6 ms·

A common pitfall that isn't listed in the article is listening to a loud minority of customers. If you had been reading Hacker News or any other tech-savvy pla

A common pitfall that isn't listed in the article is listening to a loud minority of customers. If you had been reading Hacker News or any other tech-savvy platform, you'd have been well excused for thinking there's a huge demand for a capable iPhone with a smaller screen. In reality, the sales numbers for iPhone minis were disappointing. It turns out that people spending a lot of time writing online about tech hardware are not representative of the iPhone customer base at large.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
nottorp 3y ago
> In reality, the sales numbers for iPhone minis were disappointing. Disappointing for Apple, i.e. only a few tens of millions. I know a few people that are very happy with their iPhone minis. They have nothing to upgrade to now. But it's cheaper this way :)
- mmmmmbop 3y ago
  Right. I think the point of the article was to determine what's best for your business at large, not what would make a few customers happy at the expense of your overall success.
izacus 3y ago
> In reality, the sales numbers for iPhone minis were disappointing. Disappointing by whos metric? It outsold most Android phones and massively outsold first few iPhone models released. Were iPhones 3G, 3GS, 4, etc. also disappointing? Just because the PERCENT was low, it doesn't mean the SHIPPED UNITS were low. In reality, any company you create will sell their product in VASTLY LOWER number than any iPhone Mini. Should you be fired and go bankrupt because your sales will be disappointing by Apple standards too? Should we just liquidate all companies that cater to less than 20 millions of unit sold? Should all other companies catering to small (< 20 million, the number of small iPhones shipped) audiences not exist and be replaced by average products for average people? No more Mac Studios, no more XDR displays, no more 15" 4000$ MacBooks?
- mmmmmbop 3y ago
  > Disappointing by whos metric? By all metrics relevant to Apple's business, as evidenced by the fact that it was discontinued after just two iterations.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

nottorp 3y ago

> In reality, the sales numbers for iPhone minis were disappointing. Disappointing for Apple, i.e. only a few tens of millions. I know a few people that are very happy with their iPhone minis. They have nothing to upgrade to now. But it's cheaper this way :)

mmmmmbop 3y ago
Right. I think the point of the article was to determine what's best for your business at large, not what would make a few customers happy at the expense of your overall success.

izacus 3y ago

> In reality, the sales numbers for iPhone minis were disappointing. Disappointing by whos metric? It outsold most Android phones and massively outsold first few iPhone models released. Were iPhones 3G, 3GS, 4, etc. also disappointing? Just because the PERCENT was low, it doesn't mean the SHIPPED UNITS were low. In reality, any company you create will sell their product in VASTLY LOWER number than any iPhone Mini. Should you be fired and go bankrupt because your sales will be disappointing by Apple standards too? Should we just liquidate all companies that cater to less than 20 millions of unit sold? Should all other companies catering to small (< 20 million, the number of small iPhones shipped) audiences not exist and be replaced by average products for average people? No more Mac Studios, no more XDR displays, no more 15" 4000$ MacBooks?

mmmmmbop 3y ago
> Disappointing by whos metric? By all metrics relevant to Apple's business, as evidenced by the fact that it was discontinued after just two iterations.