6 ms·

The factor that many seem to have overlooked with the $1000 price of the iPhone X is that, if it proves successful, it sets a precedence for future smartphones.

The factor that many seem to have overlooked with the $1000 price of the iPhone X is that, if it proves successful, it sets a precedence for future smartphones. The spec improvements of the iPhone X do not line up with the accompanying price increase. Even by iPhone standards it's an expensive device. If you justify the price increases you're just telling Apple you're prepared to be short changed when the iPhone X's successor comes out.

frou_dh 9y ago
The name X (10) kinda reinforces this. As in, "Don't expect next year's standard priced iPhone (nominally the 9) to be as good as this."
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  You misunderstand. The iPhone X is the new flagship line. Next year there's most likely to be an iPhone 9 and an iPhone X2, though considering Apple's naming strategy it'll probably be called something like 'the new iPhone X'.
  - frou_dh 9y ago
    They pronounce it "ten" so you expect them to say "ten-two", or "the new iPhone ten" year after year?
    - ZenoArrow 9y ago
      My point wasn't about the name but about the new product line. iPhone X is a new product line. Apple have made fundamental changes to the user interface. The iPhone 9 would be the successor to the iPhone 8. Whatever name Apple comes up with for iPhone X's successor, it's almost certain to keep the new 'all screen' interface.
      - frou_dh 9y ago
        Well I'm sure it's Apple's intention to not give up a super fat margin after establishing it. It remains to be seen whether in the medium term the market would keep its enthusiasm for a "legacy" iPhone range which becomes implicitly old and busted in the shadow of the "real" iPhone and competitor products.
        ZenoArrow 9y ago
        My argument is not that Apple is looking to lose their fat margins, my argument is that they're looking to extend those margins. The iPhone X almost certainly higher margin than the iPhone. My argument was that if consumers tolerate the $1000 price this time, they shouldn't be surprised to see future high end phones at similar prices.

frou_dh 9y ago

The name X (10) kinda reinforces this. As in, "Don't expect next year's standard priced iPhone (nominally the 9) to be as good as this."

ZenoArrow 9y ago
You misunderstand. The iPhone X is the new flagship line. Next year there's most likely to be an iPhone 9 and an iPhone X2, though considering Apple's naming strategy it'll probably be called something like 'the new iPhone X'.
- frou_dh 9y ago
  They pronounce it "ten" so you expect them to say "ten-two", or "the new iPhone ten" year after year?
  - ZenoArrow 9y ago
    My point wasn't about the name but about the new product line. iPhone X is a new product line. Apple have made fundamental changes to the user interface. The iPhone 9 would be the successor to the iPhone 8. Whatever name Apple comes up with for iPhone X's successor, it's almost certain to keep the new 'all screen' interface.
    - frou_dh 9y ago
      Well I'm sure it's Apple's intention to not give up a super fat margin after establishing it. It remains to be seen whether in the medium term the market would keep its enthusiasm for a "legacy" iPhone range which becomes implicitly old and busted in the shadow of the "real" iPhone and competitor products.
      - ZenoArrow 9y ago
        My argument is not that Apple is looking to lose their fat margins, my argument is that they're looking to extend those margins. The iPhone X almost certainly higher margin than the iPhone. My argument was that if consumers tolerate the $1000 price this time, they shouldn't be surprised to see future high end phones at similar prices.