With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/10/technology/apple-iphone-price.html

253 694 9 years ago

5_minutes3• 9 years ago

Previously, if you bought a Plus, upgraded the storage you also hit the $1000 mark quite easily.

Apple can't do much wrong: removed the audio jack did not hurt iPhone sales. The new mac book pro, ridiculously priced, a very 'particular' keyboard, was the fastest selling laptop ever.

If you see the reactions on let's say, The Verge, on any post regarding new Apple products - it's insane.

So I think Apple is still in a very comfortable position to keep on doing this artificial pricing for the time being, and for the foreseeable future as well - and get away with it. Their tandem of hard & software, though much flawed, still seems to be worth the premium price for many people.

They have me because of OSX but I won't stand another crappy laptop of them anymore.

racl1013• 9 years ago

Yep, still doesn't get better than OSX.

nikofeyn3• 9 years ago

as a user of both windows and mac os x, what do you truly like about mac os x that you prefer it so heavily over windows?

DigitalJack• 9 years ago

My wife has one of the new ones with the "particular" keyboard. I think it's okay (the keyboard), but it's pretty noisy.

Jack000• 9 years ago

I hated it at first but started liking it after a few weeks.

9 months later I kind of hate it again. You get used to the short travel, and the clickiness is very pleasant. The problem I have now is that sometimes you can feel a click and it doesn't trigger - most commonly with the arrow keys. Also occasionally a few keys would "jam" and not fully click.

Overall my typing speed and accuracy has definitely decreased.

eknkc2• 9 years ago

The "particular" keyboard is actually quite good to use. I like the way I type on this one.

However it's not reliable. A single speck of dust under the keycap then you have misfires. Keys get mushy for no reason, get stuck etc. My b key does not work reliably now for example.

5_minutes3• 9 years ago

It's so noisy that on a conference call, one can not take minutes without having to disable their own input mic.. haah

racl1013• 9 years ago

If those new Nokias start being sold in my neck of the woods (Western Canada) I think I will pretty much just stop bothering with smartphones and just go with that compromise.

If I'm being honest with myself, I just need a damn phone and an ok camera. The rest are frivolities.

I can just continue using my table for the rest.

a1371• 9 years ago

Well, I read something that I take with a grain of salt and so should you, but here it is:

Those new Nokias are only carrying the brand name under typical chinese design and manufacturing process. The incentive would be to revive the brand in markets where Nokia had stronghold with its cheaper models and the average phone has poor quality. If that's the case it'd be very disappointing for what you are expecting.

oblio• 9 years ago

Based on reviews I've read online, the new Nokia phones are still build like tanks. So I wouldn't worry too much on that front.

pilsetnieks2• 9 years ago

If by those new Nokias that aren't smartphones you mean the new 3310s (because Nokia also makes Android phones now,) you should be weary - the camera isn't exactly ok, not by modern standards, and most importantly, they only work on GSM (2G) networks that are being phased out in a lot of places.

madeofpalk2• 9 years ago

they only work on GSM (2G) networks

Haha you're kidding me? They shut down the 2G networks in Australia this year!

ihateneckbeards2• 9 years ago

Not excusing the price, but people these days spend multiple hours a day on their phones. Phones are as important as cars for example. How high prices can go ? Even higher imo

People are ready to pay for expensive cars for a better experience and higher "social standing". Phones are not that different in this regard

Malician• 9 years ago

Agree. People will spend $1000 (or more) for relatively minor features on their cars. A phone is with you 24/7 - it's less like a tool, or even a digital assistant, and more like a cybernetic implant.

The amazing thing isn't that phones cost so much but that competition is such that you can get an excellent product with top-of-the-line CPU, radio, RAM, screen, everything for $1,000 instead of $100,000 or $1,000,000.

sho• 9 years ago

competition is such that you can get an excellent product [..] for $1,000

The really interesting part is that for ~$1000 you get the best product available at any price.

That's the magic of economies of scale in consumer markets, especially technology. It's so incredibly expensive and largely fruitless to step out of the economy of scale, that practically speaking no-one does it.

I don't have a yacht like Paul Allen, I bet my house isn't as nice as Bill Gates' and my bank account looks nothing like Zuckerberg's. But it's quite possible I have the same phone!

StudentStuff8• 9 years ago

Or, for $50 you can get a phone with a midrange chipset that will be nearly as fast as any of the top tier phones out there. The slightly used phone market has really broadened access to cellphones quite a bit.

jayd16• 9 years ago

As an Android dev, I see the total opposite sentiment. Most new phones are pretty damn good, even the mid range.

I assume things will go the same way as the PC. Cheaper hardware for most, Apple still holding onto a niche in the market.

ihateneckbeards2• 9 years ago

Mid range cars can also drive pretty much like top of the range cars, they share most features yet people like high end cars.

dbcooper• 9 years ago

Android security updates are the only reason to update my Nexus 5. A decent midrange phone, with an open bootloader, would probably do me for many years.

TeMPOraL7• 9 years ago

Most new phones are pretty damn good, even the mid range.

For the first week, at least. Then they start to accumulate cruft and slow down, eventually becoming barely usable.

I've experienced it in the past. I see it happen for my friends and family. I decided some time ago to save up that $750 - $1k and go for the high-range phones, so that I can use them for two or three years without daily frustrations.

The top-most commenter is right. Phones are used even more frequently than cars; for many, even more frequently than other types of computers combined. It's one of those things it's not worth to cheap out on - like a mattress or an office chair.

(Now, of course part of me is happy for the mid-range phones costing what they do, because this is why high-end phones cost $1k and not $10k.)

criddell3• 9 years ago

That's probably not a great outcome. Financially, Apple is doing well. Are there any PC makers with solid profitability? I think the phone market is even worse. Apple takes almost all the profit.

I mostly just don't get the loyalty people have to operating systems or particular manufacturers. When there is an application that I need and it's exclusive to some platform, then that decides what OS I need.

I also am not bothered by a $1000 phone and I'm surprised that it's a topic of contention here. Many of us spend more than that on coffee in a year and the phone is probably just as important. $3 / day is well within reach for most of us. My life isn't going to be any different if I choose the $1 / day phone.

avenoir• 9 years ago

We carry these things on our bodies damn near most of the day. We use them in our down time to read books and news. To communicate with others and consume information in a matter of seconds. To remind ourselves of things occurring throughout the day. To keep track of grocery lists, diets, fitness activities, sleep cycles and etc. It's basically the first fully functional extension of our body. So, absolutely... why the hell not pay more? It's almost like paying slightly more for a bionic arm that will get you a little closer to truly experiencing the sense of touch you've been missing for years.

alacombe3• 9 years ago

why not pay more ?

1) A CAN$100 phone gives you 75% of the experience, a CAN$250 gives your 95% of the experience

2) Android doesn't lock you to use a single app depot

3) Android doesn't require 2 or 3 login / password (iCloud + iTunes)

4) Android accounts work worldwide, it doesn't fail to log you in if you change countries (I had to re-create an AppleID when I moved to Canada because the US one no longer worked)

5) You don't have to use an extra step when migrating, just log-in et voila ! (ie. not iTunes shenanigans)

6) generally poor software full of UI glitches

7) No pressure sensitive touch-ID which fails to work with aging users (try to explain the concept to a +80 yo).

8) I can still use my $2 earplugs without an adapter

9) Android does not care what OS you use on your main desktop

10) MULTIPLE SIM ! Dual SIM phone is pretty much getting standard. I wish there was triple or quadruple SIM phones

11) External storage

12) Removable batteries

etc.

cm21873• 9 years ago

Yeah but there was a big jump in performance / new features between early iphone generations.

Nowadays the difference is really marginal for every day use. You are only going to take better photos in marginal low light conditions, if you even take lots of photos, everything else will be pretty much the same experience. I'd argue that we are even in removal of features mode (audio jack, touch id) which is putting off people like me who normally wouldn't mind a high price tag for a smartphone.

There are enough apple fans out there to buy any piece of plastic that apple will sell at the price of gold. But for a wider wealthy and techie audience, I think the value added of spending more on an iphone is becoming hard to justify.

StudentStuff8• 9 years ago

Its surprising how good a used, $50 phone is today. You can get something on par with a Note 3 or Note 4 from LG and get two solid years of use out of it, perhaps more with ROMs.

This is part of why I stopped buying the latest flagship, just didn't make sense for me to worry so much when I could avoid that entirely, and get 98% of the same performance and features.

Razengan4• 9 years ago

Yeah but there was a big jump in performance / new features between early iphone generations. Nowadays the difference is really marginal for every day use.

You can say the exact same for PCs, which could have stopped getting any performance improvements about 5 years ago and the general populace wouldn’t have complained at all.

yodsanklai2• 9 years ago

Not excusing the price, but people these days spend multiple hours a day on their phones

That's my reasoning when I buy a new computer. I can buy a MBP for $2000, use it for 3 years and sell it used for $1000. $30 a month is a bargain considering I use it between 5-10 hours a day. I may pay a mac a little more (20%?) than the competition but it's worth it considering it's subjectively better (and objectively different, Mac OS / design / size -- arguably less and less so).

However, I'd never buy an iphone (or an expensive smartphone). Iphone users may disagree, but for what I've seen they provide almost the same experience as much cheaper phones (typically two times cheaper). Another issue I have with the price is that I don't feel confortable walking around with such a small expensive item. So easy to lose it or forget it.

StudentStuff8• 9 years ago

Much of this logic is why I stopped buying new computers or phones. I'd rather use a $70 T440 that I've upgraded and know how to repair most everything on than haul a MBP that I'll need to get a pro to service, that also happens to have terrible ventilation. I mean, my last MBP literally cooked itself, comparatively this T440 has a giant grill that it rapidly removes heat through (though its 15w i5 doesn't make much).

comstock2• 9 years ago

What might be interesting is if the iPhone X ends up being a device that combines more laptop-like features into a phone.

Better keyboard/mouse/display integration. Support for laptop-like apps. Then it could be worth laptop-like pricing.

sanxiyn• 9 years ago

iPhone provides software update much longer (typically two times longer) than any Android phones in the market, so it actually has longer life. If you plan to use it for a long time, it makes sense.

I agree if you plan to use iPhone for less than 2 years it's probably expensive.

nmbr213• 9 years ago

So easy to lose it or forget it.

Or break it. After I broke my Nexus4's screen three times I gave up and bought some cheap Zenfone (and it cost as much as one screen repair for Nexus).

KozmoNau78• 9 years ago

"I can buy a MBP for $2000, use it for 3 years and sell it used for $1000."

I've used a refurbed Thinkpad T420 for about a year now. It cost me $350 to buy, and I expect it to last at least 2-3 years. Less than $10 a month, and it's more than fast enough to do absolutely everything I need to do. Not too shabby for a 6 year old machine.

The only reason for buying a brand-new computer is if you absolutely need the highest end of computing power, or need the very newest peripheral ports for some reason.

funnelsgun• 9 years ago

I must be the exception here as I spend no more than an hour on my iPhone (6s) each day.

I use Apple Music, WhatsApp, and the camera. However, WhatsApp is available on Android and the camera on the iPhone 6s still doesn't even come close to that of an SLR so I tend to use that and keep the iPhone in my pocket. When I take photos, I have gone out with the intention of taking photos, so there is no convenience factor of an iPhone for me.

However, I also love cars. You can take them out for fun on a weekend, show them off and talk to other owners at meets, drive them on tracks all over the world, and, if you made sensible choices, have the depreciation of an iPhone make a car look like an investment. Meanwhile, everyone and their mother has an iPhone - there is no novelty to owning one.

Thus, until I start getting more out of an iPhone, I can't help but think how a Moto G and an extra $800 in pocket to spend on something else would give me so much more pleasure than the next iPhone.

remir2• 9 years ago

Give me a $300-$400 Android phone with support for Project Treble and an unlocked bootloader and we're talking. I'll put LineageOS on it: regular security updates, yearly OS updates and no crapware!

spike0212• 9 years ago

Even then, there will always be lower-tier iPhones and lower-tier "other" devices that will be cheaper and work just fine for most people, just like most people only need a Corolla, Camry, Civic, etc. for their daily car needs and not necessarily the newest BMW 3 or 5 series, etc.

pcurve• 9 years ago

Apple and other computer makers have tried the social standing thing too with their products, but thye have always failed. It only works up until certain point.

I do think that there are markets for $2,000, $3,000, $4,000 iphone, but they must provide functional enhancements over $1,000 model, be it insanely good camera, insanely good display, 1TB storage, or 50% more battery life in same form factor.

With computers and devices, it's more about practical utility.

So why doesn't Apple do this? Because the market for $2-$5,000 phone is too small, and given Apple's reliance on parts maker, they can only have so much competitive edge. (i.e. if they can do it, then so can Android)

csours3• 9 years ago

For $1,000 can it be durable as well as good looking? How about a serious IP (Ingress Protection - dust and water) rating?

millstone2• 9 years ago

Honest question, what does the rating actually mean? The Galaxy S7 was IP68 certified but did not survive immersion https://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s...

This might be a case of under-promise, over-deliver.

Veratyr• 9 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code is a decent summary.

IP68 means absolutely no dust whatsoever and:

"The equipment is suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer. However, with certain types of equipment, it can mean that water can enter but only in such a manner that it produces no harmful effects. The test depth and/or duration is expected to be greater than the requirements for IPx7, and other environmental effects may be added, such as temperature cycling before immersion."

In the S8's case, the manufacturer specified conditions were "submersion in up to 1.5 meters of fresh water for up to 30 minutes", from http://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/galaxy-s8/performance/.

csours3• 9 years ago

I guess I mean IP capability, not rating.

noncoml3• 9 years ago

Good looking? iPhones stopped being good looking since they added the camera that sticks out like a sore thumb.

bitdeveloper• 9 years ago

Even the slimmest of cases makes that invisible.

featherverse• 9 years ago

It isn't crossing a threshold. The old iphones and their "affordable" price tags was crossing a threshhold. Apple was dipping their toes in the middle-america Market in order to grab market share. And now they're returning to what they've always sold, overpriced gadgets aimed at a specific niche demo.

millstone2• 9 years ago

Can't it be both? Apple sells upmarket but also mid-market phones, like the iPhone SE. Features are introduced on the high-end models and then migrate down. Of course Apple will continue to compete in the mid-market range.

girvo• 9 years ago

iPhone SE

Which is the best phone I've ever owned -- Nokia N9 aside, anyway. Excellent size, great performance, latest updates and I got it second hand (but BNIB, was her insurance replacement for a lost phone) for $350AUD. I get to use iOS with a reasonably modern day chipset, an excellent camera, but for the cost of a midrange android phone. Excellent, really.

sidchilling• 9 years ago

Aren't phones supposed to get cheaper every year?

pravda• 9 years ago

An iPhone is a Veblen good [1]. The purpose of buying an iPhone is to advertise your economic resources.

Like a Gucci handbag or a Rolex watch. With a smaller markup.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

bthrn• 9 years ago

That the purpose of it is to advertise economic resources is not true. My wife has an iPhone because it's the most competent tool she can use to get the job done. Having used several Android phones prior to this, I don't blame her. Relatively speaking there are fewer security issues, compatibility quirks, and reliability issues with iPhones which makes them worth the price to her.

After the 2 year mark our Android phones are literally in the junk drawer, and her iPhone 6s is still functioning as fast as the day it was purchased.

sklinger• 9 years ago

They do, an iPhone 6s is cheaper now than when it was released.

shaan7• 9 years ago

lol

chadcmulligan3• 9 years ago

Does the actual price matter? I thought about buying one outright when I bought mine, but it worked out more expensive than buying one on a plan, I can't think of anyone who bought their's outright

Tsiklon2• 9 years ago

Personally for me and my usage in the UK, a mobile phone plan is more expensive over the course of 2 years.

Yes the initial outlay is more painful, but i find £25 a month much more palatable than £74 (for the same plan with the phone)

back of the napkin maths says the following; iPhone 7+ 128G (my current phone) - £819 phone plan (unlimited data - 600mins - unlimited texts) - £25/month Over 2 years - 819+600 - £1419

phone + plan (unlimited data - unlimited minutes - unlimited texts, closest to what i currently have) - £74/month Over 2 years - £1850

chadcmulligan3• 9 years ago

Yes I'm in australia and the maths has probably changed - plans are a lot cheaper now. Still I stand by my comment, a large percentage of iphone buyers don't look at the price, they look at the monthly rate - if the difference is $10 a month then it probably won't change things much imho.

kid0m4n2• 9 years ago

Funny thing. We in India pay regularly close to $1000 (oh the irony there) for a regular iPhone 7 - and they sell a lot here.

King-Aaron2• 9 years ago

Yep, Australia too.

iPhone 7 32 GB

Australian price: AU$1,079 ... US Price: $649

kid0m4n2• 9 years ago

No offence :P but we are paying > US$1000

isolli• 9 years ago

Turkey has long been one of the most expensive countries to buy an iPhone. The current model costs $1,200 there [0], and I remember that it was already the most expensive country 4 or 5 years ago.

[0] https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/04/cheapest-country-to-buy-an-ip...

dannysu3• 9 years ago

Nobody looks at a top of the line PC with the best graphics card(s) and say it's crossing a threshold. Everybody understands it's for a certain demographic.

According to rumors, they're still going to have various models and price points.

Also, iPhones are extremely economical because no other phones receive OS updates for as long. My iPhone 6, which cost $749 at the time, is coming up to 3 years old. It's still flawless, no speed issues or any issues. The only thing bad is that the battery isn't as good as before, but I still get through the day just fine.

I might upgrade this year just because "new & shiny", but I'll probably pass the iPhone 6 to family. And because it's still very good and receive updates, that means if I get 4 years of life out of it, its cost is actually only $375 when compared to other phones that stop getting updates 2 years in. That's really good!

morgante• 9 years ago

Seriously, I actually consider iPhones to be some of the most cost-effective purchases I make. My mom is still happily using my old iPhone 5, and my iPhone 4 functions as a pretty nice media controller.

Yetanfou4• 9 years ago

I see your 3 year young iPhone and raise my 6 year old Motorola Defy. I bought it new in 2011 for about 1/4 of what the then-current iPhone would have cost. It still works flawlessly, the battery is fine as well (~5 days of normal use on a single charge or ~7 hours of screen time). If the battery were to fail I could just replace it, no tools required.

Oh, the thing is waterproof and 'shock-proof' (although the latter is to be taken with a grain of salt, my wife managed to break the glass on hers after about three years).

In other words, it does not take an expensive iPhone to last longer than a contract period. Well-built phones can last a long time, much longer than the 2 years which most people seem to consider as normal.

thingerr2• 9 years ago

I'd be with you, except for Android's planned obsolescence. The reliance on third-parties to provide at most ~2/3 year security update paired with a dated and forked version of the Linux kernel gives me pause.

dannysu3• 9 years ago

That misses a key point I was making: OS updates.

Yes, I too have a Nexus 4 (bought in 2012) and it still works fine. But no more updates. I don't consider that on par with say my previous work laptop, which was also 3 years before I upgraded.

I also own a Moto E (2nd Gen, $60-ish) and bought a Moto G+ for my brother this year, but I can't count on them to receive OS updates for as long.

brianSP• 9 years ago

I see your 6 year young iPhone and raise my 14 year old Nokia 1100. I bought it new in 2003 80~ dolla. It still works flawlessly, the battery is fine as well (~31 days of normal use on a single charge or ~16 hours of screen time). If the battery were to fail I could just replace it, no tools required.

Oh, the thing is bulletproof (although it must be taken with a grain of salt, chuck norrys managed to break the glass on his after about three years).

In other words, it does not take an expensive iPhone to last longer than a contract period. Well-built phones can last a long time, much longer than the 10 years which most people seem to consider as normal.

arnvald• 9 years ago

Does it still get updates though?

In 2011 I bought a Motorola Droid 2 and I it's been one of the best phones I've used, but I don't think I've ever got any system update. It's been stuck on 2.1 forever.

simonh3• 9 years ago

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is.

All my iPhones get handed down. The only one out of (er, 5 devices I think?) that's properly busted is my other daughter's 4s. It started falling apart at the seams this summer and is currently held together with sliced strips of sticky tape. Still, it's lasted 5 years and was still getting OS updates last year!

simonh3• 9 years ago

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is.

The ting with OS updates is, it was supposed to be the other way around. We were told that being open source meant Android phones could never be abandoned like this. Owners would have the freedom to update the OS themselves and would truly own their device and it's software. There's no way a proprietary OS vendor would provide long terms support because it would be uneconomical and deter upgrades to new devices. What an utter crock of shit! What went wrong?

simonh3• 9 years ago

My daughter was still using my 2010 iPhone 3GS until last December. It even still worked with the App Store. I'd dig it out and fire it up again but I'm not sure where it is. I ran out of family members to had it down to.

The thing with OS updates is, it was supposed to be the other way around. We were told that being open source meant Android phones could never be abandoned like this. Owners would have the freedom to update the OS themselves and would truly own their device and it's software. There's no way a proprietary OS vendor would provide long terms support because it would be uneconomical and deter upgrades to new devices, but with Android that wouldn't matter.

What an utter crock of shit that turned out to be! What went wrong? How can Android fans that bought that line not be storming the gates of the vendors and Google that sold them these lies for being deceived and betrayed? But no, it's all about the new Samsung (factory worker poisoning, embezzling CEO, explodaphone coverup) shiny. Just roll over and be grateful for your new dose of utopian Android open source goodness, the best possible phones in the best of all possible open source worlds.

Un-effing-believable.

Tepix5• 9 years ago

If you install a more recent version of Android (such as 4.4) on the Defy (it shipped with Android 2.3 or so), it will be too slow for use (for my taste,anyway). I tried it with a faster Defy+.

Even with Android 4.4 it will be a very insecure phone. With Android 2.3 it will be laughably insecure. Visit one wrong webpage and your phone is owned. No thanks.

nikofeyn3• 9 years ago

It's still flawless, no speed issues or any issues. The only thing bad is that the battery isn't as good as before.

so, not flawless? i can replace the battery on my phone, which is very reassuring and also practical for times away from a charger.

theshrike792• 9 years ago

How often are you away from a charger or a portable power bank, really?

We can all imagine theoretical situations where one would need to swap batteries, but they're just that - theoretical. In practice you can either find/borrow/buy/steal a charger or you carry an USB powerbank with you if running out of battery is an issue for you.

delazeur2• 9 years ago

Also, iPhones are extremely economical. My iPhone 6, which cost $749 at the time, is coming up to 3 years old.

Uh, what? I'm on my second ~$70 Android smart phone in eight years. It's a tad slow, but we're talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient. I have honestly never been impressed by anything a $600+ iPhone can do beyond what my phone can. The only drawback is that it isn't compatible with Apple group texts, but that is more than made up for by the fact that I truly don't care if my phone gets lost or breaks (I back up my files, so I'm only out 70 bucks). I have no idea why people spend so much money on phones.

TeMPOraL7• 9 years ago

It's a tad slow, but weren't talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient.

A few seconds of waiting is not "truly inconvenient"? I suppose you're either a zen master, or not doing much with the phone (possibly because it's "a tad slow").

For me, the phone is something I use constantly during the day, in lots of brief bursts. Few seconds of lag may be the difference between me staying in or leaving the flow. It would often make a significant fraction of the length of a single interaction with a phone. Those kinds of frustrations add up for me over time. Avoiding all of that is worth the $700, if I can afford it.

dannysu3• 9 years ago

I mean my wife is still using my iPhone 3Gs (8 years old), so I get there are different needs. That's exactly my point.

Would you make the argument that everyone should be using $200 chromebooks?

If not, then why would one make the argument that anything more expensive than a chromebook is crossing some kind of threshold?

Gaelan4• 9 years ago

When was the last time that phone got a security patch?

jamesrcole• 9 years ago

It's a tad slow, but we're talking about literally a few seconds of waiting, nothing truly inconvenient.

Few seconds waiting for what? There's a big difference between a few seconds waiting for an app to load and, say, for it to register that you've tapped a key on its on-screen keyboard.

tagurit3• 9 years ago

There's not much to understand why people spend a fortune on phones every few years. These days it's more because of the status of owning the latest and greatest device (nothing wrong with that as people are entitled to do whatever they tf they want to do). Like everything else really.

yodsanklai2• 9 years ago

Also, iPhones are extremely economical because no other phones receive OS updates for as long.

Good point. Also they sell extremely well on the second-hand market.

cjsuk• 9 years ago

This is how I roll. Buy iPhone. Get AppleCare. When the AppleCare is done, sell it and buy a new one. Resale covers the AppleCare. If I break it, I pay the excess and walk away with a new handset the same day.

This feeds the scond hand market.

If I bust an android phone I lose it for three to four weeks, have to buy a stopgap phone and tend to end up with a botched repair from a 3rd party repairer the vendor have hired. On top of that the OS updates usually stop after a year and roll out about a month after they are announced unless I buy a Nexus which is completely non repairable anyway.

_Codemonkeyism• 9 years ago

So your last generation iPhone still gets updates? I would not call that a excellent benchmark in my book.

The trouble with iOS devices is that they stop being usable the moment you can no longer update the OS in the way that most applications only support the newest OS (happened to several iPads here with e.g. Amazon app, Twitter, Youtube) - because updates roll out to the majority of users so fast compared to Android.

"stop getting updates 2 years in."

With Android most applications still support 4.X when Oreo comes out.

Gaelan4• 9 years ago

6 is almost 3 generations ago. The 7S/8 (we're not sure) comes out tomorrow. You can buy a 7 now. The 6S was released 2 years ago. The 6 was released 3 years ago.

spike0212• 9 years ago

I have an iPhone 6 (not 6s) and can still use pretty much "most applications that only support the newest OS".

The only things I can't do involve hardware-based features for things I don't have in my phone.

steevdave2• 9 years ago

It takes only one slip up to screw your security. One targeted attack that you don't notice because you're in a rush.

I love my MotoX 2013, but it never got updates (Sprint model, Sprint blamed Motorola, Motorola blamed Sprint); it's succeptible to Stagefright so I can't use it anymore. And it will never receive an update for it.

As much as we use our phones and as much personal information is on them, security updates should be first and foremost.

Yes, AOSP exists for some devices, but 9 times out of 10, something breaks when using it.

When Android moves to a new way of doing audio or video, drivers stop working, and some people try to come up with shims, but as others point out. The developer of it gets a new phone and the project dies.

My Nexus 5 (November 2013) hasn't gotten a security update since October 2016. My iPhone 5 (September 2012) just got an update to 10.3.3 in July.

Android devices are notorious for being slow to get updates, if you ever get them at all.

Yeah it can be cheaper to get an Android device, and I have quite a few, but they simply aren't up to the same standards that iPhones are.

fehrm• 9 years ago

You must be from the valley if you think that a 1000 phone is economical. That is laughable.

dijit3• 9 years ago

It's a defensible position, I live in the EU so proximity to heaps of expendable income is not as abundant than in the US middle-class. In the UK we had a saying "the poor man pays twice", meaning that if you buy a shitty rake and it breaks you have to go buy a new one.

This is kinda the case with phones too, you can buy a $450 phone with 2 years of updates, or a $700 with 5 years.

Which one is more economical over time?

jdietrich2• 9 years ago

Diminishing returns kick in at a remarkably low price point, especially outside the US.

$250 gets you a Xiaomi Mi A1 - a phone with a 1080p display, a full metal body, 4GB of RAM, 64GB of flash, a fast 8-core processor and guaranteed software updates directly from Google.

http://www.mi.com/in/mi-a1/

Is a $750 iPhone really three times better than that phone? Is it even 5% better? If I were an Apple shareholder, I'd be giving some serious thought to Apple's future in the growing middle-income economies. Apple are clearly going gangbusters right now, but I'm highly sceptical about their continued relevance.

lotsofpulp• 9 years ago

It is better. The MacOS/iMessage/Facetime/Time machine ecosystem is is pretty awesome, and if you don't want to spend your time and effort trying to fix Windows BS and removing their malware, then an extra thousand or two is worth it. Plus, if something goes wrong, you get great customer service at the Apple Store.

I've done the Windows/Android thing, it's a pain in the ass to keep up with all the stuff. As I get older, I just need my things to work (especially smartphone and computer) and I'm willing to pay a premium. I don't even want to have to research what I'm buying, and Apple has been executing on that for quite a few years now.

leadingthenet2• 9 years ago

Is a $750 iPhone really three times better than that phone? Is it even 5% better?

Yes, it is. Three times better might be an exaggeration, but it has unique features that basically no other phone has currently, and that's worth different things to different people.

noncoml3• 9 years ago

From the so far leaked rumors I don’t see anything to justify the price. If anything there is a regression with the absence of TouchID. But I guess we will have to wait and see in two days.

bluthru3• 9 years ago

If anything there is a regression with the absence of TouchID.

FaceID fulfills that role.

mtgx4• 9 years ago

All face authentication schemes are a joke and can be broken soon after release. Fingerprint auth can be broken, too, but it's orders of magnitude more difficult to "clone" someone's fingerprint than it is to copy one of their pictures from the internet, or from a CCTV camera, etc.

Even if the system uses infrared or 3D images or whatever, it's just a matter of developing an advanced enough algorithm to deal with that, which shouldn't take that long if the target market is there (hundreds of millions of iphones with such an auth system).

noncoml3• 9 years ago

Will it be as reliable and fast as TouchID?

ianai2• 9 years ago

I think the screen will be the thing everyone talks about it. I think it's also the reason for the price.

developer22• 9 years ago

What's so innovative about the screen? All the components at the top of the phone are still present in a blocked out section. It's not like they figured out how to conceal those components beneath the screen, which is what we're truly waiting for. Until the front of the phone is 100% screen space (perhaps minus a very thin bezel), it's certainly not worth the hype.

Edit: I went back and looked at the latest leaked photos. It's better than I remember. The phone looks decent enough when the screen is off, but very gimmicky when the screen is lit. It looks like they went as far as they could, realized they couldn't deliver any better, and so left that top section of the phone in what is essentially an unfinished state. I suspect the innovation I'm holding out for will happen by iPhone 10 or 11.

1ba9115454• 9 years ago

This is a very good strategy in my opinion. The iPhone will be the Rolex of the smartphone market and purchased as a fashion item and a status symbol.

mynewtb• 9 years ago

Finally!

mtgx4• 9 years ago

How many rolexes are sold worldwide again?

Apple becoming a "fashion" company is such a horrible strategic mistake that I don't think Steve Jobs would've made. Apple will proportionally become less of a "tech" company as a it becomes a fashion company.

In other words, the technology it uses in its devices will feel less and less advanced (especially for the price) as time moves on. You can already see that with other companies developing (real) gold phones with crystals on them and such, while using specs from 2-3 years before, but charging many thousands or tens of thousands of dollars for the phone.

grecy2• 9 years ago

The first iPhone was announced at $599 in mid-2007.

That's $704 2017 dollars, and look how much more of a device you will be getting.

Seems perfectly find to me. If people want to spend it, of course a company will make it.

jononor• 9 years ago

Competition is a hell of a lot better these days. A phone at 1/5 the cost will cover the same needs.

visarga3• 9 years ago

I voted with my wallet since iPhone 4. I was an early enthusiast with iPhone and owned the first model, as soon as it came out, and the next 3 models after that. But at some point it started becoming so expensive I was put off. I can afford it but I was just disgusted. I have gone through 3 Android phones since and now use a Nexus 6P, which is a very nice phone.

jaxondu• 9 years ago

Apple's 1k pricing will be doing just fine as Samsung is also pricing Note 8 around the same.

Gaelan4• 9 years ago

I believe the Note is equivalent to Apple's Plus models.

danielrmay• 9 years ago

Is it? I think the S8 Plus is the equivalent - unless the new iPhone comes with a stylus.

zaroth2• 9 years ago

I like paying $1,000 for a device like this because I want Apple (and competitors) to know I would absolutely spend $1,000 - BUT it had better hold up, perform beautifully, bring me something technologically compelling, and do some damn cool stuff.

At $1,000 sets a very high bar. Excited to see if they meet it!

devwastaken• 9 years ago

After recently doing a bit of research into a new smartphone, I begun to understand why people buy Iphones, even if they're really really expensive. Firstly, you can explain it away financially with monthly payments, like any phone through a provider, but the biggest pain point I had is proven reliability. Take any popular Android phone, and you'll see a history of unsolved hardware problems from the manufacturer, such as boot loops. I can't afford to have my phone just 'break' itself and have to deal with my provider or some such nonesense. It was a real problem looking through dozens and dozens of different phones and knowing that each one of them tried to re-invent the wheel in some way that will probably break.

In the end, I settled for a Moto Z Play, at the recommendation of a programming blog, and that it had excellent reviews on the outlets I could find it. But, even with that, I accidentally bought an international version from Amazon unknowingly until I tried to purchase accident protection from Motorola, and they had to direct me to Indian support, which their phoneline was offline for all the times I tried to call. After ordering the proper U.S. version through motorolas site, though, everything has been fine. But thats a lot of technical stuff and throwing direct money (no monthly payments) at a single item. I can understand why people would just go to their providers site, and order an Iphone after trying, or not trying, to do research into smartphones.

For reference, I was able to return the international version even though I had used it for a week or so, and once refunded bought the U.S. one. Motorola tries to provide a monthly payment mechanism through 'Affirm', but Affirm was... Firm in that I didn't have a checking account in my bank, because my bank gives it a different name (though still is a checking.). The main saving grace of motorola is that AFAIK, their accident protection can send me a new phone before I have to send a broken one back in the future if(when) it does break.

And after all of this, still no 4G on it, because AT&T doesn't do that unless you have an 'AT&T' phone IMEI supposedly.

izacus5• 9 years ago

So basically your own telecom operator is preventing you from using yourn own phone? How do you people tolerate that?

My SO actually has the Moto Z Play and that phone has one feature that even none of the Apple iPhones had - the battery will easily live for three days, pretty much eliminating battery anxiety when traveling or staying somewhere for extended periods of time. It really feels wierd again to not have to worry about dragging cables, chargers and battery packs around on every minor event.

alkonaut6• 9 years ago

proven reliability

This. I buy iPhones because I know that every released version will be bought by several tens of millions. I don't want a smartphone that only a couple of million bought. If something is wrong with it I don't want to find a few unhappy souls on some forum complaining about the same thing, and a manufacturer that's already pushing ten new models. The "Just works" feature is worth so much to people.

Obviously some of the the flagship android phones are also big sellers, and also tend to "just work" - but those also cost about the same as the iPhone.

johnpowell• 9 years ago

And also when you have 100K broken screens you have 100K of all the other parts that are cheap. I had to replace the lightning port on my iPhone and I called around for a few minutes and bought one locally for 5 bucks I replaced myself. That gets harder when you have 100s of random phones that are slightly different.

pawadu4• 9 years ago

I don't want a smartphone that only a couple of million bought

Not sure if serious ...

eksemplar2• 9 years ago

I'd pay $1000 if I could throw it in to a wall without breaking it.

Until then I'll stick to buying previous generation hardware for 70% the price.

StavrosK• 9 years ago

I hear you, I can't find a car I can drive through the bottom of a lake either.

eksemplar2• 9 years ago

I don't crash my car once a week.

tovkal• 9 years ago

There you go http://www.hammacher.com/Product/12531

StreamBright6• 9 years ago

1000 USD phone, still no audiophile option to listen to music. I am extremely disapointed with the direction Apple is going with all of this "we remove X because you do not need it anymore" approach.

dagw6• 9 years ago

1000 USD phone, still no audiophile option to listen to music

Can't it send music via USB to an external DAC anymore?

StreamBright6• 9 years ago

You absolutely can:

- https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7932507?start=0

- https://www.whathifi.com/news/apple-ios-update-prevents-dacs...

- https://www.head-fi.org/threads/iphone-7-severe-issue-with-m...

Now I just really dont understand in what world it makes sense to have extra things lingering around your headphone/phone when Apple is motly about ergonomics and UX. You think that I buy a 1000 USD phone and than a DAC as well because they removed it from the phone? It does not make too much sense to me.

Tsiklon2• 9 years ago

I always thought the Audiophile option was an external DAC? Though the DAC that iOS devices have shipped with was traditionally quite strong.

I have an Oppo HA-2 and it works great with my iOS devices (though i use it as a portable amp for my work computer).

There's also the likes of Audeze who are shipping Headphones and Earphones with a Lightning cable DAC in addition to the usual 3.5mm TRS jack.

StreamBright6• 9 years ago

Depends. I am not a crazy audiophile so I am happy with the DAC in the iPhone 6s.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/iphone-6s-plus-audio-qualit...

StreamBright6• 9 years ago

Quoting from the article I linked you:

>Analysis & Recommendations >As expected, the analog audio output of the iPhone 6S Plus is extraordinarily good. It has only >>half the distortion of the already extraordinary iPhone 6 Plus.
>Apple has more smart people and more resources than any other audio company on the planet, so as >>we see when it comes to audio engineering, the iPhone easily outdoes many so-called "audiophile" >>products.
>For enjoying music, you will probably get poorer performance if you waste your time and money >>with outboard DACs or headphone amplifiers; the iPhone already has the best there is.

idonotknowwhy3• 9 years ago

It appears as though a lot of iPhone and Apple fans are down-voting you. I; too, would expect a better DAC+AMP for that money.

StreamBright6• 9 years ago

HN has 10-20% fanboys, so I don't mind. I actually preferred Apple because it used to have a decent DAC so I did not carry a music player with me my phone was just fine.

grzm• 9 years ago

I would argue that the 3.5mm jack is a convenience rather than an audiophile feature. Some definitely would prefer to use a wired connection without an adapter, which I can understand. In terms of audiophile quality, if one is happy listening to a digital music source (and there's plenty of debate on that), the ability to use the DAC of your choice rather than whatever is supplied by Apple in phone is a feature. That's a motivating factor in purchasing component systems rather than all-in-one devices.

The story around current DAC's isn't good and certainly can (and hopefully will!) be improved.

So, yes, the audiophile experience with an iPhone isn't great, but I'd argue that's a function of the current DAC situation (as my sibling comment points out), not the removal of the 3.5mm jack.

erikb4• 9 years ago

You may think this price is ridiculous, but iPhones are slowly dying for two to four generaltions already. The only people still on iPhone are the ones who consider it too hard to switch to Android (low IT skills), or the ones who feel some fan-like loyalty. The price matches that perfectly, exploiting the weak and stupid.

PS: Why do I call fans stupid? The company isn't 1% as loyal to you as you are to them. If you still continue to be loyal, it can't be a smart decision.

TazeTSchnitzel2• 9 years ago

iPhones are slowly dying for two to four generaltions already

I know it might be nice to believe that if you're a die-hard Android fan, but this is frankly nonsense. iOS is as popular as it ever was.

erikb4• 9 years ago

Really good argument. Thanks for not totally dropping the idea of a reasonable discussion, just because someone said "God is dead", ehm, I mean "iPhone is bad".

Actually I believe there will be another popularity spike and Apple will be a profitable company for another 20 years. But that doesn't mean iPhone's not dying. If you are that big, you can have both together.

Personal theory of mine, based on watching th tech market for 10 years (no claim to being an expert):

You are growing if you are funded and have great ideas that you can validate to be the top of the game. This is what the first iPhone and iPod did.

You are the constant leader when you provide top notch quality for a high but affordable price. That's what the Macbook does. Without an iPod like great idea you won't be able to beat that market leadership. They shouldn't expect growth with that product line, but they are really save.

And then there are losers. They may be anywhere in the market, based on previous successes and failures, but they are objectively worse than the competition and more expensive for about the same quality. This is where the iPhone stands. It lacks engineering wise so badly, it's not possible to overcome the hurdles without a complete rewrite. But the market is satisfied already. A complete rewrite is a high risk to stay on top in a stagnating market. Not worth it. The better strategy is to drain engineering costs and instead focus on marketing completely. That's what you can see with the iPhone happening. Each generation is worse than the previous, and mostly the hype and ownership-prestige is what keeps people coming back again and again. Putting money from engineering into marketing/sales will actually boost your profits for some time.

But marketing alone can't keep you on top forever. At some point the difference between fantasy and actual product will be so big that most people can't avoid the truth anymore. Then you will become the next Nokia.

Btw. I think Apple as a company still has a lot of opportunities. But the iPhone branch is dying. Hope I could explain why and why I believe that we will even see popularity rise in the next few years. Still engineering savy people have already switched away from iPhone. 100% sure about that part. For business reasons I needed to buy an ipHone 6s, and for powerusers it's a pain in the A, with no technical chance to make up the difference.

otalp• 9 years ago

Eric Schmidt has said he uses an iPhone. Elon Musk uses an iPhone 7. Mark Zuckerburg uses a MacBook Air. Travis Kalnick uses an iPhone. Most people who I know that work as engineers at Google and Facebook in the US use iPhones. But sure, they are weak and stupid and you are enlightened.

The iPhone 7 which released last year is more powerful than the Galaxy S8. Android phones lag embarrassingly behind in terms of CPU performance, disk write speeds, and software updates. If those things don't matter to you, I suppose you could get an Android phone for the AMOLED screen(though the new iPhone is reportedly going to have that too) or customization.

But to say that the only reason people buy iPhones is because they're stupid is embarrassing, really. I mean Apple weren't the company that have customers refusing to give back a phone which literally catches on fire.

erikb4• 9 years ago

A) You don't know what an engineer is, obviously. So your examples had exactly zero impact. lol.

B) The Galaxy S4 with Android 2.2 is more powerful than the iPhone 7.

C) There are two reasons. Both may apply to you, though. Reality is really hard to accept, I know.

D) Macbooks are really good. That doesn't give any additional points to the iPhone, though. I use one myself and am happy with it. It is well designed and combines strong features from both Enterprise and Opensource world.

idonotknowwhy3• 9 years ago

The iPhone 7 which released last year is more powerful than the Galaxy S8.

And yet, the Galaxy S8, Xperia XZ Premium, etc, can play Gamecube games at full speed via Dolphin. No iPhone can do this.

TazeTSchnitzel2• 9 years ago

Is the new iPhone really going to be $999? I wonder if Apple are seeding rumours like this to make a smaller price increase seem more reasonable.

pvg• 9 years ago

This is the OLED, face recognition, fully tricked out model. There will be several tiers and they're not all going to be a grand. Have you ever heard a too-high price rumour of an Apple anything, throughout the decades of them selling endless piles of expensive stuff? Seeding rumours, heh.

Simon_says• 9 years ago

Or they seed rumors to test the waters of what people will accept. Based on this thread, it looks like $999 is acceptable.

c0nducktr• 9 years ago

Most people on this site are well paid tech folks.

naraniano4• 9 years ago

It's the iPhone X, which is supposed to be the end of the line. The iPhone 8 will be priced as it has always been.

on_and_off• 9 years ago

In the country I live in (France), most smartphone sales are packaged with a subscription and the price of the phone is hidden.

Is that an exception ?

Because I see why Apple wants to sell the idea of the iPhone as a luxury product, but subsidization runs opposite to luxury.

bdcravens• 9 years ago

Most (all?) carriers in the US have shifted from subsidization to a leasing model (with ability to trade in your leased phone typically at 12 months).

However, it's still smaller monthly payments; few I suspect buy the device up-front.

alkonaut6• 9 years ago

A lot of people just get the best iphone every 24 months (e.g. rich people, or people who have a generous smartphone policy at work). Having a model that gets another couple of hundred bucks from those people is pretty clever I think.

This is basically the S-class phone (To make a car analogy, because that's what we do). The S-class Mercedes costs twice as much as the "Normal" E-class, and each time they launch a new model, it contains the most exotic and expensive new gadgets. It's sold to the very price insensitive. This offloads a lot of the R&D costs of these technical gadgets to the S-class customers. The following year, their E-class (Which is upscale but not a super luxury car) sees most of those S-class features at a much lower price point.

I'm suspecting this is what will happen with a new, expensive iPhone. It will be a testing ground for new features, and if the features work they will be introduced at much lower risk and cost to 10x the number of customers next year. This year it's oled screens, facial recognition etc.

stephengillie• 9 years ago

This makes the S-class sound like the Nightly branch of a repo, and the E-class sound like the Stable branch of the same repo.

alkonaut6• 9 years ago

In a way it is (there are new features). But the difference is that nightly is for people who accept that something might be broken. In our car analogy MB had to spend one gazillion dollars making sure the features on nightly (S-class) are as stable as you'd expect from the battle tested version. Apple will have to do the same thing. Even though the oled screens and facial recognition is new tech, their $1k-paying customers aren't happy if it doesn't just work perfectly anyway.

bruwozniak• 9 years ago

Not an exact analogy as an s-class car will be held to even higher standards and "bugs" will not be tolerated or excused as price for cutting edge features. Both are stable releases

Kluny6• 9 years ago

I also know a guy who made his living for many years repairing and reselling iPhones, who simply buys the top of the line as soon as it comes out and resells the old one to pay for it, at as close to full price as he can get away with. Since he always gets the most specc'd out phone available, treats it very carefully, always inside an otterbox, and is a pretty decent salesman, he usually gets his price. He also claims it as a tax write-off - business expense.

In that way I think he ends up paying maybe $200 every other year for his new phone. In the last 6 years I've spent WAY more than that on the Androids I used to get and break/lose every year or so. I've finally seen the light and got an iPhone myself and plan to adopt the same strategy.

test1235• 9 years ago

You could save even more money by getting a cheaper Android phone and treating it just as carefully. The problem you described has nothing to do with the brand.

la_oveja4• 9 years ago

If you break/lose your phone it's your problem, dude. My Androids are lasting ~4 years each.

mattmanser• 9 years ago

I've had nexuses for the last 5 years and have been very happy and certainly not spent the sums you're alluding to.

Unfortunately the nexus is now no more, it's the Pixel which just seems like a rip-off, if I'm going to spend that kind of money I'll go back to iPhones.

GuB-42• 9 years ago

A good strategy, however he is not really the owner of the phone. He is essentially renting it from the next buyer.

One consequence is that he has no option but treat is carefully, use a case, a screen protector, etc.. which is kind of ironic considering how much effort is put on the exterior design of the phone.

Selling the phone also has a non-zero cost : you have to find a buyer and make the transaction. In that guy's case, when he sells his own iPhone, he doesn't sell something else from his shop. And he has the advantage of being an experienced salesman and having a shop.

As for the tax write-off, sure, but I suppose that if you write off your phone as a business expense, you also need to declare the sale as business income. I doubt it is as straightforward as one may think. That guy, who is presumably a business owner, probably has an accountant to deal with such issues.

What I am trying to say is that that guy strategy probably works very well for him but how it will work for you is another story.

jamespo• 9 years ago

Thanks goodness iphones can't be lost or broken

kerrsclyde• 9 years ago

This is common with high end DSLR's too. A way to always have the latest kit for a relatively low ongoing cost.

You've got to have the folding to start the ball rolling in the first place though.

dirktheman• 9 years ago

I always take a 2-year contract. About one week before the new iPhone launch (and, conveniently, the end of my contract term), I sell my iPhone. My 6S with 64GB went this weekend for €450, which was the asking price. Next week I won't be able to get that price since there's a new model.

I'm using a cheap, Chinese Android phone for 2 weeks every other year to bridge the gap between selling my iPhone and getting the new one. I have to say: cheapy Android phones are getting better. Sure, they're nowhere near the quality and experience of iPhones, but my Doogee Shoot 2 ($54,-) performs pretty decently and actually shoots some nice photos in daylight. I won't be converting anytime soon (show me an Android phone that performs like new after 2 years of everyday usage, without lagging) but it does make me wonder sometimes that the price difference can't really be justified...

princekolt2• 9 years ago

I can completely understand the reasoning, and it is very clever indeed. This goes in line with the first Apple Watch Edition, which sold for $10k+ but wasn't very successful at all, not even for a luxury product. So they quietly removed it from sale and instead pushed the ceramic model which is still a luxury product both in looks and in price, but not at that gold tier.

However, the price of the lowest-tier of the latest model has been going up steadily over time, which seems not natural at all. I'd expect them to keep the price of the lower-tier constant, at least. OTOH, if they push out an Apple Watch with LTE, you can combine it with an iPad and the AirPods, and there will be no need for the iPhone at all. How much either of these combinations is "reasonable," only time can tell.

balladeer2• 9 years ago

By saying no need of an iPhone you mean to say no need of a phone altogether since the watch will already have LTE or you mean to say consumers will be free to buy any other phone?

Because just relying on the watch (for modes of communication, consumption etc) might have other constraints like battery life, reading, other forms of ease etc.

djrogers2• 9 years ago

However, the price of the lowest-tier of the latest model has been going up steadily over time,

The base model iPhone has been $649 for as long as I can remember, which means it's technically gone down in price when you account for a decade of inflation...

balladeer2• 9 years ago

Works for me. I may be up for the next SE Class :) Provided SE sees an upgrade. A genuine "thank you" for everyone who are paying for all the features that will be in my next SE purchase ~2 yrs later (I hope to keep it for at least that long).

On a different note, E-Class seeing most of the features of previous year's S-Class may be a bit far fetched, don't you think so? Maybe couple of features that make the newly launched E-Class visibly an upgrade from last E-Class but "most" and that too at half the price of S-Class seems slightly off. I would assume that the previous year model of S-Class would still cost the same (a little more or less) and will be in market - unless a new S-Class model is released every year.

PS. Know very little about cars (def. too little luxury ones). Just had some general doubts. And I hope E in E-Class doesn't stand for "economy".

Kluny6• 9 years ago

PS. Know very little about cars (def. too little luxury ones). Just had some general doubts. And I hope E in E-Class doesn't stand for "economy".

"Executive" I think. But it's just a symbol that means their second highest model.

skookumchuck• 9 years ago

Common pricing strategy is to have 3 price points:

1. a cheap stripper model used to bring people into the showroom

2. an expensive deluxe model with every bell and whistle. It's primary purpose is to frame the next one as being affordable:

3. the mid-price mid-range one you're expected to buy.

Of course, the price-is-no-object people will buy (2) anyway, and that's just extra gravy.

You'll see this technique used across all sorts of product lines.

sah2ed• 9 years ago

Also called price anchoring [0] in marketing.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring

dhimes3• 9 years ago

My understanding was the USD $1K mark was for the cheapest. If they were introducing a luxury version I wouldn't be so upset.

Retric4• 9 years ago

Many people spend more time on their phone than their PC. So, 1,000$ is not an unreasonable price if it's noticeably better. It's like spending 200+$ on a pair of shoes, they don't need to be that much better fit to be worth it.

I mean 1,000$ seems bad, but that can translate to under 30 cents an hour if you're spending 4 hours a day on your phone.

blubb-fish2• 9 years ago

so you spend also excessive amount of money on water because you drink it several times a day?

there is objectively no reason to spend more than 200 Euro on a smartphone - except for attempting to inflate one's ego.

astura4• 9 years ago

Except it's really easy to accidentally destroy or lose a phone. That's the reason I don't buy expensive phones anymore, because I'll probably just drop it.

eswat• 9 years ago

But unlike a PC - though they’re getting there - phones and the ecosystems on them are becoming more fine-tuned to extract more money from you. App suggestions, Apple Pay, IAPs and who knows what they will come up with in the next few years.

You may look at spending $$$ on a keyboard or chair that you use a lot as a similar purchase, but they are far less likely to dangle carrots in-front of you to take more of your money and give you questionable value in return.

Splines• 9 years ago

So, 1,000$ is not an unreasonable price if it's noticeably better.

But if $500 gets you 90% of the way there, is that last $500 really worth it? Same with shoes - I regularly spend less than $100 on my shoes and find that they are perfectly comfortable, last a long time, and fit all my needs. 0 complaints. Spending another $100 might give me a better experience (at the very least it might make me feel happier when I put them on the first time), but the returns are so low that it isn't worth it.

These days, the money bar for a "good enough" smartphone is very very low.

veidr• 9 years ago

I'm totally one of those people. I buy myself the best iPhone, every single year. But your car analogy, while popular, isn't really that illustrative.

Most of my friends have a nicer, more expensive, car than I do. Buying a previous-year showroom-demo Nissan SUV from the dealer saved me something like $20,000, compared to buying a Lexus or Audi, even one a few years old.

That's two decades of having the best phone. I'm not generally price insensitive. I'm specifically price-insensitive about devices that I spend a huge amount of time using, namely (in my case) my smartphone and computers.

And those things are also objectively way cheaper than luxury cars, so they aren't really comparable. A lot more people can decide to go high-end than can with cars, For instance, I noticed my housekeeper, a nice old lady who works for $15 an hour cash, also rocks a 256GB iPhone 7 Plus just like I do, and she doesn't even have a car.

simonbarker87• 9 years ago

The OP isn't saying that the S Class customer is the same as the super expensive iPhone customer, just that is it analogous. For it to work you should normalise/scale by the overall number of devices/cars sold.

csomar3• 9 years ago

Maybe you don't drive that much? I appreciate the luxury of the new Audi A4 especially when I'm on a 3-4 hour driving route.

If you don't drive much, try smaller cars: A1, Mini-cooper, BMW series 1, etc...

taway_12122• 9 years ago

The S-class Mercedes costs twice as much as the "Normal" E-class

I think it's mostly because base E-class comes with way smaller engine than base S-class, not to mention less standard equipment. When you start comparing apples to apples (say the 400 4MATIC variant for both cars), the price difference becomes suprisingly small.

alkonaut6• 9 years ago

The difference here in base price is 976k vs 576k for the same base spec (same driveline). The S is then probably better equipped so you could probably get closer if you specced the E up to S level. On the other hand the customers buying the S probably also throw in a 10-20% extra equipment. Funny that there is no overlap between engine choices for E/S in the US (smallest S is the 450 and E only exists as 300 or AMG)

gnicholas• 9 years ago

It's also a good way to ramp up manufacturing on new hardware features that can't go from zero to tens of millions in year one.

Put it in the flagship, make it at a higher per-unit cost, and work the kinks out to get the manufacturing process down. Then by year two it can be economically added to lower tier phones.

nunez• 9 years ago

Lots of folks lease S-classes, just like many folks (myself included, maybe) will lease the iPhone X.

twblalock2• 9 years ago

A lot of people just get the best iphone every 24 months (e.g. rich people, or people who have a generous smartphone policy at work).

You don't need to be rich to afford a new iPhone every 24 months. $1000 over 24 months is a little under $42 per month. After the first time, you won't spend that much anyway, because you can sell your current 24-month-old iPhone for a few hundred dollars when you buy the next one.

zalq• 9 years ago

The OnePlus 5 grows ever more attractive, eh?

tareqak• 9 years ago

I wonder if the iPhone upgrade program will have these: https://www.apple.com/shop/iphone/iphone-upgrade-program .

(I'm not affiliated with Apple. However, I do think that it's kind of neat that Apple has way for people to get the latest iPhone each year without having to buy it outright, or be locked to a specific carrier).

ForFreedom• 9 years ago

As the Apple increases the price of the iphone, people purchasing it is becoming far less. Since the number of people purchasing the iphone decreases, increasing the prices keeps Apples profits up.

Apple is not an innovative company anymore, but trying to be a Bentley in the phone market.

ksec• 9 years ago

If we take a look from a Global Perspective, US has the cheapest iPhone ( All prices excluding sales Tax ), and everywhere else had it more expensive. i.e The $1K Prices may be making a big waves in US, but elsewhere in the world they have been paying that much for an iPhone already.

And in terms of iPhones / Population / Apple Store, the US has it most. While in Japan 60% of the Smartphone are iPhone ( i.e Higher the US usage ) they have less then 10 Apple Stores. And it is the same everywhere else, which means any mark up in a certain countries has nothing to do with its Operation with in, and more to do with a Sales Tax, Global Pricing structure.

For Example, HongKong used to have the cheapest iPhone around the world, it was priced the same as US and because there are no Sales tax, it was 10-15% cheaper. Making HK the trading ground for all of SEA region or mainly China. ( Hence Tim Cook continue to blame HK market is more of a delusion rather then fact. ) Around iPhone 5 Apple started to put up additional $100 USD to ALL iPhone price in HK, as a way to combat the black market trading, and if everyone else where making money of it, why not keep the profits itself?

What has all these got to do with $1K iPhone. Well Apple already knew certain people are buying at those prices, again why not make a product that fit those segment? And to re balance the prices across the Globe?

And we have known for long there is no way to make the cutting edge devices every 12 months and ship 200M+ of it. They will need a product that only 10-20% of those 200M will buy, and have the best technology in it.

And mind you, shipping cutting edge technology to 20-40M user a year isn't any easier then the 200M+ iPhone.

wutwutwutwut3• 9 years ago

Yep the base price for a Iphone 7 Plus in Sweden is 1100$. Not sure it makes sense comparing prices like this though. In Sweden the cost of an iphone does not compete with your ability to get access to health care or education for example.

quickben• 9 years ago

It's also the userbase or the marketing there (unsure which one). I was in Sweden few years ago, gislaved / hestra, and overall nothing else was being sold besides iPhone. It came as a shock to me.

Only one of the tech toys stores that we visited had Samsung at the time.

kalleboo3• 9 years ago

The Swedish price also includes 25% VAT, as well as the cost of consumer protection afforded by Swedish/EU laws (which in the US you have to pay extra to get through AppleCare - although AppleCare does go further)

wil4215• 9 years ago

Why are you bringing up healthcare on an iPhone discussion? Trying to figure out how it is relevant to the pricing of an iPhone in Sweden.

falsedan4• 9 years ago

For Example, HongKong used to have the cheapest iPhone around the world, it was priced the same as US and because there are no Sales tax, it was 10-15% cheaper.

Could you explain this differently? If it had the same price as the US (converted to HKD), and no sales tax, it would be the same price as buying it in (say) Oregon:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_Stat...

Since January 2017, 5 states (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon) do not levy a statewide sales tax

masklinn• 9 years ago

I took this as meaning that it was 10~15% cheaper than surrounding countries/territories due to no sales tax, hence being used to fuel black market all around SEA: a 5% margin on an iphone obtained in HK would still be cheaper for the final Japanese buyer than a "home-bought" iPhone (8% VAT).

mtgx4• 9 years ago

Another way to look at this is that everywhere else in the world that iPhone will cost $1500-$2000 (depending on version). Will those people still be willing to pay that much for it?

vrotaru• 9 years ago

Everywhere else had it more expensive, but everywhere else IPhone are... well not niche, but definitely way less pervasive

drzaiusapelord3• 9 years ago

and everywhere else had it more expensive.

Once you correct for VAT and currency, you'll find a lot of foreign iphone sales aren't really expensive. USA pricing does not include taxes and the dollar is fairly strong now.

Well Apple already knew certain people are buying at those prices, again why not make a product that fit those segment?

I think the larger issue here is that Apple can't maintain 2008 level pricing a decade later especially as China stops being so cheap for labor. Toss in US consumers buying on credit for 24 months and its a no-brainer we'd see price jumps. Apple isn't taking a cut on its margins, so it has to do a price increase eventually.

That's on top of the phones having expensive high quality components, NAND shortages, and the cost of rare earth elements going up every so often. Prices aren't scaling for components it seems. A high quality display in 2017 isn't the same price of one in 2008, plus inflation. A modern SoC now has to support HDMI, displayport, 4-8 cores, LTE, etc all come at a component cost as well as a licensing cost. Modern phones are more or less mini laptops now, so the dream of a 'simple' ARM device is long dead. We more or less have the desktop re-invented on ARM platforms and expect them to do anything from calls to word processing to 3D gaming. That's a far cry from the original iphone and its simple apps and simple OS.

Perhaps this is the old man part of me talking, but I absolutely fell in love with smartphones in the early days. My Treo was a wonder and the iPhone twice so. The simplistic aspects of it was incredible. Everything was snappy. Apps were a couple megabytes, if that. It did the minimum I needed and then some. Now, of course, that's all changed, but for a few years there I kind had the star-trek like device I always imagined. Now I'm back to a mini-desktop, lag, big complex apps, a near unusable mobile web, constant nags for reviews/notifications, etc. The only saving grace is that a lot of that is abstracted away from me as I move towards a lot of automation and voice interfaces (voice commands, google home, etc) and I simply developed lowered expectations of the mobile experience.

verelo2• 9 years ago

"And in terms of iPhones / Population / Apple Store, the US has it most. While in Japan 60% of the Smartphone are iPhone ( i.e Higher the US usage ) they have less then 10 Apple Stores."

pet peeve of mine is then vs than.

wuliwong• 9 years ago

A fun thing to do is search "less then" in google news.

grecy2• 9 years ago

US has the cheapest iPhone

It is interesting to note among Developed countries, the US has the cheapest everything.

Cars, computers, building materials, clothes, TVs. You name it, it is cheapest in the USA.

It is interesting to note this is because people in the US have much less disposable income than people in other developed countries. Companies can charge higher prices in other developed countries because people have enough money to pay it, but they can't in the US.

drawnwren2• 9 years ago

That's why the iPhone is cheaper in Thailand and Korea where the median and mean incomes are lower .... Oh wait, it isn't.

TremendousJudge• 9 years ago

Those goods are also cheaper than in most developing countries as well. As in, the pair of Levi's that cost you $40 in Amazon will run you much higher in developing countries. Sure, you can get cheaper jeans from other local brands, but Levi's is seen as premium quality

dmoy• 9 years ago

people in the US have much less disposable income than people in other developed countries

Is this true? I always heard it was the other way around:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090616/...

And median: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income

leipert• 9 years ago

Really? To me it seems like the US has a higher disposable income per household (after taxes) [1]:

US ~41k, Switzerland ~36k, France ~30k and Germany ~32k

[1] http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/

mikeash3• 9 years ago

Typical US sales tax of 0-6% versus typical European VAT of 20-25% certainly makes a big difference too.

khalilravanna• 9 years ago

"It is interesting to note this is because people in the US have much less disposable income than people in other developed countries."

Is this a commonly known thing? First I've heard it. I would have figured it would be the opposite given our overall tax rate compared to somewhere like Sweden is infinitesimally smaller. Can you point to some analysis/citations for this?

It does seem to make sense in my mind as, anecdotally, when I was in Germany I noticed a large number of high end Audis and BMWs. Cars that are $80k in the US would be well over $100k in Germany. (This is perhaps an oversimplification of the situation given that there are a great deal more factors involved in the pricing of German-made cars within Germany vs. selling the same cars in a much more competitive foreign market like the US'.)

bogomipz• 9 years ago

"It is interesting to note this is because people in the US have much less disposable income than people in other developed countries"

I am curious did you just make this up? This is a completely bogus statement. The US is actually amongst highest per capita disposable income countries. See:

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090616/...

https://www.currencyfair.com/blog/which-country-has-highest-...

madiathomas• 9 years ago

True. I spent around $1000 for my iPhone few months back. This was for the 32GB one and it was on special.Prices for the 128GB were just ridiculous. I was a bit surprised when I saw headline of this article because we have been paying over $1000 for ages now.

Shivetya• 9 years ago

are you including VAT in European prices? Any comparison needs to be worked back to price before taxes.

wodenokoto• 9 years ago

For a while they were cheaper in Japan with sales tax than in the US without tax.

The sticky price structure of Apple was severely undercut by the price of the yen. They fixed it now, though.

dancing_shark• 9 years ago

Around iPhone 5 Apple started to put up additional $100 USD to ALL iPhone price in HK, as a way to combat the black market trading,

This post is informative, but can I suggest that we not adopt the "black market" nomenclature for cases where people buy hardware in one location, and then re-sell it?

Companies like Apple may brand this a "black market", but that implies that companies have a right to perform perfect price discrimination across the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination

I suggest we reserve the phrase "black market" for cases where contraband is being exchanged, or for cases where items were obtained through crime (e.g. the sale of stolen goods).

nto8e90nt32• 9 years ago

I would say "black market" is fair if any part of obtaining and reselling the device is illegal. For example, in the early 80s there were US tariffs on RAM chips from Japan, if I recall correctly (I might have the country wrong). But some companies found they could buy in Japan, move them to another country, and then import them into the US via this other country without the tariff. It was illegal because they were still manufactured in Japan. When the government found out, those importers got in trouble. I would count those as black market since they were being brought into the country illegally.

Is that the case we're talking about here? Buy in HK with no taxes, then sell in another country without paying the taxes? If so, that still sounds "black market" to me. I'd think you'd have to pay the taxes in the country of sale regardless of where you obtained the device. If that's not what we're talking about, then I agree it's probably not fair to label them "black market."

chemmail2• 9 years ago

I'm surprised its taken apple this long to realize a phone is more of a fashion statement than any clothes/jewelry/car. Esp to the poor. They should of had multiple teirs to begin with.

Jean-Philipe• 9 years ago

AFAIR, when the iPhone hit the markets, they were coupled with pricy contracts, totalling easily north of 2k EUR in fixed costs.

dagw6• 9 years ago

Outside the US the latest top of the line iPhones have been over $1k for a while now. I guess Apple figured if other people are willing to pay that much then why wouldn't people in the US?

exodust2• 9 years ago

Planned obsolescence is my biggest gripe with Apple and other brands that do this.

My 2012 iOS device is now stuck on iOS9. I wouldn't mind except they bundle web browser updates with the OS. This is wrong.

The web browser on iOS9 does not support javascript ES6 features such as the "Let" statement. Any web sites that use let statements will fail on iOS 9. I discovered this recently when browsing on my iPad3, 2012 model. Apple doesn't care, they just want people throwing their old hardware in the trash and buying latest product.

I understand why I can't have iOS10 on an iPad3, but the web browser should be given updates separately.

idonotknowwhy3• 9 years ago

Apple have a lot to answer for, and there are a lot of flaws with iOS devices, but this isn't one of them.

5 years of updates for a smartphone is pretty good. From Android, I think only certain Sony phones even come close to that.

By now, the battery cells will be damaged, the CPU/RAM too slow or limited, the flash memory wearing out. Time for a new phone :)

problems6• 9 years ago

If you run custom ROMs on Android that situation is currently better than anything - you can still get updates for a Galaxy Nexus from 2011. Xiaomi is also currently providing official updates for 4+ years on some devices.

The official situation should change too - with the release of Android 8 there is now a more defined layer separating the HAL from the rest of the OS, allowing updates to be pushed out universally.

exodust2• 9 years ago

5 years of updates for a smartphone is pretty good.

As mentioned, I don't mind about OS updates, I care about browser updates or at least patches for iOS Safari.

By now, the battery cells will be damaged, the CPU/RAM too slow or limited, the flash memory wearing out

Nope. The battery on my iPad3 is fine. iPads should not be classed as a "throw-away" replaceable product like phones seem to be. CPU and RAM is fine for web browsing and most apps. Flash memory wearing out? Gimme a break.

Every Steam game homepage gallery is broken now on browsers that don't support ES6 javascript. The highlight player doesn't display images or video since recent update to their website. I previously enjoyed browsing Steam on my iPad looking for new games. Example:

http://store.steampowered.com/app/449640/Bloody_Zombies/

Note, I partly blame Steam web devs for not making it backwards compatible, but also Apple for denying Safari any updates because of their dirty business model of abandoning their own products. Disgusting lack of modern environmentally concerned tech life-cycle standards. They boast about green packaging for products destined for the grave in only 5 years.

Tepix5• 9 years ago

Another way to look at it:

$1000 for two years. After two years, sell the phone for $300-$400.

That's $25-$29 per month. Around $1 per day.

bfred_it• 9 years ago

You can make that excuse for everything. I don't want to pay "Just $1 per day" on overpriced items. I'd rather pay $0.7 per day on a ok-priced item.

I hope all of this hostility from Apple will result in lower marketshare and a slow fade into oblivion. I use Apple products because they're the best, but if I have to spend $1.4k for a phone and $3.5k for a computer I'll hope MS and GOOG have somewhat caught up to the quality because it's getting tiring.

Tepix5• 9 years ago

I wasn't making an excuse. I think $1 per day is quite a lot, especially when comparing it to a $200 phone. They are almost identical.

mstolpm• 9 years ago

First of all, Apple don't need to sell many of these models: We're all doing an incredible job for Apple discussing the price tag of an unannounced phone. That alone is worth millions and millions for Apple PR.

Nonetheless I believe they will sell lots and lots of these models: It will be a status item.

Moreover, in a lot of countries, most people don't but smartphones fully upfront to own them, but pay monthly with their phone bill. So, its not $1k or $1.5k, but perhaps $50 more upfront compared to other high end smartphones and another $15 monthly surcharge on the phone bill. Doesn't seem sooo incredible that way, isn't it?

TekMol5• 9 years ago

I don't get what it is about the iPhone that people are willing to pay a premium for. Is it all just in the marketing?

I would not mind paying $1000 for a phone if it offered any additional value over my $200 Android phone.

But I cannot see anything better in the form factor of the iPhone line.

And for the software - I have an iPad and I hate the software. It is so restricted. You cannot even do basic tasks like download an mp3/pdf/whatever in your browser and then open it in the app of your choice.

fsloth2• 9 years ago

"You cannot even do basic tasks like download an mp3/pdf/whatever in your browser and then open it the app of your choice."

While I agree with your general sentiment I can save and open PDF:s from safari to third party applications just fine on my IPad.

TekMol5• 9 years ago

How do you save it? I don't get any option to do that.

Only options to directly open it in applications that are registered to open PDF files. That seems to save a copy to the directory of that application. Which is terrible messy and clunky way to deal with files imho.

For MP3s I don't get any option other then to open them in Safari.

kk_cz• 9 years ago

So, why did you pay a premium for iPad when Android tablet at roughly half the price would give you the same functionality?

(btw I don't get it either. But I don't see anything special about iPad, hence my question)

TekMol5• 9 years ago

Two reasons:

1) It had the best form factor these days. It was the lightest 9.7inch tablet. Nowadays, a Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 scores better.

2) iOS is a popular OS, so I wanted to have at least one device running it.

aianus• 9 years ago

120hz refresh rate, brightest screen, best stylus

I hate iOS but the hardware is far beyond any android tablet.

izacus5• 9 years ago

The hardware is really really good, well supported and it's pretty light with excellent battery life. It's actually not al l that more expensive than Androids either (the new "cheap" iPad is actually on-par or cheaper than Android competitors).

Having said that, Apple does make a few funny pricing decisions that pushed me to buy an ASUS Zenpad instead.

themihai4• 9 years ago

Android is full of Google suff. I can't hack my android either(i.e. get root-like access, remove stuff I want, run my *nix stuff etc) so as far as the restrictions are concerned the difference btw Android and iOS is not that significant. It pisses me off because it's said Android is OSS but in practice you can't really run AOSP on your Android device nor you can control/own your own device. You basically end-up with a tivoized device.

I think you can download pdf/mp3 files and open them in your favorite app on iOS too.

Now $1000 is a bit too much so unless it has a killer feature I will skip this upgrade.

TekMol5• 9 years ago

Yes, I have a lot of gripes with Android too. But it's not as restricted as iOS.

And no, I don't get any option to download an MP3 from Safari on my iPad.

pas2• 9 years ago

People have been saying these things for the last decade, and they still bought the next iPhone.

And I'm not saying they are wrong. But they bought it for one thing, and that's the "feels" it gives them. It's not Android, they are not buying a phone, they're getting an iPhone(tm).

Now, when you can buy a Huawei P-whatever that has the same lines-on-white flat design UI, the same speed, it's not the specs. And yes, the iPhone looks better, the Huawei thing feels bulky in comparison. Does that feel worth 500 USD? That's up to the customers.

pdimitar2• 9 years ago

...So?

I knew plenty of people who buy a new Android, priced anywhere from $400 to $700, every year, more often than not it was once every 9 months even.

So I might spend $1100 or so on the iPhone Pro / X / whatever the moniker is. But I'll use it at least 3 years.

Annual cost of owning an iPhone makes it cheaper than almost any Android.

Not everything is about upfront cost. iPhones get updated for 5 years and they don't start lagging in 8-12 months like almost all Androids do. If you don't bust it, you might sell it for 75-90% of its original cost even 3 years down the line.

Mostly philosophical article without much economical substance.

stevoo• 9 years ago

I disagree with this.

Although the iPhones might get updated for 5 years that does not make them fast. Each update makes the older device slower which at a point it becomes unusable. A 3 year old device just cant compare with the increase in features, how a newer device can.

But for Android, it all comes down to the provider. This has always been the issue. I have a Nexus 6 running 7.1 and working just fine. I could use it for another year if i wanted but it does show signals of getting old.

People used to change iphone every year as they did with Android. I believe that this is coming to an end and people will keep there phones longer as they become much more expensive (X:1100+, note8:1050, etc) and the increase in hardware is not that massive any more.

pdimitar2• 9 years ago

We both have anecdotal evidence so we can disagree all week without each of us being right globally.

I am yet to ever see a slow iPhone in my life though, anecdotal evidence or not.

Maybe you were looking at iPhone 5 or 5S. From 6 and on, they are quite long-lasting and many people hold on to them for a long time without complaints.

Nexus is not a good example from your side. It's more the exception than the rule. Have you looked at the wild landscape of most of Android land? Phones get abandoned in less than a year. That's the norm in Android.

Nexii and Pixels are the outliers.

EDIT #1: Nexus 6 should theoretically now be abandoned by Google in terms of new Android versions, same as 5X and 6P. Last two should have one more year of security updates though.

EDIT #2: "increase in features" in smartphones hasn't been happening in a while. It's been mostly rebranding of a little bit more battery-efficient SoCs, at least in Android. Apple is showing gradual increase in single-core performance, and I can't deny that my Mi 6 (using Snapdragon 835) is snappy as hell. So IMO you're half-right: people will hold on to devices for longer since they're very expensive now, but there's another half: many people, me included, feel the smartphone hype is over and that the OEMs have nothing to show except flashier displays, maybe faster SoCs, and prettier outer shells. Thus I want to buy a longer-lasting device. And that ain't any device in Android, sadly. I am not a huge fan of Apple but the durability and high performance retention (the point you're questioning) seem to be an accepted fact, so I'll go with them.

Havoc• 9 years ago

Price - yeah fine whatever.

My issue is I can't see the benefit I'm getting extra. My 7+ seems to be about the same really. Lifestyle wise this latest black rectangle is going to change literally nothing as far as I can tell.

acjohnson55• 9 years ago

$1k? Wow, they must have figured out a way to add the audio jack back!

It'll be interesting to see how this works out. I'm in the minority amongst my social group as an Android user, but I can't imagine many of the iPhone users I know shelling out $1k. But I'm sure there's a mid-range model. Right?

moonbug22• 9 years ago

It says something about your social group that you even know that fact.

Friedduck• 9 years ago

The $1k price might be easier to stomach if iPhone managed content as well as it used to. I've stopped using the apple ecosystem for photo + music management, and now find it isn't managing contacts well across devices any longer.

For all the truly amazing capabilities the basics are lacking.

yladiz5• 9 years ago

I'm not sure about music, but what's wrong with the default Photos or Contacts apps? Contacts works fine for me, and Photos works very well considering I have nearly 9000 photos. Syncing over iCloud is also fine, between my phone and my laptop.

hoorayimhelping• 9 years ago

The thousand dollar iPhone is the BMW 7 series of iPhones. Apple at this point is constrained by their supply chain. They have the capacity to introduce new tech, but the tech isn't capable of being produced at the scale to put in a couple hundred million iPhones, so they put it into a more expensive phone and sell fewer of them. Then they put the tech that works into the regular iPhones a couple of generations later when the supply chain matures. Seems like a good long term strategy.

tosser350• 9 years ago

I've always thought they should do a 10k+ iPhone. Plenty of elites would buy it as a status symbol even if the hardware really wasn't any different.

supermdguy2• 9 years ago

I've seen premium gold-covered "styled" iPhones being sold for thousands by third parties.

tonkworks• 9 years ago

like a gold iwatch?

christophilus• 9 years ago

I highly recommend all web developers buy a crappy old phone like mine and use it often on their own sites. That would improve the mobile web tremendously, I think.

(I'm still running a 4-year old, super under-powered Android phone. I shelled out $150 for it when it was brand-spanking new. That was unsubsidized.)

AndrewKemendo• 9 years ago

I'm wondering if Apple is going to come out with the equivalent of the Samsung DeX (1). I mean the new phone apparently has insane 6core SoC processing and wireless charging, which hints at a new kind of dock.

If I can replace a MacBook with an iPhone X + Apple screen then I'm definitely going to do that. Price point is higher compared to a single phone, but lower compared to phone + laptop. Solves almost all of the portability issues and makes app dev easier - which is where they want to push people anyway.

If they are going hard towards AR glasses, they need people to get used to having a single device for desktop and mobile. The glasses just become a peripheral at that point for early adopters.

1.http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mobile-accessories/phones/d...

throw2016• 9 years ago

There has to be some technology to justify the price or we revert to the old Nokia model of adding some RAM, upping the megapixels and releasing a new model and we know how that ended for Nokia. Brand can only take you so far. Nobody thought a company as entrenched as Nokia could suddenly disappear, and they did.

The bigger issue is at the moment its just taking productive income from the economy that could drive real economic activity and job growth and dumping it in Apple's already inflated bank balance which they don't know what to do with.

FussyZeus• 9 years ago

From the iPhone’s introduction a decade ago, Apple has always priced it as a premium product — a more refined and polished alternative to the legions of cheaper smartphones available in the market.

And not only is it priced that way, thats actually what it is which is why in all likelihood I'm buying one tomorrow.

Every Android I've ever used has felt like cheap shit in my hands, and works like crap after 10 months or so. My current iPhone is knocking on 3 years old and works as well as the day I took it out of the box.

imaginenore• 9 years ago

I have no idea what people do with $800+ phones. I'm on Nexus 5X (<$180), and it's perfectly fine, the camera is great, apps run just fine.

I doubt most of these people are doing phone based VR and play high end phone games.

skywhopper• 9 years ago

The author of this article has soaked up the conventional wisdom about Apple's pricing. Yes, they don't sell cheap phones, and sure they make a healthy profit, but it doesn't then follow that the product is overpriced. The iPhone has always been an extremely high-quality product and has always been competitively priced versus comparable models from other phone makers. So why do they have the reputation of premium pricing?

This $1000 iPhone X may be nearly as expensive as a Macbook Air, but that's entirely reasonable: it's a far more powerful and sophisticated computer in a much smaller package. Why would you expect it to cost less?

Yizahi• 9 years ago

Not extremely. Merely high quality. Numerous cases with broken buttons even on brand new devices, wi-fi failure issues, gps failure issues. Yes, it is anecdotal cases but so are all others for different brands.

joezydeco• 9 years ago

I'm not quite sure the $1K price for the X is Apple playing the Veblen game here.

Gruber seems to hint that the OLED display is still single-sourced by Samsung and incredibly expensive to boot:

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2017/09/06/samsung-oled-mo...

The price may just be what it is until the price of the display comes down. Apple could also be trying to modulate demand because of the low display availability, but in the case of iPhone it will probably backfire and cause demand to increase.

gigatexal2• 9 years ago

Is anyone planning on getting the phone at 1k?

YCode• 9 years ago

Millions of people, most likely.

gigatexal2• 9 years ago

Any of us in HN though?

rb808• 9 years ago

The real expensive part in the US is the cell plan. Excluding the phone, the mainstream plans are $60+/mo with taxes. If you're paying $720 a year for cell service a $1k phone really isn't that much.

(I would never pay $60/mo but lots of people do)

notsrg• 9 years ago

Don't look at the prices Canadians pay (for less), you might choke on something.

furyg3• 9 years ago

Wow, I forgot how bad it was. I have unlimited data, unlimited calling/sms, and (as of recently) free roaming in all EU countries for €30/month ($36), with T-Mobile in NL. So that's $432/year.

A $1k iPhone on it's own would cost ~ $40/mo if you spread it out over 24 months.

jondubois• 9 years ago

What's wrong with people that they would pay $1000+ for a phone that is maybe only 5% better than a $200 one?

osteele• 9 years ago

This reminds me of the arguments about whether popular bands should raise ticket prices on the one hand, or create the conditions for ticket scalpers on the other.

Let's say Apple wants to be as innovative in hardware as a company like Essential – and therefore use components or manufacturing processes that aren't available at the scale of tens of millions per quarter. What should Apple do?

* Not innovate. Leave this for smaller companies; wait for the price to come down. Risk: lose market, engineers, and ability to build competence, to other companies.

* Release in limited supply at a low price; leave the surplus to rent seekers (scalpers). Risk: Leaves money on the table; insert middleman in relationship between Apple and (ultimate) customers.

* Release in limited supply at a low price; attempt to control scalping by limiting sales per customer and locking phones to the original purchaser. Risk: Complicated mechanism that people will hate.

* Charge a higher price, in order to set demand to supply. Risk: Bad image; magnifies effects of wealth inequality.

hyperpallium• 9 years ago

An interesting analysis in general; though just for this specific case, this phone is more a different niche, than purely better. It's larger and heavier.

There are technologies, like process nodes, that improve on several dimensions, and while I'm sure the military has access to "future" process nodea, the yields are just so dramatically low (and also therefore dramatically more expensive), that it's not really feasible for a mainstream product.

The adgances it will have will be much less profound: more CPU cores, more GPU cores, maybe higher clocking, and a heavier battery to power it all. So, it's simply an attempt to broaden the product line, like the "plus" and (unsuccessful) "C" models.

Also, given that Apple sold a $10,000+ watch, they probably don't mind charging more. Though, it'll be priced to sell (which that watch didn't).

However, given that phones have overshot most people's needs (e.g. 5s iPhones are still selling well), Apple will soon need a killer app that requires all that power... like AR. Unfortunately, there's no indication that AR is a killer app. Who knows, maybe Apple will change that.

Alterlife• 9 years ago

* Sell previous years iPhones at competitive prices

In India, the SE was recently on sale for Rs. 18500 after discounts and cashbacks are accounted for... with budget alternatives.

EddieRingle• 9 years ago

Couldn't they also invest some of their massive cash reserves into production and R&D?

dmix• 9 years ago

Yes but I don't see how that would affect their pricing strategy?

Cash reserves make it easier for them to make a riskier play into the luxury market. But in the long-run the reserve is only a temporary fallback not a sustainable model.

Pushing the price up makes it easier to play with the price margins and add more expensive parts.

It could also be fueled by the output of their R&D but they could also see the value proposition they offer as justifying a higher price from entirely non-functional aspects (ie non-software/hardware innovation), just merely the emotional draw of the product via design and branding. The measure is whether people still want the product as much rather than whether it does x & y better than the competitors.

People tend to discount the utility of emotional appeal and the connection people have to the products they use daily. Instead focusing on CPU speeds or raw feature comparisons.

circa• 9 years ago

I don't know why this is such a shock to everyone. The iPhone 7 Plus 256GB was not much cheaper than $1,000. I guess because most people don't go for that model? Even so I'm not surprised at all.

scurvy• 9 years ago

Why couldn't they build iPhones in Brazil? What happened there?

swah• 9 years ago

I didn't even recalled they wanted to make iPhones here, but this article [1] basically says that "its more expensive than building them in China" and that some tax incentive laws were being disputed by the World Trade Orgnization.

[1] https://www.tecmundo.com.br/iphone/118381-decisao-foxconn-ip...

xutopia• 9 years ago

No one has mentioned the possibility of using UCB-C as a docking station. Phones are already powerful enough for the kind of work an executive does (email, word processing, spreadsheet). Now if their computer is in their pocket and they can plug into any screen at all they don't need a computer at all.

The progression of the smartphone is evidently to replace the personal computer and the iPhone X should be a step in that direction.

hammock• 9 years ago

Google pixel has USB C for docking and is only $650...

TCM• 9 years ago

I think the iPad pro is more targeted for the kind of work that an executive does. Docking stations / plugging into any screens don't seem like something that has been well thought out and I don't think that Apple's strategy right now is to market to that kind of audience.

SOLAR_FIELDS• 9 years ago

It's sad that Windows totally had the opportunity to own and drive that kind of market but it never worked out for them.

emodendroket• 9 years ago

The progression of the smartphone is evidently to replace the personal computer and the iPhone X should be a step in that direction.

Yeah, I kept hearing the same thing about tablets till sales dropped off. I'll believe it when I see it.

basseq• 9 years ago

Two immediate thoughts:

This is going to be for the hitherto-unavailable third tier of new iPhone: we'll have iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X. I expect this is referring to the X. Which may well only be offered in a 256GB configuration. A jet black iPhone 7 Plus in 256 GB is $969 today. So this might not be a huge increase for the X. I fully expect 8 and 8 Plus models to mirror current pricing.

And second, we've seen this "high price" reporting with other releases, notably the Apple Watch IIRC. Reputable outlets were floating high prices, and Apple announced "normal" pricing at the event. Other comments here have talked about anchoring: this may be more of the same Apple marketing FUD.

dep_b4• 9 years ago

I think Apple hit a point where producing an exclusive phone with top features in every department wasn't really possible anymore at their scale. We've seen them stuck at 16GB for a really long time simply because upgrading all phones to 32GB would consume another whopping 15% of the SSD market. OLED screens in that quality and format aren't produced in enough quantities to put on every iPhone - yet. But people expect an iPhone to be the best of the best given the price.

So there's a new X line that will have all the best of the best and the regularly numbered ones below it will have more mainstream features / design and will be produced in greater numbers.

trimbo• 9 years ago

OLED screens in that quality and format aren't produced in enough quantities to put on every iPhone

Apple's scale is amazing but I don't really get this observation. Is this is because Samsung has been shipping OLED at Apple-level volumes for years, so they've already sucked up most of the supply?

dep_b4• 9 years ago

Not every Samsung with an OLED screen gets the same OLED as the Note 8 and Edge 8 are getting of course. There are plenty of phones that have a much simpler construction similar to what Apple was doing with their LCD technology.

And basically Samsung is not going to cut their own production to sell to Apple. Samsung is Samsung's preferred customer I imagine, unless the phone department seriously lowballs their offer.

ascagnel_• 9 years ago

It's that Samsung/LG don't have the production capacity to make OLED screens at the volumes Apple will need to put it on a mass-market phone.

To give you an idea of the discrepancy: Samsung's two flagship phones (S8/S8 Edge) sold roughly 12MM in their first quarter of availability (April-June 2017), while the current iPhone models sold 40+ million units in their third quarter of availability (same time frame).

tagurit3• 9 years ago

It's interesting how in this forum people are concerned more about functionalities that don't justify its price point. But not so much on the aesthetics which is what the regular consumer really cares about. For the average Apple customer, the bezel change is HUGE. It's enough to justify the 1k even though it's not an innovation or some crazy performance boost. People are definitely still going to buy it.

eagletusk• 9 years ago

The should just call it by it's price tag.

iPhone $1k iPhone $1.2k iPhone $2k ...

jasonmp85• 9 years ago

This headline makes no sense. Apple has no $1k phone.

ovrdrv3• 9 years ago

Keynote is tomorrow where it is rumored to be announced.

iFelon• 9 years ago

No mention of a cell phone pushing over the bar of what constitutes a felony in terms of dollar amount. I'm in no way for raising this limit further, but I also don't think stealing a cellphone should be a felony.

Older articles, but they cover what I'm talking about: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/09/why-stealing-ip...

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-brie...

lisper• 9 years ago

"The imaging system can then stitch the patterns into a detailed 3-D image of your face to determine if you are indeed the owner of your smartphone before unlocking it."

So I pay an extra $300 to save me the trouble of putting my finger on the touchID sensor? That doesn't sound like a compelling value proposition to me.

csomar3• 9 years ago

I already paid $1,000 for my iPhone 7+ though it would cost $869 if I was living in the US (I don't know though if the prices in the Apple site are pre-VAT).

Apple next challenge is not making people pay $1,000 for an iPhone. People already do that. Apple next challenge is bringing globalization, breaking the VAT, and putting profits in safe havens away from the fiscal preys.

People already pay thousands, dozens and hundreds of them for luxury. Apple upping its price might have the reverse effect: People line up to buy the highest price iPhone because it is not "accessible for everyone". Apple always got your back with a cheaper version but you really want the expensive one otherwise you are out of line.

We are getting close everyday to the confrontation between IT giga-multi-nationals and the traditional countries/governments of the world. We are probably still too far from the real battle but everyday is showing more why these two are not friends.

norea-armozel• 9 years ago

I can't see myself buying another phone after buying an iPhone 6 in 2015. I just don't see a reason to replace it until the battery can't charge anymore. By then I don't have plans on getting an equivalent phone. Maybe something cheaper but I think purchasing phones every two years or the like is bad from an economical standpoint. I'd rather spend my money I'm better food than a fancier phone but I'm weird.

lafar6502• 9 years ago

iPhone has lost its glamour

omnimus• 9 years ago

From europe > many people have iphone. The iphone 7 plus costs around 1000usd here already. Amazingly many poeple have it including people i know that are making around 1000usd month. It is amazing, they dont even use apps, just for calling and facebook.

I dont get it its like somebody in US buying it for 5000 usd.

But it is changing. With companies like xiaomi putting up phones for 100usd that do the same for those people and look nice... I believe apple is going to be going down if they increase prices even more. These people dont want second class iphone. They want THE iphone. If they cant afford THE iphone they wont buy the shitty 500usd one. They might aswell buy the 100usd xaomi then.

I think aple is not going right way with this.

scarface74• 9 years ago

I fully expect that the high end phone will start at $1000 but why is NYTimes publishing this story as if it news? Apple hasn't published the prices of the phone and for now, the whole article is based on speculation.

With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

Related Stories