Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is the iPhone X a bargain?

Gryzor said:
Clearly the comparison to a Ferrari is flawed.
Click to expand...
Actually its dead on.

Using your logic, a Ferrari is a bargain because of all the great features.

Yes, the iPhone X has some great features, but its priced at a premium, there's no dancing around that. You need to do logical gymnastics to try to justify the position that the X is a bargain at 1,000 dollars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KONVICTED and pl1984
Gryzor said:
Eh? I think you're the one with the terribly flawed logic. Whether something is a bargain or not has everything to do with both initial price and the amount of use you get out of it over time.

Why should your toilet cost you $15,000?! lol It costs $150 or whatever, so it's cheap anyway. The cost-per-use over two years for that toilet depends on how bad your health is. So maybe it costs you £2 per hour of use, that's still a bargain. Really not sure where your flawed logic came from and the maths that resulted in your toilet costing $15,000.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t exact math. I’m just saying my iPhone is non-essential and will cease being useful far before my car or toilet would. So to say that it makes more sense to buy a $1000 phone over buying a car is not a correct comparison.
 
macher said:
Larger screen is a fact but it depends on the individual right? An individual might not want a larger screen. An individual might prefer the smaller screen on the 8. The fact is X screen is better OLED. Just compare an 8 screen to an X.

Just because a screen is better doesn’t mean anything per an individual even though it’s bigger lol. There are people who still embrace the SE. smaller screen but not as good as the X screen quality.

Take a chill pill. Take a deep breath...
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't depend on the individual. You are totally missing the point. A larger screen is a larger screen is a larger screen, regardless of colour or creed. Now, whether an individual PREFERS a larger screen, that is their opinion, but that's not what's being discussed here. The fact is, the extra £300 for the X goes towards getting you a larger screen than the 8.

When it comes to OLED vs LCD, while I'm an advocate of OLED having two TVs at home and now the X, no, being OLED does not automatically mean better. When it comes to screens and colour perception and refresh rates etc., that is very much a personal preference. To a certain technical level you claim OLED has better contrast and more accurate colour reproduction, but that does not make it "better".

No need for the health advice thanks, just pointing out your errors that you clearly acknowledge with your defensive digs.
[doublepost=1510926754][/doublepost]
boshii said:
Wasn’t exact math. I’m just saying my iPhone is non-essential and will cease being useful far before my car or toilet would. So to say that it makes more sense to buy a $1000 phone over buying a car is not a correct comparison.
Click to expand...
You never said it's non-essential, so if that's your argument then you are now introducing something different to the equation. By the same token, a car or toilet is non-essential, how far do you want to take it? All we "need" is air to breath, food, water and shelter.

I said paying $1000 for something that is on or near you upwards of 16 hours a day and used regularly represents far better value compared to a car that costs $10,000-50,000 but only gets used 5% of the time, if that. Under that logic, it is absolutely a valid comparison in terms of usage, but if you think I'm wrong, maybe you want to tell all the major car manufacturers around the world that their plans to shift to "subscription services" is incorrect 🙄
 
It’s pretty good.

But I’m starting to have some of the same issues I had with my 6S Plus with crashing apps (Pokemon Go) and I set up the phone as new.

Everything else I adore about the phone over the 6S series. Stereo speaker, glass construction, wireless charging, etc.
 
MacBook Pro still has headphone jack, USB-C, and much more RAM. Has VLC Player and MP4 converter. Has $300 Final Cut Pro.

Does an iPhone have drag and drop into folders yet without the need for iTunes? Can an iPhone recognize an external hard drive? Can you open a bunch of tabs while YouTube is playing? Does it have Transmission for torrents? How about split-view or PiP?

If X has less RAM than an iPad Pro and can't do split-view and PiP, then it's no bargain. Hard to believe an iPad still has headphone jack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sunnyday2017
Returned it, at $200 cheaper the 8 plus is the better bargain as far as I am concerned.

The UI on the X is not preferable to me. Guess because I have used iPhones long enough and had no problem with it.
 
Gryzor said:
No, it doesn't depend on the individual. You are totally missing the point. A larger screen is a larger screen is a larger screen, regardless of colour or creed. Now, whether an individual PREFERS a larger screen, that is their opinion, but that's not what's being discussed here. The fact is, the extra £300 for the X goes towards getting you a larger screen than the 8.

When it comes to OLED vs LCD, while I'm an advocate of OLED having two TVs at home and now the X, no, being OLED does not automatically mean better. When it comes to screens and colour perception and refresh rates etc., that is very much a personal preference. To a certain technical level you claim OLED has better contrast and more accurate colour reproduction, but that does not make it "better".

No need for the health advice thanks, just pointing out your errors that you clearly acknowledge with your defensive digs.
[doublepost=1510926754][/doublepost]
You never said it's non-essential, so if that's your argument then you are now introducing something different to the equation. By the same token, a car or toilet is non-essential, how far do you want to take it? All we "need" is air to breath, food, water and shelter.

I said paying $1000 for something that is on or near you upwards of 16 hours a day and used regularly represents far better value compared to a car that costs $10,000-50,000 but only gets used 5% of the time, if that. Under that logic, it is absolutely a valid comparison in terms of usage, but if you think I'm wrong, maybe you want to tell all the major car manufacturers around the world that their plans to shift to "subscription services" is incorrect 🙄
Click to expand...
At what price would you not consider the X to be a bargain?
 
`Let's say the phone costs £1000 and is worth £300 in 24 months (typically when I change). Focusing purely on the device and ignoring common charges such as providers, electricity etc., that puts the Total Cost of Ownership at £700 over two years (even less for a business who can claim VAT back). Even if you just physically use the phone for 1 hour a day, that works out at roughly £0.96 per hour of use over two years. That in itself is, quite literally, as cheap as chips. When you consider that the device is with you for maybe 16 hours a day getting sporadic use throughout and just being there for when you need it, that drops to just £0.06 per hour of it being there for you. Show me something else in life that offers so much yet costs so little per unit of time.
Click to expand...

Now there is a great example of using math to prove any misleading thing. By your own math, a $1 million house is cheaper than an iPhone.

I expect to get 200 years out of the structure and enjoy it 24 hours a day (even when I'm not physically in it, it's still very usefully holding my stuff). This works out to a mere 57 cents per hour before the structure is dilapidated and needs to be replaced.

And that leave aside that in 200 years, the land should have a resale value worth a heck of a lot more than the million I paid for it.


I don't know about you, but if I could have a house or an iPhone for roughly the same cost, I'll take the house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnifiedMelody
DevNull0 said:
Now there is a great example of using math to prove any misleading thing. By your own math, a $1 million house is cheaper than an iPhone.

I expect to get 200 years out of the structure and enjoy it 24 hours a day (even when I'm not physically in it, it's still very usefully holding my stuff). This works out to a mere 57 cents per hour before the structure is dilapidated and needs to be replaced.

And that leave aside that in 200 years, the land should have a resale value worth a heck of a lot more than the million I paid for it.


I don't know about you, but if I could have a house or an iPhone for roughly the same cost, I'll take the house.
Click to expand...

House is obviously the better choice here, as the population increases and living standards increase overall, so does your property as a result (especially if it's in a good area). And in some ways way more than the phone can ever get [1000s and 1000s better] which is considered great investment...

Phones, uncertain! Technology progression is so rapid that prices of phones slide down rather quickly as a successor always bypasses it few years quickly. that's just how it works... phones are more of a consumable, not an "investment"
 
Is it a bargain? No.

That was easy, next? 😀

Seriously though it’s definitely not a bargain, but it is a good phone. Well, it suits my needs and that’s all that matters to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H818H
Bargain? Eh, I wouldn't say that. Worth the money? Yes, absolutely. No bezels/chins, OLED, 120hz input, no home button/gesture UI, and Face ID make it worth the upgrade over the 8 Plus.
 
If you fire up your time machine and travel back to 1991, the iPhone X replaces all these items, which cost $3K in 1991 and would be $5K in 2017 dollars. What a bargain!

2014-01-16-radioshackad.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eggtastic
The price tag is significant and the X's tech isn't overwhelmingly powerful in comparison to competing droids (@ a fraction of the price) or the iPhone 8.

There is no way around it, the iPhone X is pricey by all standards. Can you imagine still spending 1k+ for this X when the next version comes out or when you're trying to purchase it 2nd hand.

But there is one thing that keep me in the Apple fam. It's longevity of these phones. Apple manages to keep iOS functioning (not always perfectly) for years after the devices release.

Droids lose their ability to update after about 2 years from rls date. It's qualcomms fault for not offering the support, and your other option is to turn to the modders market to keep your phone up to date and functional, often having to sacrafice android pay due to security issues.

The only droid phone that I've seen keep up with updates was the Oneplus One which is possible due their amazing community. My brother is always impressing me with the longevity of that phone.

Besides us MacForumers (is that a thing??? I guesss it is now), people aren't upgrading iPhones every year. probably every 2-3 years, and you can still use your iPhone for most things. I still have a iPhone 5 that I take on trips with me.

So i guess we need to look at cost of ownership.

It's the same argument for you buying those Calvin Klein dress shoes every year, because they're cheaper or going for a good pair of good-year welted real leather dress shoes that with love and care, can last you 5-10 years and still be stylish.
 
Mene said:
The price tag is significant and the X's tech isn't overwhelmingly powerful in comparison to competing droids (@ a fraction of the price) or the iPhone 8.

There is no way around it, the iPhone X is pricey by all standards. Can you imagine still spending 1k+ for this X when the next version comes out or when you're trying to purchase it 2nd hand.

But there is one thing that keep me in the Apple fam. It's longevity of these phones. Apple manages to keep iOS functioning (not always perfectly) for years after the devices release.

Droids lose their ability to update after about 2 years from rls date. It's qualcomms fault for not offering the support, and your other option is to turn to the modders market to keep your phone up to date and functional, often having to sacrafice android pay due to security issues.

The only droid phone that I've seen keep up with updates was the Oneplus One which is possible due their amazing community. My brother is always impressing me with the longevity of that phone.

Besides us MacForumers (is that a thing??? I guesss it is now), people aren't upgrading iPhones every year. probably every 2-3 years, and you can still use your iPhone for most things. I still have a iPhone 5 that I take on trips with me.

So i guess we need to look at cost of ownership.

It's the same argument for you buying those Calvin Klein dress shoes every year, because they're cheaper or going for a good pair of good-year welted real leather dress shoes that with love and care, can last you 5-10 years and still be stylish.
Click to expand...

I look at the X as an up sell with more bells and whistles. The 8 reminds me of the 2017 GMC Terrain we just got. The Terrain has been the same body for a long time and basically the same interior. This was the last year of the body change, interior change and power train. But GMC always does this. Usually with GM the last year of change it’s usually perfected to a point and rock solid but became progressively rock solid.

Same with the 8. It’s the last model per se before the change in hardware etc but it’s perfected and rock solid. Apple kept same form factor with the 6 then progressed to perfect it.

So you really can’t compare the X to the 8 per se.
 
lordofthereef said:
It doesn’t have any more power than an 8. So honestly, following that logic, the 8 is the bargain.
Click to expand...

Yesterday I went to Apple Store to check the iPhone X, but it was to difficult for me to justify the $200 difference between the iPhone 8 Plus 64GB and the iPhone X 64GB. I did not like the rounded corners of the screen on the iPhone X, for that reason I might end buying the iPhone 8 Plus, after all It seems that the iPhone 8 Plus can perform as well as the iPhone X, and the screen corner's are 90 degrees. But it's difficult to decide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleRobert
If you are going by features and tech, which you are, no it is not a bargain. There are other options that do the same thing for a similar price or cheaper.

I'm starting to think OP is Tim Cook trying to get us to believe that $1,000 entry level for Apple's premium device is a bargain so that next year when the price goes up it's less of a sticker shock.... Nice try Tim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleRobert
It's definitely not a bargain.

You can get a cheaper iPhone with 97% of the features for much much less.

Seems like the X is for the enthusiasts. It's bleeding edge technology today and that always carries with it increased costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H818H
No. It would be a bargain at SE price, or 6 price. That said, it packs a lot of tech into a small form factor. Enjoy it!
[doublepost=1510952433][/doublepost]
mcdj said:
If you fire up your time machine and travel back to 1991, the iPhone X replaces all these items, which cost $3K in 1991 and would be $5K in 2017 dollars. What a bargain!

2014-01-16-radioshackad.jpg
Click to expand...

You had me going until I saw the radar detector. 😉
 
There is nothing it does above and beyond my 6S which is worth that price. I can buy a new Brompton bicycle with the money i saved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H818H
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back