphone out there can do, so I'm having a hard time seeing how I got "ripped off".
EricTheHalfBee
Suspended
The power of facts.
sunking101
macrumors 604
You lucked out then because getting 64GB via one upgrade pricing tier means that you're saving money. Anyone who would normally buy 64GB over the old 32GB offering has benefitted. It still doesn't give Apple a 'get out of jail free' card because they have catered only for those who spend big on storage. They aren't offering anything to that massive portion of people who find 16GB too little but don't need more than 32GB. When the rest of the premium smartphone industry has moved to 32GB base levels it's embarrassing for Apple that they are so stingy to follow suit. The iPhone has frankly pathetic storage and RAM spec for even a mid-range phone.
Regarding your other points, I really don't understand why Apple only targets the people who want a posh phone for SMS and Facebook and not those who want to use the phone for work or serious use. Sure 16GB and 1GB of RAM is fine for most people but then I forked out big money for a supposedly premium smartphone because I intended to use the heck out of it. I don't play games and I use very little social media, but I do browse heavily and do a lot of research on my 6+. Not being able to hold my last app in memory for more than a few minutes, or a couple of data-heavy websites is a fatal flaw for me. Even mid-range Android phones can manage this and the top of the line ones are much better still.
I used to believe in all this 'iPhones are optimised and need much less RAM than Android phones' BS, I really did. That was back in around 2012 though and since then it has become increasingly apparent that iPhones actually do need specs approaching those of an Android device. My 6+ is garbage in many respects compared to my iPhone 5 and that is thanks in no small part to the miniscule amount of onboard RAM. The i5 had more available RAM, thanks to it being 32Bit, and on top of that it had to push far fewer pixels on its tiny lo-res screen. With it being 64Bit and also having no dedicated VRAM, my 6+ has to push far more pixels on its much larger full HD screen. The result is next to zero multitasking capability, lag & stutter, and occasional freezing on data-heavy websites. For a £699 (1082$) device this is just lousy, lousy, lousy. My cheap as chips 36 month old Android tablet with 'only' 1.5GB of RAM absolutely slays my 6+ when it comes to multitasking and frustration-free web browsing.
Now I couldn't say that about my old iPhone 5. It was a champ and in my mind the last great iPhone to come out of Cupertino. With Apple having beancounters at the helm these days and rushing software out with precious little testing or care, I'm just not seeing why you guys actively defend them so strongly. The iPhone 6 and especially 6+ are a total crock in my eyes. They look nice and have swishy screens but come on, they're not up to much inside because they're crippled by beancounter decisions that saved a couple of dollars per unit. When people are spending so much on these devices then they deserve to be treated with a modicum of respect. My 6+ was intended to last me two years but sadly I'll need to upgrade it for the 6S due to it being totally unfit for purpose.
Abazigal
Contributor
You will not find a company that perfectly caters to the needs of all its customers.
Same logic here. Why is it that Apple has to be the one to change and not its customers? Take more videos. Explore new apps and discover new uses for your smartphone. Turn this extra space into an opportunity to get more out of your device, rather than an unnecessary expenditure.
Then choose a different device?
Apple just saw its average selling price increase from implementing such a pricing model last year. In the very least, we see Apple having a very strong incentive not to do so.
And the only reason here I have seen people provide is that they simply want to save some money. Do you think these people here really care about Apple's "public image" and all that crap? Not that it's wrong to want to pay less and save some money, but let's not make this sound more righteous as altruistic than it really is.
cfedu
Suspended
I don't get it either, that's why I ditched iOS. I hated Android at first, but now I really enjoy it. Make s no sense to complain that the iPhone is too expensive and continue to buy it.
EricTheHalfBee
Suspended
I'm going to have to call BS on this statement. I have loads of old Android tablets around at work (there's an excellent chance I have the same one as you).
Please tell me what Apps you were multitasking on your Android device and your 6+ so I can duplicate some tests and compare them. Or feel free to fire them both up, record a video and post it to YouTube for us to see this magical Android device you speak of.
what a joke
2009 - 3G S - VGA video recording (640 by 480) - 16GB base storage
2015 - 6s - 4K video recording (3840 by 2160) - 16GB base storage
4k on the iPhone will probably use h265 - the successor to h264 - h265 basically halves the files sizes of h264 so a 4k file won be as big as a h264 files
1gb file Using mpg2
With h264 its 500MB
Wth h265 its 250MB
sunking101
macrumors 604
Well I'm calling BS on you multitasking regularly on your 6+, unless you're switching between the Notes and Calendar apps. I cannot keep one data-heavy app in memory along with one data-heavy website. If I spend ten minutes in either and then return to the one I was in last, it will reload the vast majority of the time. It absolutely cannot be relied upon to *not* reload. Just look at the facts for goodness sake, the iPhone 5 has the same 1GB of RAM as the 6+ but because it's a 32Bit device it uses less RAM. Then to further improve matters, with no dedicated VRAM it still has an easy task pushing the pixels on its tiny lo-res screen. The 6+ however uses more RAM out of the gate purely because it's a 64Bit device. Then, to add insult to injury, with no dedicated VRAM it has to push the pixels on a mammoth HD screen. SO, coming from the iPhone 5 and the usage pattern I employed with that, it was instantly apparent that the 6+ was just lousy at multitasking. The facts speak for themselves even if my own usage pattern and beefs are obviously subjective. You cannot deny the fact that the 6+ has way less available RAM than the two generations older iPhone 5.
So I have to ask this question, should tech go backwards? It's bad enough that Apple keep the 16GB base level of storage stuck in time so to speak but should ANY of the capabilitites of a two years newer iPhone be much worse than the older phone? At the very least, any new phone should be at least as good in every single respect as the phone it replaced. How about a phone released two years before that? I would expect incremental improvements in practically every single department. Touch ID, Apple Pay and a swanky big screen don't in any way make up for a substantial multitasking downgrade and nor should anyone defend this.
indieshack
macrumors member
Apple have become cheap hucksters. Lamentable.
bgarnett
macrumors member
16GB has stopped being enough years ago. Apple ignored users demands for bigger phones for years insisting we didn't want bigger handsets, but we did. They need to set a minimum baseline of 32GB, so many apps now are a lot bigger, you only need look at their own Pages, Numbers and Keynote as fine examples of recent years bloat.