Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"twice as fast, half the price"
- Thread starter brianbkny
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Please stick with one of the ten threads about the fact that Apple isn't lying about this and that it's AT&T who is pushing the higher-priced service over time.
Why screwed up, if not for that reason?
Why screwed up, if not for that reason?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
I think the fallicies in that statement have been pretty well documented by now. No need for yet another discussion of it.
I think the fallicies in that statement have been pretty well documented by now. No need for yet another discussion of it.
Technically they're not lying.
It has 3G networking,
as opposed to the slower 2.5G
&
The handset price has been reduced dramatically, for most countries.
R-Fly
It has 3G networking,
as opposed to the slower 2.5G
&
The handset price has been reduced dramatically, for most countries.
R-Fly
I don't think the OP was necessarily saying that it was too expensive for him, or claiming that Apple is the company setting the monthly rates.
The point is that Apple knows how much buying this new 3g iPhone will cost over the lifetime of the required contract (I'm referring specifically to the US in this case). So even if it's not their call what to charge as a subscription price, they're being a bit disingenuous to advertise the phone as if it's half the price overall. Sure, the handset itself is cheaper, but one can't buy it alone. One is required to sign a contract.
My issue isn't with the price itself, it's with Apple continuing to insist via their advertising that the new phone is cheaper, when it clearly isn't once required fees are taken into account. I generally think of Apple as too classy to stoop to those levels of shady salesmanship and wish they'd just stand behind their product as is, without trying to sucker less-informed customers.
The point is that Apple knows how much buying this new 3g iPhone will cost over the lifetime of the required contract (I'm referring specifically to the US in this case). So even if it's not their call what to charge as a subscription price, they're being a bit disingenuous to advertise the phone as if it's half the price overall. Sure, the handset itself is cheaper, but one can't buy it alone. One is required to sign a contract.
My issue isn't with the price itself, it's with Apple continuing to insist via their advertising that the new phone is cheaper, when it clearly isn't once required fees are taken into account. I generally think of Apple as too classy to stoop to those levels of shady salesmanship and wish they'd just stand behind their product as is, without trying to sucker less-informed customers.
Then maybe car companies should stop advertising sales and how much money pple will save on buying and owning a car. It's the cost of ownership.
Where's the lie?
They showed us that loading a website on AT&T's 3G was at least 2x as fast as downloading that same website on AT&T's EDGE network. Watch the WWDC '08 keynote again.
"Twice as fast": [x]
When you walk into an AT&T store and are a qualifying customer (as with most phones being offered at a lower price out the door with a 2 year contract) you can purchase the iPhone for...wait for it...."half the price" of what you could purchase said iPhone for of comparible onboard memory last year.
"Half the price": [x]
Truly a real mind-f***.
They showed us that loading a website on AT&T's 3G was at least 2x as fast as downloading that same website on AT&T's EDGE network. Watch the WWDC '08 keynote again.
"Twice as fast": [x]
When you walk into an AT&T store and are a qualifying customer (as with most phones being offered at a lower price out the door with a 2 year contract) you can purchase the iPhone for...wait for it...."half the price" of what you could purchase said iPhone for of comparible onboard memory last year.
"Half the price": [x]
Truly a real mind-f***.
It isn't a big deal because reality is reality and any criticism I have on this board won't have an effect on Apple, but this metaphor simply isn't accurate. Sure there are costs of ownership to other products, including automobiles, but generally any sales don't correspond to an offsetting increase in required further costs.
As I said earlier, I completely understand that Apple isn't setting the rate plans, and the money doesn't go to them. However, the slogan is still disingenuous.
A new potential customer walks into a US Apple store and sees the banner advertising 'Twice the speed at half the price.' Technically, the phone itself is half the price. But he or she can't buy just the phone itself. The customer is required to purchase a rate plan (yes, from ATT, but it's still mandatory to the iPhone purchase), and the fact is that the rate plan is higher than it previously was (for legitimate reasons).
So while an 8gb iPhone next week is cheaper than one a few months ago, buying that phone is more expensive because of the increase in mandatory additional costs. The plan money goes to ATT to Apple is technically correct in its slogan, but that doesn't mean the slogan isn't deceptive, which is what I was arguing all along.
Nope, because when I spend $299 for a 16GB iPhone that's twice as fast and half the price of the original, I'll be happy as a pig in poop.
Are you implying that the iPhone is different than ANY OTHER subsidized phone that is sold like this? Do people really think somehow that they won't have to pay for a phone plan to use a phone?
Your pricing point is incorrect in this example; if the customer is new, the iPhone 2G plan never existed for you; so it can't really be "higher". Like the poster with the car analogy used, should Toyota start changing their ads to say, "the car is $12, 999, but you're going to have to buy some gas and oil for it, so it's really $90K" Toyota doesn't know how much you'll be driving, any more so than Apple knows what plan you're going to pay for the phone.
I could agree with your point if Apple didn't require you to get a AT&T contract at the point of sale. But they do, so I really think they need to admit in ads to the things they REQUIRE at the time of purchse.
No one's saying Apple has to put a price in the ads. They're just saying they shouldn't say "half the price."
That would be like Toyota running an ad saying their car is $12,000 and doesn't need gas. Gee, I don't think I've ever seen Toyota try that! So why is Apple?
A car needs gas and a phone needs service. Neither Apple nor Toyota needs to say ANYTHING about that in their ads. That's fine. So ignoring it is ok, but that's far different from saying it doesn't exist, which is what we have here.
I don't have any problem with the slogan even though I won't be buying one. It's actually more accurate than most slogans out there. Is Maxwell House really "Good to the Last Drop"? No, it tastes horrible from the first sip. Does Miller Lite really "Taste Great"? Is it "Less filling" than any other light beer? No on both counts. Does Ford really make "Bold moves"? No, they're shilling 15-MPG SUVs when the price of gas is $4 per gallon.
This is all just so dumb. All these threads, pointless. All these petitions, useless. All this whining, boring.
It is half the price. That's all there is to it.
It is half the price. That's all there is to it.
So that would be the bit at the bottom of the front page on Apple.com that says: Requires new two-year AT&T rate plan, sold separately to qualified customers. would it?
Bottom of the iPhone page.
People don't petition or complain when the house that they bought for $100,000 costs extra for electricity, water, gas, etc.
I believe we're talking about the TV commercial.
I don't have the internet superimposed over my TV screen, so I don't think that really helps anyone.