Iphone X is $1000

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
ERISA Stone
Posts: 1343
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 8:54 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by ERISA Stone » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:02 am

fillary wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:42 am
with each year Apple products become more and more expensive, in such way they may lose their "fans"

#quotesIvebeenhearingsince2010

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:05 am

BW1985 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:36 am

This is what ticks me off. Spend $700 on a new phone and then a few years later they make it obsolete with updates even though the hardware is still working fine.

My wife just ordered a refurb 6S 128G for $469. Maybe she's better off just buying a new 8 64G for $699 and not having to worry about it being obsolete for awhile.
To put what @Jags4186 says into a picture:

Image

The improvement curve of CPU and GPU performance in phones has been so obscenely steep that if Apple were holding back software to be fully optimized for phones just two years old they'd be significantly short-changing the performance of their newest devices which makes no sense.

Lots of people I know use their iPhones for 3-4 years. It's possible. But realize those phones are orders of magnitude slower than their modern counterparts.

Valuethinker
Posts: 33143
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Valuethinker » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:06 am

Jags4186 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:26 pm
thangngo wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:46 pm
TareNeko wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:33 pm
So in your world, R&D is free? I'm not advocating the $1000 price tag, but 20% margin is just not realistic.
thangngo wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:45 pm
That's why Apple stock is doing well. Personally, I would pay $300 max for it if I need a new phone. Manufacturing cost of a new iPhone is roughly $225-$250. I'd give Apple 20% margin. But that's it. Now Apple price it at $1000, I'll let someone else buy it. :mrgreen:
Yes it should be marginal with the economic of scale. I googled how many iPhones have been sold. As of 7/27/16, cumulative iphone sales has reached 1 billion. My generous 20% margin would give Apple $50 billion profit. That'd cover R&D, ehh? That means I'm not buying any iPhone soon. I'll probably get a used iPhone 5 years down the road.
Considering apple has over $250 billion in cash and derives 70% of their sales from the iPhone, I think they are making more than a 20% profit :-)
https://finbox.io/AAPL/explorer/ebit_margin

Apple's EBIT margin looks like c. 27%. However if they are including the financial side of their business, that will be somewhat distorting-- it will show up in the profits, but not the sales (and therefore will give a somewhat higher ebit margin). I'd have to check but I think that is about 4x the average profit margin (cents of profit per dollar of sales revenue) of US non-financial corporations in general. And this has been the most profitable company in world history-- in absolute magnitude of profits. So if this is a niche business, that is some profitable niche!

Gross profit margin of around 40% I think-- so that's profit after paying for direct supplier costs

https://www.fool.com/investing/2016/11/ ... er-th.aspx

It's a very profitable company-- of that there is no doubt. I believe I read that 1.2 bn iphones have been sold.

The main problem is what do they do for an encore? I believe that Steve Jobs might have driven them to some more innovative products.

In some ways, I think Amazon has been more innovative of late? I don't pretend to understand all of the strategic moves Amazon has made (buying Wholefoods? Say what?) but things like AWS, the Kindle are pretty innovative in carving out new ecosystems.

Apple's future has to be about driving services into that hardware customer base. Things like Apple Music.

Valuethinker
Posts: 33143
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Valuethinker » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:34 am

Valuethinker wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:06 am
Jags4186 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:26 pm
thangngo wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:46 pm
TareNeko wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:33 pm
So in your world, R&D is free? I'm not advocating the $1000 price tag, but 20% margin is just not realistic.
thangngo wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:45 pm
That's why Apple stock is doing well. Personally, I would pay $300 max for it if I need a new phone. Manufacturing cost of a new iPhone is roughly $225-$250. I'd give Apple 20% margin. But that's it. Now Apple price it at $1000, I'll let someone else buy it. :mrgreen:
Yes it should be marginal with the economic of scale. I googled how many iPhones have been sold. As of 7/27/16, cumulative iphone sales has reached 1 billion. My generous 20% margin would give Apple $50 billion profit. That'd cover R&D, ehh? That means I'm not buying any iPhone soon. I'll probably get a used iPhone 5 years down the road.

Considering apple has over $250 billion in cash and derives 70% of their sales from the iPhone, I think they are making more than a 20% profit :-)
Just on these numbers.

EBIT would be after R&D costs. Gross profit would be before. Without looking at depth into their accounting policies*.

So if Apple's gross profit margin is 40% and its EBIT margin is 27%, then that implies that they make around $400 on an iphone after paying suppliers.

(reality is iphone is probably higher margin, other activities lower margin).

Of that gap between $400 and $270, the $130 pays for R&D, all head office costs, marketing, shipping, the rent on their retail stores, etc. They actually look pretty lean and mean on that basis-- overheads only 13% of sales. Almost too lean & mean on the R&D side.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/apple-rd- ... rts-2017-2 10.39 bn in 2016.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/Q4F ... ements.pdf looks like $215bn of revenue in same period.

So R&D/ Sales = 4.5% or so. That seems low for an innovation company. Although much of the R&D will be in the components i.e. expenditure by their suppliers (Apple is a bit Toyota like in this regard, if Toyota outsourced all its car assembly as well).

Roughly speaking, a new iphone has $45 of R&D in its final retail price (assuming you buy it from an Apple store).

* it's possible they capitalize R&D. Put it into the product development cost and then write it off (amortize) over product life. Pharma companies do that. I think it's more dubious for a tech company-- it will improve their profits appearance relative to their cash flow (unchanged). It's a way of smoothing profits and raising them in the short term (against lower profits in the long term).

WhiteMaxima
Posts: 504
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:04 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by WhiteMaxima » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:14 am

If I will get a $1000 iphoneX, I would also get 10 shares of AAPL know dividend will pay for it during my ownership of the iphoneX. Hopefully, 10 shares of AAPL will appreciate afterwards.

hudson
Posts: 1221
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:15 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by hudson » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:54 am

WhiteMaxima wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:14 am
If I will get a $1000 iphoneX, I would also get 10 shares of AAPL know dividend will pay for it during my ownership of the iphoneX. Hopefully, 10 shares of AAPL will appreciate afterwards.
WhiteMaxima,

I like that idea! Thanks!

User avatar
Leif
Posts: 2186
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:15 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Leif » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:59 am

AllenSmith wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:19 am
It's really $1150; no one is going to buy the 64gig for $1000.

$1150 for the 256GB!
Why not? I bought a 6+ with 64 GB (base was 32 GB). After 3 years of use I'm using about 32GB of the 64. Unless the X has much larger storage requirements due to higher resolution pics/vids IF I was buying a X I would go for 64.
Investors should diversify across many asset-classes so that whatever happens, we will not have all our investments in underperforming asset classes and thereby fail to meet our goals-Taylor Larimore

Valuethinker
Posts: 33143
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Valuethinker » Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:06 pm

hudson wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:54 am
WhiteMaxima wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:14 am
If I will get a $1000 iphoneX, I would also get 10 shares of AAPL know dividend will pay for it during my ownership of the iphoneX. Hopefully, 10 shares of AAPL will appreciate afterwards.
WhiteMaxima,

I like that idea! Thanks!
Should I buy BMW stock because I like BMW cars?

This idea, whilst appealing at one level, is contrary to all the ideas about diversification we try to adhere to here.

One could for example buy Apple shares, and the phone, and then have the Apple stock go down, thus increasing the effective cost of an Apple phone, potentially several-fold.

If you have US or global index funds, you have rather a lot of exposure to Apple already.

Apple is 4% of the S&P 500. So, if you hold $25k invested in a fund like Vanguard Total stock market (say $30k given its broader population of companies) you hold $1k of Apple.

Isn't that enough exposure?

roflwaffle
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by roflwaffle » Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:28 pm

Eh, it's a lot, but it's not the end of the world. DW dropped a grand on a 64 gig 6+ when it was released in exchange for switching from Sprint to TMobile. She went from paying something like $80/month to $25/month, which to me is a net positive even if she ends up paying an extra $27/month for her phone. Now we're with Sprint again because they have a crazy great 1-year promo that works out to something like $5$2/month per line.

Cell service is part phone and part plan. I work to minimize the costs of both, but at the same time I wouldn't be critical of someone who wants to spend an extra $20-30/month on their phone and/or their plan. :beer
Last edited by roflwaffle on Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm

onourway wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:05 am
BW1985 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:36 am

This is what ticks me off. Spend $700 on a new phone and then a few years later they make it obsolete with updates even though the hardware is still working fine.

My wife just ordered a refurb 6S 128G for $469. Maybe she's better off just buying a new 8 64G for $699 and not having to worry about it being obsolete for awhile.
To put what @Jags4186 says into a picture:

Image

The improvement curve of CPU and GPU performance in phones has been so obscenely steep that if Apple were holding back software to be fully optimized for phones just two years old they'd be significantly short-changing the performance of their newest devices which makes no sense.

Lots of people I know use their iPhones for 3-4 years. It's possible. But realize those phones are orders of magnitude slower than their modern counterparts.
The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.

User avatar
sunny_socal
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:22 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by sunny_socal » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:28 pm

fillary wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:42 am
with each year Apple products become more and more expensive, in such way they may lose their "fans"
The apple fans I know would rather starve (or be in debt) than go without the latest-and-greatest iPhone :shock:

wrongfunds
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:55 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wrongfunds » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm

I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !

Jags4186
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Jags4186 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:41 pm

wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm
To

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's not about today's apps opening 50ms faster. It's about the apps of tomorrow that can harness more power and do more things.

Also network speed really doesn't matter that much. Unless you're downloading large files your phone operates just as fast with a 4mbps connection as it does with a 100 Mbps connection. You're not loading webpages any faster with the later. You only need about 4mbps to stream 1080p content without lag. I'd much rather have a rock solid 4mbps connection on my cellphone than one that goes wonky from 128kbps all the way up to 150mbps.

User avatar
rustymutt
Posts: 3645
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by rustymutt » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:46 pm

With facial recognition, I'm in trouble. :oops:
Knowledge is knowing that the Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing better than to put the tomato in a fruit salad.

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:49 pm

wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's about improving what the phone can do, not how fast it opens an app. If everyone believed this we'd still be stuck with text interfaces. The hardware enables new and better software, not the other way around.

Network speed doesn't matter all that much because there are very few locations where your provider can offer you enough bandwidth to saturate existing chips. Most LTE networks in the USA are stuck at around 20Mbps average speed - way below what the chips in even couple of year old phones can handle.
wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
That's the year over year improvement from the 6 to 6s models.
Last edited by onourway on Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jags4186
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Jags4186 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:50 pm

wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
I'm not an engineer so I could be completely wrong on this, but I think you should also consider that the speed increases need to come with equal or less power consumption, equal or less heat consumption, and equal or smaller component size.

I recall the jumps from the Pentium to the Pentium 2 and the Pentium 2 chip was HUGE. I remember the Pentium 4 chip being super hot. People water cool their high end PCs to dissipate the heat of their super fast components and have ever increasing power supplies. All of these constraints for speed increases do not exist in the desktop world but do exist in the phone world. That could be why the speed increases haven't been as earth shattering.

hudson
Posts: 1221
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:15 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by hudson » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:40 pm

Valuethinker wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:06 pm
hudson wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:54 am
WhiteMaxima wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:14 am
If I will get a $1000 iphoneX, I would also get 10 shares of AAPL know dividend will pay for it during my ownership of the iphoneX. Hopefully, 10 shares of AAPL will appreciate afterwards.
WhiteMaxima,

I like that idea! Thanks!
Should I buy BMW stock because I like BMW cars?

This idea, whilst appealing at one level, is contrary to all the ideas about diversification we try to adhere to here.

One could for example buy Apple shares, and the phone, and then have the Apple stock go down, thus increasing the effective cost of an Apple phone, potentially several-fold.

If you have US or global index funds, you have rather a lot of exposure to Apple already.

Apple is 4% of the S&P 500. So, if you hold $25k invested in a fund like Vanguard Total stock market (say $30k given its broader population of companies) you hold $1k of Apple.

Isn't that enough exposure?
Thanks! Besides CDs, I own only Vanguard mutual funds.

wrongfunds
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:55 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wrongfunds » Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:38 pm

That graph has no units on the y-axis. If I were to take your word for 70% improvement in speed year-over-year, that will make 10 year improvement to be 200 times [1.7^10 = 201] Is iPhone X 200 times faster than original iPhone? I genuinely do not know.

User avatar
wander
Posts: 2311
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:10 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wander » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:58 pm

stratton wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 7:31 am
wander wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:50 pm
I am not sure if new Iphones support new T-Mobile 600 MHz frequency. T-Mobile users may need to wait for another phone.
No it won't.
I thought so too. Thanks for confirming that. For that, I wouldn't think of any reason to buy this phone if I was a T-Mobile user.

Messy_Orchid_51
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:47 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Messy_Orchid_51 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:40 am

My 2 cents on facial ID and fingerprint ID..

One serious concern with FaceID and any biometric security enabled device is that once the device is compromised there is no way to ever recover the security.

Biometric data is not modifiable. You can't change your face or fingerprint (o.k, extreme surgery aside) if that data is in the hands of a bad guy like you could change a 6 digit pin or alphanumeric password.

Security will always come at the cost of convenience. The average iPhone user unlocks their phone 80 times daily.

I have an iPhone 6s that's 2 years old and I'm debating the upgrade to the iPhone 8. I'm not sold on any gimmicky features but the truth is cell batteries have a limited lifespan, buttons and screens wear and tear, processors become obsolete, software upgrades will also render you device obsolete if the hardware doesn't.

Having thought about it, I think I will sell the 6s for about $200 back to Verizon and go with the smaller sized 8 with lower capacity (everything going cloud anyways) which should cost around $500 bought in a sales tax free state and hope I have $200 in residual value in 2 years when the next cycle repeats.

FloRidaRocky
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:11 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by FloRidaRocky » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:26 am

I've tried them and they just aren't good enough for me. To each his own.
How did you survive 15 years ago when we were all carrying flip phones?

DTalos
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:59 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by DTalos » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:46 am

FloRidaRocky wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:26 am
I've tried them and they just aren't good enough for me. To each his own.
How did you survive 15 years ago when we were all carrying flip phones?
I have survived for 15+ years with a flip phone and am only recently beginning to consider a smartphone because some companies require you to have a smartphone in order to access their services and increasingly companies are offering app only discounts. How easy is it to browse the internet and use the keyboard on an Android or iPhone? Is an Android or iPhone better for a new smartphone user in regards to overall ease of use? I am a Mac desktop user and place a high value on simplicity and ease of use and would like a similar experience in a smartphone. How much data does 30 minutes a day checking email and going to news websites use? There are inexpensive Android prepaid smartphones that come with 1 year of service and 1200MB of data for the year, but I don't know if 1200MB of data for the year is too low. Thanks in advance for your input.

User avatar
climber2020
Posts: 881
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by climber2020 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:12 am

BW1985 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:36 am


This is what ticks me off. Spend $700 on a new phone and then a few years later they make it obsolete with updates even though the hardware is still working fine.

Don't update the software. At least for a few months. This is a very well known thing that Apple does, whether it's intentional or not, to make their older model phones garbage. The newer software is optimized for the newest phone.

I usually wait several months and browse the forums at macrumors.com to see user reports on how old phones handle the newest iOS.

User avatar
climber2020
Posts: 881
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by climber2020 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:15 am

DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:46 am
FloRidaRocky wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:26 am
I've tried them and they just aren't good enough for me. To each his own.
How did you survive 15 years ago when we were all carrying flip phones?
I have survived for 15+ years with a flip phone and am only recently beginning to consider a smartphone because some companies require you to have a smartphone in order to access their services and increasingly companies are offering app only discounts. How easy is it to browse the internet and use the keyboard on an Android or iPhone? Is an Android or iPhone better for a new smartphone user in regards to overall ease of use? I am a Mac desktop user and place a high value on simplicity and ease of use and would like a similar experience in a smartphone. How much data does 30 minutes a day checking email and going to news websites use? There are inexpensive Android prepaid smartphones that come with 1 year of service and 1200MB of data for the year, but I don't know if 1200MB of data for the year is too low. Thanks in advance for your input.
It's all user dependent. I've used both androids and iPhones, and I like the simplicity and durability of Apple products. If I were buying a brand new phone today, I'd probably go with the iPhone SE. Not a fan of the bigger size phones. Email doesn't use much data at all. News websites probably depend on the site and how graphics heavy they are. I have wifi access most of the day, so most months I use less than 100 MB of data, but I know lots of people who would burn through that in a few hours.

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:31 am

onourway wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:49 pm
wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's about improving what the phone can do, not how fast it opens an app. If everyone believed this we'd still be stuck with text interfaces. The hardware enables new and better software, not the other way around.

Network speed doesn't matter all that much because there are very few locations where your provider can offer you enough bandwidth to saturate existing chips. Most LTE networks in the USA are stuck at around 20Mbps average speed - way below what the chips in even couple of year old phones can handle.
wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
That's the year over year improvement from the 6 to 6s models.

Network speed certainly is important. If the request can happen much faster on the network then more bandwidth is available for additional requests thereby increasing throughput for everyone. Lets be real on processor speed here. Chips for PCs and servers have stopped moving beyond a certain clock speed. They've long realized that parallel processing is more important than speed. My chip today is slower than the one I had 10 years ago but I now have 4 cores vs 1.

User avatar
CyclingDuo
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:07 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by CyclingDuo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:36 am

DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:46 am
FloRidaRocky wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:26 am
I've tried them and they just aren't good enough for me. To each his own.
How did you survive 15 years ago when we were all carrying flip phones?
I have survived for 15+ years with a flip phone and am only recently beginning to consider a smartphone because some companies require you to have a smartphone in order to access their services and increasingly companies are offering app only discounts. How easy is it to browse the internet and use the keyboard on an Android or iPhone? Is an Android or iPhone better for a new smartphone user in regards to overall ease of use? I am a Mac desktop user and place a high value on simplicity and ease of use and would like a similar experience in a smartphone. How much data does 30 minutes a day checking email and going to news websites use? There are inexpensive Android prepaid smartphones that come with 1 year of service and 1200MB of data for the year, but I don't know if 1200MB of data for the year is too low. Thanks in advance for your input.
Since you are a Mac desktop user - we highly suggest going with the iPhone. Plenty of plans available with unlimited data (Verizon, T-Mobile, T).

Screen size being the issue for ease of use browsing the internet. At least our eyesight is not as keen as it was in our younger days, so going for the largest screen size you can helps the experience from that standpoint.

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:01 am

wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:31 am
Network speed certainly is important. If the request can happen much faster on the network then more bandwidth is available for additional requests thereby increasing throughput for everyone. Lets be real on processor speed here. Chips for PCs and servers have stopped moving beyond a certain clock speed. They've long realized that parallel processing is more important than speed. My chip today is slower than the one I had 10 years ago but I now have 4 cores vs 1.
It was pretty clear that what I was saying was that your complaint that the iPhone X uses a slower LTE chip than the Galaxy S8 and others doesn't make much difference when the real-world maximum speeds users are getting hover about 20Mbps - speeds that were easily handled by the hardware originally introduced in the iPhone 5 in 2012.

Until the network operators upgrade their own equipment faster chips in your new phone won't make any difference - and the upgrades that are going to come during the primary useful lifespan of the iPhone X are not going to get to the point where the LTE chip it contains is a bottleneck. This is the kind of thing that people worry about on spec sheets but won't make any difference in actual usage.

donaldfair71
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:15 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by donaldfair71 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:21 am

matatupuncher wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:59 am
The anti-IPhone snobs on here are worse than beer snobs.
There's a sociology lesson here in that very few people can go, "My phone is good, your phone that is kinda different is also good, we both can have nice things and they're not the same nice thing".

lazydavid
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by lazydavid » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:37 am

onourway wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:01 am
Until the network operators upgrade their own equipment faster chips in your new phone won't make any difference - and the upgrades that are going to come during the primary useful lifespan of the iPhone X are not going to get to the point where the LTE chip it contains is a bottleneck. This is the kind of thing that people worry about on spec sheets but won't make any difference in actual usage.
This is true except for T-Mobile customers. Tmo is aggressively rolling out band 71 (700Mhz), which dramatically increases both reception and speed for most customers. iPhone 8/X owners will be left behind as this occurs.

alfaspider
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 4:44 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by alfaspider » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:39 am

wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:31 am
onourway wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:49 pm
wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's about improving what the phone can do, not how fast it opens an app. If everyone believed this we'd still be stuck with text interfaces. The hardware enables new and better software, not the other way around.

Network speed doesn't matter all that much because there are very few locations where your provider can offer you enough bandwidth to saturate existing chips. Most LTE networks in the USA are stuck at around 20Mbps average speed - way below what the chips in even couple of year old phones can handle.
wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
That's the year over year improvement from the 6 to 6s models.

Network speed certainly is important. If the request can happen much faster on the network then more bandwidth is available for additional requests thereby increasing throughput for everyone. Lets be real on processor speed here. Chips for PCs and servers have stopped moving beyond a certain clock speed. They've long realized that parallel processing is more important than speed. My chip today is slower than the one I had 10 years ago but I now have 4 cores vs 1.
It's more than parallel processing. Chip frequency is not the same thing as speed. Although today's chips may run at the same frequency as a processor from 10 or even almost 15 years ago, they can do vastly more work per clock-cycle. A single core of the latest i7 8700k at 3.2ghz is several times as powerful as a Pentium 4 at 3.2ghz.

Regarding next-gen LTE. Over the years, I've found there's rarely been a benefit to having the bleeding edge wireless internet technology on a phone. By the time the network is upgraded so that the new standard is generally in use, the first phones to feature that technology are already obsolete. You also have the competing standards issue. Remember wimax phones?

neilpilot
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 1:46 pm
Location: Memphis area

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by neilpilot » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:45 am

I lead a simple life when it comes to phones, and Android works just fine for me. Where I live the sales tax rate is 9.75%, so the sales tax on a $1k iPhone X would be $97.50. I can buy TWO Samsung-SM-J320A, the last phone I used on the AT&T network, for the sales tax on that iPhone.

Unfortunately I'm now switching my 2 lines to Xfinity Mobile, and have purchased two new LG X Charge androids for $1 each including tax during the recent Xfinity $200-off promotion.

So I figure I can invest the $2193 that I've saved if I had, instead, bought 2 new iPhone X.

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:54 am

lazydavid wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:37 am
This is true except for T-Mobile customers. Tmo is aggressively rolling out band 71 (700Mhz), which dramatically increases both reception and speed for most customers. iPhone 8/X owners will be left behind as this occurs.
T-Mobile didn't even get the licenses for this band until April of this year. There is currently one handset on the market that supports it - the LG V30. This isn't much of a strike against the new iPhones. There is no way they were going to integrate a new band by a small carrier that was only purchased this year and has barely begun rollout.

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:15 am

onourway wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:01 am
wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:31 am
Network speed certainly is important. If the request can happen much faster on the network then more bandwidth is available for additional requests thereby increasing throughput for everyone. Lets be real on processor speed here. Chips for PCs and servers have stopped moving beyond a certain clock speed. They've long realized that parallel processing is more important than speed. My chip today is slower than the one I had 10 years ago but I now have 4 cores vs 1.
It was pretty clear that what I was saying was that your complaint that the iPhone X uses a slower LTE chip than the Galaxy S8 and others doesn't make much difference when the real-world maximum speeds users are getting hover about 20Mbps - speeds that were easily handled by the hardware originally introduced in the iPhone 5 in 2012.

Until the network operators upgrade their own equipment faster chips in your new phone won't make any difference - and the upgrades that are going to come during the primary useful lifespan of the iPhone X are not going to get to the point where the LTE chip it contains is a bottleneck. This is the kind of thing that people worry about on spec sheets but won't make any difference in actual usage.
You're right faster LTE chips won't do anything. However, a gigabit LTE chip will. They are getting 120MB+ speeds in real world scenarios with the S8 now. In a controlled test they got near 1000MB with that phone.

FYI - All major carries have been building out gigabit LTE since early 2017.

This link is dated but shows where tmobile is going or has gone in 2017.
https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and- ... speeds.htm

The Iphone X and the 8 for that matter should have included qualcomms snapdragon chip. Samsung already included it in the S8 and most other makers will have a phone out this or early next year that supports gigabit LTE. So now the millions that buy the new Iphone will have a phone that is already behind the curve from a network perspective. But man that processor will be faster. Maybe Apple's ploy was to get those people who buy this version to upgrade much sooner than normal cycle of 2 to 4 years.

This link will explain the tech and the benfits of gigabit LTE
https://www.cnet.com/how-to/gigabit-lte ... explained/

https://www.wirelessweek.com/blog/2017/ ... igabit-lte

This link show how fast it is.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/t- ... s8-samsug/

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:25 am

alfaspider wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:39 am
wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:31 am
onourway wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:49 pm
wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's about improving what the phone can do, not how fast it opens an app. If everyone believed this we'd still be stuck with text interfaces. The hardware enables new and better software, not the other way around.

Network speed doesn't matter all that much because there are very few locations where your provider can offer you enough bandwidth to saturate existing chips. Most LTE networks in the USA are stuck at around 20Mbps average speed - way below what the chips in even couple of year old phones can handle.
wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
That's the year over year improvement from the 6 to 6s models.

Network speed certainly is important. If the request can happen much faster on the network then more bandwidth is available for additional requests thereby increasing throughput for everyone. Lets be real on processor speed here. Chips for PCs and servers have stopped moving beyond a certain clock speed. They've long realized that parallel processing is more important than speed. My chip today is slower than the one I had 10 years ago but I now have 4 cores vs 1.
It's more than parallel processing. Chip frequency is not the same thing as speed. Although today's chips may run at the same frequency as a processor from 10 or even almost 15 years ago, they can do vastly more work per clock-cycle. A single core of the latest i7 8700k at 3.2ghz is several times as powerful as a Pentium 4 at 3.2ghz.

Regarding next-gen LTE. Over the years, I've found there's rarely been a benefit to having the bleeding edge wireless internet technology on a phone. By the time the network is upgraded so that the new standard is generally in use, the first phones to feature that technology are already obsolete. You also have the competing standards issue. Remember wimax phones?
I'll give you that on the speeds. Bus size, cache etc play a huge role.

However, what you call bleeding edge(gigabit LTE) is already out in dozens of tmobile markets and is in many ATT, Verizon and Sprint markets. All carriers are moving fast in this direction. It will not be like wimax be any means. Gigabit LTE is not 5G. 5G is where the competing standards will come into play again.

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:49 am

wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:15 am
You're right faster LTE chips won't do anything. However, a gigabit LTE chip will. They are getting 120MB+ speeds in real world scenarios with the S8 now. In a controlled test they got near 1000MB with that phone.

FYI - All major carries have been building out gigabit LTE since early 2017.

This link is dated but shows where tmobile is going or has gone in 2017.
https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and- ... speeds.htm

The Iphone X and the 8 for that matter should have included qualcomms snapdragon chip. Samsung already included it in the S8 and most other makers will have a phone out this or early next year that supports gigabit LTE. So now the millions that buy the new Iphone will have a phone that is already behind the curve from a network perspective. But man that processor will be faster. Maybe Apple's ploy was to get those people who buy this version to upgrade much sooner than normal cycle of 2 to 4 years.

This link will explain the tech and the benfits of gigabit LTE
https://www.cnet.com/how-to/gigabit-lte ... explained/

https://www.wirelessweek.com/blog/2017/ ... igabit-lte

This link show how fast it is.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/t- ... s8-samsug/
I understand what gigabit LTE is. The new iPhones may in fact include a chip that is capable of it - however because Apple demands that they have multiple suppliers they are not enabling the capabilities on Qualcomm equipped models because they need feature parity with those built by Intel.

I maintain that this is something that matters to spec geeks and nowhere else. In the long run improving network speeds will be important, but in the next couple of years when these generation phones will see their primary use they will only be effective for geeks running speed tests for bragging rights. The reality is that most of the web is not equipped to provide data to customers at speeds where this makes a difference. We recently upgraded our Internet service at our office from 50Mbps to 100Mbps. Nobody noticed. The same thing happened on most people's home cable service in the area - Spectrum took over and upgraded you from 50 to 100Mbps. Nobody else in our office full of reasonably tech-aware engineers had even noticed until I told them it had happened.

LeSpy
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:56 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by LeSpy » Fri Sep 15, 2017 11:27 am

wrongfunds wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:30 pm
I have a feeling that fancy photo and graph is completely wrong. The 70% or 90% faster over 10 years is pretty much pathetic. We expect that kind of improvement EVERY SINGLE YEAR in computing aka Moore's law.

Once again, "emperor has no clothes" !
I agree with you and I will state that the graphs are actually drawn in an very misleading way. Look at the y-axis and assign a value of, lets say 100 for the CPU power for the first data point. Then do a rough visual all the way up to the last data point, the value is several times larger than 100; perhaps 700-1000. That would imply a much greater increase than just 70% or 90%, it would be more like 700% - 1000%.

Now let's say it is in fact 70-90% faster. That may well be true when they benchmark the chips, yet most of the time it won't actually execute software an equivalent percentage faster. So its practical implications in the use of the phone will often not be noticeable in the apps that are used most of the time, setting aside cases where the customer is going from a very outdated phone that can no longer run the OS very well anymore -- a condition that is out of your control with the disincentive to a for-profit company to create streamlined OS versions that don't waste hardware capacity. Apple is far from alone in engaging in the practice; many companies selling products using CPUs & GPUs do this.

I'm not criticizing those who are excited about the new iPhones; they're great and well made. I've had one for several years. There's nothing wrong with going ahead to buy one and having the latest & greatest.
Last edited by LeSpy on Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Just sayin...
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:12 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Just sayin... » Fri Sep 15, 2017 11:29 am

One more thought. The new iPhone X is not a net $1,000 or $1,150 expense. Likely, you are replacing an existing phone that can be sold on any number of sites. You'll have to figure that delta into your investment analysis numbers. In our case, the broken-screen unit is worth about $100. For others with higher capacity and/or newer phones, they're worth more.

DTalos
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:59 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by DTalos » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:15 pm

CyclingDuo wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:36 am
DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:46 am
FloRidaRocky wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:26 am
I've tried them and they just aren't good enough for me. To each his own.
How did you survive 15 years ago when we were all carrying flip phones?
I have survived for 15+ years with a flip phone and am only recently beginning to consider a smartphone because some companies require you to have a smartphone in order to access their services and increasingly companies are offering app only discounts. How easy is it to browse the internet and use the keyboard on an Android or iPhone? Is an Android or iPhone better for a new smartphone user in regards to overall ease of use? I am a Mac desktop user and place a high value on simplicity and ease of use and would like a similar experience in a smartphone. How much data does 30 minutes a day checking email and going to news websites use? There are inexpensive Android prepaid smartphones that come with 1 year of service and 1200MB of data for the year, but I don't know if 1200MB of data for the year is too low. Thanks in advance for your input.
Since you are a Mac desktop user - we highly suggest going with the iPhone. Plenty of plans available with unlimited data (Verizon, T-Mobile, T).

Screen size being the issue for ease of use browsing the internet. At least our eyesight is not as keen as it was in our younger days, so going for the largest screen size you can helps the experience from that standpoint.

How long do iPhones last before they generally start to slow down or become obsolete due to operating system updates?

bluebolt
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:01 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by bluebolt » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:36 pm

DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:15 pm
How long do iPhones last before they generally start to slow down or become obsolete due to operating system updates?
2-5 years. In addition, the lithium battery has a limited life - after 2 or 3 years it's noticeable and after 5 or so years it will probably have a significant impact on the charge capacity.

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:37 pm

Jags4186 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:41 pm
wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:16 pm
To

The human mind can only go so fast. If my app opens in 500 ms and will open in 250 ms in the next phone will that really be noticeable? How about when it goes from 125ms to 60 ms? Frankly I'd rather them increase storage and it's access time and battery life before speeding up processing tasks.

In the case of the 8 and X, I'd rather them stay with the current processor and have the next gen LTE capability. The S8 has it. Network speed is way more important on a mobile device at this point.
It's not about today's apps opening 50ms faster. It's about the apps of tomorrow that can harness more power and do more things.

Also network speed really doesn't matter that much. Unless you're downloading large files your phone operates just as fast with a 4mbps connection as it does with a 100 Mbps connection. You're not loading webpages any faster with the later. You only need about 4mbps to stream 1080p content without lag. I'd much rather have a rock solid 4mbps connection on my cellphone than one that goes wonky from 128kbps all the way up to 150mbps.
Its not faster rendering I'm after. Its the request and transmission time for those bits and bytes.

Those apps that can do more in the future are going to need faster access to data in the cloud. I don't care how fast or what my apps can do if I don't get a response from the server fast enough. Gigabit LTE is getting closer to the panacea of getting data from the cloud faster than it can be read from the devices storage.

Yeah it takes 4MB to stream 1080p but you're hogging that bandwidth for the entire duration of the video. What if you could get that entire 2hr content to your device's cache/storage in < 60 seconds.

wfrobinette
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by wfrobinette » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:59 pm

onourway wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:49 am
wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:15 am
You're right faster LTE chips won't do anything. However, a gigabit LTE chip will. They are getting 120MB+ speeds in real world scenarios with the S8 now. In a controlled test they got near 1000MB with that phone.

FYI - All major carries have been building out gigabit LTE since early 2017.

This link is dated but shows where tmobile is going or has gone in 2017.
https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and- ... speeds.htm

The Iphone X and the 8 for that matter should have included qualcomms snapdragon chip. Samsung already included it in the S8 and most other makers will have a phone out this or early next year that supports gigabit LTE. So now the millions that buy the new Iphone will have a phone that is already behind the curve from a network perspective. But man that processor will be faster. Maybe Apple's ploy was to get those people who buy this version to upgrade much sooner than normal cycle of 2 to 4 years.

This link will explain the tech and the benfits of gigabit LTE
https://www.cnet.com/how-to/gigabit-lte ... explained/

https://www.wirelessweek.com/blog/2017/ ... igabit-lte

This link show how fast it is.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/t- ... s8-samsug/
I understand what gigabit LTE is. The new iPhones may in fact include a chip that is capable of it - however because Apple demands that they have multiple suppliers they are not enabling the capabilities on Qualcomm equipped models because they need feature parity with those built by Intel.

I maintain that this is something that matters to spec geeks and nowhere else. In the long run improving network speeds will be important, but in the next couple of years when these generation phones will see their primary use they will only be effective for geeks running speed tests for bragging rights. The reality is that most of the web is not equipped to provide data to customers at speeds where this makes a difference. We recently upgraded our Internet service at our office from 50Mbps to 100Mbps. Nobody noticed. The same thing happened on most people's home cable service in the area - Spectrum took over and upgraded you from 50 to 100Mbps. Nobody else in our office full of reasonably tech-aware engineers had even noticed until I told them it had happened.
So if apple won't enable the chip then whats the use? I"d be a really upset consumer if I got the intel chip and apple decided to open up the qualcomm chip.

I disagree that it matters only to spec geeks. It matters to anyone on a network. Less congestion due to a bigger pipe benefits everyone.

Nobody noticed from 50 to 100 because collectively you weren't bogging down the 50mb connection. Have them all start to stream march madness at the same time or have someone start downloading a TB file from a server/machine at 50 MB then switch to 100mb. I guarantee they would notice. Try to run a corp network at 10GB/sec but have everyone connect at 100mb/sec and see what happens.

BW1985
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:12 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by BW1985 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:41 pm

Messy_Orchid_51 wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:40 am

Having thought about it, I think I will sell the 6s for about $200 back to Verizon and go with the smaller sized 8 with lower capacity (everything going cloud anyways) which should cost around $500 bought in a sales tax free state and hope I have $200 in residual value in 2 years when the next cycle repeats.
You don't think it's worth it to sell it on the open market for around twice that amount?
"Squirrels figured out how to save eons ago. They buried acorns. Some, they dug up, for food. Others, they let to sprout, in new oak trees. We could learn from squirrels." -john94549

Texanbybirth
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by Texanbybirth » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:56 pm

donaldfair71 wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:21 am
matatupuncher wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:59 am
The anti-IPhone snobs on here are worse than beer snobs.
There's a sociology lesson here in that very few people can go, "My phone is good, your phone that is kinda different is also good, we both can have nice things and they're not the same nice thing".
Exactly. :beer

I've got an iPhone 5. Apparently I'm left out for iOS 11, which I'm actually looking forward to. We'll be spending the next couple months in my house deciding whether I get the SE, the (much more expensive) 8, or the (now cheaper, but marginally more expensive) 7. I have no appetite for the X. I have TouchID on the iPad and I LOVE it. All three above choices have it, but I'm intrigued by wireless charging.

I like cyclingduo's breakout of cost per day for the phone in one year. With AppleCare and case, an 8 comes out to $3.04. A 7 now comes out to $2.44/day. Since I obviously keep phones longer than one year, my daily cost goes down by 50% at least. I spend about $1.05/day on AT&T's DirectTV NOW, $4 on electricity, $2-$3 on water, and way more on transportation. Although I can't say I would give up my car before my iPhone (like another poster), it is certainly a very useful piece of technology in my life.

onourway
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by onourway » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:56 pm

wfrobinette wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:59 pm

So if apple won't enable the chip then whats the use? I"d be a really upset consumer if I got the intel chip and apple decided to open up the qualcomm chip.

I disagree that it matters only to spec geeks. It matters to anyone on a network. Less congestion due to a bigger pipe benefits everyone.

Nobody noticed from 50 to 100 because collectively you weren't bogging down the 50mb connection. Have them all start to stream march madness at the same time or have someone start downloading a TB file from a server/machine at 50 MB then switch to 100mb. I guarantee they would notice. Try to run a corp network at 10GB/sec but have everyone connect at 100mb/sec and see what happens.
And the reason that we aren't bogging down the network is because the Internet as it stands today doesn't demand connection speeds faster than around 20Mbps for 99% of what most users do. The web servers can't typically provide data faster than that and video streaming doesn't demand that much bandwidth. Yes, of course if one part of the equation is over capacity everyone will suffer - but that's the point I'm making - the current tight points in capacity are much further upstream than in the end users handset. Increasing the theoretical capacity of your handset from the current ~450Mbps to 1Gbps makes no difference if the bottleneck further upstream limits you to 20Mbps.

squirm
Posts: 1035
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by squirm » Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:45 pm

BW1985 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:36 am
wfrobinette wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:26 am
greg24 wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:16 am
We've had iphones for a while, but we've always had older versions. The difference between them is negligible, IMO.

We have the 6 and it is working fine. Maybe in a year or two, we'll buy another 6 or SE if we need a new phone.
They might not make a 6 in a year or two but more likely you'll be left behind from an OS version standpoint and 1 by 1 your apps will eventually stop working.
This is what ticks me off. Spend $700 on a new phone and then a few years later they make it obsolete with updates even though the hardware is still working fine.

My wife just ordered a refurb 6S 128G for $469. Maybe she's better off just buying a new 8 64G for $699 and not having to worry about it being obsolete for awhile.
The most have innovations are getting less and less, just as happened to pc's in the past. You have nothing to worry about.

batpot
Posts: 574
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:48 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by batpot » Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:51 pm

Just bought a brand new Moto G5 Plus 64gb for $240.
It's plenty fast and there's no bloatware.
flagship phone prices are such a joke, only more laughable are the people who get sucked in.

User avatar
happyisland
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:36 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by happyisland » Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:08 pm

According to an article on phonearena the $1k phone has a production cost of $412, meaning the profit margin is roughly 58%. Add in some R&D and marketing and Apple is still making an absolute killing on its diehard fans.


Source:
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-i ... st_id98129
Last edited by happyisland on Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

neilpilot
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 1:46 pm
Location: Memphis area

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by neilpilot » Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:45 pm

happyisland wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:08 pm
According to an article on phonearena the $1k phone has a materials cost of $412, meaning the profit margin is roughly 58%. Add in some R&D and marketing and Apple is still making an absolute killing on its diehard fans.


Source:
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-i ... st_id98129
According to an article on phonearena the $1k phone has a materials production cost of $412.

"Materials cost" is much less than production cost.

User avatar
CyclingDuo
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:07 am

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by CyclingDuo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:40 pm

DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:15 pm
How long do iPhones last before they generally start to slow down or become obsolete due to operating system updates?
I've never had a problem using them 2-3 years, but I would expect once you get to year 4-5 things start to get long in the tooth (don't keep my phones that long, so I don't know).

thangngo
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:08 pm

Re: Iphone X is $1000

Post by thangngo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:47 pm

CyclingDuo wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:40 pm
DTalos wrote:
Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:15 pm
How long do iPhones last before they generally start to slow down or become obsolete due to operating system updates?
I've never had a problem using them 2-3 years, but I would expect once you get to year 4-5 things start to get long in the tooth (don't keep my phones that long, so I don't know).
My first iPhone was an iPhone 3G got it around 2009. It slowed down considerably so I upgraded to my current phone.

My current iPhone was an iPhone 6 got it around 2015. It's working fine no slowing down while I'm using iOS 11 beta. Battery can still hold 2 days. I think Apple did a good job with the iPhone 6 and I don't think it'll be obsolete for another 2-3 years.

Post Reply