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.
UK Survey - iPhone too expensive!
- Thread starter OllyW
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
edesignuk
Moderator emeritus
madofrain
macrumors member
Hmm
Well the N95 which its unfortunately habitually compared too here costs £199.99...It has the option of a budget bracket £25 a month contract on 02... £35, £45,£55 for 18 months is a lot of money on top of £279 up front..We're just spoilt and used to heavy handset subsidies..
Also the 'Gadget Show' on channel 5 flamed it for having no vid support ,camera flash,low specced 2 meg, no 3g or flash browser plugin..Making direct comparisons again to the N95 ,it really didn't fair too well..
They said its only saving grace in their tests was that it looked good.. :O/
Did better in last nights coverage on music phones, but again they brought up the fact that it was severely under specced for the price.
This is the main tech review show on TV here.. So..They have a fair amount of influence with the average consumer.
People really do use their camera phones a lot here too... They've all but replaced digital camera's... People don't care about optical zoom and overall picture quality,as long as it has the lion share of functions (has a flash,does video ) then they're happy.
To be charging the ammount of ££ that they are Apple need to be trumping everything on the market.. Spec and style wise.. Steve Job's reality distortion field doesn't extend to our murky shores I'm afraid.
I looked on T3 and pretty much the same number of people voted for waiting for Iphone 2.0 as not being interested at all..So I assume if they up the specs by adding 3g,sort the camera out and flash plugins, win over the press they'd be home and dry?
Of course Apple doesn't care, they'll make enough cash in the U.S.
So finally for me personally, I use my phone camera a lot when out with mates.. Buying an iphone would mean a 3 megapixel drop/ditching video and a camera flash from my current sony..... For what I personally use my phone for, its just not up to par..
Apple get plenty of cash out of me, I've owned a mac since 1989 and have bought every version of the ipod up till the touch. So here's to hoping I can ditch my current mobile some time soon. 🙂
Well the N95 which its unfortunately habitually compared too here costs £199.99...It has the option of a budget bracket £25 a month contract on 02... £35, £45,£55 for 18 months is a lot of money on top of £279 up front..We're just spoilt and used to heavy handset subsidies..
Also the 'Gadget Show' on channel 5 flamed it for having no vid support ,camera flash,low specced 2 meg, no 3g or flash browser plugin..Making direct comparisons again to the N95 ,it really didn't fair too well..
They said its only saving grace in their tests was that it looked good.. :O/
Did better in last nights coverage on music phones, but again they brought up the fact that it was severely under specced for the price.
This is the main tech review show on TV here.. So..They have a fair amount of influence with the average consumer.
People really do use their camera phones a lot here too... They've all but replaced digital camera's... People don't care about optical zoom and overall picture quality,as long as it has the lion share of functions (has a flash,does video ) then they're happy.
To be charging the ammount of ££ that they are Apple need to be trumping everything on the market.. Spec and style wise.. Steve Job's reality distortion field doesn't extend to our murky shores I'm afraid.
I looked on T3 and pretty much the same number of people voted for waiting for Iphone 2.0 as not being interested at all..So I assume if they up the specs by adding 3g,sort the camera out and flash plugins, win over the press they'd be home and dry?
Of course Apple doesn't care, they'll make enough cash in the U.S.
So finally for me personally, I use my phone camera a lot when out with mates.. Buying an iphone would mean a 3 megapixel drop/ditching video and a camera flash from my current sony..... For what I personally use my phone for, its just not up to par..
Apple get plenty of cash out of me, I've owned a mac since 1989 and have bought every version of the ipod up till the touch. So here's to hoping I can ditch my current mobile some time soon. 🙂
Maybe for casual snaps in the pub, but I don't know anyone who takes any number of photos who would use a cameraphone as their only camera.
Brother-in-law came around over the weekend and we sorted out some photos of the kids for an grandparents xmas calender gift. The exact same shot was taken with his N95 and my old Canon A520.
My photos with a less megapixel camera trounced his camera phone so no way would I give up a digital camera for a camera phone if this is the best we can get at the moment.
My photos with a less megapixel camera trounced his camera phone so no way would I give up a digital camera for a camera phone if this is the best we can get at the moment.
i have a N95 and iPhone, I must say that the iPhone lacks this camera function, but i prefer the iPhone overall for its ease of use and interface.
Pictures are quite bad on the n95, this is amplified when you look at them in true resolution.
I have a 30inch 2560x1600 screen (~5mp) when you look at the pictures snapped by a n95 they are high res but awful quality.
Samsung have released a 10mp camera phone that will absolutely blitz the n95 in quality. (only available in korea atm)
£200 aparently 😛
madofrain
macrumors member
umm
I'm not saying buy a N95. I'm saying that's sadly what it's habitually compared to spec wise without rhyme or reason.
A camera phone ,any N series mobile, Sony Ericsson K850i ,Samsung G600 or whatever isn't going to hold up when compared to an SLR but they're all superior to the Iphone.
There is just no excuse for putting 2 year old tech into something you label and price as a smart phone.
That's before you even get to 3g..Battery concerns?? What do you think wifi does? If I access wifi on my touch is sucks the battery dry.
And 'this isn't the mobile version of the internet' They have the cheek to advertise it when it lacks java and flash support?
This is an Apple fan site, not an ideal spot for a unbiased open and honest debate about a product that like the mac os people will defend until they are blue in the face.
This post starts with a simple statistic, I'm just trying to suggest what might be behind the lack of interest..
I'm not saying buy a N95. I'm saying that's sadly what it's habitually compared to spec wise without rhyme or reason.
A camera phone ,any N series mobile, Sony Ericsson K850i ,Samsung G600 or whatever isn't going to hold up when compared to an SLR but they're all superior to the Iphone.
There is just no excuse for putting 2 year old tech into something you label and price as a smart phone.
That's before you even get to 3g..Battery concerns?? What do you think wifi does? If I access wifi on my touch is sucks the battery dry.
And 'this isn't the mobile version of the internet' They have the cheek to advertise it when it lacks java and flash support?
This is an Apple fan site, not an ideal spot for a unbiased open and honest debate about a product that like the mac os people will defend until they are blue in the face.
This post starts with a simple statistic, I'm just trying to suggest what might be behind the lack of interest..
Cloudane
macrumors 68000
Yeah I always say with phone cameras, don't even look at the original resolution. It's a comparatively crappy lens+sensor taking pictures at the same resolution as a dedicated camera (probably for marketing purposes), so the results are rubbish. Scale them down to 640x480 or so, which is all you need for most camera phone stuff (pictures of friends messing about at the pub etc) and they look pretty good.
Any kind of semi-serious / high resolution photography should be done with a proper camera. Phone cameras are getting better every year, but there will always be a phone taking up space that camera innards should be taking. Progression of the technology is still a great thing... chances are you won't happen to have your SLR on you when that UFO lands, but you'll have your phone. But with planned photography there's no excuse not to use a decent camera (including compact... all but the tiniest are better than phone cameras currently) if you want decent results 🙂
Hang on, what was the topic again....
Oh yeah, iPhone pricing. If you consider that it uses a brand new technology (multitouch) and an interface to the level never seen on a mobile before, the pricing is fair. (Though the original USA pricing which got lowered after a month or so was a total rip off hehehe). Thing is, us Brits are used to thinking we've got a bargain, which the "free" handset deals do very effectively. As there's an upfront cost, most people's impression of the pricing is going to be negative from the outset.
Any kind of semi-serious / high resolution photography should be done with a proper camera. Phone cameras are getting better every year, but there will always be a phone taking up space that camera innards should be taking. Progression of the technology is still a great thing... chances are you won't happen to have your SLR on you when that UFO lands, but you'll have your phone. But with planned photography there's no excuse not to use a decent camera (including compact... all but the tiniest are better than phone cameras currently) if you want decent results 🙂
Hang on, what was the topic again....
Oh yeah, iPhone pricing. If you consider that it uses a brand new technology (multitouch) and an interface to the level never seen on a mobile before, the pricing is fair. (Though the original USA pricing which got lowered after a month or so was a total rip off hehehe). Thing is, us Brits are used to thinking we've got a bargain, which the "free" handset deals do very effectively. As there's an upfront cost, most people's impression of the pricing is going to be negative from the outset.
thworple
macrumors 6502
It is a little expensive, but not based on the technology that is included in the phone, its the fact that the business model that Apple are using is so alien to the general consumer in the UK. Let's not forget that this is a phone aimed at the consumer market, and not the business market.
The most popular form of mobile phone in this country is PAYG, which isn't available to the iPhone, and those that do get contracted phones in the UK, usually get free, or dramatically reduced phones as part of their deal with an operator. Therefore asking people to pay a £269 premium on top of a contract is quite an ask in such a market. I bought one, but I feel that my purchase was justified, as I badly needed a new iPod, which I would have been spending at least £200 on anyway, so the premium for me was the extra £69.
The reason that most people find it expensive hasn't got anything to do with the tech thats in the phone. Most users simply use their handsets for phone calls and SMS messaging. Technology features on phones such as the camera, and 3G technologies are for the most part still underused by the average UK user. I've had camera phones for years, as do many people I know, but none of them use it as their primary camera. Likewise, no-one uses video calling, or WAP/Web services on their phones. So these points are not important to them - its the fact that they'd be spending nearly £300 on a phone, which, despite offering an array of different features, will still end up being used for the same thing they do with every other phone they have ever had - phone calls and texting.
The only extra feature which they would probably be interested in is the fact its an iPod too - which as I stated before, is one of the reasons why I bought one myself.
The most popular form of mobile phone in this country is PAYG, which isn't available to the iPhone, and those that do get contracted phones in the UK, usually get free, or dramatically reduced phones as part of their deal with an operator. Therefore asking people to pay a £269 premium on top of a contract is quite an ask in such a market. I bought one, but I feel that my purchase was justified, as I badly needed a new iPod, which I would have been spending at least £200 on anyway, so the premium for me was the extra £69.
The reason that most people find it expensive hasn't got anything to do with the tech thats in the phone. Most users simply use their handsets for phone calls and SMS messaging. Technology features on phones such as the camera, and 3G technologies are for the most part still underused by the average UK user. I've had camera phones for years, as do many people I know, but none of them use it as their primary camera. Likewise, no-one uses video calling, or WAP/Web services on their phones. So these points are not important to them - its the fact that they'd be spending nearly £300 on a phone, which, despite offering an array of different features, will still end up being used for the same thing they do with every other phone they have ever had - phone calls and texting.
The only extra feature which they would probably be interested in is the fact its an iPod too - which as I stated before, is one of the reasons why I bought one myself.
I think that the way that the iphone has been given such a slaughtering in review against other phones is just not realistic.
Firstly I am a student so most of my time is spent in a classroom bored. Therefore an iPhone is very useful, letting me quickly check my email, text and be my iPod as well. Having spent over 8 months with a n95 I see the novelty has worn off with the extensive features it carries. I used the camera only a handful of times and did not use it to listen to music unless my iPod was low on battery. Also there is a small design defect with the n95 with the speaker on the phone (the one used for a normal phone call) has a grill on it, but the grill has holes big enough for small grains of sand to get in (which it has and has ruined the call quality). When I compare this simple design feature to the iPhone the grill on the iPhone is a lot more protective against dirt getting in.
When i actually hold the phone in hand i think the iPhone is heavier but feels more sturdy because of its glass and aluminum case, compared to the endless plastic on the n95, I am confused to why Nokia did not put a hard plastic cover on the n95's screen, it allows you to press the screen against itself, not good.
Most of the time i use WIFI to connect to the internet mainly because its free. Why would you want to go on java and flash things on such a small screen. I use it occasionally to check the news and general browsing.
The problem is how the iPhone will make me feel in the months to come since i finished messing around with all the settings and features on it.
At the moment i think its neutral on its price. Mainly because i havent fully used the phone properly as i only have had it a couple of weeks.
Firstly I am a student so most of my time is spent in a classroom bored. Therefore an iPhone is very useful, letting me quickly check my email, text and be my iPod as well. Having spent over 8 months with a n95 I see the novelty has worn off with the extensive features it carries. I used the camera only a handful of times and did not use it to listen to music unless my iPod was low on battery. Also there is a small design defect with the n95 with the speaker on the phone (the one used for a normal phone call) has a grill on it, but the grill has holes big enough for small grains of sand to get in (which it has and has ruined the call quality). When I compare this simple design feature to the iPhone the grill on the iPhone is a lot more protective against dirt getting in.
When i actually hold the phone in hand i think the iPhone is heavier but feels more sturdy because of its glass and aluminum case, compared to the endless plastic on the n95, I am confused to why Nokia did not put a hard plastic cover on the n95's screen, it allows you to press the screen against itself, not good.
Most of the time i use WIFI to connect to the internet mainly because its free. Why would you want to go on java and flash things on such a small screen. I use it occasionally to check the news and general browsing.
The problem is how the iPhone will make me feel in the months to come since i finished messing around with all the settings and features on it.
At the moment i think its neutral on its price. Mainly because i havent fully used the phone properly as i only have had it a couple of weeks.
AFAIK noone was saying the iPhone camera was better than any other phone camera, just saying that any cameraphone isn't as good as a proper camera. I don't see how that is defending Apple....
Funny, cos I swear Apple is targeting 1% market share for 2008. So this article is telling me 28% of people are considering it?
Id say, thats good. Apple has absolutely no intention of competing in the bargain basement market.
Id say, thats good. Apple has absolutely no intention of competing in the bargain basement market.
Applespider
macrumors G4
It's only good if they actually end up buying it.
I was in an O2 shop today to look at a new phone. While I was in there, 5 different customers (groups) came in. 4 of them stopped to look at the iPhone. Three of them went to the bother of asking lots of questions about the tariff details and how certain features worked. Three of them went to the back of the store with a different phone model (N95, N81, Viewty) because they couldn't entirely believe the value proposition when weighed against the other phones.
CD3660
macrumors 603
I'd say that this is a good thing.
The iPhone is a premium piece of hardware (calling it a phone is inadequate) and people must expect to pay a premium price for it. Not everyone is in a position to do so, nor indeed would some want to.
Do you really want everyone to have one? It wouldn't be quite so special then, would it.