Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well, at least the base iPhone 14 is at least a little better than the 13. Not as pointless as the base M2 MacBook Air which was worse and more expensive than the previous one.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Tagbert
GOOD MORNING!
One of the reasons we are doing this is because we are going to have to replace SO MANY phones for that #VIBRATEGATE issue everyone's having. Basically, their cameras are destroying themselves. Oh well.
I'm looking forward to the upcoming periscope cameras, that's going to be a full on popcorn show of bugs and issues.
 
Good marketing strategy by Apple to make the price gap so minimal between the pro and 14 (or 14 plus). I would spend my money on the pro max any day because of its much better specs!
To be fair, the regular and Pro models aren’t THAT different from each other, cost-wise. I think the small price difference is appropriate.

There’s a negligible cost difference to their own A-series (A16 vs A15) chips, and stainless steel isn’t more expensive than 7000-series aluminium, if at all. Yes, the Pro has the more expensive camera module, and the Pro’s screen should be slightly more expensive, but that’s mostly it.

Apple charge what they charge because they can. They successfully created this perceived difference in value by adding a 3rd lens, and convincing the world that steel was an expensive, luxury material, while 7000-series Aluminium is not. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Great! My carrier screwed me over and I ended up having to leave my launch-day Pro Max at the store 😡 So I ordered directly from Apple, but I'm still seeing 10/27-11/03 delivery. Ordered on launch day, so a week after pre-orders started. 🙄😭
 
I had the 14 PM and I just returned it yesterday. I only ordered the phone because the always on display was going to be useful to me as a night stand clock. That idea got wrecked once I realized their always on display isn't always on. Apple issued a statement of scenarios where the AOD would be turned off. One reason being it will turn off after xxx minutes/hours of user inactivity.

It sure would have been nice if Apple would have advertised this information before I ordered the device. Needless to say I went back to my 13 Pro Max and my wallet is $1200 lighter again.
You mean $1200 heavier again, right (you got your money back)?
 
That's one spin or the other is the non pro Phone 14 is so poor value the Pro demand is up
Definitely the 1 yr Apple should NOT have made a non-pro iPhone.

Noticed the S7 Watch is gone too.

“You want to go to the island” lol. Apple needs to have an Ewan McGregor commercial based on The Island lol. “But h can’t I have some bacon?!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveJUAE
The 5C sold very well. I remember being at uni at the time and everyone who didn’t have the 5S,6, and 6S during those times had the iPhone 5C. It helped Apple regain customers who were starting to shift towards Samsung and at the time HTC.
It was quite possibly the 1st iPhone that appealed and was affordable to those on a lower budget.
5C did not sell well, and that it why they didn't make another.
 
The 5C sold very well. I remember being at uni at the time and everyone who didn’t have the 5S,6, and 6S during those times had the iPhone 5C. It helped Apple regain customers who were starting to shift towards Samsung and at the time HTC.
It was quite possibly the 1st iPhone that appealed and was affordable to those on a lower budget.

I’ll bet more 5C clones/knock-offs sold than official 5C globally.

It was NOT stoping anyone looking at HTC M2/5 or any other android due to the screen being so large and price points was negligible in difference.

5C was the first budget iphone yes, yet didn’t do well as a budget comparison as most western world countries subsidies for 5S/6/6S was quite high already. I mean $99/129 vs 0 isn’t much of a wallet breaker. Most would wait until their next pay check.
 
Great! My carrier screwed me over and I ended up having to leave my launch-day Pro Max at the store 😡 So I ordered directly from Apple, but I'm still seeing 10/27-11/03 delivery. Ordered on launch day, so a week after pre-orders started. 🙄😭

I would be surprised if it does not ship sooner. If you check online, you will see various models for in store pick up the same day. Not sure if that is the stores receiving stock, or people returning devices that immediately show as in stock.

edit: was able to get a Pro Max for same day pickup just this morning.
 
Last edited:
The standard 14 reminds me of the iPhone 5c. In both cases, Apple essentially repackaged last year’s phone and the tried to convince everyone it was a brand new phone. Consumers weren’t fooled in either case.

The iPhone 5c was my favorite iPhone, I don't even have to think hard about that. I don't remember if they tried to convince us it was brand new...but it was MORE brand new than the previous phones that would have occupied that slot. Those first couple of years, and in the next few years afterwards, Apple would release a new phone with the new stuff, and continue to sell last year's new phone at a discount. That's exactly what they did that year, too, but with a brand new (awesome) chassis. They gave us MORE than we should have expected at the time, in that slot! The build quality was excellent, the design was striking and youthful, and the phone had the best combination of materials and shape that Apple ever made. It was comfortable to hold and didn't slip out of your hand. I was (and, I guess, am) extremely disappointed that it didn't last.

(another note about your comment lower in this post)

It's worth noting that ever since introducing the "pro" lines, Apple has only ever replaced them, not sold them at a discount. The 11 pro, the 12 pro, the 13 pro were all available for one year only from Apple, and then were removed from the lineup.

Now, the 14 is more than a repackaged 13. It may not be MUCH more, but it is more. The things you get on a 14 that you don't on a 13:

--A15 Bionic chip instead of A15 chip (20% more GPU cores)
--Better camera (includes improved Cinematic Mode, and the new video-software-gimbal-whose-name-I-can't-remember-as-I-type-this)
--Reengineered chassis for easier reparability
--Satellite SOS
--Crash detection

(Oh and let's not forget: a max-sized phone in this part of the lineup, the largest screen ever available in an iPhone that wasn't a pro.)

Reasonable people can debate the value of any of those, but they ARE things that exist on the 14 that don't on the 13. Is that worth the extra $100 you'd spend over a new 13 (still available)? Again, reasonable people can debate that, but it's at least worth the consideration.

The 5C sold very well. I remember being at uni at the time and everyone who didn’t have the 5S,6, and 6S during those times had the iPhone 5C. It helped Apple regain customers who were starting to shift towards Samsung and at the time HTC.
It was quite possibly the 1st iPhone that appealed and was affordable to those on a lower budget.

See, I remember seeing the the 5c all over the place! I lived in a college town, perhaps that was it. A little less expensive, a little more expressive?

5C was the first budget iphone yes, yet didn’t do well as a budget comparison as most western world countries subsidies for 5S/6/6S was quite high already. I mean $99/129 vs 0 isn’t much of a wallet breaker. Most would wait until their next pay check.

I don't remember it being particularly "budget". It was the least expensive one in the lineup, but it was no more expensive than we would have expected the discounted 5 to be. This perhaps speaks to what the first person I quoted here said: Apple tried to position it as a brand new phone, and thus the $100 lower price (or was it $50? I think it was $100) was a bonus. That DOES support what the poster said. Anyway, as he said, I wasn't fooled, but it WAS still less money than the 5S (and a better phone: there, I said it!).

But everyone called it the "budget" iPhone except Apple. Apple didn't announce it as such, they didn't advertise it as such, they just had it available and advertised its bright and cheery design. Almost every review I remember CALLED it the budget iPhone and CHARACTERIZED it as Apple offering a budget iPhone...but Apple never said any such thing (at least not publicly).
 
GOOD MORNING!
One of the reasons we are doing this is because we are going to have to replace SO MANY phones for that #VIBRATEGATE issue everyone's having. Basically, their cameras are destroying themselves. Oh well.
Good morning, mr obvious
 
I don't remember it being particularly "budget". It was the least expensive one in the lineup, but it was no more expensive than we would have expected the discounted 5 to be. This perhaps speaks to what the first person I quoted here said: Apple tried to position it as a brand new phone, and thus the $100 lower price (or was it $50? I think it was $100) was a bonus. That DOES support what the poster said. Anyway, as he said, I wasn't fooled, but it WAS still less money than the 5S (and a better phone: there, I said it!).

But everyone called it the "budget" iPhone except Apple. Apple didn't announce it as such, they didn't advertise it as such, they just had it available and advertised its bright and cheery design. Almost every review I remember CALLED it the budget iPhone and CHARACTERIZED it as Apple offering a budget iPhone...but Apple never said any such thing (at least not publicly).

Agree. The iPhone 5c was cheapest iPhone that year but not necessarily a "budget" phone. It was essentially a lower cost (polycarbonate instead of aluminum) version of the 5 from the year before.

The 2013 U.S. retail price (without a 2 year carrier contract) for the 16GB 5c was $549 compared to $649 for the 16GB 5s which launched at the same time.
 
Looks like they are cutting back across the board.

 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.