Does the iPhone 8 have what it takes to be a success?

Source: ¿El iPhone 8 tiene lo que se necesita para ser un éxito?

The above interview was conducted October 17 with Carlos Morales
Editor en Jefe, Forbes Digital (Mexico).

The source questions and my answers in English are below:

How can we read the fact that the new iPhone lineup raised so little noise? There was no massive lines outside the Apple Stores and people demonstrated almost zero interest in the new models compared with the hype motivated by the iPhone 7.

I don’t know about you but I don’t like waiting in lines. I don’t think Apple considers waiting in lines to be a good user experience for its customers. Over the years Apple has been able to improve availability and online orders so that lines can be eliminated. I suggest a better way to gauge interest in new models and that would be to look at sales. Sales seem to be going up even as lines have been going down.

The iPhone 8. What do you think of the fact that the iPhone 7 is outselling the iPhone 8?

Is it a fact? I think this notion is coming from a survey of operator stores in the US over a short time period. The mix of phones has never been known and is a matter of speculation. The only data we do have is the average selling price derived by dividing the revenues by the number of units sold (and ignoring deferrals). This price set a new record during the last 12 months. Expectations are that it will increase to another record again next year. I might add that this has never been observed in the phone business as far as I know. The opposite has been the trend.

Whats the outlook for the the iPhone 8 vs the iPhone 7 and the iPhone X?

The iPhone 8 is likely to be the best selling model over the next 12 months. The iPhone X will be the best seller in the first quarter but I expect it will come second during the following quarters. The iPhone 7 will end up 3rd.

What do you think about the smartphone prices, aren’t they too high? How far can they be stretched ?

Smartphone prices are very low. World-wide, average smartphones sell for less than $300. You can see a break-down by region here.

iPhone prices are, on average, more than double the average of all smartphones. Note that apple’s latest line-up also includes the cheapest iPhone ever with the SE now starting at $350.

I don’t think the average selling price will increase in 2018 globally. It will probably decrease as it has for a long time. Average iPhone prices will increase but probably only by $10 or so.

The iPhone price tiers are well understood. I published an analysis here:

More important however is that the iPhone remains priced at about $1/day, no matter the model, and as such the value users perceive is very high. The most expensive iPhone costs about 8 cents per hour of use, 1.4 cents each time you unlock it and 1 cent for ever 25 interactions you have with it (touches or taps). On a per use basis the iPhone is extraordinarily cheap. I know of no consumer product that is cheaper. This is determined partly by the intensity of use and by the high resale value (I assume 30% residual value after 2 years).

Do we really need a borderless OLED display in a smartphone? What about the face recognition technology?

Having no borders means you can get a screen that is bigger than the iPhone Plus in a phone the size of an iPhone. I think users will value getting more screen in a smaller phone. I certainly would. Having OLED means it can be curved a bit and also have nicer, truer black.

Face recognition saves time and is more secure. I don’t know another way of making the experience better for something that you do 30,000 times a year.

What do you think about the Apple Watch, which seems to be—finally—on the right track?

The Apple Watch has been on the same track for 2.5 years. I don’t see any change in that trajectory.



  • obarthelemy

    “I know of no consumer product that is cheaper.”

    Mmmmmm…. any other smartphone ?

    • value

      Probably, particularly for the cheaper models, but you need usage data here. We know from all measured statistics that iPhones are used a lot more, and therefore deliver more value, that Android phones generally.

      • obarthelemy

        That’s a long leap of correlation to causation… Of course people with little use for a smartphone will get a cheaper phone = Android, hence the stats.

        That doesn’t mean that heavy iOS users suddenly start using less when switching to Android, or Android users more when switching to iOS. ie your inference about value is baseless or worse: a light user would get much worse value from an expensive device.

      • value

        Are you okay? Nothing you wrote makes any sense, is related to what I wrote, doesn’t imply that I wrote something I didn’t, or isn’t trivial.

        Correlation vs causation is obviously not at all relevant here, because nobody asserted anything causal, and the ratios are the same whether causal, one way or the other, or not.

      • obarthelemy

        Whoosh ?

      • value

        I see you won’t address any substantive points or make any sort of coherent statement, revealing your true intent here.

      • Space Gorilla

        obarthelemy is the Resident Asymco Troll, along with his sidekick klahanas (who also posts all over MacDailyNews as applecynic, which gives you another clue about intent). Best not to engage them. Don’t feed the trolls as they say.

      • klahanas

        Hi. Do you miss me?
        Troll is anyone that doesn’t buy into your BS narrative.

      • obarthelemy

        Hey Klahanas !
        You still haven’t blocked him ?

      • klahanas

        Naah… He amuses me.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Well define okay … in Android, that translates to something other than “healthy, sound mind, and breathing”. It all depends on which Android phone you’ve bought … because your “choice” will determine if you’re “okay” or not.

      • Space Gorilla

        iOS could easily encourage higher usage, by making many jobs-to-be-done easier, having less friction within the ecosystem, having a higher degree of integration with other devices and accessories, making certain features more easily available or fun to use, and more. You’re assuming equivalence in the two user experiences, but we can’t assume that, and the available data points to the opposite conclusion, that there is something about the iOS user experience that leads to higher usage. I would guess a mix of the user experience and the users, it wouldn’t be just one or the other, but don’t discount how much the user experience matters. My father-in-law has a new Android smartphone (LG), very nice, but he gets stuck quite often doing tasks and gives up. I’m sure you are very capable on your Android devices, but your experience doesn’t map to all users.

    • 程肯

      “On a per use basis”

      • Yes. And with *all* factors considered, particularly iPhone resale value.

        I would also add useful life; Apple products tend to remain functional a very long time.

      • obarthelemy

        Apple products break / get lost / get stolen like any other if not more. I’ve seen oodles of “resale value” arguments, not one that takes that breakage/loss into account, or the cost of AppleCare.

        Once you take that into account, a $200 midranger, even if it only lasts 2 years (they last 4, but for the sake of argument) you get a whole phone for the cost of AppleCare, or for the statistical cost of damage/loss to your phone.

        And that’s not an argument specifically about Apple, but about all premium phones. Which bites even harder if you add the other option of last year’s flagship at $400. You can’t fit that whole phone into AppleCare’s cost, but it kills the perf/features argument.

      • I’ve seen oodles of “resale value” arguments, not one that takes that breakage/loss into account

        AppleCare is optional, and eBay is loaded with examples of high final values for broken Apple products.

        Here’s an example of a 7+, now three iPhone generations back, that sold for $535 with a cracked screen. If you prefer your examples with even more damage search sold “iPhone for parts” listings.

        I’ve been at this a long time (embarrassingly long). I will be the first to concede that used Apple resale values are lower than they used to be, but to argue that Apple’s resale values are not uncommonly high – and a clear Apple customer advantage – is folly. Consumers have enjoyed this economic reality for decades, and now the opportunity’s been formalized by businesses like Gazelle.

      • obarthelemy

        Hum… the 7+ is a year old, counting that as 3 generations is disingenuous.

        A new iP7+ is $670 from Apple, and a screen replacement is $170. So unless the buyer intends to keep using the cracked screen, that ebay sale is a Very Bad Deal. Wonder if it will actually sell, what matters is not so much that someone is listing it, but that someone actually bought it.

        Couldn’t find the item, but looking for it found other similar sales, priced way more sanely ($200 to $300), so that example price was also rather disingenuous I think. There’s a $350 jet black 128GB, but with no bids. Gazelle offers $290 for a 32GB w/ slight defect (scratches, not a broken screen), $115 for major issue but still turns on.

        So, the iP7+ launched for $769. It’s now worth $290 if quasi-mint condition, except say 10% chance it got destroyed (value = 0) and 10% chance it got damaged but still turns on (Gazelle value = $115), so expected value value = 290 x 0.8 + 0 + 115 x 0.1 = $272.

        1 year of iPhone cost 770 – 270 = $500. That’s the regular price for a 6 month old Galaxy S plus (would be a S6 Edge in this case), which I’m sure will have some resale or extended use (kids !) value. One we use realistic prices and take accidents into account, I’m still not seeing above average resale value.

        Note that this is true for Android flagships bought at full price too, but those tend to have frequent and early sales. I’m standing by my assertion that low/midrangers are much better deals, even if you consider them a total write-off after 2 years (which they aren’t).

      • Disingenuous? How many generations back is the 7?

        Search for final values not active listings.

        Search for the cost of replacement parts, not the cost of replacement services; the difference can be measured by a factor of 5-10.

        I’m ducking out here. Arguing about the used and broken value of Apple products is akin to arguing about gravity.

      • obarthelemy

        Still can’t find that listing. Can you link it ?

        And indeed, resale value and cost of use can be discussed like gravity. Not with a mystery outlier ebay listing, but with dat and a smidgen of maths. Let’s move on from the “objects fall because they have a greater affinity to the ground” stage ?


        Search for sold “for parts” iPhone 7 listings. The database offers >9,000 examples. Functional iPhone results are much higher.

        Here’s a disingenuous but not mysterious example at the high end of broken phones.

        7/64/Rose Gold, 40 bids, sold for $1375 and the screen is cracked:

      • obarthelemy

        Thanks, the link works, and the phone got sold. It’s a 256GB model, original price $970, so 1 year of use and a cracked screen cost $435, that’s -50% in a single year, slightly better than my calculated -$500 indeed, but direct sales not via Gazelle ($350 for “used-not-broke”n).

        My bias is that I’m averse to second-hand stuff.

        But mostly, I’m averse to overpriced stuff. My base recommendations for phones are the $100 5″ Xiaomi Redmi 4X or $150 5.5″ Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (I myself got the $200 6.5” Xiaomi Mi Max because I have a large-screen fetish, it’s a blown-up Redmi Note). They’re perfectly serviceable phones w/ all modern amenities and more (touchID, SD slot, FM radio, good-not-great camera, 3GB RAM 32 GB storage…)

        I used to buy premium stuff (HTC HD2 then Samsung Galaxy Note v1) but this no longer makes any sense. Even for dedicated picture-takers, last year’s flagship at half price and a photo-op week-end with the money left over makes more sense. A flagship’s (iOS or Android) $800 extra cost is extremely hard to justify by actual benefits. Apple is the epitome of that.

      • As Michael and then Silvio put it, Just when I thought I was out…they pull me back in!

        We’re talking about Apple. Not samsung, not xiaomi, not htc. We’re taking about the uncommon value proposition of used and broken Apple products.

        Search for iPhone 7 replacement displays. They’re about $40USD. A reseller of used iPhones pays wholesale. The math, like love, moves objects.

      • obarthelemy

        Well, if you want to claim “less expensive than competing products”, at some point you have to look into how (in-)expensive competing products are. Technically that’s not a direct comparison until you reach the $400 last year flagships, but commercially and functionally it is, the overwhelming majority of premium customers around me could use anything really.

        As for iP7 screen repair, after watching a video I might try it on my own phone, I wouldn’t do it for someone else, and of my 20 closest acquaintances, 1 could maybe pull it off and another one would be silly enough to try it but fail. You do lose water resistance, and if the home button took any damage, you can’t fix that yourself.

        You’re the one who mentioned Gazelle, so I followed up on that. Many people won’t feel confident with ebay or Craig’s list.

      • Well, if you want to claim “less expensive than competing products”

        To reference another great quote, There you go again; you only included part of what I said.

        To be precise, I said that’s “what can make Apple products less expensive to own than competing products”. Operative here word, can. Far from a blanket statement. #gametape

        Many people won’t feel confident with ebay or Craig’s list

        You are correct. That’s precisely many people have unprotected s*x: produce ready hands to receive our freshly obsoleted Apple products. No fuss, no muss.

        This time I’m really out. Good night now (another borrowed gem).

      • obarthelemy

        But then again, since my argument is that you need the comparison element in a “less… than…” statement, the presence of absence of can has absolutely 0 impact on the logic that if you want to compare one thing to another, you need info on the other thing too.

        I wasn’t debating whether that statement is true or false, just pointing out that it has 2 elements, so contrary to what you said, it *is* about Samsung, HTC, Xiaomi too.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Why bother? You’re still killing yourself to refute a point … listing or no listing doesn’t matter …. carry on.

      • obarthelemy

        Again, there’s a weird causality inferred. iOS phones don’t get used more because they run iOS, but because they’re more expensive and people who spend more on phones do so because they’ve got more use for a smartphone.
        I’ve seen people switch to/from iOS, phone use doesn’t change when/because you switch OS. But you might choose to spend more on your next phone when you realize you’re using it for 3hrs/day.
        Reciprocally, if you’ve got little use for the smarts in a smartphone, you won’t plunk down $500+ for one.
        As always, the author is attributing to iDevices properties & behaviours that work for all smartphones. The difference is between low, middle and premium phones, not between iOS and not iOS.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        That was hilarious for circular logic …. you’re chasing your own tail …. LOL.

      • klahanas

        So if you slack from using it, you’re losing money?

      • 程肯

        Don’t worry, Horace was using an average; others will make up for your slacking!

      • klahanas

        Oh thank goodness, I was worried that “I” would be losing money, but thanks to the kindness of others… 😉

  • Chris

    After ten years, the iPhone is beginning to look like the iPod lineup at its peak. By that, I mean that Apple has entries in a variety of sizes and features at all of the profitable price points. This leaves little room for competitors.

    • obarthelemy

      Well, iPod had significantly more market share than iPhone (90% in the US IIRC). In phones, it’s around 12%, a bit past its peak. Very different situations.

      • belief

        Not even obarthelemy actually believes that iPhone market share in the US is 12%.

      • obarthelemy

        I also think he iPod never had 90% overall share. Your point ?

      • belief

        “Well, iPod had significantly more market share than iPhone (90% in the US IIRC). In phones, it’s around 12%,”

      • Space Gorilla

        Let me guess obarthelemy the troll’s response, something along the lines of the iPod having more market share blah blah Church of Market Share iPhone has less market share so the point still stands iPhone will fail Any Day Now ™. Heh, have fun with our little obart troll, I’ll go get the popcorn.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Is obarthelemy the same as klahanas? They’re both clown-ass as far as commentary goes, but yeah, it’s entertaining. It’s astounding to what extent someone is willing to go just for spite. But human beings (or whatever) never fail to surprise. I know people who’ve been waiting for Apple to go bankrupt since 1993 !!!! And they’re still hoping …. LOL. I think these two clowns are the same. Somehow the one billion devices must have been sold to all these “subjugated” and “enslaved” people all over the world !!! Can you imagine that? This is hilarious.

      • klahanas

        You two are made for each other!
        Yes. Subjugated. Can you tell Apple to allow you to do something they don’t want you to do? Amazing!

      • Space Gorilla

        I think they’re two different people but it’s not impossible that they’re the same person. klahanas also posts on MacDailyNews constantly as applecynic. They’re both huge trolls posing as ‘intellectuals’.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Of course no forum would exist without trolls … whether it’s Apple/Mac related or not. That’s okay, it doesn’t bother me.

        I had forgotten the username for one, so I fell into the trap at the beginning, but I do know obarthelemy quite well. He’s an ass-clown like the rest of them out there.

        The best thing to do, is to NEVER engage or respond to them in any shape or form. Once you ignore them long enough, they’ll just go away.

        klahanas was trying to lure me continuously, and I didn’t give in. He just went away.

      • klahanas

        Please continue to ignore me, but that means with third parties too, otherwise you’re fair game…

      • klahanas

        Honored that you even think of me as a faux intellectual. I have never paraded any credentials, though I do know you think I’m at a disadvantage with you….you know people with Masters Degrees…. Me, just applecynic….

      • obarthelemy

        Do I need to make it clear that, lacking any qualifier, iPhone’s share is the overall share, ie wwide ?

      • belief

        Apologies if english is not your first language but yes, absent a qualifier of course the second number should be comparable to the first one. And those numbers not being comparable means that they are not relevant as evidence to support the rest of your paragraph. Hope that helps!

      • obarthelemy

        No prob, sorry for the confusion too.

        But still, the salient fact isn’t that wwide != US, but that iPod != iPhone. I still can’t find wwide peak iPod share (read 72% in an artcile, but no source and not ironclad wording), but it undoubtedly was way above the iPhone’s. If 72%, that’s exactly 6x.

      • BMc

        US installed base for iPhone is close to 50%.

      • obarthelemy

        I know, but iPhone wwide marketshare is 12% right now. Peak iPod’s was much higher than that. And in the US, iPhone marketshare is at 40-50%, half of iPod’s at its peak. So comparisons between the two are a bit excessive.

        I’m also not sure there aren’t profitable smartphones below $350; Android’s ASP is $200-250 with lots of profitable OEMs.

      • Simon_Hibbs

        Of around 300 smartphone makers only the top 10 are profitable. This is lead by Apple and Samsung who between then soaked up about 96% of global profits in Q1 2017. Many of them are in the business for other reasons, such as they are parts makers showcasing their component businesses, they are part of a wider consumer product portfolio or they are part of a services play. Competition among Android OEMs is so cutthroat, profits have been squeezed out of most of the market.

      • obarthelemy

        As a consumer I love competition. I get a whole good phone for the price of 2 years of AppleCare or an Apple screen replacement. Or 6 good phones for the price of an iPhone X (which is excellent, but still, “good” is enough, they all do the same thing except low-light pics and AR). Or 2 excellent Galaxy S7s for the price of an iPX (Consumer Reports prefers the S7).

        I’m curious as to which Android OEMs are showcasing their component business. Apart from Samsung, who are already showcasing last year’s screens, and memory, and fab in the iPhones; their SoCs and cameras haven’t been OEMed in any significant way. Sony phones don’t even have top-rated cameras (their own sensors are better showcased by other brands), Huawei isn’t even trying (their cameras are Leica-branded and their now-excellent Kirin SoCs aren’t used by anyone else), LG is barely now trying to move into mobile OLED. So, question, to which OEMs does your statement apply ?

        Ditto for services. Xiaomi is making a push to not hand over all of it to Google, but who else, outside of mandatory OEM appstores for China since Google’s PlayStore/Services are absent over there ? I’d argue that, same as for the iPhone, Services are not a demand driver (nobody buys the hardware for the services), merely incidental sales; Maybe a bit of lock-in in the long run, at best, though you have to be an idiot to lock yourself in to a specific OEM when the exact same services can be had in an OEM-independent form. Amazon exited phones (they were rumored to be contemplating a PlayStore-sporting comeback a few months ago ?). LeEco has effectively vanished. So yep, Xiaomi is trying services, even stores.

        I’m not sure how relevant the “wider consumer product portfolio” is. Wide portfolio Android OEMs have hilariously failed to extract any synergies, at best they’re capitalizing on brand image and that’s it. Sony can’t even manage to make a photo, or music, or gaming-oriented phone. Let alone have some type of extra feature related to their TVs, cameras, or PlayStation. Xiaomi is diversifying semi-randomly, but again it’s brand-based, there are no technical synergies.

        In the same vein, I’ll need a source for the “300 OEMs”. That sounds a bit high. The share of the top 5 has been stable at 60% for half a decade (though not quite the precise 2 OEMs besides the Samsung-Apple-Huawei leading triumvirate), I’d guess the top 10 break 75%… well, maybe there are 290 OEMs fighting for dregs. In France, we’re supposed to have 2 local OEMs (Wiko and Archos), but they’re simply re-badging Chinese phones (the exact same phones, not one iota of change, even the French translations are lacking).

        So yep, profits are being squeezed. Yet huge companies have been borne out of it: Xiaomi, BBK (Vivo+Oppo+OnePlus). And about half of the historical players have hugely thrived (Samsung, Huawei) or survived (Sony is reportedly making a profit, LG hasn’t given up yet, HTC, well… can we talk about something else ?), which is a much better scorecard than for non-Android OEMs (RIM, Nokia, Palm, HP, Alcatel before TCL…).

        In the end, between newcomers, thriving old-timers, and surviving old-timers that have been incredibly inept at digesting Mobile into their wider portfolio, I think Android is an incredibly good deal for the customers, and much better than any alternative for the OEMs. If Nokia had gone Android, they’d probably still be around in their original form.

      • preference

        “Or 2 excellent Galaxy S7s for the price of an iPX (Consumer Reports prefers the S7)”

        They prefer a phone that has been released over one that hasn’t?

      • obarthelemy

        Sorry, got that wrong, CR prefers the GS7 over the iP8 not X

      • Kizedek

        “I’m not sure how relevant the “wider consumer product portfolio” is. Wide portfolio Android OEMs have hilariously failed to extract any synergies, at best they’re capitalizing on brand image and that’s it. Sony can’t even manage to make a photo, or music, or gaming-oriented phone.”

        I think that was kind of the point. You’d think there would be more synergies every where on the Android side. But they seem to be elusive.

        So, if a wider portfolio OEM is failing to extract synergies, where is the value they are really offering? You seem to be saying can you buy this or that phone if your priority is this or that single feature.

        The profitability for the OEMs isn’t there, because the ongoing demand isn’t there. The ongoing demand isn’t there, likely because the all-around value to the consumer is either uncertain, unreliable, or indiscernible from 100 other offerings.

        Really, you are highlighting a lack of focus. Continual iterations that go deep into all aspects of the phone and make for a great all-around product just aren’t there.

        Thus, even within popular lines of Android phones, like the Galaxy, the next model may be a hit or miss. Thus there is no real reason to anticipate that the model that will be available two or three years after the purchase of your current phone is going to be something you really want to spend the following two or three years using on a daily basis, even if you can live with the current model you have now.

        You downplayed Apple services, but the truth is, when a company has 30 years of both hardware and software integration expertise, then there are true and undeniable synergies to be found between its hardware and software. That undeniably contributes to the value that consumers are finding in the iPhone.

        And Apple’s track record contributes to their customers’ confidence that the model available in two or three years will also be more than satisfactory. All this in turn contributes to the iPhone’s stable ASP and profitability.

        Forget Sony, I’m curious if Google is going to find any synergies (this time) between its Ad and Services business, and the hardware business they just purchased at great expense. I’m not sure that they will. Let alone help or allow their OEM’s to find or extract any synergies either.

      • obarthelemy

        Indeed, the OEMs’ inability to differentiate & lock-in is a huge indictment of their worthiness. I get that a common OS and ecosystem are conducive to a race to the bottom, but
        a) that’s a lot less true for Android, whose open-sourcyness lets OEMs add/change pretty much whatever as long as they don’t break compatibility and load up Google gaggle of apps.
        b) getting the OS, apps, cloud services, and ecosystem ready-made frees up resources to work on the extra stuff. Nokia and MS got killed by their inability to finalize the OS, let alone build up the ecosystem.

        I think OEMs have caught on that technical stuff (pen, windows, touchID, face unlock, KNOX, dual cams…) doesn’t suffice, they need branding and services. Features have been pioneered on the Android side for a while, but it’s new that designs now are emerging on this side too. I’m fairly sure Apple would have avoided The Notch if there was any other way to make their new design visually unique, but they were all taken already (all-glass, curved glass, rounded corners and sides…). Nokia and others are emphasizing OS updates, Xiaomi is opening stores…

        You seem to utterly disregard that design/fashion angle. Weak iPhone 8’s sales (it’s an X, with the old case and the LCD screen Apple fans were howling up to last month is so superior to AMOLED ^^). Another clue is that Apple is particularly strong w/ teens, not the most discerning/objective clientèle.

        I’m not sure what Google is trying to do w/ Pixel besides having something for sale to first-party snobs, but whatever they’re going for, they’ve got the same learning curve ahead of them as any beginner OEM. Starts with: maybe you should accen-tu-ate the positive, but the negatives will sink you. If I were them, I wouldn’t go for the luxury segment but for the LTS/entreprise segment. The synergies are already there for Google, with any and all Android phone, not just Pixels: track and ads, and lock-in to their apps&cloud. It’s not even in Google’s interest to have anything exclusive to the Pixel.

      • Kizedek

        “You seem to utterly disregard that design/fashion angle. Weak iPhone 8’s sales (it’s an X, with the old case and the LCD screen Apple fans were howling up to last month is so superior to AMOLED ^^). Another clue is that Apple is particularly strong w/ teens, not the most discerning/objective clientèle.”

        No doubt there is a design/fashion angle. Apple integrates design and thoughtfulness into everything it does at every step of the process, not as an afterthought.

        You seem to utterly disregard that people aren’t stupid. The design/fashion angle may get a certain percentage of users — the first or even second time around that they make a choice for an iPhone.

        But then they are very unlikely to want an Android after that, due to the whole package of UX, software, software updates, reliability, etc. The evidence is that switching is overwhelmingly from Android to iOS.

        As usual, the arguments about LCD – AMOLED were always about off the shelf AMOLED not being ready or up to standards required. By all accounts, Apple has come up with and specified certain requirements for its manufacture.

      • Kizedek

        “You seem to utterly disregard that design/fashion angle. Weak iPhone 8’s sales (it’s an X, with the old case and the LCD screen Apple fans were howling up to last month is so superior to AMOLED ^^). Another clue is that Apple is particularly strong w/ teens, not the most discerning/objective clientèle.

        As usual, the arguments about LCD – AMOLED were always about off the shelf AMOLED not being ready or up to standards required. By all accounts, Apple has come up with and specified certain requirements for its manufacture.

        Pixl phone burn-in, and Samsung’s need to shift-around persistent on-sceen UI elements like home/back buttons by a few pixels from screen to screen just confirm this.

        No doubt there is a design/fashion angle. Apple integrates design and thoughtfulness into everything it does at every step of the process, not as an afterthought.

        But you seem to utterly disregard that people aren’t always foolish when they make choices that you don’t make. The design/fashion angle may get a certain percentage of users — the first or even second time around that they make a choice for an iPhone.

        But then they are unlikely to want an Android after that, due to the whole package of UX, software, software updates, reliability, etc. The evidence is that switching is overwhelmingly from Android to iOS.

        Since you like to reduce the iPhone’s success to design/fashion as much as possible, I think we can say that a choice for Android is all about price. Some people just have different priorities about what in life to spend a little more on to get the tool they want for the use and value they expect to get out of it : for some, that’s their car, sports-gear, or coffee-maker; for others, it’s their phone/tablet/laptop/desktop.

      • klahanas

        “I think we can say that a choice for Android is all about price.”
        No it’s about choice, which subsumes price as but one attribute.

      • Kizedek

        The point being, “Android is as much about price alone, as iPhone is about design/fashion alone.”

        But while we are on the subject, you miss as usual that “choice” is a bit of a red herring. Everyone has all the choice in the world, of Android and iOS alike. You choose a smartphone out of all the choices available in the world, and for many people, that choice is an iPhone.

        Then the next time you want a phone, you choose again. And many former Android users choose an iPhone.

      • klahanas

        And those who choose an iPhone choose to have less choice thereafter. This is logically demonstrable, and we’ve had this conversation ad nauseum.

        Yes! You can choose to live in a country with elections or you can choose to live in a country that’s a (supposedly) benevolent dictatorship. Thereafter should you choose the benevolent dictatorship, you will have less choice.

        iOS device OEMs: 1
        iOS Stores: 1
        iOS Software Controllers: 1
        iOS recourse: None

        It’s like all AOL all the time…

        Fashion is not logically demonstrable, it’s subjective.

      • Kizedek

        We’ve had this discussion before. Such is the nature of choice. And, again, “choice” is more subjective and either restricting or enabling depending on different contexts and criteria.

        You can choose a car with an internal combustion engine over an electric car, and thereafter have more choice of filling stations or repair shops. No kidding.

        But you make the choice in the first instance on the fact that you will be sitting in the car for a good portion of each day, actually driving it (and hopefully not sitting in stinky filling stations, or garages for maintenance).

        For example, many iPhone users just want to make as good a movie on their phones as possible. I don’t care about the “freedom” to buy the same crappy editing software from 10 different stores, if the iPhone is letting me get out there and create an awesome movie: that ability to shoot and create an awesome movie easily is what gives me my freedom to express myself.

        It’s a tool, after all, remember. It should be good at the jobs I want to do with it, not just part of a wider, “freer” system that is theoretically good at making up for its shortfalls.

        Yes, there are trade-offs. But AOL is a bit of a straw man as usual, because it was more about a portion of the web and the iPhone was the first phone to give a decent browsing experience (and it is arguably still the best browsing experience, and preferred by enterprise over Android because it is more secure).

        I want to go to the whole web; I don’t really want to go to every possible Android App store (and I am sure most Android users don’t either — because in other arguments you turn around and say that people do so at their own risk).

        Again, it is the difference between sitting in the car and enjoying that, or “enjoying” the fact that you *could* pull into every filling station (which you won’t without their rewards card), or into every stinky garage for regular the maintenance you will be more likely to need on that vehicle (but which you won’t want to without a recommendation from someone you trust).

      • klahanas

        No straw man about it. AOL was better because you could enter and leave at will, on the same hardware. A censored device is only a portion of the possible. Like I said, I agree you have a choice to enter. Once in your choices are limited. That’s just math.

        You can tout the virtues of the benevolent dictatorship, it does not change the fact that you’re subjugated.

        I enjoy the car too, I also have more brands of car to chose se from, I get to pick what the radio plays, where to get gas and which passenger road and neighborhood to visit. You are only being allowed to visit the large, but gated community, but that’s less choice.

      • Space Gorilla

        Ever the drama queen.

        verb (used with object), subjugated, subjugating.
        1. to bring under complete control or subjection; conquer; master.
        2. to make submissive or subservient; enslave.

        Go sell crazy someplace else.

      • klahanas

        I defer to Mr. Dediu regarding somewhere else. You have no authority.
        I wasn’t even speaking to you, but since you insist…
        If I were selling crazy, I sure wouldn’t be knocking on your door, you’re well stocked.

      • Space Gorilla

        Apple offers a closed and regulated experience which works very well for some, but for some users like you that model doesn’t work. And that is fine, choose what works for you. But to paint that as a dictatorship and to say those of us who choose Apple’s offering are subjugated only makes you look silly. That’s your choice though, if you want to present yourself as ridiculous that’s fine.

      • klahanas

        That does not change what I said. You are subjugated, literally, as are your software providers. What you are allowed to do with your device is under other’s control. You may like that, but it doesn’t change the fact.

      • Space Gorilla

        Excellent choice 🙂

      • klahanas

        Retracted due to lack of desire for BS.

      • Space Gorilla

        Too late, you wrote:

        “How is Stockholm this time of year?”

        A reference to Stockholm syndrome, defined as “feelings of trust or affection felt in certain cases of kidnapping or hostage-taking by a victim toward a captor.”

        So you’ve said people who choose Apple are part of a dictatorship, are subjugated, and are hostages suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

        I’m more than happy to continue this discussion. Please, do go on.

      • klahanas

        No. Just you.

      • klahanas

        By the way…you’re not wanting to be able to buy crappy editing software from 10 stores is not impeded. Stick to Apple’s store. That’s how choice works. Except, like I said, you make a choice in the beginning and subsequently are confined to whatever you are allowed to do. You see choice as a burden, fine, then “don’t watch that channel”, don’t impede me from watching it on my otherwise identical unit.
        On the other hand…If you want to buy software that lampoons public figures, duplicates functionality, has confederate flags, etc. (not passing judgement) you should be able to shop at iOS App stores that offer them.
        (Keep in mind I’m a liberal, just protecting my right to be hit on the head and suddenly want those things).

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Choice is also subjective. It all depends on what you consider choice. Android itself is still one OS. There are kinks applied by the vendors, but all of that is window dressing. You’re fundamentally in a Google ecosystem, whether you like it or not. And google has been tightening the noose on that with every iteration.

        So if we abstract it out like this:

        Device: latest Qualcomm Snapdragon, 4GM of RAM, large display …. substitute any vendor as the manufacturer …. they’ll all offer the same. So Android Device vendors: 1

        Android App Stores: 1 (Google Play)

        I have no idea what you mean by “recourse” but in a literal sense, you have none with Android. With iOS, you do have a support network, from phone lines to Apple Stores. With Android you don’t have none of that.

        This is NOT at all like AOL …

        There is nothing that’s logically demonstrable other than math … you’re talking about “choice” and phones …. there is so much subjectivity there, you can’t start with logic.

      • klahanas

        First of all…there is absolutely no doubt even by the most fanatical partisans that there are alternate App Stores on Android, so I suggest you get informed. Even if there were none, including no Play Store, you can sideload. So that point is most definitely dead. Strike one.

        It’s not at all like AOL, AOL was more free, because AOL did not force you to stay within their curated confines. You could enter and leave AOL on the same hardware. Strike two.

        There is no recourse in the ecosystem, all Apple decisions are final, until Apple chooses, if Apple chooses, to change them.

        Finally….how about choice, within the ecosystem, on where you choose to give your money? Strike Three!

        There is absolutely no subjectivity, or even ambiguity in any of those points.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Hmm …. I’d say it’s neither. In fact, when you look at any segment of the Android market, all the phones look the same, typically use the same components, and are priced the same. So it’s an illusory sense of choice/competition, where there is none.

        This is identical to the PC world; if you’re interested in a midrange laptop, all the offerings from HP, Dell, Lenovo, and Toshiba are going to be nearly the same, because the components are commoditized, and so is the OS …. so there is no differentiation other than price, of which there is little.

        This is pretty much the state of Android phones. All the flagships have the same chipsets and features, and screen sizes. All the “less than flaghships” are again inline with one another. And the low-end is the same too. Of course you’ll get the weird oddball things here and there, but most people are going to settle between Samsung, LG, Sony, HTC and maybe one more vendor. Of those “respectable” Android vendors, they all copy each other furiously. This is like the 1990’s of the PC world. A perception of choice, but in reality, you’ll always get the same thing … back then it was Intel/Windows, and now it’s Qualcomm/Android.

      • klahanas

        And within Qualcomm/Android there are multitudes of devices with varying price points and features and different companies so that I have more choices of how and where to spend my money.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        Only the top two actually. Everyone else is losing money.

      • BMc

        You are right! Apple results today prove your impeccable analysis…

      • obarthelemy

        iPhone sales up 2% y/y… Well at least they’re no longer down, but market grew faster than that.

      • Space Gorilla

        You conveniently left out Apple’s guidance for next quarter. You’ve been selling Apple doom for years, with essentially the same story. Here’s obarthelemy in 2011:

        “The way Apple disrupts is always the same: take something nerdy and not user-friendly, and make it chic and easy-to-use. It *is* innovation, but they’ve been doing the same “innovation” (PCs, than MP3 players, then smartphones, then tablets) for ages now. My guess is: that specific innovation is running out both of new markets and of space within each market, and the competition is getting wise to it… Historically, all Apple products have been progressively marginalized: Apple II, Macs, even iPhone is losing share already.”

        You’ve actually been selling that story since before 2011 and I’m sure with five more minutes of searching I could find an even older snippet, but this will do.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        He’s used to being a punching bag for intelligent comments. Oh well, every forum needs a clown, and he sure makes good one.

      • BMc

        Try to keep your ADD in hand. The article you are commenting on was the iPhone 8. The media meme was that it was not selling well – that the iPhone 7 was selling better. The results and executive commentary (which is on the record and cannot be false) is that the iPhone 8 series were the best selling iPhones since introduction.

      • obarthelemy

        Try to keep your imagination in check. How can you get that from those results ? iP8 was mostly unavailable over the period. Execs are paid to say whatever helps.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        That’s the dumbest thing you’ve said in this thread. If they say it on record, they’re on the hook. All execs have a fiduciary duty to shareholders …. they will not risk anything like that.

        You however, have no duty to anyone, and as far as we know are not paid for being here, so you say anything and everything to garner attention.

        iPhone 8 was only available for a few days, but you can always measure those few days against the past launches too … it’s not rocket science.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        That’s funny. The only Android vendor making money is Samsung, and they’ve stated publicly, they only make a profit on their high end phone.

        And 40-50% share for a single vendor with a limited device selection compared to the thousands of options other there is rather impressive …. not that much different than iPod’s dominance. iPhone carries the same mindshare as the iPod … perhaps even more.

  • klahanas

    Doesn’t one ecosystem favor one kind of user over another. I still use a PC, preferably a desktop, to do work, to create. I use tablets to consume, and phones mostly to, well…text and talk. With the exception of mobility, I find the PC superior in each and every way, with more options, more power, and lower price/performance.

    I can live without a smartphone, I can’t without a feature phone + laptop.

    • Shameer Mulji

      I’m kind of in the same boat as you. Although, I think with one more update / iteration, I should be able to make do with a cheap smartphone (iPhone SE) and an iPad Pro.

    • Glaurung-Quena

      Except that feature phones are far, far more frustrating to use for anything other than making calls. Ease of use makes for a compelling reason to get a touchscreen phone instead of a feature phone, even if I have to charge the phone daily instead of every few days. And thankfully if you don’t care about apps or having a supercomputer in your pocket, an older model touchscreen smartphone with a good camera can be had for not a lot of money.

      • klahanas

        We agree if the phone is your only computer.

        Let me restate…

        Smartphones involve many compromises as computers. Other than mobility, they are inferior to laptops and desktops, as computers, in every way. Mobility being small size. Everything else would be compute functions.

        If I were to only have one computer…, it would be a laptop and I would use a feature phone only for calls and text.

        But that’s me as a certain kind of user… one who wants a supercomputer, not necessarily in their pocket. It always turns out that I have both with me. Smartphone in pocket (might as well, need to have a phone anyway) and laptop in car or on a desk.

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        PC’s also involve many many more compromises as computers …. far more than smartphones. They’re also superior to laptops and PC’s in many ways other than connectivity. Especially for a Windows/PC user. Things like reliability, security, network access (4G), affordability, battery, etc. are all factors.

        It sounds like you’re a little more of a “classical” computer user, who prefers traditional computing. And that’s okay. I also have a desktop computer, but I do prefer to use my phone for a lot of things compared to my desktop. A lot of UI’s are far better designed on iOS than on MacOS …. Windows would not even be a consideration.

      • klahanas

        Name ONE thing, other than mobility, that a phone or even a tablet, can do better than a PC or that a PC cannot easily be adapted to do?

        In many ways, what is considered the forefront of mobile computing, is a decade behind PCs. This of course is due to size constraints. So…?

      • Shawn Dehkhodaei

        I will refrain from engaging in any discussion with you. After reading the rest of the thread, it’s rather obvious why you’re here. Enjoy your evening.

      • klahanas

        Your disciplined avoidance is appreciated.
        Have a nice life…

    • Shawn Dehkhodaei

      I would disagree with the premise of your argument. It’s not the ecosystem that prefers one user or another; it’s the user. The ecosystem offers a combination of convenience, value, reliability, performance, and ROI. Every consumer or user decides which ecosystem offers the best combination for their lifestyle.

      I personally have found the PC to be inferior in every regard for my usage for the past 25 years, and I’m educated in computers and programming, have done consulting, teaching, tutoring, etc. on computers for years. However, this is just me.

      I think what you explained above, is someone who prefers the phone to be just a device for voice communication, with occasional texting. Otherwise, any smartphone will offer a far better experience, for the same amount of money (a cheap Android phone is the same price as a brick phone). Maybe you like the fact that feature phones are somewhat disposable.

      • klahanas

        You missed the point, the phone for the functions of talking and texting, the PC for all other compute functions….

  • They’re judging a marathoner on their starting sprint. iPhone 8 will likely be on sale for 2-3 years, same as most iPhones, and I strongly suspect its glass body design will be reused in next year’s S model (or 9 model, depending on how quickly Apple can transition entirely to X design). So yeah, maybe it’s not off to a charging start, but it’s running a marathon, not a sprint. If Apple wanted everyone on the latest and greatest iPhone, they wouldn’t keep selling older iPhones. The judgment is more relevant to Android phones that are discontinued within a year or two.

  • I think because of iPhone X iPhone 8 is getting low attention

  • Actually I am also looking for this type of problem..I feel that performance of IPhone8 was not good.