Ok then your area is only wired for Comcast and you cant get ATT/Fios/fiber etc. Stuck paying whatever monopolized price they choose to bill you "just because."
Point remains it is taking advantage of people with no other viable options.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple should be arrested for daylight robbery [MERGED]
- Thread starter ThatiPhoneKid
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ok then your area is only wired for Comcast and you cant get ATT/Fios/fiber etc. Stuck paying whatever monopolized price they choose to bill you "just because."
Point remains it is taking advantage of people with no other viable options.
S.hit, this is worse than I thought. Even the SK will not work with these new iPADs.
In 2017 I spent:
- US$ 34.99 in the Lightning Male to USB Type-C Male Cable (6.6' / 2 m)
- US$ 49 in the 29W USB Type-C Power Adapter
- US$ 149.99 in the Smart Keyboard for the 10.5 IPP
- US$ 829 in the IPP 10.5 (256 GB, wifi+cell)
- Not to mention the old Apple Pencil
- The Smart Cover
- A Khomo rear case
And now I am supposed to:
- Sell every single thing and hope that some suck... ops, buyer compensate for my inevitable losses, since it will be impossible to sell all items for the same price I paid a year ago.
Then I'll have to spend a lot more buying all the new things, even if I want the same capacity (256 GB). The 256 GB LTE (IPP 11) is 32% more expensive.
This isn't just about the iPAD, I would have to replace every single item from that list.
Which I would consider doing if the prices were the same. And if the improvements were worth paying more.
Is there someone really in doubt Apple will fail and fail tremendously with this scam?
I'll only say this: truth is the daughter of time. We'll see who's going to take the hit in the end.
I bought everything on your list as well... This is why I am using AT&T Next (20 month) going forward. This allows me to control my costs to an extent and keep my money for as long as possible. I am thinking another iPad Pro will be announced in 12 or so months. Unfortunately, I am a habitual early adopter so I will always buy the newest model lol.
I went with the 12.9" 256GB LTE model so 12 payments of $65 is $780... plus the taxes up front of $107 puts me at $887 after a year. After those 12 payments, I will owe AT&T $519. I am pretty confident I will be able to sell this model after 12 months for more than $519. Let's say I sell it for $850 then pay off AT&T. That leaves me with $331 from the sale and puts me out of pocket around $556 ($46 per month) for the latest and greatest iPad rental for 12 months haha.
Not sure if I will buy the apple pencil, folio, or keyboard this time around.
Already bought a folio case off amazon for $19.
I am not saying my way makes sense...its just my method to the madness haha.
We’re talking about luxury electronic items not essential services. Mercedes doesn’t offer their cars for the same price as a Hyundai. Prada doesn’t offer their bags at the same price as Crumpler. Camper doesn’t offer their shoes for the same price as Crocs. Apple doesn’t have to offer its tablet at the same price as Huawei.
A $50 increase on a purely optional luxury item is not taking advantage of people. Every.single.person has the option not to buy a new iPad Pro. There are non-Apple viable options.
If there are not viable alternatives from other brands and Apples offerings are way better than everyone else’s then their price premiums are justified. You’re simultaneously saying Apples tablets are by far the best AND they should be cheaper. Talk about head in the sand.
Apples profit margin is the lowest it’s been since 2009. As I posted, they are at 26%. Macdonalds is 45%. Where are your anti-Macdonalds rants about how much they are taking advantage of their customers? Macdonalds takes way more money from Americans on a basic requirement- food. Apple is making just over half as much profit selling luxury items to people who are generally middle class and above.
The problem is Americans income isn’t keeping up with inflation. Unfortunately I can’t talk about the political reasons why on this forum or it will get censored.
Except in my country buyers have to fool customs, otherwise they would be forced to pay 60% of what the real price of each item is. Not to mention shipping costs and the fact no one buying an imported item can avoid paying in one lump sum. Plus 6.38% charged to the credit card over each transaction.
When someone buys an iPAD having owned a previous model that person is already losing money, considering it will not be able to sell her devices for the same price it paid a year (or years) before. That is, if she manages to sell each thing (it's never easy).
Even if that was the case there's still the increase in all prices (such as the 32% in the same 256 GB LTE, IPP 10.5 (2017) vs. 11 (2018)) which cannot be justified.
The best course of action is to only buy when major changes are introduced and your device is really outdated - this never happens in less than 3-4 years. By then perhaps the prices will be acceptable, which I doubt, considering everything from Apple is terribly overpriced.
Plenty other smartphones can be purchased on the market that are from different companies. Same for PCs and tablets.
This is one reason why the "ecosystem" has been pushed so hard. Over time, the cost to switch platforms goes up continuously. Who wants to repurchase all their software because it's restricted to a single operating system?
When your device soon becomes slow thanks to an irreversible update and you have no choice but to endure or replace, you have to factor in replacing all your paid software and any hardware that's ecosystem-specific.
Maybe those users look into software that exists on both platforms. Plenty of examples where the subscription is not platform specific.
Ah yes, the subscription model, 'software as service'... another great model for the consumer.
It's especially good when the software is mature and there won't be much reason for anyone to upgrade anytime soon.Interesting comments. On ecosystems, Google appears to be headed in the same direction as Apple. Google’s Rick Osterloh as quoted at the Verge:
"A lot of the innovation that we want to do now ends up requiring controlling the end-to-end user experience".
iOS apps allow 5 installs, and if I am not mistaken, when you remove say an older device with a given app, you free up one of those 5 ‘licenses’. I’ve never had a problem.
I don’t like Adobe’s subscription model, but Adobe has always been fairly easy to work with as far as re-setting a license instance, so when you upgrade, transferring a software license is usually not an issue. Software companies can make this easy or hard, but in principle transferring a license is easy.
"A lot of the innovation that we want to do now ends up requiring controlling the end-to-end user experience".
iOS apps allow 5 installs, and if I am not mistaken, when you remove say an older device with a given app, you free up one of those 5 ‘licenses’. I’ve never had a problem.
I don’t like Adobe’s subscription model, but Adobe has always been fairly easy to work with as far as re-setting a license instance, so when you upgrade, transferring a software license is usually not an issue. Software companies can make this easy or hard, but in principle transferring a license is easy.
Ah yes, the subscription model, 'software as service'... another great model for the consumer.
Well one can either complain about buying stuff that works just on one platform or chose a different model.
If both don’t please maybe a computer isn’t for you then.
What a response! If I don't like strictly locked-down OS or subscription model to perpetually pay for software, then don't use computers?
What about the old buy software and install it on whichever supported platform you like?
Anyways, the point was that switching platforms isn't as easy as people make it out to be once you're waist-deep in it.
What a response! If I don't like strictly locked-down OS or subscription model to perpetually pay for software, then don't use computers?
What about the old buy software and install it on whichever supported platform you like?
Anyways, the point was that switching platforms isn't as easy as people make it out to be once you're waist-deep in it.
Yup, still believe that it’s easier to swap platforms for most people than they think.
I don’t give much for the fear talk of being locked into a platform.
"Fear talk"? What are you on about. Nobody is "locked" into a platform, but the switch can incur quite a hefty penalty, especially when other hardware can't be used (such as the single-platform Apple Watch), software purchases, licensed media, etc.
I see your point (many of us do I assume), but end of day these are 1st world problems. None of us need this or are forced to purchase one. You will be alright.
This entire forum - 100% of the threads and posts - are dedicated to discuss what, at the end of the day, are first world problems. It’s kinda obvious, isn’t it? We have food, shelter & sanitation, so we’re here bitching about the price of iPads. That’s a given.
What we also have, however, is Apple applying Page 1 of Microeconomics for Dummies causing a shift in the supply x demand curves (to sell less for a higher price and earn more or the same money at lower cost) and testing demand elasticity for their products. They’re doing this very openly and people are falling for it. What worries me the most is that this is not typical competitive behavior, Apple is behaving like a monopolist or a company with market power - meaning their products are so different they are not competing with high-end Samsung and the like, they are in their own class.
If they want more money, well power to them since it’s their stuff, but this will definitely push price-sensitive consumers (or poorer people, if you’d like) out of iOS.
You are absolutely correct and I agree with this. I don't like their practices at all, and they do it because they continuously get away with it. Though we both agree it is 1st world problems, it still isn't right. Hopefully this changes soon, as their current practice of keeping avg cart prices up even if less units are selling will not work much longer as it will get to a point where it's blatantly priced for ridiculous profit margins without caring about the consumer at all. Competition will need to become more fierce to help humble Apple.
Apple's margins have barely changed despite the higher prices. This proves they genuinely are building truly innovative products with cutting-edge technologies that push costs higher.
I understand some people are happy for lesser products at lower prices, but this isn't what Apple does. Apple always makes the very best products they possibly can. If we want the best products, we all have to accept we'll have to pay a modest amount more.
Lol. They don't make the very best products they can at all. They build devices with the smallest incremental improvements they can possibly manage whilst still charging as much as they can possibly get away with.
"Apple always makes the very best products they possibly can"...
Really, after the Mini just went 4 years without a single update (following one two-year update that made it worse in some ways), and the 'current' Mac Pro is 5 years old.
What you said simply isn't true, and it's even more pathetic considering Apple is a trillion-dollar company. And yes, their margins have been going up. 'Give you less for more' would be more accurate.
Margins remain about the same as they have for the past decade.
You are entitled to your opinion about giving "less for more", but the health of Apple as a company shows you are in the extreme minority.
I've always said the future of Mac is iPad so I'm not bothered about neglecting a product line that has a limited life left in it.
[doublepost=1541390816][/doublepost]
This is plainly wrong. For example, iPhone X was the most futuristic smartphone Apple ever launched last year. And this year they've delivered a long list of new innovations that customers clearly love.