The $99 8GB iPhone is for suckers...

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by wikoogle, Jun 12, 2009.

  1. wikoogle macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #1
    I'm pretty sure Apple has a lot of iPhone 3Gs still in their warehouses that they want to get rid of.

    So they don't announce the 3G S's hardware specs during the conference to mislead people into thinking the only major differences between the 3G and 3G S was 8GB of space and a better camera.

    My friend almost bought an iPhone 3G thinking that the only difference was the 8GB of space and a slightly better camera, and not realizing all the hardware improvements.

    For any extra $100 (the cost of one month of service from ATT on your 2 year contract), you get twice the space, a much newer processor twice as fast, double the ram, a much more powerful GPU, a far better camera and videocamera and lots of extra features.

    So I posit that anyone who opts for the $99 8GB iPhone was suckered by apple. You spend that much on the phone plan with ATT in just one month!

    And I'm actually kind of pissed at apple for offering it as an option and not releasing all the info on the 3G S's hardware during the conference itself just to take advantage of people who aren't as techinically knowledgable as we are. My friend almost made the mistake of going for the 8 Gig thinking that the only major difference between the two phones was the camera.

    If apple just wanted to have a $99 iPhone, they could've just released a 4gb iPhone 3G S for $99, instead of repackaging a much slower last gen device for that price.
     
  2. slpdLoad macrumors 6502a

    slpdLoad

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #2
  3. jpl0539 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    Arlington, TX
    #3
    They have released the info about the 3Gs... even on the tv commercial it say its the FASTEST iPhone yet. You have to be pretty ignorant to not understand what that means. Plus go on Apple's website and it has the specs on the site. They aren't hiding anything. $99 for a 3G is a great deal if you don't need the features the 3Gs has to offer.
     
  4. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #4
    3G is to cover that sub-$100 market. Cheap phone and people will buy regardless of plan.
     
  5. edk99 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Location:
    FL
    #5
    Your friend does not sound to bright. If he would of done 5 seconds of research he would know there is a difference. There is nothing misleading when the specs are clearly displayed on teh comparison page on apples site.
     
  6. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #6
    Were you at this forum during the WWDC.

    There were tons of threads complaning that the 3G S was barely an upgrade at all. It wasn't until the actual specs leaked that this stopped somewhat.

    Even the people here though the 3G S was barely an upgrade as a result of WWDC. There were tons of news articles saying the same thing. What chance did people who don't that much about tech have.

    Thanks the T-Mobile's screw up, now the people who actually pay attention know that the changes are very very signficant. But I don't think apple wanted that info to get out until they emptied their 3G stocks.

    They even named it 3G S to make it seem like a small upgrade underneath the hood when it was in reality a huge change.
     
  7. TheSpaz macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #7
    It's "too bright", "the comparison" and "Apple's site."

    Sorry, but when you're saying someone else isn't bright... you should at least be more careful with how you word it.
     
  8. Hints-The-Name macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #8
    Suckered? How can "The fastest, most powerful iPhone yet" Not clear that it is faster. What did he think S standed for? Super? Supreme? Sexy? And in the keynote he said S Stands for Speed
     
  9. dlamin517 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #9
    Its not being suckered. Some people cannot afford 200 bucks for a phone. So apple is selling an older model at a lower price so they can make money off the app store
     
  10. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #10
    omg who cares. his point came across:rolleyes:
     
  11. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #11
    Those who can't afford the $100 difference should be signing into a contract that has them paying $100 every single month for 2 years.

    If Apple wanted to offer a real budget option rather than just empty their old stock, they could have and should have offered a 4 GB 3GS for $99, instead of a phone with vastly inferior hardware under the hood, that makes it run twice as slow.

    I can point you to a ton of threads on this board, and articles on google news of people saying the 3GS was barely an upgrade. This almost all stopped once the actual specs leaked out. Coincidence. No, lots of people were given that impression by WWDC.
     
  12. slpdLoad macrumors 6502a

    slpdLoad

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #12
    Regardless of technical specs or design, adding video, voice controls, a 3 megapixel autofocus camera, and a compass are all very differentiating features. If you don't need one of those, then save yourself $100.
     
  13. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #13
    And that's what my friend was thinking too. That's what a lot of people who ordered the 3G were thinking.

    Until my friend found out that the internal hardware was indeed a true generational leap forward, that the upgrade wasn't just to the camera, a compass and a few tweaks here and there. Then he canceled his preorder right then and there.

    There's no reason Apple couldn't have been upfront about the actual changes underneath the hood, unless they wanted to empty their 3G stocks is all I'm saying.
     
  14. slpdLoad macrumors 6502a

    slpdLoad

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #14
    It's faster. That's really all it is. And that part is well advertised. It's not like the $99 doesn't get the 3.0 upgrade.

    This is hardly false advertising.
     
  15. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #15
    Some people will not spend more than $100 on a phone.

    Read that again in case you read it too fast and didn't get it.

    It doesn't matter WHAT you get for that extra $100. If you feel like saying "but for only $100 you get..." then just stop yourself and read my first sentence again.

    I know it's hard, because we aren't those people. But just because we can't understand them, it doesn't mean they're not real.

    And don't tell me about monthly fees adding up to thousands of dollars. It's not about the numbers. It's about the psychology of it. Even if they can afford it they don't feel right spending more than $100 on a cell phone, just like you wouldn't feel right with a 'Hello Kitty' themed iPhone.

    Think about THAT for a minute, if you can.
     
  16. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #16
    I don't know guys. This guy's name is a combination of wiki and google. He must know what he's talking about. :rolleyes:
     
  17. iranintoavan macrumors regular

    iranintoavan

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    #18
    The main reason for putting the $99 3G out there is for all the people that don't care that much about phones, because it breaks the psychological price barrier of "under $100 bucks".

    There will be a lot more people that will now buy the iPhone 3G that weren't even considering buying one at all, just because it is "under $100 bucks". And as mentioned earlier in the thread, it will be nice for all those people who don't care to have the latest and greatest and would rather save $100.
     
  18. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #19
    Once agian, if it was just to have a $99 iPhone, they could've just released a 4gb iPhone 3G S for $99, instead of repackaging a slower last gen device for that price.

    No, it's not false advertizing. They weren't outright lying.

    They were just being purposefully ambiguous, using terms like it's faster bc it's magic, even down to naming it the 3G S that just makes it seems like a very minor small change.

    Why use stupid BS terms like that even when reporters were asking them if there were any hardware changes.
     
  19. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #20
    How you could have watched that keynote and walked away thinking the new phone didn't have a bunch of improvements just flabbergasted me. You were clearly not paying attention.
     
  20. ratbatblue macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #21
    Who cares? I'll tell you. All of us who were raised to speak and write the language correctly, and who take pride in it, and would like to sound like something more than uneducated techno-geeks. The P who replied that someone barely literate shouldn't go around calling others stupid, or "not bright", was right on the money. I automatically look on what is being said with skepticism when the author obviously slept, or was otherwise mentally absent, through 12 (?) years of school.
     
  21. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #22
    I don't think grammar mistakes are that big of a deal on an internet forum. Most posters make grammar mistakes, as do I. On message boards, we don't care to spell check or grammar check ourselves as we would in more professional settings.

    I do take issue with the poster calling someone they barely know anything about "not too bright" though.

    Clearly, many people did if the posts and threads on this forum saying that the 3G S was barely an improvement are any indication.

    Besides, few people watch the full conference. They just read an article or something. And lots of articles back then simply said the upgrades were the camera and compass such because Apple wouldn't release the actual improvements in the internal hardware.

    If not for the T-mobile leak, most articles would still be saying that same thing.
     
  22. mkruck macrumors regular

    mkruck

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    #23
    I thank you from the bottom of my heart for posting this.

    For those of you who say "it doesn't matter", I give you this:

    Perception is everything. If you communicate like a semi-literate, lazy half-wit, that's exactly what you're going to be perceived as.

    Once you get out of school and enter the business world, please, by all means, write a business email with poor grammar, or even better, with "txt-speak". That goes over so well.

    Flame away.
     
  23. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #24

    Nonsense.

    It was common knowledge Apple changes the processor, RAM and graphics chip. Apple rarely gets into tech specifics. They do, however, talk about x increase in speed and showed a few benchmarks. That was quite clear.

    Some think the upgrade is worthwhile, others don't.
     
  24. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #25
    It doesn't matter how they did it, they were not evasive about it being twice as fast. Just because someone isn't bright enough to read what Apple made perfectly clear doesn't mean they were hiding anything.
     

Share This Page