The cost of making an iPhone may be as little as $220, meaning a $300-$400 profit for Apple.
Sparrow
simple_...@yahoo.com
none
> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
It has been determined that a magazine like BusinessWeek costs a mere 36
cents to make, but they charge $2.95!
What a ripoff!
Alan Baker
Sparrow <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
That kind of analysis can be applied to most consumer goods.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
MuahMan
"Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Mactards don't care. They gladly pay 5 times as much for real old technology
like is in the iPhone. As long as it's Apple they don't care what it cost
in terms of money or chinese lives.
ZnU
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article <1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> Sparrow <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>
> That kind of analysis can be applied to most consumer goods.
Yup. It's exceedingly silly to ignore R&D costs with a product like the
iPhone, which clearly has a massive amount of R&D in it.
In fact, as manufacturing gets cheaper in general, which it does every
year, more and more of the value in physical products is going to be
related to the intellectual property in them, rather than the physical
manufacturing cost. People are already used to this with goods like
software, which have next to no physical production cost already.
--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
Nashton
Imagine that. A company that's not giving away its products.
I can't get over it...
none
> In article <1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> Sparrow <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>
> That kind of analysis can be applied to most consumer goods.
yes, i was astonished when i bought a box of salt at walmart and it cost
89 cents! But when i got home and did some research, and that salt only
cost 6 CENTS according to iSupply!
DAMN, i've never felt more ripped off in my life!
Jim
> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
You think you're and eagle in the industrial world trying to make it
look as if Apple is ripping off the buyers of the iPhone, however being
a sparrow you aren't about to fly with eagles.
It's obvious you know nothing of the cost of OEMimg a product.
--
Jim
John Slade
"Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his money
are soon parted."
John
Bill Gates
> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his money
> are soon parted."
except that Apple has always provided value above and beyond media hype,
the iPhone ranks right up there with the microwave and pre-sliced bread!
use one and you'll see! so P.T. Barnum had a "gig", but Steve Jobs
provides the world great value, and will rank up there with Edison when
his day is done.
Jim
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
I'll be you think you provide better value in your cheap, cobbled
together Windows boxes you sell, even to the point of thinking you have
better components, spiffier cases and so on.
--
Jim
Alan Baker
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Would you care to point us to a similar breakdown for a Treo or a
Blackberry?
Kurt
"MuahMan" <Mua...@yahue.com> wrote:
Yes, let's hear your "details".
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
Kurt
"simple_...@yahoo.com" <simple_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/070626/devericks.gif
Is that the best you can do?
Mitch
<a...@b.com> wrote:
> It has been determined that a magazine like BusinessWeek costs a mere 36
> cents to make, but they charge $2.95!
>
> What a ripoff!
Right.
It's appropriate -- maybe even obligatory -- that we (as consumers) be
aware of big differences in cost and price.
But there are other factors taken into our personal accounting of
whether we're being ripped off, and most vary with our attitudes:
does it offer something of real value to me?
what are the alternatives like?
is the producer working hard to make it?
does the producer provide an expertise or valued qualities to it?
is the product being improved?
is the product working/lasting in the way I should expect?
does the product add anything more than what I bought it for? (and do I
value those provisions?)
does having this give me some advantage in another way?
does having it make me feel good in any other way?
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
If you think it's overpriced, don't buy it. It is that simple. If you
buy it anyway knowing the apparent difference in cost vs price, then
either you don't think it's overpriced or you simply don't care.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"And when exactly did all this happen?" "When we rewrote the
dictionary." (Capt. Sheridan and Julie Musante, B5 "Voices Of
Authority")
karlkr...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
>Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
$220 maybe for the compnents, which is hardly the same as manufacture,
plus marketing plus distribution, plus sales costs, plus invenory
costs.
George Kerby
On 7/7/07 2:33 PM, in article gURji.1119$m%.1013@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net,
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
It depends on which side of the ball that you're on.
No shit.
Simpleton.
George Kerby
On 7/7/07 8:58 PM, in article
labolide-5059A9...@news.giganews.com, "Kurt"
<labo...@spacegmail.com> wrote:
MuahMan is too busy kissing Bill Gates' asshole. Don't bother him with such
things.
KDT
> "Sparrow" <funnybunnyf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
How do you explain all of the Windows users buying iPods that have
similar margins?
John Slade
"Bill Gates" <i...@IEdiedtoday.com> wrote in message
news:im-ED7D12.13...@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net...
> "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
>> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his
>> money
>> are soon parted."
>
> except that Apple has always provided value above and beyond media hype,
In your OPINION. Why is it that the Apple kooks seem to confuse facts
and opinions?
> the iPhone ranks right up there with the microwave and pre-sliced bread!
The iPhone is a great product but so are the other phones like it. Apple
wasn't first with a smart phone and they won't be the last.
> use one and you'll see! so P.T. Barnum had a "gig", but Steve Jobs
> provides the world great value, and will rank up there with Edison when
> his day is done.
Edison invented things. Steve Jobs hasn't invented anything.
John
John Slade
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-6AFBE...@news.telus.net...
> In article <gURji.1119$m%.1013@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
> "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> "Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> > Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>> >
>>
>> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
>> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his
>> money
>> are soon parted."
>>
>> John
>
> Would you care to point us to a similar breakdown for a Treo or a
> Blackberry?
If they're overpriced like the iPhone is.
John
Alan Baker
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-6AFBE...@news.telus.net...
> > In article <gURji.1119$m%.1013@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
> > "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> >> > Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
> >> >
> >>
> >> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
> >> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his
> >> money
> >> are soon parted."
> >>
> >> John
> >
> > Would you care to point us to a similar breakdown for a Treo or a
> > Blackberry?
>
> If they're overpriced like the iPhone is.
>
> John
Here's a clue, John:
Something isn't automatically overpriced because you can add up the
price of the components and have the total cost come out to less than n%
of the price to the consumer.
There are lots of costs that go into things that aren't included in a
simple addition of the costs of the hardware. In the case of things like
the iPhone (or Treo, or Blackberry) there's a lot of R&D that has to be
paid for as well.
John Slade
"George Kerby" <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C2B65383.2FF32%ghost_...@hotmail.com...
Yep this is an opinion. My opinion and the opinion of others. However
I see products that do the same things that are cheaper, much cheaper.
John
Kurt
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
He would prefer that Apple dump their product. Ain't gonna happen. He
can buy Chinese for that.
Bill Gates
> Yep this is an opinion. My opinion and the opinion of others. However
> I see products that do the same things that are cheaper, much cheaper.
do you have an example to illustrate your point?
if not, you are lying.
Kurt
Bill Gates <i...@IEdiedtoday.com> wrote:
He would have to have a clue about actual product manufacturing. No one
up here does. I certainly don't pretend to and I've actually worked with
outsourcing prototypes.
Mitch
Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Yep this is an opinion. My opinion and the opinion of others. However
> I see products that do the same things that are cheaper, much cheaper.
Okay, I'm curious. Can you show me one?
First: high res is a deal-maker.
It's gotta have nearly what iPhone offers (320x480) to be even
considered.
George Kerby
On 7/9/07 7:07 PM, in article
l5Aki.45770$5j1....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net, "John Slade"
<hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> "George Kerby" <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:C2B65383.2FF32%ghost_...@hotmail.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/7/07 2:33 PM, in article
>> gURji.1119$m%.1013@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net,
>> "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum or
>>> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his
>>> money
>>> are soon parted."
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>> It depends on which side of the ball that you're on.
>
> I see products that do the same things that are cheaper, much cheaper.
>
> John
>
Sorry for your peyote vision. Do try to rejoin reality someday. Meanwhile, I
just watch my retirement fund grow with AAPLs everywhere...
George Kerby
On 7/9/07 8:49 PM, in article
im-068158.19...@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net, "Bill Gates"
<i...@IEdiedtoday.com> wrote:
Drugs. That is his answer. He has nothing.
MuahMan
R&D Expenses? Please, Apple steals all their technology and then uses
children slaves in China to build their products. I.E. Xerox.
George Kerby
On 7/10/07 4:21 PM, in article AP6dnSOUFbHCZQ7b...@comcast.com,
John Slade
> In article <pXzki.45767$5j1....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
> "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:alangbaker-6AFBE...@news.telus.net...
>> > In article <gURji.1119$m%.1013@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
>> > "John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Sparrow" <funnybu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1183806648.9...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> No shit. Apple and Jobs run under the philosophy of P.T. Barnum
>> >> or
>> >> whoever said, "There's a sucker born every minute" and "A fool and his
>> >> money
>> >> are soon parted."
>> >>
>> >> John
>> >
>> > Would you care to point us to a similar breakdown for a Treo or a
>> > Blackberry?
>>
>> If they're overpriced like the iPhone is.
>>
>> John
>
> Here's a clue, John:
>
> Something isn't automatically overpriced because you can add up the
> price of the components and have the total cost come out to less than n%
> of the price to the consumer.
Here's a better clue. Me saying an item is overpriced is an opinion so
you can't treat it like it's a fact.
>
> There are lots of costs that go into things that aren't included in a
> simple addition of the costs of the hardware. In the case of things like
> the iPhone (or Treo, or Blackberry) there's a lot of R&D that has to be
> paid for as well.
I know. However this has nothing to do with my opinion that the iPhone
is overpriced. You obviously don't think anything Apple does is overpriced
or wrong. You're just a parroting idiot and from now on, don't even bother
responding to me. Plonk!
John
Alan Baker
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
If it's obvious that you're treating your opinion as if it were fact.
You: the iphone is overpriced because its components only cost n%, and I
won't examine similar devices because they're not overpriced.
>
> >
> > There are lots of costs that go into things that aren't included in a
> > simple addition of the costs of the hardware. In the case of things like
> > the iPhone (or Treo, or Blackberry) there's a lot of R&D that has to be
> > paid for as well.
>
> I know. However this has nothing to do with my opinion that the iPhone
> is overpriced. You obviously don't think anything Apple does is overpriced
> or wrong. You're just a parroting idiot and from now on, don't even bother
> responding to me. Plonk!
Wow.
John Slade
"Bill Gates" <i...@IEdiedtoday.com> wrote in message
No I'm not lying and you know it. There are tons of smartphones out
there that play and take video. They also have web browser and music
playback. I'm not going to waste my time picking out some to inform the
clueless here. If you don't know they exist then you're stupid or don't know
what you're talking about.
John
George Graves
(in article <alangbaker-65D65...@news.telus.net>):
Alan. Slade eventually Plonks everybody who disagrees with him. Welcome to
the club.
George Graves
(in article <9S8li.19915$2v1....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>):
Yeah, there's the Nokia N95 at $700. Over $100 MORE expensive than a iPhone.
Slade, you're an idiot!
Todd Allcock
> Yeah, there's the Nokia N95 at $700. Over $100 MORE expensive than a
iPhone.
> Slade, you're an idiot!
And AT&T's own 8525, $200 cheaper than an iPhone and has 3G.
Hell, my old Nokia 3650 had a video recorder, a web browser and can play
MP3s. It cost me $100 (subsidized) three years ago.
Again, none of these features are NEW- some are just better implemented
today. Again, that's a good thing. "iPhones do x, y, and z better" is
an arguable point. "iPhone is the first/only phone to do x, y, or z"
isn't...
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Alan Baker
George Graves <gmgr...@comcast.net> wrote:
It never fails to amuse me when someone starts plonking people for
making cogent civil arguments.
jasonp
The iPhone does Visual Voicemail. What other phone does that right
out of the box?
-Jason
William Michael Greene
"John Slade" <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:9S8li.19915$2v1....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
How about this John? You don't buy an iPhone. There, feel better. Again I
can't figure out for the life of me why someone would hate a device so much
or for that matter argue with people that want/have one. If you don't think
the iPhone is worth the asking price, then don't buy one. Obviously there
are people that feel that it is worth the asking price, me included, but
what I can't understand is the wasted energy from people that don't want
one. Guess what, it's your choice don't buy one, get something else.
George Graves
(in article <alangbaker-DF67F...@news.telus.net>):
It's Slade's way. He always does that with everybody. He hates Apple and
everything - ANYTHING Apple does and if you don't agree, it's PLONK!
Actually I like being on Slade's plonk-list. I can still take him to task for
his stupidity and transparent hatred without him ever contradicting me. Try
it, you'll like it!
Todd Allcock
> The iPhone does Visual Voicemail. What other phone does that right
> out of the box?
You got me. None.
Wow- it just a few posts we've knocked the iPhone down from "only device
that can do x# of amazing things" to "it can do Visual Voicemail OUT OF
THE BOX."
Every other e-mail and .wav-capable phone on the planet has to be setup
for it first...
ANY phone with POP/IMAP or push e-mail and a .wav player can have it for
free after a trip to www.callwave.com.
So, VV is not really a "new feature" either. The "bubbles" are clever,
but the concept (e-mail an audio file of the voicemail) is readily
available. Callwave has been touting it with full-page ads in the trades
since the iPhone was announced back in January.
Even "dumbphones," without e-mail or audio players can have the TEXT of
the VM message SMS'd to them within seconds of the VM message being left-
a sort of "poor man's VV."
Many of these posts do illustrate, however, how exactly RIGHT Apple was
about the cellphone market- obviously a lot of these "new features" of
the iPhone ARE too difficult to use, since many of us have already had
many, if not most, of the iPhone's capabilities and didn't even know it,
or at least how to exploit them! Look at "none" for example- he thought
Google Maps was an iPhone "first" and I'll bet his prior phone was
perfectly capable of running it. (Heck- even virtually all "free" phones
support Java, and therefore GMM!)
It'd be interesting to know what percentage of iPhone customers upgraded
from devices that already possessed many of the same capabilities.
das Megabyte
take those $220 in components and combine them to create a smartphone.
I'm guessing you couldn't (I couldn't).
Which really makes that $380 a service charge you are paying Apple to
assemble them for you. Whether or not that service is worth it depends
on your requirements. If your requirements could have been met
completely by someone else for less, then you will find the iPhone over
priced for your needs.
In absolute economic terms, the iPhone is only overpriced if it cannot
be sold for the price asked (see: Playstation 3). This is obviously
not the case; Apple is selling tons of them. Eventually, the demand at
this price will dry up, and Apple will lower the price.
That isn't "over pricing." It's economics, it's psychology. New stuff
is more expensive because the stupid idiots who find satisfaction in
owning devices that meet their requirements will pay more.
I actually have, in the past -- in the early part of the decade I
bought a series of pocket pcs, the cheapest of which was $600 and the
most expensive over a thousand with modem and wifi costs added in, and
was unimpressed by each. The software didn't respond well to input.
Using them was a chore. They all got flipped on eBay to help purchase
my first iPod.
Remember: requirements for any product don't just include WHAT the
device does, they include HOW it does it. The iPhone does what it does
very well, in almost all cases better than any phone on the market
(smart or not). Using it is fast and enjoyable and involves very
little hunting, very shallow menus and communicative, usually intuitive
interfaces. Sure, there are imperfections on a 1.0 device, but on this
one there are precious few.
I hope they enjoy their $380. God damn did they earn it.
dasMB
Kurt
Todd Allcock <elecc...@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
> It'd be interesting to know what percentage of iPhone customers upgraded
> from devices that already possessed many of the same capabilities.
I'll be running, not walking, from my Treo at end of year. I know many
fleeing Backberry, though the not the ones who have employers footing
the bill. They'll get an iPhone for personal use.
none
> Look at "none" for example- he thought
> Google Maps was an iPhone "first" and I'll bet his prior phone was
> perfectly capable of running it. (Heck- even virtually all "free" phones
> support Java, and therefore GMM!)
>
> It'd be interesting to know what percentage of iPhone customers upgraded
> from devices that already possessed many of the same capabilities.
but you are missing the point. NO phone had the full version of Google
Maps, much less the one specially created by Google and Apple for the
"iPhone". The phones you are talking about are just pulling up
maps.google.com
that's a HUGE difference.
Todd, your main problem is you don't understand how well the iPhone is
conceived. You are very much like a PC person saying Windows is just
like a Mac! So everyone is laughing at you on this subject.
Get real, the iPhone has many brand new features no other phone has ever
had, and all the current features work better on the iPhone than on any
phone.
Have you even used one? I bet not!
Todd Allcock
> Todd Allcock <elecc...@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
> but you are missing the point. NO phone had the full version of Google
> Maps, much less the one specially created by Google and Apple for the
> "iPhone". The phones you are talking about are just pulling up
> maps.google.com
No, they're not. Google creaged three versions of GMM prior to Apple's-
a java version, a Palm OS, and a WinMo. All have GPS support. Does
iPhone's? All integrate into the phone's contacts and dialer.
> that's a HUGE difference.
Not really- each was customized for the strengths or weaknesses of each
platform. That's why I assume they left GPS support off the iPhone
version, since the iPhone reportably doesn't support a bluetooth GPS.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. (My three year-old $99 Nokia 3650 can do
GMM with GPS.)
> Todd, your main problem is you don't understand how well the iPhone is
> conceived.
Sure- it's the same as an iPod- adapt existing geek technology for non-
geeks. A great marketing concept, and from what I see, an excellent
execution of it. YOU don't seem to understand I don't dislike the
iPhone. I think it's neat. What upsets me is that Apple, AT&T, or both
almost seems to have intentionally gutted it. It's so close to
excellence that it's flaws stand out, like a large clear diamond with a
big fat occlusion in the center.
Why no flash? Why no BT serial or DUN profiles? Why no 3rd-party
software? Why no document editors? (Which wouldn't be a flaw with 3rd
party support!) Why does changing SIMs kill it's iPod functionality?
> You are very much like a PC person saying Windows is just
> like a Mac!
No, I just understand technology and marketing, and understand the
difference between them. I don't think "Windows is just like a Mac." I
think a Windows PC provides better value than a Mac for how I use it.
I'd probably buy my mother a Mac- it's more intuitive, and safer from
"pilot error" for a newbie. Myself, I started with DOS (and pre-DOS)
OSes- Windows isn't particularly difficult for me.
> So everyone is laughing at you on this subject.
Proper capitalization... you're learning.
> Get real, the iPhone has many brand new features no other phone has
ever
> had,
Yet no one seems to be able to tell me what they are- because the ones
you and everyone else point out have existed before! (Other than "multi-
touch" and the accelerometer, which while nifty, don't do any "work."
> and all the current features work better on the iPhone than on any
> phone.
Except dialing a phone (my WinMo phone shares this defect as well!) A
regular 12-key push-button interface is still the ideal dialing method.
> Have you even used one? I bet not!
Not yet. I have no interest in owning one, and only VERY slight interest
in buying one for my wife, which is negated since Cingular doesn't work
where I live, so I'm waiting for the hoopla to die down before I waste a
salesperson's time in showing me one.
You may have used an iPhone, but you don't seem to know much about any
other phone if you still think Google Maps is plowing new ground...
Tinman
"Todd Allcock" wrote:
>
> No, they're not. Google creaged three versions of GMM prior to Apple's-
> a java version, a Palm OS, and a WinMo. All have GPS support. Does
> iPhone's?
Yea, assisted GPS. You "assist" the iPhone by telling it where you are (no
joke).
--
Mike