iPhone 14 Pro Max Why is the iPhone still seen as the holy grail of smartphones?

[Ratlerbite]

Oh hell yea. I have the beta. I’ll have to keep an eye out

 

[Starscape]

Holy Grail? To people that prefer Apple, yes.

 

[fw85]

Holy Grail? To people that prefer Apple, yes.

And apparently to their largest competitors as well
You know, the ones that used to each have a unique look & feel, until they started playing a game called - who can create the most lifelike iPhone imitation powered by Android?

 

[myhaksown]

Don’t think they paid, yet. Tax avoidance is a strategy used by all. After all why pay more taxes than you have to?

Yeah, but my point was that Apple is no different than any other company and saying that they’re too intelligent and mature to cancel beloved products and that they care more about the product than the money is a ludicrous statement. So, while I did unintentionally misstate it, the point remains, they’re no different than any other company. They want every dime they can and we should understand that Apple does nothing for us unless moneys involved plain and simple. If being environmentally conscious didn’t make their users more loyal, spend more on products “because it’s a recycled material it’s $300 more this year! Isn’t that great!?”, and get them huge amounts of free press they’d happily forget it. We should never forget that. That’s capitalism and Europes DMA is proving that point every day Apple chooses to maliciously comply instead of supporting user choice and reduced prices.

Oh and iBooks.

 

[I7guy]

Yeah, but my point was that Apple is no different than any other company and saying that they’re too intelligent and mature to cancel beloved products and that they care more about the product than the money is a ludicrous statement.

Companies do have loss leader products especially since it’s claimed apple is no different than other companies. But it’s true - true for apple, true for you and true for me that we want every dime coming to us.

So, while I did unintentionally misstate it, the point remains, they’re no different than any other company.

Maybe they are different. Look at their press releases during lockdown.

They want every dime they can and we should understand that Apple does nothing for us unless moneys involved plain and simple.

As a statement that is general in nature, that is true. The real question is everything profit motivated? Can’t say yes or no to that.

If being environmentally conscious didn’t make their users more loyal, spend more on products “because it’s a recycled material it’s $300 more this year!

What? In 2024 companies should attempt some form of green or carbon neutral or environmentally conscious. And they should also be recognized for it.

Isn’t that great!?”, and get them huge amounts of free press they’d happily forget it. We should never forget that. That’s capitalism and Europes DMA is proving that point every day Apple chooses to maliciously comply instead of supporting user choice and reduced prices.

What it proves is how the EU loves to play Robin Hood with someone else’s money.

Oh and iBooks.

??

 

[myhaksown]

Companies do have loss leader products especially since it’s claimed apple is no different than other companies. But it’s true - true for apple, true for you and true for me that we want every dime coming to us.

Maybe they are different. Look at their press releases during lockdown.

As a statement that is general in nature, that is true. The real question is everything profit motivated? Can’t say yes or no to that.

What? In 2024 companies should attempt some form of green or carbon neutral or environmentally conscious. And they should also be recognized for it.

What it proves is how the EU loves to play Robin Hood with someone else’s money.

??

I’m all for being environmentally friendly but I’m just clarifying my argument against the person I was initially debating with. However the Liam robot and its follow up have been proven to do little to solve the issues related to rare earth materials. My point is just if we were not experiencing climate change in a dire way right now no profit driven company would bother investing unless it cut costs for them or increased sales thru an improved public image. But to be clear I am thrilled with the amount of solar they’ve setup especially in stages where fossil fuels are in heavy use.

So in the money and profit end. Apples known to have billions in savings 63 billion to be exact. And a huge stock buy back just completed in may. 150billion I think it was? Anyway the person I was debating was saying apples not about the money unlike google. But the thing is, they are that’s not to say that they shouldn’t invest in accessibility tech, recycling tech, or many other areas that they are doing serious good. However, a company of scale like Apple could lower prices instead of cutting the lowest capacity iPhone to make their next price point up the lowest. If costs them cents. Maybe a dollar or so between the two chips but not $100 to go from 128 to 256. At scale it’s likely lower by a lot and we can make that assumption because even here on MacRumors there are many articles that touch on Apple always getting the best pricing even at the detriment to competition. They could lower prices instead of the multiple hundred of billions spent on stock buy backs. They are in business to make their shareholders money. For example the brief iBook comment. They paid 463million (might be slightly off on the number) for an antitrust ebook price fixing scheme. They got in trouble for their tax practices and are fined constantly for not licensing patents (adjacently related is the Qualcomm fight), and now with the DMA the repeated efforts to comply maliciously. They try everything to keep their money even when it shouldn’t have been entirely theirs to begin with. Otherwise they’d become a non profit and get off the stock market.

During lockdown I can say I’m proud of how they handled it, especially that they offered store associates the ability to work from home with the call center folks (who also were home). They handled it better than any other company I read about during Covid. Even a friend of mine with Apple was thrilled with their handling of the situation.

I do understand what you mean about the press releases and that they are different but at the core it’s the same. Even if they do genuine good. But the arbitrary App Store guidelines and application of them, same with the various pricing tiers for developers, and so many other areas…I can’t really fault the EU for doing it. Even if I fundamentally disagree with breaking down the walled garden that’s protected us so much better than google play. I do believe that small developers deserve better. DMA is a mixed bag solution.


I’d argue that Apple cuts products that don’t sell or let them linger for years without updates. Mac Pro, initial HomePod, FCP 7 (cut for absolutely no reason other than to make their inferior X), Aperture (no reason they dumped it for photos), and others. Should I mention the Newton?

I’ll close with this, Apple is the same under the hood but different functionally. They’ve pushed for environmental improvements from suppliers, helped create jobs in Texas with Mac Pro assembly (may have closed), and fights child labor among other abuse of employees by suppliers and even dropped one for failure to comply. That is something to be proud of. But underneath they don’t do anything Google doesn’t. They are profit driven and they don’t do anything that doesn’t improve their public image or increase sales or cut their losses. They had said google discontinues products all the time (google graveyard) but Apple is too intelligent and mature. So functionally that’s what the person I initially debated the topic against didn’t understand they do the same things. But Apple is genuinely doing good for so many people around the world.

 

[I7guy]

I’m all for being environmentally friendly but I’m just clarifying my argument against the person I was initially debating with. However the Liam robot and its follow up have been proven to do little to solve the issues related to rare earth materials. My point is just if we were not experiencing climate change in a dire way right now no profit driven company would bother investing unless it cut costs for them or increased sales thru an improved public image.

Clearly a lot to unpack and thanks for the reply. Just to point out not only in reference to companies but individuals as well would not have the urge to try out their best to preserve the environment.

But to be clear I am thrilled with the amount of solar they’ve setup especially in stages where fossil fuels are in heavy use.

So in the money and profit end. Apples known to have billions in savings 63 billion to be exact. And a huge stock buy back just completed in may. 150billion I think it was?

Okay people may not like it but it is what it is.

Anyway the person I was debating was saying apples not about the money unlike google. But the thing is, they are that’s not to say that they shouldn’t invest in accessibility tech, recycling tech, or many other areas that they are doing serious good. However, a company of scale like Apple could lower prices instead of cutting the lowest capacity iPhone to make their next price point up the lowest.

Now why should they do that? I’ve seen that comment on MR before that apple should give away their stuff. Their shareholders wouldn’t be too happy about that.

If costs them cents. Maybe a dollar or so between the two chips but not $100 to go from 128 to 256. At scale it’s likely lower by a lot and we can make that assumption because even here on MacRumors there are many articles that touch on Apple always getting the best pricing even at the detriment to competition. They could lower prices instead of the multiple hundred of billions spent on stock buy backs.

Why should they jeopardize their future if they have a plan and are following the plan? I get some think like that, but the only real change will be to have an investor uprising.

They are in business to make their shareholders money. For example the brief iBook comment. They paid 463million (might be slightly off on the number) for an antitrust ebook price fixing scheme. They got in trouble for their tax practices and are fined constantly for not licensing patents (adjacently related is the Qualcomm fight), and now with the DMA the repeated efforts to comply maliciously. They try everything to keep their money even when it shouldn’t have been entirely theirs to begin with. Otherwise they’d become a non profit and get off the stock market.

The above all sounds like business as usual. Nothing illegal just being a business bully - which they aren’t the only ones. And that damn DMA I’m happy they are fighting back as legally as they can.

During lockdown I can say I’m proud of how they handled it, especially that they offered store associates the ability to work from home with the call center folks (who also were home). They handled it better than any other company I read about during Covid. Even a friend of mine with Apple was thrilled with their handling of the situation.

100%.

I do understand what you mean about the press releases and that they are different but at the core it’s the same. Even if they do genuine good. But the arbitrary App Store guidelines and application of them, same with the various pricing tiers for developers, and so many other areas…I can’t really fault the EU for doing it.

The App Store guidelines aren’t arbitrary. I’m sure they are well thought out with legal. You think they should just let the App Store go and let everyone have it? The motivations for the dma imo are politics, not doing right for the consumer.

Even if I fundamentally disagree with breaking down the walled garden that’s protected us so much better than google play. I do believe that small developers deserve better. DMA is a mixed bag solution.

Yep, like killing a fly with an elephant gun. But then small devs ought to think when they opt-in is this a business model I want. They why people talk here is entitled. As if a dev could come and tell apple how to run their business.

I’d argue that Apple cuts products that don’t sell or let them linger for years without updates. Mac Pro, initial HomePod, FCP 7 (cut for absolutely no reason other than to make their inferior X), Aperture (no reason they dumped it for photos), and others. Should I mention the Newton?

Well they have had hundreds of products over the decades. HomePod surprised me but they keep updating it.

I’ll close with this, Apple is the same under the hood but different functionally. They’ve pushed for environmental improvements from suppliers, helped create jobs in Texas with Mac Pro assembly (may have closed), and fights child labor among other abuse of employees by suppliers and even dropped one for failure to comply. That is something to be proud of. But underneath they don’t do anything Google doesn’t.

Sure apple does. They keep their products around longer, imo have better software/ecosystem, corporate privacy thinking. To name a few.

They are profit driven and they don’t do anything that doesn’t improve their public image or increase sales or cut their losses.

Image is everything, but as you pointed out during Covid they did a lot. So the above statement really isn’t true.

They had said google discontinues products all the time (google graveyard) but Apple is too intelligent and mature. So functionally that’s what the person I initially debated the topic against didn’t understand they do the same things.

At a high level it’s easy to say apple equals google in all respects. But the bones of both companies are very different.

But Apple is genuinely doing good for so many people around the world.