That is a solution to a problem people run in to every three years or so. That is, their battery is worn out and doesn’t hold a charge anymore. There is the different situation of battery just running out in the middle of the day, but that situation is covered by power banks, which are way more convenient and versatile.
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 Tim Cook’s latest iPhone scam explained
- Thread starter ThomasJL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The same thing could be said about just about every purchase anyone makes.
There are, right this second, millions of people spending money on things that I wouldn’t buy. Things that I could easily find an almost unlimited number of “better things to spend the money on”.
Perhaps I could take the time to tell them all that they should be buying something else that they don’t actually want, but I do. However, I think I’ll stuck to just understanding that they probably have different tastes, personal circumstances, disposable income etc to me and therefore it’s probably best for them to actually just buy the thing that they decided upon with those factors taken into account.
Because being able to maintain the things you own is nice, especially when those things are pretty expensive.
Yes, you can take your stuff to Apple to have the battery replaced or mail it in, but that's not always convenient, so it would be nice if user-repairability was more of a serious consideration.
I don’t think Steve Jobs was an ethical and honest person. I actually think the opposite. I just think Cook is much worse when it comes to being stingy with what’s included in products, and when it comes to prices.
Read up on Steve Jobs email about Amazon Kindle.
In fact I blame Steve Jobs for the current state of the App Store and how it seems it will ultimately lead to its failure. Like the Mac App Store.
Last edited:
There's no denial that Apple is a greedy company.
But the scam you're talking about is a bad example. Many people on this very forum said for the past 5 years or so that they don't need a faster iPhone, especially those buying the regular one. You probably can't tell the difference between an A15 and a A16 in a blind test. A Pro user (whatever that means) is more likely to push the limits of their iPhone, the chip upgrade makes more sense. So yes Apple wants to maximize profits, but think about the customer: why would you want a more expensive chip if it doesn't bring you any marginal value?
Also, Apple has been upfront about the chip that is inside the iPhone 14, they never pretended nor claimed they would always provide the latest chip in the whole lineup. You are not entitled to a product that never existed. As a customer, you can decide not to buy the iPhone 14 if the older chip is a deal breaker for you. You can also buy the 14 Pro.
There’s no such thing as “iPhone 13 CPU”. It’s A15 Bionic and from what I’ve seen that was very clear on the announcement and well-documented on Apple.com so no, it’s still not a scam. A scam is deliberate misleading for personal/financial gain. A scam would be advertising an A15 chip as an A16 chip saying it has increased performance while actually being identical.
You don’t have to take the phone to Apple. There’s multitude of repair shops that can replace the battery. Seriously, at least over here every average mall has a repair shop that will quickly replace the battery on your phone. I have done it in the past. Drop the phone there, pick it up one hour later. Done.
It makes sense to optimize products for everyday use, instead of something that happens maybe once every three years. Having an integrated battery lets you have a bigger battery, or a smaller device. And better water-resistance.
Yeah, it’s outrageous. I’ll be sure to by my next thing from another mega corporation.
🤪
Well, you see, in a world without capitalism, our beloved iPhones might be just figments of our imagination, mere illusions of tech wizardry! Picture this: no bustling market forces, no fierce competition, and no wild quests for profits – just a utopian landscape where everyone shares everything, including the iPhone's secret sauce.
But alas, in that realm of socialist dreams, would the brilliant minds of Steve Jobs and his cohorts have ever been inspired to create the sleek, magical device we now hold so dear? Perhaps not! The allure of potential riches and the drive to outdo their rivals spurred them on, resulting in the revolutionary invention that changed our lives forever.
So, while capitalism might have its flaws and quirks, let's not forget that it also birthed the technological wonders we treasure today, like our fancy iPhones!
Only technical people would read the specs, most people don’t. Most people just assume iPhone 14 would use a faster cpu than 13.
Not sure if anyone mentioned before, but the iPhone 14 has 5 GPU cores, while the iPhone 13 has 4 GPU cores. So it is an upgrade.
Most people, especially people who don’t read the specs, don’t care about the CPU on their phones. Does it run TikTok? The latest pay to win game? Good enough.
Specs on a phone (and every device for that matter) are a collection of different things. CPU is just one of them. And CPUs in iPhones are ludicrously fast when compared to alternatives in any case. There are other feature besides CPU. The screens, the camera, the battery’s. The size and weight. It’s just stupid to stare at the CPU and demand that is HAS to be faster on the new phone. And, to be pedantic: it IS faster. A15 on iPhone 13 has 4 core GPU, on 14 it’s 5 core.
But all of this is theoretical, as not many people upgrade phones every year. Better comparison would be between iPhone 14 and 12, or 11. Or even older.
the false but yet powerful promise of competition and material wealth 🙂
It’s like when chips producers reduce the filling quantity of their packages, but keep the size and fill the rest with air. Nobody would dispute that this is a scam and most consumers don’t look at the packaging to realize that it now only holds 6 oz when it was 7 oz before.
Companies have one goal and one goal only - to make money at any expense. Yes, usually making the customer happy equates to gobs of money. Apple does this better than most companies out there today. But a scam? This is not the definition of a scam.
It seriously mystifies me .... why would I ever think the products I buy defines me? Why would I ever think the products I buy have my best interest in mind? Who cares if someone is using a Nothing phone, an Android phone, or an iPhone. If it works for them and their situation - great.
There is a reason why a lot of people buy iPhones. I could write pages on why. People get utility and use out of them.
If humans were not a selfish species, we could probably be in the Star Trek age right now with disease, hunger, and poverty all taken care of. But to think this ONLY applies to companies is to be extremely short sighted. We as a species will buy inferior products produced by slave labor any day just to save a few bucks.
It seriously mystifies me .... why would I ever think the products I buy defines me? Why would I ever think the products I buy have my best interest in mind? Who cares if someone is using a Nothing phone, an Android phone, or an iPhone. If it works for them and their situation - great.
There is a reason why a lot of people buy iPhones. I could write pages on why. People get utility and use out of them.
If humans were not a selfish species, we could probably be in the Star Trek age right now with disease, hunger, and poverty all taken care of. But to think this ONLY applies to companies is to be extremely short sighted. We as a species will buy inferior products produced by slave labor any day just to save a few bucks.
It's not false, but it's essential to recognize that not everyone with innovative ideas is solely seeking compensation for their efforts. However, we cannot ignore the fact that wealth remains a significant driving force behind many innovations. While it may not be the primary motivator for everyone, the desire to achieve financial success undeniably serves as inspiration for numerous groundbreaking ideas.
It's commendable that some individuals are purely driven by the noble goal of benefiting humanity, and their contributions are truly invaluable. Nevertheless, in most cases, the pursuit of financial success plays a crucial role in stimulating innovation and overall progress.
This topic is undoubtedly multifaceted, and there's no definitive right or wrong answer. By understanding and appreciating people's various motivations, we can gain a more comprehensive perspective on the dynamics of innovation. Ignoring these motivations would indeed be unhelpful in our quest to foster creativity and advancements that benefit society as a whole.
I am pro-consumer.
That said, if people are comfortable outlaying a significant amount of money (and I would characterize all iPhone prices as a "significant amount") to buy a device, and still don't know or don't want to check the specs...at that point, that's on them. Caveat Emptor has to come into play at some point, instead of expecting the corporation who makes the specs known having to compensate for the inertia of people who have the ability, but not the will—to inform themselves.
Besides, one could easily make the flip-side-of-the-same-coin argument, that outside of the insular, self-selecting, tech-or-at-least-Apple-enthusiast community (including myself, and probably anyone reading this) that cares enough about this stuff enough to use their own free time post to a message board/forum about it—the people buying iPhones without looking at spec sheets do that because they don't care, not because they are being duped. They're buying a phone because it's faster than the one it's replacing, not because they care about how it fairs against the previous year's model that they in all likelihood don't have.
I don't buy the premise that there are scores of people out there who both:
1. ...care about the specs so little that they don't even check them
2. ...but care just enough that they are A) aware of and B) have developed so much confidence in the assumption that the processor is upgraded every year, that they don't have to look.
Anecdotally—as you can see evidence of in this very thread—the likely majority of laypeople not steeping themselves in tech/Apple news and/or discussion are more likely to think, "Apple puts out basically the same phone every year" than "I expect a generational processor leap every year, to the point where I don't even look to check if that is the case either during pre-purchase, purchase, or even in the post-purchase return period." That is a STRETCH.
Fair point!
Thing is, having to replace my battery myself would be inconvenient. I'd rather concede that unlikely option that I have a more convenient mail-in service for, especially because the sealed-in battery brings other tradeoffs that I benefit from every day, rather than the tradeoffs a user-replacable battery (which is a rare event in the aggregate) would bring.
So whose convenience "wins"? I would say the convenience of the users/possible customers who there are more of. Given how many phone/device manufacturers and electronics as a whole (Nintendo Switch, for example) have adopted sealed-in battery designs and still had incredible success with those products, it's clear that consumers have delivered their verdict on which side is more niche.
It is click bait. I understand why youtubers do this but not what the motivation is for a forum like this. Maybe it is like the excitement you get from kicking a hornets nest.
Oh I didn’t mean for my original post to be an endorsement of capitalism, just the identification of it.