It's telling that you can get one of these for LESS than an iPT.

[Michael Goff]

Who said anything about Apple losing money?
$450 cheaper is compared to the same company (Apple).
You know the phone listed is crap? Interesting, I thought it wasn't released yet, but somehow you've have one and have done an exhaustive analysis of it compared to the iPT. You found they it's a crap phone.

Enlighten us, where did it fail in the compare to the iPT?

Was it the extra storage, the print id, the phone, ... oh wait, the iPT doesn't have those things.

Display 1920x1080 vs 1136x640
Camera 13mp from Nexus6 vs 8mp
Ram 3g vs 1g
MicroSD up to 64g vs no MicroSD

What about the device made it crap?

Can you provide a link to this exhaustive comparative you did?

BTW, once again, you ignored the point. The iPT and Mini1/Mini3 were outdated when 1st released based on Apple's own standards. As far as sticking to facts, prove your 'fact' that this is a crap device.
http://www.xiaomitoday.com/bluboo-x...k-powered-smartphone-with-a-killer-price-tag/

The SoC is crap. It is running a higher resolution screen with an inferior SoC. It is running a less optimized OS with a higher resolution screen and a crap SoC. The apps are also going to be less optimized. Also, the Nexus 6 camera isn't anything to brag about. It wasn't a great camera.

As for the price comparison, you're the person bringing up Apple's newest device. The price comparison between them is important.

 

[1458279]

The SoC is crap. It is running a higher resolution screen with an inferior SoC. It is running a less optimized OS with a higher resolution screen and a crap SoC. The apps are also going to be less optimized. Also, the Nexus 6 camera isn't anything to brag about. It wasn't a great camera.

As for the price comparison, you're the person bringing up Apple's newest device. The price comparison between them is important.

Is the camera worse than the outdated iPT camera? How great is the front camera on the iPT compared to this one? Saying it's "nothing to brag about" ? Have you compared the iPT camera to this one?
Or, if you actually wanted to stay on point, compare the iPT to the latest that Apple has to offer in other lines.

Again, you've ignored the point.
The iPT and Mini1/Mini3 were outdated when 1st released based on Apple's own standards.

The price compare was between iPT and the non Apple offerings. When you compare Apple's iPhone to the iPT, one has the best offerings, the other doesn't. Do you account for that in your price compare?

It's like going into a fancy restaurant and getting a big mac for $20 and saying it's justified because it's a fancy restaurant. The fact is, you're still getting a big mac for $20. Saying that same restaurant has meals for $200 doesn't alter the fact that you just got a big mac for $20.

It point that you'll likely ignore again is what the iPT is offering vs what it costs. The compare is what is being offered by another company at the same or less cost. You're trying to justify the $20 big mac based on how fancy the restaurant is. I'm calling the big mac exactly what it is, a big mac. If some people are so star struck by Apple, that they'll pay $20 for a big mac, then fine, pay what you want for whatever you want to buy, but in the end, you still paid $20 for a big mac.

It's pretty clear that you are not interested in the point that I've made. You've ignored the issue of the iPT/Mini1/Mini3 not being updated to Apple's latest tech.

This is why so many people are sheep and will follow those that control their minds. They'll pay $20 for a big mac and defend it.

On the slim chance you have any openness left in your mind, you should watch this 5 part series. Otherwise, just continue to be a sheep.

http://www.mojvideo.com/video-the-c...gineering-of-consent-1-5/6d93daeb5363e5e7a0c2

 

[Michael Goff]

Is the camera worse than the outdated iPT camera? How great is the front camera on the iPT compared to this one? Saying it's "nothing to brag about" ? Have you compared the iPT camera to this one?
Or, if you actually wanted to stay on point, compare the iPT to the latest that Apple has to offer in other lines.

Again, you've ignored the point.
The iPT and Mini1/Mini3 were outdated when 1st released based on Apple's own standards.

The price compare was between iPT and the non Apple offerings. When you compare Apple's iPhone to the iPT, one has the best offerings, the other doesn't. Do you account for that in your price compare?

It's like going into a fancy restaurant and getting a big mac for $20 and saying it's justified because it's a fancy restaurant. The fact is, you're still getting a big mac for $20. Saying that same restaurant has meals for $200 doesn't alter the fact that you just got a big mac for $20.

It point that you'll likely ignore again is what the iPT is offering vs what it costs. The compare is what is being offered by another company at the same or less cost. You're trying to justify the $20 big mac based on how fancy the restaurant is. I'm calling the big mac exactly what it is, a big mac. If some people are so star struck by Apple, that they'll pay $20 for a big mac, then fine, pay what you want for whatever you want to buy, but in the end, you still paid $20 for a big mac.

It's pretty clear that you are not interested in the point that I've made. You've ignored the issue of the iPT/Mini1/Mini3 not being updated to Apple's latest tech.

This is why so many people are sheep and will follow those that control their minds. They'll pay $20 for a big mac and defend it.

On the slim chance you have any openness left in your mind, you should watch this 5 part series. Otherwise, just continue to be a sheep.

http://www.mojvideo.com/video-the-c...gineering-of-consent-1-5/6d93daeb5363e5e7a0c2

Why would I compare the iPT, which costs 200$, to the 6S?

As for comparing Apple to not Apple, it compares rather well in terms of performance. But you seem to be ignoring that.

Also, throw around the word sheep a little more. It should make your horrible argument seem a little less crappy eventually.

 

[1458279]

Why would I compare the iPT, which costs 200$, to the 6S?

As for comparing Apple to not Apple, it compares rather well in terms of performance. But you seem to be ignoring that.

Also, throw around the word sheep a little more. It should make your horrible argument seem a little less crappy eventually.

The compare of the iPT to the 6S is to see the best offering from the same company. Apple put old tech into the iPT and Mini and proved it had newer tech by putting that newer tech in the iPhone.

You say I'm ignoring Apple to Apple in terms of performance? The point of the tread is that the iPT is old tech by Apple's own standard, the price doesn't reflect this. Saying it's cheaper than Apple's other offerings is exactly why I used the big mac analogy, because in the end, a big mac is still a big mac.

In the end, the iPT/Mini are still old tech. Who else was putting out non-retina screens when the Mini1 came out.

What part of the argument do you find horrible? Let me guess, the part where someone challenged Apples product offerings.

Was it that the Mini1/Mini3/iPT were so awesome that they flew off the selves? No, the market has spoken about Apples 2nd class offerings. Sales are down. Sales are down at least in part because it's old tech. Worse than being old tech, it's overprice old tech. Some even suggested that Apple would have dropped those two lines, look how long it took the iPT to get an update.

Over time, the market will give the answer. We'll see how well the iPT does with it's old tech/ high price offerings. We'll see how the Mini compares to other offerings over time. Apple went this route before and was about a month from bankruptcy. They weren't saved by an ecosystem or great service, they were crushed by a free market.

They didn't make a comeback based on old tech, they offered what the free market wanted. Maybe you think the free market want's over price out dated tech. How much of a market impact is the iPT actually making for Apple? Is it really a home run product? Even Apple moved it off the main line up and made it more of an "also ran".

 

[1458279]

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/1...-went-bankrupt-because-it-failed-to-innovate/

Whoever this Steve Jobs guy is, I don't know. Maybe he knows something about Apple? He said "because it failed to innovate".

How exactly is the out dated iPT/Mini1/Mini3 innovative? Is it the logo?

Maybe someone can Google Steve Jobs and find out who he is Probably some loser that knows nothing about Apple.

 

[1458279]

"The output was not there and people have caught up with it" "The differentiation has eroded"
-- Steve Jobs.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe old tech/high price is the new answer. Maybe everyone else is here smarter than Steve Jobs, maybe someone should find out who this fool Steve Jobs is. Did Steve Jobs ever bring a product to market?

 

[I7guy]

Ok, that's a different argument. I think Apple puts out a very good phone that seems to be right in line with the market. It's actually one part that makes the iPT worse because you KNOW Apple can make a better iPT. It used to be (years ago) the iPT was known as an iPhone without the phone.

Btw because hasselblad has a 75mp camera and canon only has s 50mp camera is that the yardstick on old tech? Or one phone has 8 cores vs 2 custom designed cores is that the benchmark?

Not sure why you compare spec for spec as a guideline for old/new tech?

 

[I7guy]

"The output was not there and people have caught up with it" "The differentiation has eroded"
-- Steve Jobs.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe old tech/high price is the new answer. Maybe everyone else is here smarter than Steve Jobs, maybe someone should find out who this fool Steve Jobs is. Did Steve Jobs ever bring a product to market?

Maybe everybody here is smarter than Tim Cook?

 

[1458279]

Again, ignoring the point that Steve Jobs made. How exactly is the iPT innovative? What exactly is cutting edge on the iPT? You're suggesting about something with 75mp makes the iPT cutting edge?

Really? Your point is that the iPT/Mini1/Mini3 were all cutting edge? All the world stopped, held their breath and said _WOW_ that's innovation that takes your breath away. Excellent point, everyone agrees with you, the iPT is the greatest leap forward mankind has ever made.

What exactly does Tim Cook have to do with the point that Steve Jobs made? Can you not see the point that Steve Jobs made? Are you suggesting that Tim Cook wouldn't agree with Steve Jobs?

You seem to have a real disconnect with logic, do you even have an advanced degree? Have you studied logic or critical thinking or is your degree in trolling?

 

[Michael Goff]

The compare of the iPT to the 6S is to see the best offering from the same company. Apple put old tech into the iPT and Mini and proved it had newer tech by putting that newer tech in the iPhone.

You say I'm ignoring Apple to Apple in terms of performance? The point of the tread is that the iPT is old tech by Apple's own standard, the price doesn't reflect this. Saying it's cheaper than Apple's other offerings is exactly why I used the big mac analogy, because in the end, a big mac is still a big mac.

In the end, the iPT/Mini are still old tech. Who else was putting out non-retina screens when the Mini1 came out.

What part of the argument do you find horrible? Let me guess, the part where someone challenged Apples product offerings.

Was it that the Mini1/Mini3/iPT were so awesome that they flew off the selves? No, the market has spoken about Apples 2nd class offerings. Sales are down. Sales are down at least in part because it's old tech. Worse than being old tech, it's overprice old tech. Some even suggested that Apple would have dropped those two lines, look how long it took the iPT to get an update.

Over time, the market will give the answer. We'll see how well the iPT does with it's old tech/ high price offerings. We'll see how the Mini compares to other offerings over time. Apple went this route before and was about a month from bankruptcy. They weren't saved by an ecosystem or great service, they were crushed by a free market.

They didn't make a comeback based on old tech, they offered what the free market wanted. Maybe you think the free market want's over price out dated tech. How much of a market impact is the iPT actually making for Apple? Is it really a home run product? Even Apple moved it off the main line up and made it more of an "also ran".

You can't compare a 650$ device and a 200$ one.

 

[1458279]

You can't compare a 650$ device and a 200$ one.

The original compare was a $200 product to a $199 product. The issue was one product being offered and what it offered vs what others were offering in the price range.

It was about one product, the iPT, and questioned it as an offering by Apple as compared to the other product that is not from Apple.

Issues over quality, ecosystem, etc were not part of the original point.

 

[NT1440]

The original compare was a $200 product to a $199 product. The issue was one product being offered and what it offered vs what others were offering in the price range.

********.

Just because a carrier was paying some of the cost (and passing it onto you anyway) for a $600+ device does not mean the device was $200.

 

[Michael Goff]

The original compare was a $200 product to a $199 product. The issue was one product being offered and what it offered vs what others were offering in the price range.

It was about one product, the iPT, and questioned it as an offering by Apple as compared to the other product that is not from Apple.

Issues over quality, ecosystem, etc were not part of the original point.

No, the 6S is 650$. The 6 was 650$.

 

[1458279]

No, the 6S is 650$. The 6 was 650$.

The only issue concerning cost is the iPT vs the compared device. It was about what value Apple was offering compared to others in the market. The cost of other flagship products, wasn't the point at all.

This keeps getting off the point. The point is Apple's offerings of the iPT/Mini1/Mini3 and how they compare to other offerings.

Apple offers the iPT which is outdated by Apple's current offerings and others offer much more updated tech.

If you simply compare the device you get from Apple vs others. For about $200 you get an outdated iPT vs a 5" android phone that can also run apps and play music.

Clearly Apple didn't put it's best into the iPT/Mini1 or Mini3. The Mini3 was slammed and many passed on the "upgrade" The iPT was passed for years with no update at all while the price held steady. The Mini1 came after cheaper tablets already had Retina level displays.

Point: the iPT is no where near Apple's best offering. I don't see the purpose of talking about ecosystem or calling something crap without support or chip shortage. This is about Apple not offering it's new tech in it's new device.

There's nothing innovative, new, or impressive about the iPT or the Mini line.

 

[1458279]

********.

Just because a carrier was paying some of the cost (and passing it onto you anyway) for a $600+ device does not mean the device was $200.

The only concern to the consumer is how much comes out of their pocket. The device doesn't have to be used as a phone, that would put it on par with the iPT which has no phone option.

 

[I7guy]

The only concern to the consumer is how much comes out of their pocket. The device doesn't have to be used as a phone, that would put it on par with the iPT which has no phone option.

The bolded is what is commonly referred to as a straw-man argument.

 

[1458279]

The bolded is what is commonly referred to as a straw-man argument.

So your suggesting a hidden cost on the device that the iPT doesn't have? So the true cost to the consumer is not the price posted?

What if you don't use the carrier? The price I saw looked to be the outright purchase price, I doubt it's an "on contract" price because that would put it inline with prices of most expensive phones.

Why would I include the carrier cost on one item when the other doesn't have a carrier cost?

Is the device $200 on contract or off contract? If it's off contract, then that's the complete purchase price if you don't use the phone. I'm using a non-phone device as the basis of the compare, the iPT doesn't require a carrier.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

I ignored the carrier cost because the iPT doesn't have one. Otherwise, I could have use the iPhone 6S as the compare.

Yet again, the point is missed. Is the iPT Apple's best? Is it innovative or not? How many times does this point get overlooked.

I guess some just can't stop trolling. Can't answer the question.

Too many trolls, too many blind people. Ironic that you actually used a reference to logic, that's too funny

 

[Michael Goff]

The only issue concerning cost is the iPT vs the compared device. It was about what value Apple was offering compared to others in the market. The cost of other flagship products, wasn't the point at all.

This keeps getting off the point. The point is Apple's offerings of the iPT/Mini1/Mini3 and how they compare to other offerings.

Apple offers the iPT which is outdated by Apple's current offerings and others offer much more updated tech.

If you simply compare the device you get from Apple vs others. For about $200 you get an outdated iPT vs a 5" android phone that can also run apps and play music.

Clearly Apple didn't put it's best into the iPT/Mini1 or Mini3. The Mini3 was slammed and many passed on the "upgrade" The iPT was passed for years with no update at all while the price held steady. The Mini1 came after cheaper tablets already had Retina level displays.

Point: the iPT is no where near Apple's best offering. I don't see the purpose of talking about ecosystem or calling something crap without support or chip shortage. This is about Apple not offering it's new tech in it's new device.

There's nothing innovative, new, or impressive about the iPT or the Mini line.

And yet the iPT compares well against most things in its price bracket.

So your suggesting a hidden cost on the device that the iPT doesn't have? So the true cost to the consumer is not the price posted?

What if you don't use the carrier? The price I saw looked to be the outright purchase price, I doubt it's an "on contract" price because that would put it inline with prices of most expensive phones.

Why would I include the carrier cost on one item when the other doesn't have a carrier cost?

Is the device $200 on contract or off contract? If it's off contract, then that's the complete purchase price if you don't use the phone. I'm using a non-phone device as the basis of the compare, the iPT doesn't require a carrier.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

I ignored the carrier cost because the iPT doesn't have one. Otherwise, I could have use the iPhone 6S as the compare.

Let me pin down your question. Are you asking about the price of the phone you mentioned in the first post? Are we comparing the iPT to the phone mentioned in the first post? Or are we comparing he iPT to other Apple devices? It can be one or the other, but you keep switching between the two.

 

[I7guy]

So your suggesting a hidden cost on the device that the iPT doesn't have? So the true cost to the consumer is not the price posted?

What if you don't use the carrier? The price I saw looked to be the outright purchase price, I doubt it's an "on contract" price because that would put it inline with prices of most expensive phones.

Why would I include the carrier cost on one item when the other doesn't have a carrier cost?

Is the device $200 on contract or off contract? If it's off contract, then that's the complete purchase price if you don't use the phone. I'm using a non-phone device as the basis of the compare, the iPT doesn't require a carrier.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

I ignored the carrier cost because the iPT doesn't have one. Otherwise, I could have use the iPhone 6S as the compare.

Yet again, the point is missed. Is the iPT Apple's best? Is it innovative or not? How many times does this point get overlooked.

I guess some just can't stop trolling. Can't answer the question.

Too many trolls, too many blind people. Ironic that you actually used a reference to logic, that's too funny

No I'm suggesting not everybody buys strictly on price. I agree, with the second bolded part. I'm a consumer and your statement does not apply to me, it may apply to some people, but that is what is also known as a red-herring, since you can't prove that point. Because you state these very general not proven opinions doesn't mean anyone is trolling when it comes time to respond.

Your assuming specs are the only things that matter, they don't. Support, service, longevity etc. Which is why an iphone can be pretty much sold for a decent price years after it's bought, but some of the higher speced phones value tank in 2 minutes.

 

[Jessica Lares]

The iPod Touch was the first iPod that moved away from the traditional clickwheel.

The iPad Mini wasn’t revolutionry, but it addressed the main problem of the bigger iPad - The size. But with little tradeoffs. So instead of having to carry my MacBook Pro or a separate case with a bigger iPad, I can just stuff this Mini in my coat pocket (or carry it in my hands without it being awkward) with a keyboard case and stylus, with the same power of the main iPad.

 

[1458279]

The iPod Touch was the first iPod that moved away from the traditional clickwheel.

The iPad Mini wasn’t revolutionry, but it addressed the main problem of the bigger iPad - The size. But with little tradeoffs. So instead of having to carry my MacBook Pro or a separate case with a bigger iPad, I can just stuff this Mini in my coat pocket (or carry it in my hands without it being awkward) with a keyboard case and stylus, with the same power of the main iPad.

I don't remember all the specs of the Mini1 but I do remember the size was really well liked. I passed because of the non-retina and how that made it the "odd man out" of the line up.

The problem I have with the Mini1/Mini3 are that they were passed when it came to full upgrades. They were no longer "a smaller version", they became a 2nd class product.

It's sad because I think the Mini and Nexus 7 were very close to the right size.

 

[1458279]

No I'm suggesting not everybody buys strictly on price. I agree, with the second bolded part. I'm a consumer and your statement does not apply to me, it may apply to some people, but that is what is also known as a red-herring, since you can't prove that point. Because you state these very general not proven opinions doesn't mean anyone is trolling when it comes time to respond.

Your assuming specs are the only things that matter, they don't. Support, service, longevity etc. Which is why an iphone can be pretty much sold for a decent price years after it's bought, but some of the higher speced phones value tank in 2 minutes.

"Since you can't prove that point"
What point can I not prove?

If it price doesn't apply to you, it should still concern you (_IF_ you were in the iPT market) what the product offers.

It's one thing to ask a high price, it's another thing to offer older tech, it's another thing to both ask a high price and offer older tech.

If the iPT were at Apple's best, this would be different.
If the iPT were at a lower price that reflected the outdated tech, this would be different.

"Your assuming specs are the only things that matter" I did the compare based on specs, it's up to the buyer to establish a value for support, service, longevity, etc.
I did this because I have no clue about this company, they could shut down next week and I wouldn't know.
On the other hand, I only asked for out of contract service once from Apple on a iPod Classic. They wanted too much for replacement of the battery, so I replaced it myself. I consider that poor service because their price for battery replacement was more than the entire value of the product. It actually locks up during normal use, but I've gotten used to it. I had to send it in soon after purchase and again after that. It was covered, but still shows production problems.

Point: the value of service, support, etc is subjective. A person can put whatever value they want on that part of the equation. However, that doesn't mean that Apple can't offer the same service, support, longevity _AND_ have a better camera, more ran, larger screen, etc.

Q. Would the long term value of the iPT be more or less if it had a larger screen, faster CPU, more ram, better camera?

The current value of the iPT that I bought is about $18 from most sites. Sub-flagship products from Apple, esp the iPT don't hold much value. It can't run iOS 7, which makes it worth less money. The same thing would likely happen with the new sub-par iPT Apple is offering now.

All these things can factor into the purchase decision, but they remain subjective. Me, I value the product based on what I pay and what I get for what I pay. I don't see much value in service on an outdated product.

I also can't speak to the other products quality or service. Is it not possible for them to offer good service? Has it been established that it's a crap product?

Again, it was just a product to product compare. I don't have stats on both products service records. I do remember that it took Apple quite a while to fix problems with a notebook and they had color/screen issues with the Mini and that took a while for many to resolve. So I left that for the buyer to value.

 

[I7guy]

"Since you can't prove that point"
What point can I not prove?

If it price doesn't apply to you, it should still concern you (_IF_ you were in the iPT market) what the product offers.

It's one thing to ask a high price, it's another thing to offer older tech, it's another thing to both ask a high price and offer older tech.

If the iPT were at Apple's best, this would be different.
If the iPT were at a lower price that reflected the outdated tech, this would be different.

"Your assuming specs are the only things that matter" I did the compare based on specs, it's up to the buyer to establish a value for support, service, longevity, etc.
I did this because I have no clue about this company, they could shut down next week and I wouldn't know.
On the other hand, I only asked for out of contract service once from Apple on a iPod Classic. They wanted too much for replacement of the battery, so I replaced it myself. I consider that poor service because their price for battery replacement was more than the entire value of the product. It actually locks up during normal use, but I've gotten used to it. I had to send it in soon after purchase and again after that. It was covered, but still shows production problems.

Point: the value of service, support, etc is subjective. A person can put whatever value they want on that part of the equation. However, that doesn't mean that Apple can't offer the same service, support, longevity _AND_ have a better camera, more ran, larger screen, etc.

Q. Would the long term value of the iPT be more or less if it had a larger screen, faster CPU, more ram, better camera?

The current value of the iPT that I bought is about $18 from most sites. Sub-flagship products from Apple, esp the iPT don't hold much value. It can't run iOS 7, which makes it worth less money. The same thing would likely happen with the new sub-par iPT Apple is offering now.

All these things can factor into the purchase decision, but they remain subjective. Me, I value the product based on what I pay and what I get for what I pay. I don't see much value in service on an outdated product.

I also can't speak to the other products quality or service. Is it not possible for them to offer good service? Has it been established that it's a crap product?

Again, it was just a product to product compare. I don't have stats on both products service records. I do remember that it took Apple quite a while to fix problems with a notebook and they had color/screen issues with the Mini and that took a while for many to resolve. So I left that for the buyer to value.

Trying to ascertain whether service or support means anything. An ipt = iPad minus 3G and is smaller and runs iOS 9. Maybe for some it's worth it. It's not the tech it's what you do with it.

 

[1458279]

Trying to ascertain whether service or support means anything. An ipt = iPad minus 3G and is smaller and runs iOS 9. Maybe for some it's worth it. It's not the tech it's what you do with it.

Ok, that could be an important point for some, I don't value service/support on a product as much as others probably do. I can also understand that some wouldn't value things they don't use. Having a finger print scanner on an iPT only used for music wouldn't add much value. I can also see that a smaller screen could be a plus for some that used it just for music, just as much as a faster CPU has no value if you aren't using it all.

 

[MRU]

This thread takes 'beating a dead horse' to another level.