Sounds like quite orthogonal to Apple, and relevant to personal issues the single anecdotal example person had, overcompensating by constantly buying gadgets, etc...
There are tons of people with 2, 3, 4, 6+ year old Macs, iPhones, and iPads (my iPad is from 2014 or so and works just fine)...
How can you criticize Apple when you are doing the same thing?
To me this behavior reinforces OP's point.
I honestly expected to see him engaged in something that was against the kind of preying on insecurity he claims Apple is doing, and was curious to see what it was because I want to see examples of marketing that doesn’t do this.
I was genuinely surprised to see what business he was in, and find it bizarrely hypocritical of him, since he is doing exactly what he accuses Apple of doing.
Can you explain how this reinforces his point?
I mean... is your theory that if Apple didn’t exist, people wouldn’t buy things to look cool?
> A lot of people are intelligent and strong enough to resist this brainwash, but a lot of others are not.
Speaking of signaling status... somehow comments like this are always posted by folks who sort themselves into the first category.
Maybe people buy things you don’t want to buy just because they like them, not because they’re too dumb to resist “brainwashing.”
I mean, I can't think of a person who'd be aware enough of it and be willing to state this as a member of the second category?
One could argue a whole lot of highly valued startups are built on the premise of selling conveniences to people with far too much money and not enough sense.
You mean marketing? What company isn't doing that?
With the ability to easily swap batteries, and more efficiently written software, nobody would have to really update their phones. Which is why I guess most batteries are now integrated.
It's a terribly waste just for corporate profits and peoples vanity's sake.
A spurt of canned air followed by digging with a toothpick wrapped in cotton and damped with ethyl alcohol does magic.
Do you have AirPods ? or have you considered buying them ? I'm also on the fence about that Face ID stuff
I’m convinced that the camera quality degrades as the phone gets older/more used. What convinced me was my mom receiving a brand new 6S replacement from Apple and seeing the major camera improvement even though her broken 6S was in mint condition.
Can anyone provide some insight to this? It took years of speculation for us to learn our slower OS/battery concerns were real. I’m wondering if this is next.
ps: the 40yo man might have sold or made use of the other iPhone. I hope he did not just pile them up in a drawer.
Does anyone know any other region where Apple Store operate with commission, one of the things John Gruber likes to pride Apple are their employees don't have commission and therefore could give candid advice.
Or did All Apple Store has commission now since Burberry Queen took over?
Apple integrates their online store with their B&M locations so closely it really wouldn't make any sense for them to have different return policies.
I applaud your approach to sales, very empathetic. Are you still working there ?
for some people, a dinner out costs $2k.
that is why you should never judge your clients.
same thing for the other gentleman.
you don't know their stories, or their backgrounds.
I think your prejudices see him as some sort of insane man. When, as I've written above, there are people who spend a lot of cash indiscriminately.
Not all of us have to be financially careful.
> His story is just to point out how the sense of worthlessness in some people is financially exploited by prestigious brand like Apple.
Apple did not exploit anyone. If you desire something so much, then go for it. What imperative does Apple have to forbid someone to exercise their freedom?
Or phones are his thing. Everyone has a thing they have probably spent stupid relative amounts of money on. A gaming computer? Games? A guy I know from Jiu-Jitsu collects Gi's at $200+/each.
I think people are free to do whatever they want with their money. Is my view an extreme one nowadays?
The social pressure for having "an old phone" most have been incredibly high.
Something like that happen to me on university, I had a 5 years old phone with no Whatsapp/Blackberry chat. It made me feel so left behind and even sad sometimes.
Commodities seem harmless, but brainwashing people to buy moderate quality products at luxury prices is horrifying.
It plays music, like my iPod did. As well as podcasts. I don't use any apps otherwise that don't come with it from Apple. On the rare occasion someone decides to call me it answers, sometimes (it's slow to answer, but after 3 retries, sometimes the first).
I try to answer text messages on my Mac with Messages.app. It's easier to type.
Not sure I want to upgrade. I was planning on it. I can afford it. Kind of just trying to see how long I can keep it going for fun. I think I've had it for close to 5 years now.
Improvement in camera could be enticing, but the platforms to which the photos, videos are shared would compress them anyways making them all nearly identical. Better frame rates is the only thing which makes a difference. Case in point : MKBHD made a blind test last year and low cost smartphone Mi Pocophone which scored pathetic camera performance in individual reviews came out top in the blind test.
So, the subscription services are the new lifeline for the hardware manufacturers; included free subscription should add some value to the new customers and if the SW services work; may be compensate for diminishing hardware sales.
Marques doesn't have kids.
I loved my Redmi Note 4. I even liked the chin, as the buttons were on it - so my usable screen size was actually larger than the Pixel XL that replaced it.
That phone took perfectly acceptable shots with still subjects that I'd have been happy to live with but the shutter lag was terrible. I have six months of mostly blurry photos of my kids solely because the phone couldn't deal with any amount of fast motion so it had to go.
Recently upgraded to a Pixel 3a solely because of Night Sight and for my use case it was a no-brainer as I can't get the time back. I also couldn't give a rats behind about notches and bumps - my phones go straight into bumper cases and 9-glass before they're turned on.
Some people really do need the less-talked-about features that are only of late getting any amount of attention by manufacturers.
But say you had bought iPhone 8 (same year as Redmi Note 4) and you share pictures to social media; Pictures from iPhone 11 would be indiscernible to those who see your photos at the other end.
I disagree. As an iPhone 8 user even iPhone X pictures are massively improved, not to mention a Huawei P30 or Pixel 3XL... night sight doesn't exist and post-processing by external apps only.
The same goes to X and Xs, although the difference is a little less drastic, but P30 and Pixel were both winning, and when you compare it, it was obvious.
I am excited about the possibility of graphene based batteries. https://www.graphene-info.com/graphene-batteries and https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-develops-battery-mat...
Which could be as early as 2020-2021 if the leaks are correct https://www.techspot.com/news/81435-samsung-rumored-readying... my current phone will last me until then.
More about that https://www.wired.co.uk/article/graphene-batteries-supercapa...
It seems this graphene tech can be used for other things too, the future looks exciting.
But, it will happen in increments and for all the above features to be available in one smartphone which is affordable, will take another 3-4 years and hence my OP comment that current generation is done.
These are all nice, but I'd rather have thin AR glasses powered by the phone's CPU/GPU at some point. Might fix the smombie infestation, too.
Why are these not available to the public?!? Because of the Google glass PR disaster?
I think that's probably the reason Apple decided not to take a risk with their version:
5G Network? Every phone will have it in 3 years.
>1TB storage? In Android land you can already buy a 1TB microSD card and stick it into your phone resulting in >1TB total storage. Are many people doing that?
Fingerprint reader in the screen: Who cares if its below the display or on the back of the phone? It's a rather small improvement.
>Fingerprint reader in the screen: Who cares if its below the display or on the back of the phone? It's a rather small improvement.
Fingerprint authentication at any point on the screen could decrease the overall time taken for unlocking the phone and getting to the intended action. It's quite common in android to have always on Amoled display for notifications, touching the notification can directly take one to the app without having to authenticate separately first.
May be it should have worded better, I reread the comment multiple times and I don't get where the current generation is done comes from. It reads to me as Hardware is done, period.
The market is saturated, and of course every company will try to milk it for as long as they could, while trying to figure out the next big thing, if there is any that is the size of current Smartphone market.
Well yes, all cameras look the same if you do a "blind" test. :)
Essentially, camera quality in this day and age doesn't matter, unless you're a "pro" (which I predict 90% of the people who buy the 11 pro aren't)
Case in point: I have a SE and it takes photos fine. I'm not any model or pro, so taking pictures of basic day-to-day events or things is good enough for me.
They had people vote on the 'best' picture, and they always chose the sharpest one. You could clearly make out which camera took which photo. The biggest problem was that the DSLR was never focused right so it was blurry.
This simply means that it was a crappy test. As far as I remember, people choose a colour profile that was much more punchy.
Cameras are much, much more than a colour profile. These tech reviewers are fun to watch but I wouldn't base my opinions solely on their work.
This test for real-life camera usage is as objective as it can get. Most people shoot pictures to put on social networks, not to submit for documentary film awards.
Not at all, most people do not take different pictures of the same scene under the same settings from about half a dozen flagship phones, post it on Instagram and ask which one is better. In fact, this is the only time I've seen such usage.
In practice, people use a single phone to capture moments that do not come back and even if the scene is repeatable people prefer to succeed on the first take, therefore they will take photos until they get one that is good enough and editable. Most people don't even know how the photo will look like until they try a few edits. It is an intuitive process that involves multiple trials and misses.
So the best camera is the one that gives you the photo that is easiest to edit to achieve the picture you desire. #nofilter is a special case, a niche and If you ask me, it's not a nofilter just because the device applied a filter by itself.
Anyway, if that test was correct the cheap and great photos phone would have been a viral hit. When people see a great photo, they do ask how you took it. That did not happen.
If you want perfection, get a proper camera and more importantly learn how to shoot with it
I don't give a rat's butt whether 70% of consumers don't care about the features and characteristics of my phone. I care about them, and that's all that matters. Currently rocking a 6s which is serving me fine though.
That's true in the Android world as well. When the GPS in my three-year-old LG Stylo 2 finally crapped out so thoroughly (along with a puffed-up battery, perhaps with a built-in antenna being damaged?) that I couldn't ignore it anymore, I wound up getting a Stylo 5.
As it turns out, it has the same Qualcomm 450 SoC as the three-year-old phone it replaced. It's fast enough for my needs, but no speed demon. The only real upgrades are support for more of T-Mobile's LTE bands, a higher-resolution screen, an aluminum frame, a 3500 mAh battery up from 3000, and Android 9; the camera app is improved, and the Bluetooth stack is more up-to-date. Much to their credit, they had the courage to not remove the headphone jack. There is one major downgrade: the inevitable sealed-case, non-removable battery schtick that I really hate. I hope that fad passes by the time I need to replace this one, but there's too much money at stake for the phone manufacturers not to shaft their customers. I better hope the battery doesn't crap out prematurely.
That being said, I like the Stylo 5; the 2 had excellent battery life even when the battery got puffy, and the 5 is even better (at least in my first week of usage). That relatively-anemic 450 SoC is at least power-efficient.
The smartphones will continue to grow and accelerate their hardware and software development. This is simply the future. I the next 50 years I think everyone will use just one device and this is more likely to be something like a smartphone.
What Steve Jobs did in his first iPhone presentation can't be done again. He simply set the bar so high that there is no bar anymore, I don't see how other companies will reach them, not because they can't but because they all try to copy them from that point on, instead of trying to innovate like they did.
I can't also really understand why the public is bashing so hard those events expecting miracles, and making statements that Apple is not innovating. What do you want cloaking software making you invisible? Let's be real, also who is that naive to think that even if they have developed something amazing they will release it right away. Things don't work like that in the real world.
Apple and Steve did some truly "breakthrough" product announcements. Steve mentioned this in his iPad announcement. The timing was right, the technology was right, the market was right.
It's possible we're not going to get another one of those remarkable revelations like the iPhone and the iPad in our lifetimes. And that's ok.
The speed of change has been tremendous in the past 100 years and –besides doing a lot of good– also has serious social and ecological repercussions.
Perhaps I'm getting old, but maybe it's a good thing that the pace of change is slowing.
Yep. I have a BLU smartphone that I bought for $55 bucks off of Amazon. It literally does everything I need and has now lasted me > 2 yrs with no sign of slowing down. I will never understand why people would pay the price equivalent to buying a decently speced out desktop or laptop for a phone when there are so many cheaper alternatives that provide the same features and functionality.
Agreed. Even a Xiaomi Mi A2 with Android One for 130-150€ is almost on par with these high end phones that cost eight times as much: It's fast enough. It has a gorgeous display. It has a decent camera and it has up-to-date software.
In these times of diminishing returns it's amazing that Apple is able to fetch these prices. It shows us how much of a vendor lockin there is. Perhaps (hopefully) also how much people are willing to pay extra for more privacy.
I'd bet given the rise in privacy plugin use for browsers (Privacy Badger, uBlock, etc) I'm not the only one doing that either.
Snd it can't be a small number, as Apple constantly mentions privacy in their marketing, down to the level of individual services.
For the subset of people who care, they're virtually a monopoly.
Strongly agree, and the reason for that is that is that level of quality is good enough for the 99.99% use case of photography and anything above is simply a waste of storage space.
If you are actually a professional artist, it matters. If you're doing computer vision, it matters. For the other 99.99% of photos, it doesn't matter.
What Apple is selling at this point is just the aspiration that you're in the special 0.01%, or could be.
Yes, the chips and sensors used in modern phone cameras are ridiculously good for the size and cost. And phone cameras started replacing budget and mid-price P&S cameras years ago.
But, Apple's move to a triple camera set-up is really compelling. Not only has the phone replaced the average P&S, it's now replacing higher end P&S. The main argument for a separate P&S these days is a zoom lens. Apple just made that argument moot (superzooms notwithstanding). You can now take landscape, snapshot, and portrait photos natively on the camera without stitching or cropping. That's amazing. Or, at least I think so.
I was considering replacing my wife's older Canon S90 P&S with a new Sony RX100 IV. I probably won't bother - I'll just replace her iPhone 8 with an 11 Pro.
This opens a huge area of business for them, if they can convince ad film makers devices because the current set of filming devices that they use aren't inexpensive.
For a lot of the world, a $500 smartphone was a luxury, and a $1500 smartphone (like a $3000+ laptop, or $1000 monitor stand) is an unfunny joke.
While they’re amazing devices, they’re just not replacements for a real computer, being locked down, with no exposed file system, and the imprecision of touch-only input.
This in my opinion is very dangerous and will prevent the country from ever becoming a producer of information and services.
I'm as sure as I agree with this statement that this can be a historic comment about smartphones until the next breakthrough happens :)
If it didn't have the notch it would just have a larger bezel on a side, or some BS like a popup camera.
The "camera behind screen" idea barely works (for obvious reasons), and is hardly what would revolutionize mobile hardware. It's an aesthetic concern, not a functional one.
Things that might do that, larger camera sensors (e.g. 1"), week or more long batteries, total voice control, etc.
I think the point here is that the recent "big" features are all pretty minor things like 60fps screens etcetera, they are really nice but nowhere near as important as the new things we used to have every generation.
Smartphones I’ve owned:
HTC One X: 130 g
Galaxy S5: 145g
Samsung Galaxy S7 edge: 157g
iPhone XS: 177 g
I’m happy with the screen size vs the phone size on the XS, but I didn’t realize I wanted something lighter too. This phone is way too heavy. The new iPhone 11 Pro is 188g. Hopefully next time around they make something lighter.
Headphone jack, sure. But after face ID / full screen, I wouldn't go back to home button and touchID if they'd paid me...
Eye tracking based scrolling would be something that I'd like; for reading long articles/books. Using regular camera is prohibitively power hungry; not sure if there is research for special purpose cameras for this purpose.
I bought my last phone over 4 years ago and it wasn't new back then. The only reason I'm thinking about buying a new one is the software version. But it probably won't cost more than $200, because that's already enough to get better hardware than I got 4 years ago for double the price, and I don't have an issue with performance.
Needless to say, I don't quite get how flagship phones still sell so well considering you can do basically everything for a small fraction of the cost. Is there really a mobile game or other app out there which requires top specs? Would such a game even sell enough quantities?
The point is that the upgraded version ships with less features. I use bluetooth-headphones so I don't care, but I can easily see why this is infuriating to others.
Google is hot with the ML train, they develop and release new state-of-the-art algorithms and improve all aspects of smartphone (videos, pictures, batteries, actions, gestures, keyboards, biometry, security, ...).
On the Asia side, companies are the first to release foldable phones. They are already acquiring user feedbacks and cost insights for the next generation of foldable phone, and Google is a supporting partner, with Android 10 embracing those new phones with new APIs.
I'm looking forward for foldable phones improvements and more Google magic
Apple is rarely first to put certain component or piece of technology into their products, but is usually first one to do it properly and create first actually usable product. That’s why pretty much every actual innovation only takes off after Apple has implemented it.
If people feel strongly enough that the name is not accurate, they will have to buy a competing product that fulfills their needs at the price they are willing to pay.
I suppose what would be interesting, but highly proprietary, would be Apple's marketing research information on how the "Pro" marketing term is received by their target consumers.
All that being said, I personally have never bought from Apple, and think the $150 upgrade cost is ridiculous (not to mention the $300 jump from the XR, which is still $300 more than I paid for my Pixel)! So I could say the "Pro" marketing isn't working on me! But overall, they aren't hurting for customers.
"MacBook Pro" and "iPad Pro" are the ones you buy if you need it for work, because the increased price will pay for itself with increased productivity. But buy the "Air" or basic versions if you are primarily using it for more basic tasks and media consumption.
Not sure the "Pro" distinction will hold up for iPhone, though. I guess it depends if Pro Photographers actually will give up their "Pro" cameras for an iPhone 11 Pro. And I can't think of any other profession where the iPhone Pro will "pay for itself" in productivity increases relative to other iPhones.
For most people relying on a smartphone for work, be it 700 or 1000 the device will pay for itself in a few months at most, so I think the price difference won’t matter much. Better battery performance could be significant though.
I'm not sure how meaningful the "Pro" suffix really is, but the iPhone has undoubtedly become a piece of professional equipment in the media industry.
Dictaphone, camera, editing and publishing, phone, notepad, email... arbitrary other software around all of these, all in your pocket. Makes total sense.
I find it odd how people will happily pull their wallets out for a PC they will spend a ton of time on, but then balk at the idea of spending half that on a device that lives in your pocket and can help you do practically anything that comes to mind, even if all that comes to mind is entertain you for a few moments. Is it just down to the physical size of the device?
But none of what you described explains why you would need a Pro instead of the standard. Its nice to have, but the base model isnt nerfed to a point that makes it unusable.
1) They age better, and oftentimes are more not just useable, but actually a joy yo use, for a longer time
2) The price difference just isn't that much to justify taking a lower power device. Sure, the iPhone 11 would probably be just fine compared to an iPhone 11 Pro. But when you're talking about phones in that price caliber, honestly what's an extra $200? And I've never had a phone in my hand wishing it was less capable, so why chance wanting to replace it earlier?
Like I said, I bought the X at launch and that was to replace, in turn, a 6 Plus which was still very usable so I'm far from an every year upgrader, and I think that has to do with the fact that I always get the biggest and best, and then just age out a few cycles instead of continuously upgrading.
I’ve been handing down my iPhones since day one. All of them have got 6 years minimum use.
I dunno, for all the uses and advantages my phone gives me, I'm happy to pay. My last one was an X and it's served me extremely well since I bought it at launch. I passed on the XS, but the 11 is tempting.
You may “need” one when you’re at school or university, but i would think many people can easily do without a PC, after that.
Here is one: I'm a botanist. I take a lot of pictures of herbarium specimens (pressed plant specimens in natural history museums) to make morphological measurements. I have a Sony A7RM3 that is a MUCH higher resolution, better quality camera, but it's a lot bigger, requires more setup time, etc. With an iPhone, the pictures I take are automatically uploaded into Apple's cloud storage and available on my laptop. It's a very nice, simple, relatively seamless system.
If I'm shooting something for a billboard, yeah, I'll go get out a real camera. Almost anything smaller than that can absolutely be done on almost any modern flagship phone.
People can be productive and do fantastic work on any working material. But why have it worse when you’ll be using the device day in day out and stare at it for years ?
I don’t think we are arguing the Pro is nicer, right ?
I didn't watch the entire presentation, but didn't seem very different from current high end phones, except for the camera.
I don’t mean candy bowls or flashy sofas, but well lit, well ventilated, with decent toilets, noise isolation and living space between desks, and ergonomic chairs (at least adjustable in height and depth/inclination)
Cheaping out on work environment is the first sign of misplaced priorities IMO. Especially when it’s so easy to get penalties from work inspection.
* I’ll settle for a million dollar a year, I confess
I’m estate agent and I want to be able to photograph exteriors and interiors.
I’m a garden designer, I like to photograph my clients gardens for a portfolio.
I run a small bar, that has live music sometimes- I like to photograph and video the bands for my website.
There may be other folks out there who want the fastest phone for the purposes of demoing technology. For me, I mostly just don't want to look like I'm a luddite (although I've seen a surprising number of founders/CEOs who rock the SE).
1. No Camera bump (c'mon, this is simple)
2. Good photos (I'm not trying to replicate Mona Lisa, I just need an ok camera that captures day-to-day things)
3. Small, portable
This is an iPhone 7+ we’re talking about... Maybe not the best springboard for your complaint.
Obviously for heavy lifting, I still would prefer an SLR with an assortment of lens options and such though.
Twice during this summer, I was not able to share my screen with coworkers using Zoom because my MacBook pro would overheat and throttle the processors. It might be that there's some dust inside the fan (I have a cat) but I am not able to open and clean it up. How is that "Pro"?
Our servers are all linux based and virtualization in mac is spotty (especially if you want to share a Docker-based setup via Zoom on a mildly hot day).
I strongly doubt I will go back to Mac when the time comes for renewing. I really do need to get stuff done, and this machine has gotten in my way too many times.
The finger reader thingie is nice, though.
Where I work, for example, the social media team are looking to buy an iPhone for IG Story content, as well as internal videos.
Whilst it obviously won't replace a pro photographer's equipment for static, paid shoots, it will be used often in a "pro" setting.
I vlog with a DSLR and even with an iPhone X most people can’t tell when I use footage from that (running with a dslr is hard, for example). iPhone Pro likely makes better video than my T6i Rebel in many situations. Depth of field is usually where DSLRs shine
I find that modern phones are better than traditional cameras a) by nailing exposure more consistently in tricky lighting conditions, b) having a far better display for proofing your shots, and c) can use computational photography tricks to create great HDR photos.
Where the standalone cameras are useful are where you need a capability that you just can't get in a phone. (And that's a set of capabilities that's been greatly diminished over the years, although it will never fully go away.)
People don't _look at_ Instagram posts in the same way they might a fine art photograph. It's a double tap while scrolling through hundreds of posts.
I say this as an avid amateur wildlife photographer who posts on Instagram and gets a handful of likes while friends get hundreds or thousands for an out-of-focus image of a milkshake and bagel.
The iPhone is a lifestyle product. It does a lot of things, but it does some of them quite poorly.
The new camera is better than it used to be, but it's still a long way of short of the quality you'd expect from a high-end professional photo studio camera.
As a lifestyle product, the important factor is the narrative that buying it will put you within reach of that professional creative lifestyle.
In a sense it will, if your definition is limited to lifestyle social sites like IG and FB.
But in a more honest and realistic sense it won't, because it lacks the quality and the flexibility of real professional equipment. A good DSLR + glass will still kill it, and medium format - which is what the most successful full-time studio pros are likely to use - will absolutely destroy it.
There are still situations where that high end is needed. Fashion, ads, and high-end portraiture and photojournalism all rely on it. I don't think studio photographers working in those fields are going to be moving to an iPhone any time soon.
My point was mostly that the definition of “pro photographer” is much wider these days than many people realize. For many values of “pro” an iPhone Pro is going to be absolutely fantastic and a better fit than higher-end pro.
That's precisely what I meant. It's what most people do most of the time.
Taking a shot of my breakfast smoothie with my 150mp Phase One, editing on a calibrated workstation and exporting to have it resized to 2mp for display on mobile phones is beyond pointless.
But the part it’s really going to revolutionize is the baseline level of expected image quality. Just like Casey Neistat forced everyone to start using DSLRs for vlogging with his famed 2 or 3 year experiment.
Not if I'm travelling internationally, as then I'm concerned about the implications of having border officials demand access to my phone. Or if I'm participating in various watersports/snowsports/backcountry activities where a phone is problematically fragile and difficult to keep charged.
In either of those scenarios (which account for the majority of pictures I take) I'm more likely to have a camera accessible than a phone.
Case in point, I have an iPhone X and a DSLR with all of the above lenses and the camera kit + lenses were more expensive than the new iPhone and I probably would use them less.
More like "Prosumer" digital cameras, without removable lenses.
Don't know if the new mac pro will shake that up.
It does, you need to be able to charge its cost as a business expense to be able to afford it. The "Pro" signals to the tax auditors that Apple approves of this :-)
Self-styled "influencers". They'll be all in.
A great example of this is the "PS4 Pro"
I love it when people complain about the prices Apple charge, especially given the experiences I've had with customer service at Apple, so... story time!
I had an iPhone 5 when it first came out. At the time I was a heavy motorbike rider to and from work. One day when I was riding home it rained heavily (this was in England, so yeah...) and my pocket had been left open. When I got home my iPhone was completely submerged in water for at least 20 minutes.
I took it to Apple the next day and they replaced it for free. Try that with your Pixel... oh that's right, you don't have any stores to take it into world wide. Shame.
Fast forward to only two years ago...
I was in Vienna for Christmas a few years back. We'd gone through Italy to get there. During my time in Italy I noticed my iPhone 6S' battery was dropping quickly. I couldn't work out why. By the time we got to Vienna it would drop by 20% every 15-20 minutes. I found a premium reseller who took it in and replaced the battery in 45 minutes for free. I bought the phone in Australia.
Try that with your Pixel... oh that's right, you have to post your phone to the manufacturer and wait for them to fix it or replace it, a process I know to take weeks. Shame. But you saved $300 though!
I personally don't think it's worth counting the pennies in that manner given the services you're getting outside of the hardware. It's not much of a price hike at all, in the grand scheme of things.
As it turns out, I've never destroyed any of my own phones, so I saved $300 every two years since I started buying smart phones 12 years ago. So $1800. If my phone gets submerged and Google won't replace it, I guess I'll have to buy another phone with my $1800 budget!
Also, when I got my Pixel 3, the back had some waves in the paint. It literally did not matter at all, because I put a case on it, and it couldn't affect functionality at all, but I told them I wasn't happy, and they shipped a new one that did not have the cosmetic imperfections. Try that with your iPhone! Oh yeah, it would probably work.
shrug This isn't a competition. Just be smart with your money (or do with your money as you choose, whether someone else thinks it smart or not!)
Expensive compared to what, exactly? Car insurance, which doesn't have a world wide chain of stores you can walk into when your car is smashed up? House insurance, which also does not afford you the luxury of world wide stores with commission free staff to assist you when your house burns down?
Most "insurance", if you want to call it that, doesn't offer you the same level of experience, so in what way is it expensive?
My house insurance doesn't teach me how a boiler works so I can use it correctly, or my dish washer, TV, or anything else about the property I own. Apple DO run classes for learning to do just about anything on your iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc. I'd have to only attend one, perhaps two, of those classes for the staff member's time to be worth more than what I paid for my "insurance".
So what are you comparing it to that makes it expensive?
> As it turns out, I've never destroyed any of my own phones
Which of course means no else does, neither.
> shrug This isn't a competition.
Then why did you argue price as a competitive factor in your purchasing decision? That's literally a competition.
It's expensive to pay nearly double for a phone because you feel you need classes to learn how to use it.
I'm saying it is perfectly fine if you want to spend more money for the Apple experience. And obviously you are fine with that, too. I prefer to use my money on other things. It's not a competition between rabid fans. It's a market for selling chunks of hardware. So yes, they are competing for our dollars. I prefer to maintain my decision-making over where those dollars go. Having special in-store luxury experiences is not why I buy a phone that takes pictures and does other things nicely, too. But it's fine if you spend that money.
Insurance is betting you're going to have something bad happen. Expensive insurance is when the ones calculating the insurance make a bunch of money off you because you pay a lot more than you get out of it. Paying a ton for a low deductible but never making a claim. If you personally don't destroy phones, paying a lot for insurance on them doesn't make sense. I never said no one else should do so, or that no one else destroys phones. Obviously you do. But still not enough to make up for the price premium.
Overall it's not a solid argument for the phone, but you have your reasons for buying it. It just does nothing to discount my reasons for saving my money and buying a different phone.
Now you're just being dishonest. You know right well that a flag ship Android is near the same price.
Actually on a (Samsung) Galaxy 5 you could've just popped open the back of the phone and replaced the battery yourself in a few seconds.
Most people do not get free replacements or repairs for their iPhones.
(Admittedly, the bloke next to me with the iPhone 4 arguing that the back glass had shattered "all on its own; I didn't drop it, honestly!" probably wasn't going to get a new phone for free...)
Thus the "expensive" iPhones are $250 or less per year. And they are, in my opinion, usually better than the Android equivalent.
You might say; "but what if I have the same upgrade cycle with iPhones". Well, then you can have a look at what a used version of the last gen iPhone costs. Where I live; it is something like $100-200 less than what it was new. That means; some people are having the newest version of the iPhone for only $100-200 / year. That is, at least, roughly the same price as your are getting (or better, depending on resale value of the specific Android phone), but with the newest version of a more premium product.
In other words. You might be getting ripped off at $260. It all comes down to money over time, not amount at a defined moment, unless the amount is prohibitive.
When it was time to upgrade, it apparently also became time for apple to jack up the price of their flagship to a thousand bucks and I just vehemently avoided that out of principle.
Looking at alternatives,the Galaxy seemed like a reasonably similar premium (not polished software fosho) phone, but sticker price was similar to iPhones. However thos things go on sale a lot. Nabbed a S9 few months after release for 500 and looks like it'll last me three years at least. Super happy with the hardware (and software actually) as well.
The only "flaw" in your logic above is that in principle an iPhone probably can last 4 years but that's not constant - models from them are sometimes just not as reliable (we talking 4 year reliability vs 3) and it's not just a thousand dollars, it's thousand and tax and bells and whistles (which for apple is always more). Plus you now have a premium phone that you better don't break or scratch (if you want to sell) or you're out a very large number of Benjamins.
Don't get me wrong, I am writing this on a Sony Android phone, which I expect to get 0 dollars for if I try to sell it. But from an economic perspective I don't think there is a clear advantage to Android devices.
In your opinion, the iPhone is better, so it's OK that you're spending more, but it's weird to say someone's getting ripped off by buying an excellent one year old phone for much, much less.
The money over time argument rarely works out as better for a more expensive item. Anecdotally, the people I know that buy a brand new flagship do not wait four years between phones. The ones that are OK with a one year old flagship are also OK with a three year old one. And even if they upgrade more often, it's just so much less expensive (over time.)
This new extra-wide camera is interesting as it's fairly rare for a consumer-targeted camera to exceed a 24mm (FFE) focal length. Even in expensive professional lenses, getting to 13mm (FFE) is fairly unusual. Most ultra-wide glass stops at 16mm.
The idea that apple needs an extra $300 dollars to fit that into my phone, maybe i'll just get two pixel 3s. Or a nice point and shoot.
The 'bare minimum' that the consumer will accept vs 'the average feature set expected' vs 'lets sprinkle in some unicorn dust and charge people up the wazoo' model is getting a little old. Its why I have iPhone 6s, 7s, still in the fleet of devices I support. The consumer and businesses are simply tired of this bs.
The new iPhone Pros appear to mark a shift; it's the same shift the Mac Pro announcement did in June, and was also a source of contention on Hacker News.
It's hard to name the more expensive version to convey it's better without in turn suggesting the cheaper one is shittier.
"Pro" lets you do that by suggesting that it's for a different audience, allowing consumers of the budget model to save face so to speak (I don't need it because I'm not a professional).
I'd imagine people getting into vlogging and such, or even people who just want to be "that cool and popular" (especially younger people) that would buy in to the "Pro" moniker.
I made the point elsewhere, but I think that ignores "professionals in the workplace doing this alongside other things". These can easily be "pro" for content creation teams, like editorial staff for capturing Stories from events and the like.
Just because they're not replacements for high-end commercial photography equipment doesn't mean they're not being used as intended by professionals.
Completely agree that their terminology might be skewing, but I wouldn't be so dismissive of their use in a professional context, even if the users aren't "photography professionals" themselves.
Without knowing anything about the X phones, I at first assumed that XR was the top of the line X phone. XR just... sounds like a better phone.
I think they resolved this with the 11 line.
Naturally it's just a marketing term.