4 ms·

Out of curiosity, do you have that same mindset (i.e. a factor of your decision to purchase is whether or not you're willing to buy another one if the first one

Out of curiosity, do you have that same mindset (i.e. a factor of your decision to purchase is whether or not you're willing to buy another one if the first one is unusable) with anything else in your life? Also, Applecare+ is a worthwhile deal if you're that concerned about breaking the phone (and probably even moreso now with the glass-backed phones).

ethbro 8y ago
The difference for me is the "good enough" factor. I'm fine with paying an explanation premium to go from 90 -> 100% functionality. But only when 90% functional doesn't already cover my needs. Apple goosed the iPhone price exactly as phone processors started hitting Moore's cliff of diminishing performance returns. High performance across the market + most users served by "good enough" processors = commodity Apple's never done well with commodities.
- iainmerrick 8y ago
  “Moore’s cliff”? iPhone processors (unlike Macs) are still getting much faster every update. You can debate whether that extra speed is actually useful in everyday life, but they are getting faster.
  - ethbro 8y ago
    The A12 made some extremely smart memory µarch changes and benefited from a node shrink to TSMC's 7N. We'll see how EUV scales for everyone.
GCA10 8y ago
There's an interesting psychological dynamic here that's probably relevant for other high visibility purchases, too. I'm thinking cars in particular. There's a subset of us that under-spends relative to what we could own if we really wanted the greatest wheels on earth. It's not so much that we're in constant dread of an engine failure or crash that would turn a $90K Tesla or BMW into scrap metal. But we get most of what we want with Toyotas and Fords. And we're spared the stress of worrying about the well-being of one more precious element in our lives. (Houses, spouses and little kids create plenty of those stresses as is.)
PopeDotNinja 8y ago
The only thing I can think of is the $400-ish digital camera I bought to take pics when I really want something nicer than my cell phone. If I lost that, I might replace it.

ethbro 8y ago

The difference for me is the "good enough" factor. I'm fine with paying an explanation premium to go from 90 -> 100% functionality. But only when 90% functional doesn't already cover my needs. Apple goosed the iPhone price exactly as phone processors started hitting Moore's cliff of diminishing performance returns. High performance across the market + most users served by "good enough" processors = commodity Apple's never done well with commodities.

iainmerrick 8y ago
“Moore’s cliff”? iPhone processors (unlike Macs) are still getting much faster every update. You can debate whether that extra speed is actually useful in everyday life, but they are getting faster.
- ethbro 8y ago
  The A12 made some extremely smart memory µarch changes and benefited from a node shrink to TSMC's 7N. We'll see how EUV scales for everyone.

GCA10 8y ago

There's an interesting psychological dynamic here that's probably relevant for other high visibility purchases, too. I'm thinking cars in particular. There's a subset of us that under-spends relative to what we could own if we really wanted the greatest wheels on earth. It's not so much that we're in constant dread of an engine failure or crash that would turn a $90K Tesla or BMW into scrap metal. But we get most of what we want with Toyotas and Fords. And we're spared the stress of worrying about the well-being of one more precious element in our lives. (Houses, spouses and little kids create plenty of those stresses as is.)

PopeDotNinja 8y ago

The only thing I can think of is the $400-ish digital camera I bought to take pics when I really want something nicer than my cell phone. If I lost that, I might replace it.