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.
Other Is Apple going to keep charging $1,000+ for new iPhones every year?
- Thread starter JWATT
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You can not compare things without comparing scale. The ability to make 1 thing and make 1 million things are very very different. Can Ford make a battery powered car. Absolutely. Will they be able to make as many as Tesla can without Musk's fancy battery factory? Not for several years.
Apple's screens come from Samsung. They can't do it on their own. If they're gonna sell 200 million devices per year they have to get the parts. If it's a part they can only get 15 million of per year, it's not a part they can use even if other companies are using it already.
When I say that the X or the XS is a 2019 or a 2020 phone, what I mean is that we really can't expect Apple to get they hands on enough OLED screens to fulfill all iPhone orders until that year. IF they were gonna stick to the "1 main model" plan this year then the iPhone would not have OLED screens in 2018, period. They'd come out with an LCD iPhone again and that would be that.
I don't mean they couldn't literally build one. I'm saying they couldn't make it and sell it because of their size and scale.
As is with everything else in this world. The cost of living increases all the time. It was going to happen with smartphones. Hell a gallon of milk was about $2 a few years ago now they’re up to $5. It’s been happening for a long time now. Expect the prices to go further up if those tariffs go into effect as well.
Probably. But you don't have to buy one every year, so there's that. In fact, you don't have to buy one at all.. but I get the frustration. You want a new iPhone but you don't want an expensive flagship type phone.
I don't have a problem with Apple selling $1,000+ iPhones (heck, I bought an IPhone X 256GB last year), but I do hope they keep less expensive models available. It seems like their current strategy is to offer the older models like the iPhone 7 for less, but it would be nice to see a fairly recent model that is significantly smaller available for around the price of the $450 iPhone 7.
I manage a university computer Help Desk where faculty, staff, and students frequently stop by for assistance with all sorts of technology... including smartphones. Inexpensive Android phones are very popular... especially among students. Some students, faculty and staff have expensive Android phones and iPhones, like the Galaxy Note and the iPhone X. I also know retirees on fixed incomes who have switched from iPhone to Android, because they can get a newer Android phone for less than an older iPhone 7. I think the demise of the home button will drive more older customers to Android as well. If the iPhone just isn't what it used to be for them, might as well try something less expensive. Apple is also ignoring the market of parents buying phones for teens and even pre-teens. My kids aren't old enough for smartphones, but my teenage nieces and nephews have inexpensive Android phones even though their parents are iPhone users.
In technology there is strength in numbers related to market share. I'd hate to see Apple lose market share because they don't offer enough range in their prices. I guess the hard part is that even if they offer a $400 iPhone that is brand new, it will probably look small and underpowered next to Android devices in the $300 range from LG, Motorola, Essential, etc. One of my coworkers just switched from iPhone to Android and bought an Essential Phone with Android Pie and a 360 degree accessory camera for about half the price of an iPhone X. He seems pretty happy with it so far. Personally I'm too wedded to my Apple Watch to switch, but I recognize that I do pay a premium. Even if I did switch to Android, I'd probably find a reason to justify getting a $400 Android Wear watch, and over $1,000 on a Galaxy Note 9. I'd end up spending just as much as I do on Apple products.
I don't have a problem with Apple selling $1,000+ iPhones (heck, I bought an IPhone X 256GB last year), but I do hope they keep less expensive models available. It seems like their current strategy is to offer the older models like the iPhone 7 for less, but it would be nice to see a fairly recent model that is significantly smaller available for around the price of the $450 iPhone 7.
I manage a university computer Help Desk where faculty, staff, and students frequently stop by for assistance with all sorts of technology... including smartphones. Inexpensive Android phones are very popular... especially among students. Some students, faculty and staff have expensive Android phones and iPhones, like the Galaxy Note and the iPhone X. I also know retirees on fixed incomes who have switched from iPhone to Android, because they can get a newer Android phone for less than an older iPhone 7. I think the demise of the home button will drive more older customers to Android as well. If the iPhone just isn't what it used to be for them, might as well try something less expensive. Apple is also ignoring the market of parents buying phones for teens and even pre-teens. My kids aren't old enough for smartphones, but my teenage nieces and nephews have inexpensive Android phones even though their parents are iPhone users.
In technology there is strength in numbers related to market share. I'd hate to see Apple lose market share because they don't offer enough range in their prices. I guess the hard part is that even if they offer a $400 iPhone that is brand new, it will probably look small and underpowered next to Android devices in the $300 range from LG, Motorola, Essential, etc. One of my coworkers just switched from iPhone to Android and bought an Essential Phone with Android Pie and a 360 degree accessory camera for about half the price of an iPhone X. He seems pretty happy with it so far. Personally I'm too wedded to my Apple Watch to switch, but I recognize that I do pay a premium. Even if I did switch to Android, I'd probably find a reason to justify getting a $400 Android Wear watch, and over $1,000 on a Galaxy Note 9. I'd end up spending just as much as I do on Apple products.
Something more like car lease with a fixed depreciation, where you just pay for use.
These IUP make you pay on the phone a monthly chunk at a time.
On a two year plan after one year since I paid for half the phone I should rip out the processor or screen and just return the other half.
Wow. That's shocking. I don't know a single person who's iPhone was in working condition three years later.
That's a bit of a bad example, but I broadly agree with your point.
Milk was often sold at below cost, because supermarkets (in many western countries) refused to pay dairy farmers fair prices (even actual cost of production) for milk. It caused a major problem here in the UK, and I think the US too (I think in the US there's a big movement to pay fair prices for branded milk to send a message).
I think/hope things have got better with regards to milk, hence the price increasing to what it should be --- rather than the cost of living rising by 2.5 times in just a couple of years.
However the cost of living does rise, and that causes cost increases for lots of things, including tech... But I still think Apple are rising prices ahead of inflation. But then they have massive R&D costs, provide excellent support and their products hold their value well... So whilst the cost of Apple products may be high, I'd argue that they're better value for some of us than competing products.
Scale is an issue but when my £200 Lenovo P2 also sports an OLED screen, then one of those is neither future tech nor warrants a big price uplift.
Apple is just pushing the luxury angle in lieu of any real advancements and buyers are falling for it. It is a legitimate marketing ploy but let's be honest and see it for what it is and not pretend that Apple is doing anyone any favours here.
My wife's iPhone 6 still works well, and she hasn't even had to have the battery replaced. It's pretty much because of light use. She uses her iPad much more than her iPhone, and her iPhone battery almost never drops below 35%. My iPhone 6 did not fare as well. I'm sure it would have been usable with a battery replacement, but I wanted to upgrade by the time the iPhone X was released.
But yeah... most people want to upgrade closer to 2 years if they can. I've never been one of the annual upgraders.
A friend of mine got a 3 year contract last week and it was the first time I’d heard of them. I checked my O2 today and it’s a big part of what they are marketing this year. I wouldn’t be comfortable with a phone that is under contract two years after its warranty has expired to be honest.
I also think carriers shoot themselves in the foot because it’s one more year where people won’t be upgrading. They are already worried as less people are upgrading regularly so I think they are going for the quick money.
I disagree. Apple might be offering current tech but they are charging a lot more for it than other android manufacturers. The iPhone Xs max starts at £1,099 in the U.K. and that’s for 64GB of storage. The note 9 which has more features than the max costs the same same but you get 512GB of internal storage. The base note 9 is only £899 over here and you get 128GB of storage.
Apple seem to be charging a lot more than Samsung who also offer cutting edge premium tech.
It’s only the ecosystem that’s keeping me with Apple.
Bad example but you understood what I was trying to get across. Also Apple has been overcharging for their products since the beginning of time. But the beauty of life is that we have choices so if you ever feel it’s too expensive you can go against buying it.
When I consider how much I use my iPhone the price does not seem so bad. It is freedom for me and allows me to still conduct business, even when not in the office.
It’s the price you pay to have the “nicest phone.” No one is forcing you to upgrade every year. Don’t like the prices, then don’t buy an iPhone.
My mum bought her iPhone 4 in 2010 and she used it as her daily driver until 2017.
My dad got an iPhone 5 in 2012 and it still works now. It’s not his daily driver but it still works.
I think in two years the lowest priced plus will be $1300. In four years I predict $1500 for the lowest priced plus.
I think Apples strategy is to have the best phone spec wise no matter the price so any time people say what is the best phone it will be the iPhone. Then their other phones the previous years models will keep trickling down.
Right now they're still selling the iPhone 7. So when the main top end phone starts at $1300 they'll likely sell the older years models for $1000, $800, $400 etc and that will be their strategy to offer value whilst still having the insanest phone spec wise that costs a kidney.
Other phone companies can't do this because they don't have the same cachey you know? Samsung can't sell a Galaxy S9 type device for $1300 or $1500. People just wouldn't buy it and I don't think Samsung has the technical ability to deliver a processor as good as the A12 (or A11 for that matter). They seem always two years behind.
I think Apples strategy is to have the best phone spec wise no matter the price so any time people say what is the best phone it will be the iPhone. Then their other phones the previous years models will keep trickling down.
Right now they're still selling the iPhone 7. So when the main top end phone starts at $1300 they'll likely sell the older years models for $1000, $800, $400 etc and that will be their strategy to offer value whilst still having the insanest phone spec wise that costs a kidney.
Other phone companies can't do this because they don't have the same cachey you know? Samsung can't sell a Galaxy S9 type device for $1300 or $1500. People just wouldn't buy it and I don't think Samsung has the technical ability to deliver a processor as good as the A12 (or A11 for that matter). They seem always two years behind.
Last edited:
If you can justify it yourself that way then it’s not so bad. However many can enjoy the same power and freedom with an iPhone that is one or three years old too. iOS is very much the same across all devices but with the new iPhone you get a shiny gold edge, a processor Apple tells you is better even if it’s not noticed, and a camera that handles low light with slightly less noise. The marketing department at Apple are superb at selling most people a slightly better experience. At the end of the day people who pay these prices want a shiny new toy and the allure of the promo images does the job perfectly. There’s nothing wrong with that at all.
My 5S, 6+, 6S, 6S+ are all still working. Even my 3GS still powers up and holds a charge.
That has less to do with arrogance and more with having to create a growing profit every year. That’s how our capitalism works. And even if they only manage to sell the same amount of phones every year, there will then be some analyst shouting “Apple is doomed, their profit doesn’t grow no more!!!”
If Warren Buffett is to be believed, it's only going to go up from here. Long live capitalism, lol 
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/warren-buffett-says-he-bought-just-a-little-more-apple-recently.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/warren-buffett-says-he-bought-just-a-little-more-apple-recently.html