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.
Damn this man just sucked the life out of everything. What you're describing is capitalism at it's finest, and that's what makes America so great. If you want to get a new iPhone after a year and you can afford to do so, no one is stopping you!
Also, what's wrong with getting a new phone every year anyway? It's no different than leasing a new car every 3 years, it just has different terms. Very few people pay cash in full for a brand new car, and very few people pay cash in full when buying a new phone. After 3 years (depending on the level of wear and tear) that car is still
"perfectly working", so why do people feel the need to upgrade? It's not a "
requirement" to upgrade to a new car after 3 years, nor is it a "
requirement" to upgrade to a new iPhone after 1 year. You could choose to keep both your car and your phone after the "lease" is up and until you have completed financing and officially own it, but the option is there for those who want to and can afford to upgrade.
Both cars and iPhones are depreciating assets. "Never buy a depreciating asset. If it drives flies, floats, or f**ks - lease it" (yes this quote is from a TV show, but the financial advice is very sound). iPhones are depreciating assets whether you believe it or not, and they happen to depreciate at a much faster rate than cars do. You're caught up in the view that smart phones are a consumer good that people should use until it can no longer function properly. But very few people use a phone until it dies, just like very few people drive a car until the fenders fall off.
HOWEVER, most people
do use microwaves until they stop working. If you look at them as an asset (one that depending on how you purchase, how long you keep it for, and how you resell it, could be an investment) the current system makes a lot of sense. Also, smart phones are more similar to cars than they are to microwaves and toasters in that they are easier for manufacturers to upgrade every so often. The automotive industry is constantly innovating. The smart phone industry is constantly innovating. But look at a microwave industry, when was the last time you looked at a microwave and said "wow that's innovative"? They've pretty maxed out on innovation, there's only so much you can do to a microwave - hence manufacturers have taken the approach to creating the longest lasting microwave, instead of the most innovative. It's much easier to innovate when it comes to cars and smart phones, hence the greater demand for upgrading to newer models sooner.
If people want to upgrade to a new iPhone every year, let them. This is America, they are living their version of the American dream, not to mention helping the economy. If you'd prefer to keep an iPhone for a number of years and then upgrade when it stops working, that's fine, you're allowed to do that too! But know that phones are no longer standard consumer goods, they're assets and should be viewed as such. Also, it's always nice to get the newest tech!
