If AirPods will be included, does this mean that the iPhone 8 will be on a six week back order months after launch?
If AirPods will be included, does this mean that the iPhone 8 will be on a six week back order months after launch?
At first I also thought that the AirPods were outrageously priced. However, after comparing the prices of the similar quality BT headphones, and owning a pair, I changed my opinion.It'd only make sense to package AirPods with an iPhone if sales were bad and no one was paying $160 for them.
I wouldn't be a fan of an increased price partly due to included accessories which not everyone would want.
A question: Has anyone here ever heard the word receiver used for the earpiece? It sound totally strange for me and I can't find a dictionary entry that backs it up either...
If Apple does charge more than $1000 for the coming iPhone, will Wall Street still expect those tens of millions of iPhone purchasers to upgrade to a newer iPhone the following year? And if they don't, will analysts still claim it's due to Apple being unable to innovate? Why doesn't the same logic apply to toasters and microwave ovens? Use them a year and then upgrade to new ones. I honestly don't know when this requirement to upgrade products on a yearly basis started. When I was growing up 50 some odd years ago, I'm sure products tended to last a lot longer (many years) and we were quite happy to have a product last a long time. Why has that attitude changed so much? One would think with so much talk about dwindling resources consumers would be a lot smarter than to simply stop using perfectly working products just to buy slightly newer ones. I really don't understand this type of behavior.
If Apple does charge more than $1000 for the coming iPhone, will Wall Street still expect those tens of millions of iPhone purchasers to upgrade to a newer iPhone the following year?
Actually, you're probably too young to remember when a phone had two parts. The base, with its rotary dial (then eventually touch tone) and the wired "receiver." It was not unusual to say to someone "give me the receiver."
It seems odd now that it is AIO, but that's likely why they still use that terminology.
I have said previously that they are considering including AirPods.
It is the flagship iPhone, the most forward thinking and with its higher price, they are able to include them
Wall Street expects tens of millions to upgrade, but not all from the iPhone 7. I'll be trading in my iPhone 6.If Apple does charge more than $1000 for the coming iPhone, will Wall Street still expect those tens of millions of iPhone purchasers to upgrade to a newer iPhone the following year? And if they don't, will analysts still claim it's due to Apple being unable to innovate? Why doesn't the same logic apply to toasters and microwave ovens? Use them a year and then upgrade to new ones. I honestly don't know when this requirement to upgrade products on a yearly basis started. When I was growing up 50 some odd years ago, I'm sure products tended to last a lot longer (many years) and we were quite happy to have a product last a long time. Why has that attitude changed so much? One would think with so much talk about dwindling resources consumers would be a lot smarter than to simply stop using perfectly working products just to buy slightly newer ones. I really don't understand this type of behavior.
Of course your paying for them in the price and it's definitely an insentive to buy the Edition. AirPods aren't a fanboy item, they are for the majority of iPhone buyers but clearly not audiophiles or somebody that cares that much if their sound isn't perfect. I think you may fit into that category but that doesn't mean everybody does.I do hope they don't include the AirPods. The phone will be expensive enough as it is, I don't want the additional price hike for something I will throw into garbage right from the box.
[doublepost=1494155623][/doublepost]
Whether they include them or not, you are paying for them in the price. They don't just throw them in for free. Without the addition of those useless toys the price of the actual phone would be lower than it would be if they are part of the package. Apple isn't stupid even though it seems to try to make us think so every so often.
Should they include it there's less incentive for me to pay the price for the phone - I don't have any use for AirPods. I've tried them and I can't justify paying that much for mediocre sound quality and low battery life. They're small, that's one thing going for them. Then again, the Anker Soundbuds aren't much bigger and cost 1/5 of their price. And provide just as mediocre sound quality which I still can live with in gym. AirPods is a true fanboy item.
I'm not wrong, I said they are considering including them, NOT that they will.I think you're wrong now and every time in the past. It'll come in time, but one year after the release of AirPods, which are considerably more expensive than EarPods and constantly out of stock, just doesn't make sense for apple.
A little off topic, but does anyone know the App running on the iPhone in the picture to this article?
If Apple had left the phone jack on the phones, couldn't all of this engineering/marketing of wireless/lightning/dongle business have been put into more useful stuff that didn't seem to be compensating for reinvention of the wheel? Especially when the wheel was perfectly fine for its intention: output to high quality headphones and/or speakers? So far all of this stuff has mainly contributed to less sound quality and higher prices for both the phone and the wireless speaker systems. Anyway, a dead horse generally stays dead."But, if the rumor proves to be accurate, AirPods would presumably replace Apple's wired......"
there goes the wires. To me, iPhone 8 is noting but layer upon layer on small feature improvements... nothing drastic.
i think it might be EDJing Pro. The interface is very similar.