Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So the cripple a phone on many levels and still ask for $799 or even more?

I recently looked for a new TV and was surprised that TVs despite their size and all those modern features cost much less than smartphones. It seems TVs are getting cheaper while smartphones are getting more expensive. For €749 you already get a 48 inch OLED TV. There are TVs with a screen size over 80 inch for the price of an iPhone 14 Pro.

That's because every TV is now a "smart" TV and the manufacturers are now in the business of capturing your viewing habits and selling that data.

They sell the TVs for cost, or even less, and make it up on selling the data.
 
So the cripple a phone on many levels and still ask for $799 or even more?

I recently looked for a new TV and was surprised that TVs despite their size and all those modern features cost much less than smartphones. It seems TVs are getting cheaper while smartphones are getting more expensive. For €749 you already get a 48 inch OLED TV. There are TVs with a screen size over 80 inch for the price of an iPhone 14 Pro.
The TV's that appeal to me are LG 55-65" OLED models, which go for $1200-1600. In terms of quality and market position, these are more equivalent to iPhone. And just like smartphones, you can pay anything you want for a TV. They are not all the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirunJae
well of course, this device only exists for upselling purposes anyway. If they truly cared about providing the best customer experience available, they would put the best available tech currently available in "the" iPhonE (singular)
That's exactly what they did while Steve Jobs was alive, and for a few years after. Every year they poured the best they could do for that year into one really great model.

Inevitably though, the greed got to them. Especially with a bean counter as CEO. They'll tell you that the iPhone market is vast and complicated, and needs 20 different iPhones on sale at any time to hit every imaginable price point. In truth, it's all just greed.
 
Non pro phones are for the peasants.
I don't know, at $799 and $899 they don't sound like peasant phones. More like they sound like terrible buys that exist only to upsell the Pro models.

I don't see what the point is anymore, honestly. If Apple is only going to put its best foot forward with the Pro phones now, then just get rid of the standard models, and embrace the fact that flaghship iPhone starts at $1000+. And just keep last year's Pro models in the lineup at those price points.
 
A 48 megapixel sensor on a lens that will only resolve 10 megapixels is a waste. Stating 48 megapixels is marketing hype. I don't get excited about "new and improved" cameras in cell phones. What I would like to see is higher dynamic range, better low light performance and better focus, not more megapixels.

What exists now is really quite exceptional for a device that fits in one's pocket. Inconceivable 20 years ago even with the best DSLR. Technology advances are amazing.
 
A 48 megapixel sensor on a lens that will only resolve 10 megapixels is a waste. Stating 48 megapixels is marketing hype. I don't get excited about "new and improved" cameras in cell phones. What I would like to see is higher dynamic range, better low light performance and better focus, not more megapixels.

What exists now is really quite exceptional for a device that fits in one's pocket. Inconceivable 20 years ago even with the best DSLR. Technology advances are amazing.
While the 2000s' megapixel war was largely marketing, there's a real benefit to a 48 MP quad-Bayer setup for the exact things you mention - dynamic range and low-light performance. It's not going to give you the equivalent of a stand-alone camera with 40+ MP and it's not really trying to. In the end, you end up with a substantially better 12MP image, with the ability to shoot at 48 MP (sort of, with the limitations of the quad filter) if you want if you want.
 
TBH I haven't been impressed in the 48MP (shooting in RAW) not sure why.

The problem is physics, not technology.

The resolution of any lens is proportional to its diameter. You would ideally like the lens to be about two inches in diameter.

Also, the noise you see in the image is inversely proportional to the size of the pixels on the sensor. So larger sensors (with the same number of pixels) produce clearer images.

There is no way that technology of any kind can get around the "laws of the physical universe". Larger cameras will always be better.

Yes, these tiny cell phone camera can be quite good, but larger ones can be even better. To be impressed with a 48 MP image, you need at the least a full-size 35 mm sensor. But that would never fit in your pocket, so we compromise on image quality.
 
What makes the most sense to me is that the 15/15+ will get the 48MP sensors from the 14P/14PM while the 15P/15PM will get larger 48MP sensors for improved low-light performance.

That said, most of you are more knowledgeable and follow this stuff more closely than me, so I put more stock in your opinions and forecasts than my own. :)
 
So the cripple a phone on many levels and still ask for $799 or even more?

I recently looked for a new TV and was surprised that TVs despite their size and all those modern features cost much less than smartphones.
...and TVs would be even cheaper if manufacturer's stopped insisting on trying to make them "smart". I have no use for the built-in apps, but it doesn't seem like you can even buy a "dumb" TV anymore.
 
well of course, this device only exists for upselling purposes anyway. If they truly cared about providing the best customer experience available, they would put the best tech currently available in "the" iPhonE (singular)
I don’t understand this argument, which I see often. This idea that they’re ONLY making a certain device to convince people to buy a more expensive device. So…they’re spending all that money on making these things and they don’t actually want to sell them? I understand pricing things at levels that encourage an upgrade, but clearly people are going to buy the lesser ones.
 
So the cripple a phone on many levels and still ask for $799 or even more?

I recently looked for a new TV and was surprised that TVs despite their size and all those modern features cost much less than smartphones. It seems TVs are getting cheaper while smartphones are getting more expensive. For €749 you already get a 48 inch OLED TV. There are TVs with a screen size over 80 inch for the price of an iPhone 14 Pro.
Smaller tech is more expensive to produce and manufacture. How is one model "crippled" over another simply because it has more features? You do realize there are different options on vehicles when you buy them.... they are not all the same right? Same with phones. Want the best features in a car? Gotta pay. Want the best features in a phone? Gotta pay.
 
You know if Apple can sell their lowest end phones with the tech and design their flagship models used to have and do so at below half the price the tech debuted at, their flagship models shouldn't cost more than $200 extra to make than the under $500 models. So they can charge over $500 for a few new higher spec tech bits. But let's strip the low end from anything that would make them like the phone too much and never bother upgrading. What they take out wouldn't even add $5 to the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
So the cripple a phone on many levels and still ask for $799 or even more?

I recently looked for a new TV and was surprised that TVs despite their size and all those modern features cost much less than smartphones. It seems TVs are getting cheaper while smartphones are getting more expensive. For €749 you already get a 48 inch OLED TV. There are TVs with a screen size over 80 inch for the price of an iPhone 14 Pro.
No even 90Hz, no even 2x optical zoom. It's hilarious. I will go with Samsung Ultra.
 
well of course, this device only exists for upselling purposes anyway. If they truly cared about providing the best customer experience available, they would put the best tech currently available in "the" iPhonE (singular)
There is a trade-off to be made between weight/bulkiness and features (though I don't know how sensor size factors in here). I'm glad that Apple isn't only offering the Pros — though I'd prefer the regular iPhones to have no camera bump at all.
 
Apple becomes non premium grasping brand to make even 2 cents to be richer. I have iPhone 12 and looking at what Apple does I'm slowly thinking going with Samsung Ultra. The fact iPhone 14 doesn't have 90Hz or 2x optical zoom is hilarious. My grandpa got Motorola G82 for 200$ and he got 120Hz, good Dolby Atmos (really), AoD and Pro mode. Paying more for having this in Pro model is a big misunderstanding.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.