• Happy holidays, folks! Thanks to each and every one of you for being part of the Tom's Hardware community!

Apple Marketing VP Phil Schiller Says No to Cheap iPhones

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, I suppose Apple can do whatever they want. Especially considering their plan has been working out for them quite well so far.

But some people don't want the Cadillac overpriced smartphone, they just want the plain old Chevy. If Apple wants to stay that company that only sells the flashy Cadillacs, then so be it.
 
the company's products are built on the foundation of higher cost for higher build quality
Click to expand...
Apple’s market share of smartphones is just about 20%, we own the 75% of the profit
Click to expand...

"No, we won't make a cheap iPhone, because that would cut into our profit margins too much. Higher cost means higher markup! Where did you come up with this higher quality concept?"
 
"Despite the popularity of cheap smartphones, this will never be the future of Apple’s products. In fact, although Apple’s market share of smartphones is just about 20%, we own the 75% of the profit.”

They're ripping you off, people. And they know it, they've known it all along. And now they can just tell you it because they know you'll buy their stuff anyway.

I'm glad we're hitting the point where users are starting to see the flaws of iOS and OSX and moving to other platforms. And I'm glad Linux is starting to see more growth into new markets. This is going to be a great new year for technology.
 
"[E]very product that Apple creates, we consider using only the best technology available"
should be
"[E]very product that Apple creates, we consider using only the best technology available at our price range."

"In fact, although Apple’s market share of smartphones is just about 20%, we own the 75% of the profit."
Which means
"Our only goal is to make as much profit as possible."
 
The earlier iPads wiped out the competitions. People said Android based tablets were bad, catch up with Applet iPads, and that's why they don't succeed. Guess what, they're still catching up with Apple's quality, but they're eating some of Apple's lunch. The point is that earlier iPads were better than Android pads, but actually were cheaper (brand name stuffs, not no name), when compare similar models, or similar buyer targets (high end, mid end, etc). So that explains why Android tablets are eating Apple's lunch.

Even a $0 "smart" phones cost money for about 2 year contract in the US, so there is not much point of making iPhone cheaper actually. They're already cheap comparing to other phones. They also probably makes lots of money for Apple if it's free (with 2 year contract). So, what Apple need to do is producing more variety like the iPods, at various price points (who say iPods are cheaply made, even with lower price?). The variety is about screen size. They need larger size. People laugh at 5" and 5.5" phones, until Samsung sells boat load of them. Who's laughing now? Apple rejected the idea, and upgraded to 4". Now, try to squeeze 1080p into that 4". 1080p is a rage for phones now, so Apple better watch out, regardless if it improves the quality or not. Where else you go? better screen, better cpu, better memory. So screen is a big factor, that Apple is behind.
 
[citation][nom]WithoutWeakness[/nom]"Despite the popularity of cheap smartphones, this will never be the future of Apple’s products. In fact, although Apple’s market share of smartphones is just about 20%, we own the 75% of the profit.”They're ripping you off, people. And they know it, they've known it all along. And now they can just tell you it because they know you'll buy their stuff anyway.I'm glad we're hitting the point where users are starting to see the flaws of iOS and OSX and moving to other platforms. And I'm glad Linux is starting to see more growth into new markets. This is going to be a great new year for technology.[/citation]

Yah because a Galaxy S3 or Note II is soooo much cheaper than an iPhone 5?

For each one, its the base model:

iPhone 5: $699
Note II: $729
S3: $649
LG Optimus G: $649
Nokia 920: $599

Yah the Apple is really ripping people off...

Also, Linux's penetration on laptop and desktop for average users has not grown in any significance over the past 7 years, where as OSX share actually has.

Android is very successful, no question about that, as long as its FREE for manufacturers it will be very popular with them. Also, if Google starts in anyways to block features or give advantage to their products with Android over competitors, you will see an exodus from Android, perhaps that would be good for Ubuntu or some Linux variant.
 
[citation][nom]nnull[/nom]The earlier iPads wiped out the competitions. People said Android based tablets were bad, catch up with Applet iPads, and that's why they don't succeed. Guess what, they're still catching up with Apple's quality, but they're eating some of Apple's lunch. The point is that earlier iPads were better than Android pads, but actually were cheaper (brand name stuffs, not no name), when compare similar models, or similar buyer targets (high end, mid end, etc). So that explains why Android tablets are eating Apple's lunch.Even a $0 "smart" phones cost money for about 2 year contract in the US, so there is not much point of making iPhone cheaper actually. They're already cheap comparing to other phones. They also probably makes lots of money for Apple if it's free (with 2 year contract). So, what Apple need to do is producing more variety like the iPods, at various price points (who say iPods are cheaply made, even with lower price?). The variety is about screen size. They need larger size. People laugh at 5" and 5.5" phones, until Samsung sells boat load of them. Who's laughing now? Apple rejected the idea, and upgraded to 4". Now, try to squeeze 1080p into that 4". 1080p is a rage for phones now, so Apple better watch out, regardless if it improves the quality or not. Where else you go? better screen, better cpu, better memory. So screen is a big factor, that Apple is behind.[/citation]


Apple has supply constraints which limit how much changes they can make since they're demand is incredibly high and manufacturing capacity is a significant restriction.

iPhone 5 will sell close to 50 million units in the first 4 months or so, having enough displays and other components for the finishing product is a constraint to them.

They were already supplied constrained on displays which caused shortages.

If they had changed their display substantially they may have only sold 20-30 in the first 4 months.

Its easier to come with a radically different product and only need to sell a few million units. Even the S3 has half the demand of an iPhone 5, if you look at the differences between the S2 and S3 its as incremental as the 4S and 5, except Apple was able to greatly reduce the weight with increased dimensions where Samsung had to do the opposite and increase the weight.
 
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]Yah because a Galaxy S3 or Note II is soooo much cheaper than an iPhone 5?For each one, its the base model:iPhone 5: $699Note II: $729S3: $649LG Optimus G: $649Nokia 920: $599Yah the Apple is really ripping people off...Also, Linux's penetration on laptop and desktop for average users has not grown in any significance over the past 7 years, where as OSX share actually has.Android is very successful, no question about that, as long as its FREE for manufacturers it will be very popular with them. Also, if Google starts in anyways to block features or give advantage to their products with Android over competitors, you will see an exodus from Android, perhaps that would be good for Ubuntu or some Linux variant.[/citation]

If you really think that Apple isn't ripping you off then you are in iSheep denial. I'm not saying that other companies aren't bad at it but it is a well known fact that Apple is the worst with their markups. Case in point (this was on a TH article) it costs Apple $15-$30 to increase the storage capacity of their phones, yet the final price is $100 for the consumer to step up to the next tier. In fact, check this article out: http://www.ebnonline.com/author.asp?section_id=1893&doc_id=253759
So much for Apple's superior hardware, it costs them $23/unit more to make the iPad mini than the Kindle Fire HD but iPad mini is double the price of the Kindle Fire HD.

Oh and you are talking in circles when you say a mass exodus from Android will be good for a Linux variant. If you missed the memo Android is Linux variant, by far the most popular one right now. Plus, the fact that it is an open source platform means that even if Google stopped developing it, it would take a very, very long time to die.
 
Apple isn't a cheap device brand. Not meaning price wise but quality and functionality. What Apple needs to keep an eye out on is relying on Samsung and other suppliers intentionally creating a part supply shortage in order to under-cut Apple sales. Samsung has upper hand because they are based in the part of the World that can manufacture electronics cheaply and in abundance.
 
[citation][nom]j2j663[/nom]If you really think that Apple isn't ripping you off then you are in iSheep denial. I'm not saying that other companies aren't bad at it but it is a well known fact that Apple is the worst with their markups. Case in point (this was on a TH article) it costs Apple $15-$30 to increase the storage capacity of their phones, yet the final price is $100 for the consumer to step up to the next tier. In fact, check this article out: http://www.ebnonline.com/author.as [...] _id=253759So much for Apple's superior hardware, it costs them $23/unit more to make the iPad mini than the Kindle Fire HD but iPad mini is double the price of the Kindle Fire HD.Oh and you are talking in circles when you say a mass exodus from Android will be good for a Linux variant. If you missed the memo Android is Linux variant, by far the most popular one right now. Plus, the fact that it is an open source platform means that even if Google stopped developing it, it would take a very, very long time to die.[/citation]

I am quite aware that Android is Linux, what I am saying is a Linux variant NOT controlled by a company that is directly producing products that are competing with companies using Android.

You do understand at a very high business level the risk a company takes by using software from a company that has control of that software AND is making products to compete with you. Eventually there because a huge conflict of interest.

Android is OpenSource, it is not the risk that Google will stop developing it, its the risk that they can in the future change upcoming release licenses causing other companies to use an older version and fork off that. This is a significant risk when that company is competing with you.

Just like how people have suspicions on Oracle's control of Java and possibilities of what they can do. OpenJDK exists, but how much penetration and influence it will have compared to Java in the industry if Oracle made major changes to how Java is license, priced, etc.


Apple, has and always does have higher margins. And most companies charge roughly +$50 for higher memory, Apple does charge $100. At the base model, the prices are not far off, when you go to higher levels you need to add about $50 more. Again, going from a $699 (32GB S3) vs $799 (32GB iPhone 5) is a 14% price increase, where as for the 16GB its a 7.7% difference. Is the price difference like 50%, no, its not even 25%. Just like a S3 (16GB) is 8.3% more than a 920, they're different products, different demands, different prices and companies can command different profit levels. Samsung has higher margins off its S3 than the Nokia 920, does that make them evil? No its makes them a company trying to make profit, because that's what companies do.

Also, the iPad mini is not double the price of the Kindle Fire HD. The price difference comes since Amazon needs to get marketshare and wants to push content to make its money. They do not make as much money on the actual device since they want to push advertisements and content to their users, this allows them to subsidize their costs. Completely different business models.

Hence why the Kindle Fire HD is not even readily available outside the USA.

Why is the Nexus 7 more expensive than the Kindle Fire HD? Does that mean Google is price gouging its customers? No, different products, different levels of support, different, different, different.

Even though a GM may be the same size, shape and have the same HP as a BMW, I don't expect BMW to price their product at GM's level, they're actually different outside of a few common specs.
 
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]Yah because a Galaxy S3 or Note II is soooo much cheaper than an iPhone 5?For each one, its the base model:iPhone 5: $699Note II: $729S3: $649LG Optimus G: $649Nokia 920: $599Yah the Apple is really ripping people off...Also, Linux's penetration on laptop and desktop for average users has not grown in any significance over the past 7 years, where as OSX share actually has.Android is very successful, no question about that, as long as its FREE for manufacturers it will be very popular with them. Also, if Google starts in anyways to block features or give advantage to their products with Android over competitors, you will see an exodus from Android, perhaps that would be good for Ubuntu or some Linux variant.[/citation]
Could you please state the source of your prices. Because for example in amazon all phones you mentioned are cheaper than the prices you posted with the exception of the iPhone.
 
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]Android is OpenSource, it is not the risk that Google will stop developing it, its the risk that they can in the future change upcoming release licenses causing other companies to use an older version and fork off that.[/citation]
Android is Open Source and it will have to remain Open Source, unless Google completely changes Android not to use software, like the linux kernel, that was already Open Source to begin with and protect by licensing agreement that forces everyone that changes it's code to post those changes to the community.
 
Android is NOT open source. You can get the Android source code and modify it any way you like (like Amazon here or Aliyun in China), but then you don't get access to all of Google's products/services. That side of Android is open.

The other side of Android is what you get on your Samsung ot HTC phones. This version is not open source, and it's stupid for people to keep stating it is. These companies are members of the OHA (Open Handset Alliance) which has pretty strict rules about what you can do to Android in order to maintain compatibility. It's not open source because of these restrictions. Google also pushes its weight around if you don't follow the rules (remember when Acer had to cancel their Aliyun Android phone at the last minute because of pressure from Google?).
 
75% of the profits does noe mean they mark their phones up 75%.

iSupply has done teardowns of numerous high end phones over the years and found that phones from Samsung or Apple (for example) have similar costs to build and similar margins. In fact, given that Samsung makes their own components it's likely their phones cost even less to make.

The reasons Samsung's OVERALL margins are so low is because they sell a gazillion feature phones and dumb phones which have low margins due to their selling price. If Samsung only sold GS3's or Note II's, then they'd be raking in the money just like Apple.

It doesn't help that Samsung makes 30 models of smartphone and another 60 models of dumb/feature phones, all with different screens, processors, memory, cameras, OS versions and so on. Apple only makes a couple models which means their economies of scale are the best in the industry. This also increases their margins.
 
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Android is Open Source and it will have to remain Open Source, unless Google completely changes Android not to use software, like the linux kernel, that was already Open Source to begin with and protect by licensing agreement that forces everyone that changes it's code to post those changes to the community.[/citation]

Android is under Apache Software License, whereas the Linux Kernel is GPL.

http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html


They don't even wanted contributed code to be GPL:

How can I contribute to Android?

There are a number of ways you can contribute to Android. You can report bugs, write apps for Android, or contribute source code to the Android Open-Source Project.

There are some limits on the kinds of code contributions we are willing or able to accept. For instance, someone might want to contribute an alternative application API, such as a full C++-based environment. We would decline that contribution, since Android is focused on applications that run in the Dalvik VM. Alternatively, we won't accept contributions such as GPL or LGPL libraries that are incompatible with our licensing goals.

We encourage those interested in contributing source code to contact us via the AOSP Community page prior to beginning any work. You can find more information on this topic at the Getting Involved page.
Click to expand...

http://source.android.com/faqs.html#what-kind-of-open-source-project-is-android
 
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]I am quite aware that Android is Linux, what I am saying is a Linux variant NOT controlled by a company that is directly producing products that are competing with companies using Android.You do understand at a very high business level the risk a company takes by using software from a company that has control of that software AND is making products to compete with you. Eventually there because a huge conflict of interest.Android is OpenSource, it is not the risk that Google will stop developing it, its the risk that they can in the future change upcoming release licenses causing other companies to use an older version and fork off that. This is a significant risk when that company is competing with you.Just like how people have suspicions on Oracle's control of Java and possibilities of what they can do. OpenJDK exists, but how much penetration and influence it will have compared to Java in the industry if Oracle made major changes to how Java is license, priced, etc.[/citation]
There is no chance that Google is going to close off Android or change its business model of being OpenSource. That is one of the huge differences between Android and iOS, its not going to change in the near future. Just like Oracle hasn't changed their JavaSDK model for many, many years and the rumors of change for the SDK are only because Java, as a development platform is in decline (especially on the web). When things change rumors fly.

[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]Apple, has and always does have higher margins. And most companies charge roughly +$50 for higher memory, Apple does charge $100. At the base model, the prices are not far off, when you go to higher levels you need to add about $50 more. Again, going from a $699 (32GB S3) vs $799 (32GB iPhone 5) is a 14% price increase, where as for the 16GB its a 7.7% difference. Is the price difference like 50%, no, its not even 25%. Just like a S3 (16GB) is 8.3% more than a 920, they're different products, different demands, different prices and companies can command different profit levels. Samsung has higher margins off its S3 than the Nokia 920, does that make them evil? No its makes them a company trying to make profit, because that's what companies do.Also, the iPad mini is not double the price of the Kindle Fire HD. The price difference comes since Amazon needs to get marketshare and wants to push content to make its money. They do not make as much money on the actual device since they want to push advertisements and content to their users, this allows them to subsidize their costs. Completely different business models.Hence why the Kindle Fire HD is not even readily available outside the USA.Why is the Nexus 7 more expensive than the Kindle Fire HD? Does that mean Google is price gouging its customers? No, different products, different levels of support, different, different, different.[/citation]
First of all, we all know that Apple has higher margins and that is exactly what we think they are crap. They make arguably worse, but definitely no better products than anyone else but think they can charge double for them. Sorry, my bad I said 200% and I should have only said 170%. Oh and sorry but the Nexus 7 is sold for exactly the same price as the Kindle HD if you compare the models side by side (32GB to 32GB, etc.).
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_7_32gb&feature=microsite&hl=en

[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]Even though a GM may be the same size, shape and have the same HP as a BMW, I don't expect BMW to price their product at GM's level, they're actually different outside of a few common specs.[/citation]
This doesn't even make sense, I have never understood why people try to use car analogies to explain something computer related. It never works.
 
[citation][nom]ericburnby[/nom]Android is NOT open source. You can get the Android source code and modify it any way you like (like Amazon here or Aliyun in China), but then you don't get access to all of Google's products/services. That side of Android is open.The other side of Android is what you get on your Samsung ot HTC phones. This version is not open source, and it's stupid for people to keep stating it is. These companies are members of the OHA (Open Handset Alliance) which has pretty strict rules about what you can do to Android in order to maintain compatibility. It's not open source because of these restrictions. Google also pushes its weight around if you don't follow the rules (remember when Acer had to cancel their Aliyun Android phone at the last minute because of pressure from Google?).[/citation]

I would not expect to call up Google and say here is my code use it in Android, any more than I would expect to do that with Ubuntu.
 
[citation][nom]j2j663[/nom]There is no chance that Google is going to close off Android or change its business model of being OpenSource. That is one of the huge differences between Android and iOS, its not going to change in the near future. Just like Oracle hasn't changed their JavaSDK model for many, many years and the rumors of change for the SDK are only because Java, as a development platform is in decline (especially on the web). When things change rumors fly.First of all, we all know that Apple has higher margins and that is exactly what we think they are crap. They make arguably worse, but definitely no better products than anyone else but think they can charge double for them. Sorry, my bad I said 200% and I should have only said 170%. Oh and sorry but the Nexus 7 is sold for exactly the same price as the Kindle HD if you compare the models side by side (32GB to 32GB, etc.). https://play.google.com/store/devic [...] site&hl=enThis doesn't even make sense, I have never understood why people try to use car analogies to explain something computer related. It never works.[/citation]

Because design, reliability, customer service & support other other considerations.

No manufacturer even comes close to the customer service and support Apple provides with Apple store and their telephone support.

Materials matter too, Apple never cheaps out on quality and type of materials. Using metal and glass where other people use cheap plastic. From laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc they use much better materials to build their products. This does make things more expensive.

You can have a polyester sweater or a wool one, wool will cost more.

You can have a car with elegant solid wood, better build quality and materials, this adds to the cost. The BMW's engine is fined tuned way more than a GM engine. Apple controls both the hardware and software and can achieve through optimization and control of these components what other manufacturers cannot. IE. Android is written to run on a huge permutations of hardware configurations there's positives and negatives for this.

Since iOS will only run on a few tightly controlled hardware configurations this makes it a lot easier to optimize and support.


Again, Amazon SUBSIDIZES their products since they are making money off advertisements and content. You simply do NOT understand or comprehend different business models for selling products. This is classical hardware egghead thinking. You look at specs and prices and think that's all that a product is.

Kindle Fire HD is not even readily available as a iPad Mini is across the globe.

Also, even if I did get a Kindle Fire HD for $199 and got an iPad mini for $329,

that's 65% more, not 170% LOL.

199 * 1.65 = $328.35

LOL, 100% more is double the price, last time I checked 329 is not double 199.
If it was truly 170% more it would have cost $537.30 for an iPad Mini.

100% of 199 is $199
70% of 199 is $139.30

so 170% is 199+199+139.30 = $537.30.


The fact that you don't even understand Amazon's business model is a shame.
You do know Amazon charges customers money to remove advertisements from some of their electronic products?

I won't even address the other ridiculous things you have said, because clearly you do not even understand my responses and the higher level implications they have beyond specs and advertised price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom