With a $1k Price, Apple's iPhone Crosses a Threshold - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/10/technology/apple-iphone-price.html <comment><USER3> If we take a look from a Global Perspective, US has the cheapest iPhone ( All prices excluding sales Tax ), and everywhere else had it more expensive. i.e The $1K Prices may be making a big waves in US, but elsewhere in the world they have been paying that much for an iPhone already.

And in terms of iPhones / Population / Apple Store, the US has it most. While in Japan 60% of the Smartphone are iPhone ( i.e Higher the US usage ) they have less then 10 Apple Stores. And it is the same everywhere else, which means any mark up in a certain countries has nothing to do with its Operation with in, and more to do with a Sales Tax, Global Pricing structure.

For Example, HongKong used to have the cheapest iPhone around the world, it was priced the same as US and because there are no Sales tax, it was 10-15% cheaper. Making HK the trading ground for all of SEA region or mainly China. ( Hence Tim Cook continue to blame HK market is more of a delusion rather then fact. ) Around iPhone 5 Apple started to put up additional $100 USD to ALL iPhone price in HK, as a way to combat the black market trading, and if everyone else where making money of it, why not keep the profits itself?

What has all these got to do with $1K iPhone. Well Apple already knew certain people are buying at those prices, again why not make a product that fit those segment? And to re balance the prices across the Globe?

And we have known for long there is no way to make the cutting edge devices every 12 months and ship 200M+ of it. They will need a product that only 10-20% of those 200M will buy, and have the best technology in it.

And mind you, shipping cutting edge technology to 20-40M user a year isn't any easier then the 200M+ iPhone.

<comment><USER4> > _US has the cheapest iPhone_

It is interesting to note among Developed countries, the US has the cheapest _everything_.

Cars, computers, building materials, clothes, TVs. You name it, it is cheapest in the USA.

It is interesting to note this is because people in the US have much less disposable income than people in other developed countries. Companies can charge higher prices in other developed countries because people have enough money to pay it, but they can't in the US.

<comment><USER5> Really? To me it seems like the US has a higher disposable income per household (after taxes) [1]:

US ~41k, Switzerland ~36k, France ~30k and Germany ~32k

[1]: [http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/](http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/)

<comment><USER6> In Argentina and Brazil taxes are so high that it's often cheaper to travel to the US just to buy a laptop like a MBP (for instance, the cheapest touch bar model is about $3k USD). And to give some perspective: the average salary over there is ~10 times lower than here in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This reminds me of the arguments about whether popular bands should raise ticket prices on the one hand, or create the conditions for ticket scalpers on the other.

Let's say Apple wants to be as innovative in hardware as a company like Essential – and therefore use components or manufacturing processes that aren't available at the scale of tens of millions per quarter. What should Apple do?

* Not innovate. Leave this for smaller companies; wait for the price to come down. Risk: lose market, engineers, and ability to build competence, to other companies.

* Release in limited supply at a low price; leave the surplus to rent seekers (scalpers). Risk: Leaves money on the table; insert middleman in relationship between Apple and (ultimate) customers.

* Release in limited supply at a low price; attempt to control scalping by limiting sales per customer and locking phones to the original purchaser. Risk: Complicated mechanism that people will hate.

* Charge a higher price, in order to set demand to supply. Risk: Bad image; magnifies effects of wealth inequality.

<comment><USER8> Couldn't they also invest some of their massive cash reserves into production and R&D?

<comment><USER9> Yes but I don't see how that would affect their pricing strategy?

Cash reserves make it easier for them to make a riskier play into the luxury market. But in the long-run the reserve is only a temporary fallback not a sustainable model.

Pushing the price up makes it easier to play with the price margins and add more expensive parts.

It could also be fueled by the output of their R&D but they could also see the value proposition they offer as justifying a higher price from entirely non- functional aspects (ie non-software/hardware innovation), just merely the emotional draw of the product via design and branding. The measure is whether people still want the product as much rather than whether it does x & y better than the competitors.

People tend to discount the utility of emotional appeal and the connection people have to the products they use daily. Instead focusing on CPU speeds or raw feature comparisons.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> A lot of people just get the best iphone every 24 months (e.g. rich people, or people who have a generous smartphone policy at work). Having a model that gets another couple of hundred bucks from those people is pretty clever I think.

This is basically the S-class phone (To make a car analogy, because that's what we do). The S-class Mercedes costs twice as much as the "Normal" E-class, and each time they launch a new model, it contains the most exotic and expensive new gadgets. It's sold to the _very_ price insensitive. This offloads a lot of the R&D costs of these technical gadgets to the S-class customers. The following year, their E-class (Which is upscale but not a super luxury car) sees most of those S-class features at a much lower price point.

I'm suspecting this is what will happen with a new, expensive iPhone. It will be a testing ground for new features, and if the features work they will be introduced at much lower risk and cost to 10x the number of customers next year. This year it's oled screens, facial recognition etc.

<comment><USER11> I also know a guy who made his living for many years repairing and reselling iPhones, who simply buys the top of the line as soon as it comes out and resells the old one to pay for it, at as close to full price as he can get away with. Since he always gets the most specc'd out phone available, treats it very carefully, always inside an otterbox, and is a pretty decent salesman, he usually gets his price. He also claims it as a tax write-off - <USER2> expense.

In that way I think he ends up paying maybe $200 every other year for his new phone. In the last 6 years I've spent WAY more than that on the Androids I used to get and break/lose every year or so. I've finally seen the light and got an iPhone myself and plan to adopt the same strategy.

<comment> GuB-42 A good strategy, however he is not really the owner of the phone. He is essentially renting it from the next buyer.

One consequence is that he has no option but treat is carefully, use a case, a screen protector, etc.. which is kind of ironic considering how much effort is put on the exterior design of the phone.

Selling the phone also has a non-zero cost : you have to find a buyer and make the transaction. In that guy's case, when he sells his own iPhone, he doesn't sell something else from his shop. And he has the advantage of being an experienced salesman and having a shop.

As for the tax write-off, sure, but I suppose that if you write off your phone as a business expense, you also need to declare the sale as business income. I doubt it is as straightforward as one may think. That guy, who is presumably a business owner, probably has an accountant to deal with such issues.

What I am trying to say is that that guy strategy probably works very well for him but how it will work for you is another story.

<comment><USER11> > One consequence is that he has no option but treat is carefully, use a case, > a screen protector, etc.. which is kind of ironic considering how much > effort is put on the exterior design of the phone.

Yeah, but I do that too regardless of whether I'm planning to resell it, because cracked screens are a pain in the ass and that applies to any phone.

> Selling the phone also has a non-zero cost : you have to find a buyer and > make the transaction. In that guy's case, when he sells his own iPhone, he > doesn't sell something else from his shop. And he has the advantage of being > an experienced salesman and having a shop.

He actually just sells them on facebook. He does have a shop, but he's not in the iPhone business anymore - he has a car dealership. Like I said, good salesman! He's the most active facebook user I've ever encountered, so he may be paying his "shop" rent that way.

I suspect the strategy won't work quite as well for me - but I think I can expect to pay the same $2-400 every 1-2 years that I have been paying, plus I get an iPhone instead of a cheap Android. I didn't think it would win me over, but it has.

<comment><USER12> I, too, like to avoid cracked screens the best I can – with reasonable precaution. I'm not going to wrap an already big phone in an even bigger case to make it a bigger nuisance every single day.

(I also don't buy the hassle of using screen protectors. I do not mind micro scratches all that much because I'm not trying to protect the resale value of a consumable item. I can put it in the same pocket with keys or many other sharp items if that's what's most convenient in a given situation. There is indeed a cost at trying to preserve any carryable item in mint condition.)

<comment><USER13> > I also don't buy the hassle of using screen protectors.

They're not really for "micro scratches", though - they're for when you drop the phone or otherwise catch the front with something heavy/sharp/etc. My last two screen protectors have saved my screen from damage - considering that's £30 of outlay compared with ~£270 for a new iPhone 7 screen _each time_ , I would say they're vital.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Not excusing the price, but people these days spend multiple hours a day on their phones. Phones are as important as cars for example. How high prices can go ? Even higher imo

People are ready to pay for expensive cars for a better experience and higher "social standing". Phones are not that different in this regard

<comment><USER15> > Not excusing the price, but people these days spend multiple hours a day on > their phones

That's my reasoning when I buy a new computer. I can buy a MBP for $2000, use it for 3 years and sell it used for $1000. $30 a month is a bargain considering I use it between 5-10 hours a day. I may pay a mac a little more (20%?) than the competition but it's worth it considering it's subjectively _better_ (and objectively different, Mac OS / design / size -- arguably less and less so).

However, I'd never buy an iphone (or an expensive smartphone). Iphone users may disagree, but for what I've seen they provide almost the same experience as much cheaper phones (typically two times cheaper). Another issue I have with the price is that I don't feel confortable walking around with such a small expensive item. So easy to lose it or forget it.

<comment><USER16> Much of this logic is why I stopped buying new computers or phones. I'd rather use a $70 T440 that I've upgraded and know how to repair most everything on than haul a MBP that I'll need to get a pro to service, that also happens to have terrible ventilation. I mean, my last MBP literally cooked itself, comparatively this T440 has a giant grill that it rapidly removes heat through (though its 15w i5 doesn't make much).

<comment><USER17> You make it sound like the MBP is a weighty piece of burden compared to a dainty T440 (use a T440 vs. haul a MBP.)

And the part about cooking itself sounds like a manufacturing defect for which you should have gotten a replacement - in normal conditions it should just shut down, if temperatures get high enough that ventilation and throttling don't help.

<comment><USER16> My old MBP is heavier than my T440 by half a pound. I also never said that it shut itself down, just that it was consistently uncomfortably hot to be using, and I couldn't imagine attempting to use it to run a bunch of VMs like I use my T440 for.

I'm happy to have sold that MBP and put Apple far behind me, with the inflatable battery and high temps, it was on par with the $20 x100e I picked up last year (though that x100e was much lighter/smaller).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Previously, if you bought a Plus, upgraded the storage you also hit the $1000 mark quite easily.

Apple can't do much wrong: removed the audio jack did not hurt iPhone sales. The new mac book pro, ridiculously priced, a very 'particular' keyboard, was the fastest selling laptop ever.

If you see the reactions on let's say, The Verge, on any post regarding new Apple products - it's insane.

So I think Apple is still in a very comfortable position to keep on doing this artificial pricing for the time being, and for the foreseeable future as well - and get away with it. Their tandem of hard & software, though much flawed, still seems to be worth the premium price for many people.

They have me because of OSX but I won't stand another crappy laptop of them anymore.

<comment><USER19> My wife has one of the new ones with the "particular" keyboard. I think it's okay (the keyboard), but it's pretty noisy.

<comment><USER20> The "particular" keyboard is actually quite good to use. I like the way I type on this one.

However it's not reliable. A single speck of dust under the keycap then you have misfires. Keys get mushy for no reason, get stuck etc. My b key does not work reliably now for example.

<comment><USER21> Yeah I really like the feel of it, but my "n" key has stopped working twice already (within a month of purchase!) - I've "massaged" it back to life both times with firm pressing. That reminds me I need to order compressed air from Amazon. Can I bill that to Apple I wonder

<comment><USER20> I disassembled "n" a couple weeks ago, not just removing the keycap, but the entire butterfly mechanism. Cleaned up then reattached using glue. Works fine now.

As far as I can tell, the mechanism is too fragile / shitty.

There is a single metal dome below the key which acts like the spring and actuator. Butterfly thing is there to keep the keycap in place and distribute pressure so if you hit a corner it directs that to the dome thingy. That metal dome seems to have an issue with heat as most people report problems when the device heats up. Maybe it expands. If you look at the contacts below it looks like there is too little margin for error.

I think this keyboard is gonna create a lot of issues in the long term.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> After recently doing a bit of research into a new smartphone, I begun to understand why people buy Iphones, even if they're really really expensive. Firstly, you can explain it away financially with monthly payments, like any phone through a provider, but the biggest pain point I had is proven reliability. Take any popular Android phone, and you'll see a history of unsolved hardware problems from the manufacturer, such as boot loops. I can't afford to have my phone just 'break' itself and have to deal with my provider or some such nonesense. It was a real problem looking through dozens and dozens of different phones and knowing that each one of them tried to re- invent the wheel in some way that will probably break.

In the end, I settled for a Moto Z Play, at the recommendation of a programming blog, and that it had excellent reviews on the outlets I could find it. But, even with that, I accidentally bought an international version from Amazon unknowingly until I tried to purchase accident protection from Motorola, and they had to direct me to Indian support, which their phoneline was offline for all the times I tried to call. After ordering the proper U.S. version through motorolas site, though, everything has been fine. But thats a lot of technical stuff and throwing direct money (no monthly payments) at a single item. I can understand why people would just go to their providers site, and order an Iphone after trying, or not trying, to do research into smartphones.

For reference, I was able to return the international version even though I had used it for a week or so, and once refunded bought the U.S. one. Motorola tries to provide a monthly payment mechanism through 'Affirm', but Affirm was... Firm in that I didn't have a checking account in my bank, because my bank gives it a different name (though still is a checking.). The main saving grace of motorola is that AFAIK, their accident protection can send me a new phone before I have to send a broken one back in the future if(when) it does break.

And after all of this, still no 4G on it, because AT&T doesn't do that unless you have an 'AT&T' phone IMEI supposedly.

<comment><USER10> > proven reliability

This. I buy iPhones because I know that every released version will be bought by several tens of millions. I don't want a smartphone that only a couple of million bought. If something is wrong with it I don't want to find a few unhappy souls on some forum complaining about the same thing, and a manufacturer that's already pushing ten new models. The "Just works" feature is worth so much to people.

Obviously some of the the flagship android phones are also big sellers, and also tend to "just work" \- but those also cost about the same as the iPhone.

<comment><USER23> > I don't want a smartphone that only a couple of million bought

Not sure if serious ...

<comment><USER10> Dead serious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm wondering if Apple is going to come out with the equivalent of the Samsung DeX (1). I mean the new phone apparently has insane 6core SoC processing and wireless charging, which hints at a new kind of dock.

If I can replace a MacBook with an iPhone X + Apple screen then I'm definitely going to do that. Price point is higher compared to a single phone, but lower compared to phone + laptop. Solves almost all of the portability issues and makes app dev easier - which is where they want to push people anyway.

If they are going hard towards AR glasses, they need people to get used to having a single device for desktop and mobile. The glasses just become a peripheral at that point for early adopters.

1.[http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mobile- accessories/phones/d...](http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mobile- accessories/phones/dex-station---black-ee-mg950tbegus/)

</comment><comment><USER25> Nobody looks at a top of the line PC with the best graphics card(s) and say it's crossing a threshold. Everybody understands it's for a certain demographic.

According to rumors, they're still going to have various models and price points.

Also, iPhones are extremely economical because no other phones receive OS updates for as long. My iPhone 6, which cost $749 at the time, is coming up to 3 years old. It's still flawless, no speed issues or any issues. The only thing bad is that the battery isn't as good as before, but I still get through the day just fine.

I might upgrade this year just because "new & shiny", but I'll probably pass the iPhone 6 to family. And because it's still very good and receive updates, that means if I get 4 years of life out of it, its cost is actually only $375 when compared to other phones that stop getting updates 2 years in. That's really good!

<comment><USER26> I see your 3 year young iPhone and raise my 6 year old Motorola Defy. I bought it new in 2011 for about 1/4 of what the then-current iPhone would have cost. It still works flawlessly, the battery is fine as well (~5 days of normal use on a single charge or ~7 hours of screen time). If the battery were to fail I could just replace it, no tools required.

Oh, the thing is waterproof and 'shock-proof' (although the latter is to be taken with a grain of salt, my wife managed to break the glass on hers after about three years).

In other words, it does not take an expensive iPhone to last longer than a contract period. Well-built phones can last a long time, much longer than the 2 years which most people seem to consider as normal.

<comment><USER25> That misses a key point I was making: OS updates.

Yes, I too have a Nexus 4 (bought in 2012) and it still works fine. But no more updates. I don't consider that on par with say my previous work laptop, which was also 3 years before I upgraded.

I also own a Moto E (2nd Gen, $60-ish) and bought a Moto G+ for my brother this year, but I can't count on them to receive OS updates for as long.

<comment><USER27> Okay, but why do we need "software updates"? If the phone still works and is able to do the job what difference does it make?

I had a Moto G for over 3 years that cost $150 in 2014 and which continued to work perfectly with zero updates (Android 4.4) during that period.

It finally died last month when I tried to recharge it on an USB cable that I wired backwards (on a motorcycle). Replaced it with a $120 Lenovo that's fantastic, does everything I could think of and more.

I think people who are ready to buy an iPhone for over $1000 would in fact pay any price; Apple should try to sell those for $2500 and see what happens.

For the rest of us, a $120 Android phone is more than enough.

<comment><USER28> > Okay, but why do we need "software updates"? If the phone still works and is > able to do the job what difference does it make?

Yes, maybe not updates as such but we certainly need security patches. Any network connected device does and phones are more connected than most, frequently sharing networks with strangers or friends that aren't tech savy enough to keep their environment secure..

<comment><USER29> Most of my family members (ie. >70yo. non tech folks) skip all update altogether, security or not. The argument is that updates introduce features changes which bother their experience and force them to figure out where everything is.

In layman terms, security updates are seen as trojan horse for larger updates they don't want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> If those new Nokias start being sold in my neck of the woods (Western Canada) I think I will pretty much just stop bothering with smartphones and just go with that compromise.

If I'm being honest with myself, I just need a damn phone and an ok camera. The rest are frivolities.

I can just continue using my table for the rest.

<comment><USER17> If by those new Nokias that aren't smartphones you mean the new 3310s (because Nokia also makes Android phones now,) you should be weary - the camera isn't exactly ok, not by modern standards, and most importantly, they only work on GSM (2G) networks that are being phased out in a lot of places.

<comment><USER31> > they only work on GSM (2G) networks

Haha you're kidding me? They shut down the 2G networks in Australia this year!

<comment><USER32> Actually, early reports look like they will be updated to (3G) when the phone comes to the U.S. market.

[https://www.cnet.com/news/nokia-3310-3g-us-launch-fcc- filing...](https://www.cnet.com/news/nokia-3310-3g-us-launch-fcc-filing/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Two immediate thoughts:

This is going to be for the hitherto-unavailable _third_ tier of new iPhone: we'll have iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X. I expect this is referring to the X. Which may well only be offered in a 256GB configuration. A jet black iPhone 7 Plus in 256 GB is $969 today. So this might not be a huge increase for the X. I fully expect 8 and 8 Plus models to mirror current pricing.

And second, we've seen this "high price" reporting with other releases, notably the Apple Watch IIRC. Reputable outlets were floating high prices, and Apple announced "normal" pricing at the event. Other comments here have talked about anchoring: this may be more of the same Apple marketing FUD.

</comment><comment><USER34> No one has mentioned the possibility of using UCB-C as a docking station. Phones are already powerful enough for the kind of work an executive does (email, word processing, spreadsheet). Now if their computer is in their pocket and they can plug into any screen at all they don't need a computer at all.

The progression of the smartphone is evidently to replace the personal computer and the iPhone X should be a step in that direction.

<comment><USER35> I think the iPad pro is more targeted for the kind of work that an executive does. Docking stations / plugging into any screens don't seem like something that has been well thought out and I don't think that Apple's strategy right now is to market to that kind of audience.

<comment><USER36> It's sad that Windows totally had the opportunity to own and drive that kind of market but it never worked out for them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Planned obsolescence is my biggest gripe with Apple and other brands that do this.

My 2012 iOS device is now stuck on iOS9. I wouldn't mind except they bundle web browser updates with the OS. This is wrong.

The web browser on iOS9 does not support javascript ES6 features such as the "Let" statement. Any web sites that use let statements will fail on iOS 9. I discovered this recently when browsing on my iPad3, 2012 model. Apple doesn't care, they just want people throwing their old hardware in the trash and buying latest product.

I understand why I can't have iOS10 on an iPad3, but the web browser should be given updates separately.

<comment><USER38> Apple have a lot to answer for, and there are a lot of flaws with iOS devices, but this isn't one of them.

5 years of updates for a smartphone is pretty good. From Android, I think only certain Sony phones even come close to that.

By now, the battery cells will be damaged, the CPU/RAM too slow or limited, the flash memory wearing out. Time for a new phone :)

<comment><USER39> If you run custom ROMs on Android that situation is currently better than anything - you can still get updates for a Galaxy Nexus from 2011. Xiaomi is also currently providing official updates for 4+ years on some devices.

The official situation should change too - with the release of Android 8 there is now a more defined layer separating the HAL from the rest of the OS, allowing updates to be pushed out universally.

<comment><USER40> Yeah I'll totally bet the farm on the hope that in five years shady_dude_1998 will upload a nice ROM for me on some kind of site that forces me to watch an add for 15 seconds first.

I'm not against the idea of customizing your phone with a custom ROM but let's not pretend that it's a genuine option for regular consumers.

<comment><USER39> I'm not suggesting that - look at big professional projects like Lineage, Paranoid and others.

I'd say it is a quite genuine option - you just need to know one person who can set you up once, updating is simple and streamlined.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Funny thing. We in India pay regularly close to $1000 (oh the irony there) for a regular iPhone 7 - and they sell a lot here.

<comment> King-Aaron Yep, Australia too.

 __iPhone 7 32 GB __

Australian price: AU$1,079 ... US Price: $649

<comment><USER41> No offence :P but we are paying > US$1000

<comment> King-Aaron No offence taken! That's pretty outrageous, do you know if they have a justification for that price in your country?

<comment><USER42> It's mostly due to custom duty on electronics and gadgets, which can be upwards of 25%

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> "The imaging system can then stitch the patterns into a detailed 3-D image of your face to determine if you are indeed the owner of your smartphone before unlocking it."

So I pay an extra $300 to save me the trouble of putting my finger on the touchID sensor? That doesn't sound like a compelling value proposition to me.

</comment><comment><USER44> $1k? Wow, they must have figured out a way to add the audio jack back!

It'll be interesting to see how this works out. I'm in the minority amongst my social group as an Android user, but I can't imagine many of the iPhone users I know shelling out $1k. But I'm sure there's a mid-range model. Right?

<comment><USER45> It says something about your social group that you even know that fact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> The $1k price might be easier to stomach if iPhone managed content as well as it used to. I've stopped using the apple ecosystem for photo + music management, and now find it isn't managing contacts well across devices any longer.

For all the truly amazing capabilities the basics are lacking.

<comment><USER47> I'm not sure about music, but what's wrong with the default Photos or Contacts apps? Contacts works fine for me, and Photos works very well considering I have nearly 9000 photos. Syncing over iCloud is also fine, between my phone and my laptop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Is the new iPhone _really_ going to be $999? I wonder if Apple are seeding rumours like this to make a smaller price increase seem more reasonable.

<comment><USER49> Or they seed rumors to test the waters of what people will accept. Based on this thread, it looks like $999 is acceptable.

<comment><USER50> Most people on this site are well paid tech folks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Apple's 1k pricing will be doing just fine as Samsung is also pricing Note 8 around the same.

<comment><USER52> I believe the Note is equivalent to Apple's Plus models.

<comment><USER53> Is it? I think the S8 Plus is the equivalent - unless the new iPhone comes with a stylus.

<comment><USER52> Ah, wasn't aware of the S Plus models. You're probably right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> The author of this article has soaked up the conventional wisdom about Apple's pricing. Yes, they don't sell cheap phones, and sure they make a healthy profit, but it doesn't then follow that the product is overpriced. The iPhone has always been an extremely high-quality product and has always been competitively priced versus comparable models from other phone makers. So why do they have the reputation of premium pricing?

This $1000 iPhone X may be nearly as expensive as a Macbook Air, but that's entirely reasonable: it's a far more powerful and sophisticated computer in a much smaller package. Why would you expect it to cost less?

<comment><USER55> Not extremely. Merely high quality. Numerous cases with broken buttons even on brand new devices, wi-fi failure issues, gps failure issues. Yes, it is anecdotal cases but so are all others for different brands.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> I don't know why this is such a shock to everyone. The iPhone 7 Plus 256GB was not much cheaper than $1,000. I guess because most people don't go for that model? Even so I'm not surprised at all.

</comment><comment><USER57> There has to be some technology to justify the price or we revert to the old Nokia model of adding some RAM, upping the megapixels and releasing a new model and we know how that ended for Nokia. Brand can only take you so far. Nobody thought a company as entrenched as Nokia could suddenly disappear, and they did.

The bigger issue is at the moment its just taking productive income from the economy that could drive real economic activity and job growth and dumping it in Apple's already inflated bank balance which they don't know what to do with.

</comment><comment><USER4> The first iPhone was announced at $599 in mid-2007.

That's $704 2017 dollars, and look how much more of a device you will be getting.

Seems perfectly find to me. If people want to spend it, of course a company will make it.

<comment><USER58> Competition is a hell of a lot better these days. A phone at 1/5 the cost will cover the same needs.

<comment><USER59> I voted with my wallet since iPhone 4. I was an early enthusiast with iPhone and owned the first model, as soon as it came out, and the next 3 models after that. But at some point it started becoming so expensive I was put off. I can afford it but I was just disgusted. I have gone through 3 Android phones since and now use a Nexus 6P, which is a very nice phone.

<comment><USER60> "vote with your wallet". I'll never stop being amazed at how readily americans buy into the "democracy = consumerism" equation. Or the number of things they happily apply that formula to.

I suppose that 'we're here to change the world' soda commercial isn't nearly as absurd when you consider the audience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> The thousand dollar iPhone is the BMW 7 series of iPhones. Apple at this point is constrained by their supply chain. They have the capacity to introduce new tech, but the tech isn't capable of being produced at the scale to put in a couple hundred million iPhones, so they put it into a more expensive phone and sell fewer of them. Then they put the tech that works into the regular iPhones a couple of generations later when the supply chain matures. Seems like a good long term strategy.

<comment><USER62> I've always thought they should do a 10k+ iPhone. Plenty of elites would buy it as a status symbol even if the hardware really wasn't any different.

<comment><USER63> I've seen premium gold-covered "styled" iPhones being sold for thousands by third parties.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> It's interesting how in this forum people are concerned more about functionalities that don't justify its price point. But not so much on the aesthetics which is what the regular consumer really cares about. For the average Apple customer, the bezel change is HUGE. It's enough to justify the 1k even though it's not an innovation or some crazy performance boost. People are definitely still going to buy it.

</comment><comment><USER65> I already paid $1,000 for my iPhone 7+ though it would cost $869 if I was living in the US (I don't know though if the prices in the Apple site are pre- VAT).

Apple next challenge is not making people pay $1,000 for an iPhone. People already do that. Apple next challenge is bringing globalization, breaking the VAT, and putting profits in safe havens away from the fiscal preys.

People already pay thousands, dozens and hundreds of them for luxury. Apple upping its price might have the reverse effect: People line up to buy the highest price iPhone because it is not "accessible for everyone". Apple always got your back with a cheaper version but you really want the expensive one otherwise you are out of line.

We are getting close everyday to the confrontation between IT giga-multi- nationals and the traditional countries/governments of the world. We are probably still too far from the real battle but everyday is showing more why these two are not friends.

</comment><comment><USER66> For $1,000 can it be durable as well as good looking? How about a serious IP (Ingress Protection - dust and water) rating?

<comment><USER67> Honest question, what does the rating actually mean? The Galaxy S7 was IP68 certified but did not survive immersion [https://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/samsung- galaxy-s...](https://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/samsung- galaxy-s7-active-fails-consumer-reports-water-resistance-test/)

This might be a case of under-promise, over-deliver.

<comment><USER68> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code) is a decent summary.

IP68 means absolutely no dust whatsoever and:

"The equipment is suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer. However, with certain types of equipment, it can mean that water can enter but only in such a manner that it produces no harmful effects. The test depth and/or duration is expected to be greater than the requirements for IPx7, and other environmental effects may be added, such as temperature cycling before immersion."

In the S8's case, the manufacturer specified conditions were "submersion in up to 1.5 meters of fresh water for up to 30 minutes", from [http://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/galaxy-s8/performance/](http://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/galaxy-s8/performance/).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> It isn't crossing a threshold. The old iphones and their "affordable" price tags was crossing a threshhold. Apple was dipping their toes in the middle- america Market in order to grab market share. And now they're returning to what they've always sold, overpriced gadgets aimed at a specific niche demo.

<comment><USER67> Can't it be both? Apple sells upmarket but also mid-market phones, like the iPhone SE. Features are introduced on the high-end models and then migrate down. Of course Apple will continue to compete in the mid-market range.

<comment><USER70> > iPhone SE

Which is the best phone I've ever owned -- Nokia N9 aside, anyway. Excellent size, great performance, latest updates and I got it second hand (but BNIB, was her insurance replacement for a lost phone) for $350AUD. I get to use iOS with a reasonably modern day chipset, an excellent camera, but for the cost of a midrange android phone. Excellent, really.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> No mention of a cell phone pushing over the bar of what constitutes a felony in terms of dollar amount. I'm in no way for raising this limit further, but I also don't think stealing a cellphone should be a felony.

Older articles, but they cover what I'm talking about: [https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/09/why-stealing- ip...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/09/why-stealing-iphone- felony/qgTlkhQ8AnMS7OO7xtsWmI/story.html)

[http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue- brie...](http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue- briefs/2016/02/the-effects-of-changing-state-theft-penalties)

</comment><comment><USER72> I highly recommend all web developers buy a crappy old phone like mine and use it often on their own sites. That would improve the mobile web tremendously, I think.

(I'm still running a 4-year old, super under-powered Android phone. I shelled out $150 for it when it was brand-spanking new. That was unsubsidized.)

</comment><comment><USER73> From europe > many people have iphone. The iphone 7 plus costs around 1000usd here already. Amazingly many poeple have it including people i know that are making around 1000usd month. It is amazing, they dont even use apps, just for calling and facebook.

I dont get it its like somebody in US buying it for 5000 usd.

But it is changing. With companies like xiaomi putting up phones for 100usd that do the same for those people and look nice... I believe apple is going to be going down if they increase prices even more. These people dont want second class iphone. They want THE iphone. If they cant afford THE iphone they wont buy the shitty 500usd one. They might aswell buy the 100usd xaomi then.

I think aple is not going right way with this.

</comment><comment><USER40> I think Apple hit a point where producing an exclusive phone with top features in every department wasn't really possible anymore at their scale. We've seen them stuck at 16GB for a really long time simply because upgrading all phones to 32GB would consume another whopping 15% of the SSD market. OLED screens in that quality and format aren't produced in enough quantities to put on every iPhone - yet. But people expect an iPhone to be the best of the best given the price.

So there's a new X line that will have all the best of the best and the regularly numbered ones below it will have more mainstream features / design and will be produced in greater numbers.

<comment><USER74> > OLED screens in that quality and format aren't produced in enough quantities > to put on every iPhone

Apple's scale is amazing but I don't really get this observation. Is this is because Samsung has been shipping OLED at Apple-level volumes for years, so they've already sucked up most of the supply?

<comment><USER75> It's that Samsung/LG don't have the production capacity to make OLED screens at the volumes Apple will need to put it on a mass-market phone.

To give you an idea of the discrepancy: Samsung's two flagship phones (S8/S8 Edge) sold roughly 12MM in their first quarter of availability (April-June 2017), while the current iPhone models sold 40+ million units in their third quarter of availability (same time frame).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> In the country I live in (France), most smartphone sales are packaged with a subscription and the price of the phone is hidden.

Is that an exception ?

Because I see why Apple wants to sell the idea of the iPhone as a luxury product, but subsidization runs opposite to luxury.

<comment><USER77> Most (all?) carriers in the US have shifted from subsidization to a leasing model (with ability to trade in your leased phone typically at 12 months).

However, it's still smaller monthly payments; few I suspect buy the device up- front.

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> First of all, Apple don't need to sell many of these models: We're all doing an incredible job for Apple discussing the price tag of an unannounced phone. That alone is worth millions and millions for Apple PR.

Nonetheless I believe they will sell lots and lots of these models: It will be a status item.

Moreover, in a lot of countries, most people don't but smartphones fully upfront to own them, but pay monthly with their phone bill. So, its not $1k or $1.5k, but perhaps $50 more upfront compared to other high end smartphones and another $15 monthly surcharge on the phone bill. Doesn't seem sooo incredible that way, isn't it?

</comment><comment><USER79> I have no idea what people do with $800+ phones. I'm on Nexus 5X (<$180), and it's perfectly fine, the camera is great, apps run just fine.

I doubt most of these people are doing phone based VR and play high end phone games.

</comment><comment><USER80> ...So?

I knew plenty of people who buy a new Android, priced anywhere from $400 to $700, every year, more often than not it was once every 9 months even.

So I might spend $1100 or so on the iPhone Pro / X / whatever the moniker is. But I'll use it at least 3 years.

Annual cost of owning an iPhone makes it cheaper than almost any Android.

Not everything is about upfront cost. iPhones get updated for 5 years and they don't start lagging in 8-12 months like almost all Androids do. If you don't bust it, you might sell it for 75-90% of its original cost even 3 years down the line.

Mostly philosophical article without much economical substance.

<comment><USER81> I disagree with this.

Although the iPhones might get updated for 5 years that does not make them fast. Each update makes the older device slower which at a point it becomes unusable. A 3 year old device just cant compare with the increase in features, how a newer device can.

But for Android, it all comes down to the provider. This has always been the issue. I have a Nexus 6 running 7.1 and working just fine. I could use it for another year if i wanted but it does show signals of getting old.

People used to change iphone every year as they did with Android. I believe that this is coming to an end and people will keep there phones longer as they become much more expensive (X:1100+, note8:1050, etc) and the increase in hardware is not that massive any more.

<comment><USER80> We both have anecdotal evidence so we can disagree all week without each of us being right globally.

I am yet to ever see a slow iPhone in my life though, anecdotal evidence or not.

Maybe you were looking at iPhone 5 or 5S. From 6 and on, they are quite long- lasting and many people hold on to them for a long time without complaints.

Nexus is not a good example from your side. It's more the exception than the rule. Have you looked at the wild landscape of most of Android land? Phones get abandoned in less than a year. That's the norm in Android.

Nexii and Pixels are the outliers.

EDIT #1: Nexus 6 should theoretically now be abandoned by Google in terms of new Android versions, same as 5X and 6P. Last two should have one more year of security updates though.

EDIT #2: "increase in features" in smartphones hasn't been happening in a while. It's been mostly rebranding of a little bit more battery-efficient SoCs, at least in Android. Apple is showing gradual increase in single-core performance, and I can't deny that my Mi 6 (using Snapdragon 835) is snappy as hell. So IMO you're half-right: people will hold on to devices for longer since they're very expensive now, but there's another half: many people, me included, feel the smartphone hype is over and that the OEMs have nothing to show except flashier displays, maybe faster SoCs, and prettier outer shells. Thus I want to buy a longer-lasting device. And that ain't any device in Android, sadly. I am not a huge fan of Apple but the durability and high performance retention (the point you're questioning) seem to be an accepted fact, so I'll go with them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> The OnePlus 5 grows ever more attractive, eh?

</comment><comment><USER83> Does the actual price matter? I thought about buying one outright when I bought mine, but it worked out more expensive than buying one on a plan, I can't think of anyone who bought their's outright

<comment><USER84> Personally for me and my usage in the UK, a mobile phone plan is more expensive over the course of 2 years.

Yes the initial outlay is more painful, but i find £25 a month much more palatable than £74 (for the same plan with the phone)

back of the napkin maths says the following; iPhone 7+ 128G (my current phone) - £819 phone plan (unlimited data - 600mins - unlimited texts) - £25/month Over 2 years - 819+600 - £1419

phone + plan (unlimited data - unlimited minutes - unlimited texts, closest to what i currently have) - £74/month Over 2 years - £1850

<comment><USER83> Yes I'm in australia and the maths has probably changed - plans are a lot cheaper now. Still I stand by my comment, a large percentage of iphone buyers don't look at the price, they look at the monthly rate - if the difference is $10 a month then it probably won't change things much imho.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER85> I'm surprised its taken apple this long to realize a phone is more of a fashion statement than any clothes/jewelry/car. Esp to the poor. They should of had multiple teirs to begin with.

</comment><comment><USER86> Outside the US the latest top of the line iPhones have been over $1k for a while now. I guess Apple figured if other people are willing to pay that much then why wouldn't people in the US?

</comment><comment><USER87> > From the iPhone's introduction a decade ago, Apple has always priced it as a > premium product — a more refined and polished alternative to the legions of > cheaper smartphones available in the market.

And not only is it priced that way, thats _actually what it is_ which is why in all likelihood I'm buying one tomorrow.

Every Android I've ever used has felt like cheap shit in my hands, and works like crap after 10 months or so. My current iPhone is knocking on 3 years old and works as well as the day I took it out of the box.

</comment><comment><USER88> The should just call it by it's price tag.

iPhone $1k iPhone $1.2k iPhone $2k ...

</comment><comment><USER89> I don't get what it is about the iPhone that people are willing to pay a premium for. Is it all just in the marketing?

I would not mind paying $1000 for a phone if it offered any additional value over my $200 Android phone.

But I cannot see anything better in the form factor of the iPhone line.

And for the software - I have an iPad and I hate the software. It is so restricted. You cannot even do basic tasks like download an mp3/pdf/whatever in your browser and then open it in the app of your choice.

<comment><USER90> So, why did you pay a premium for iPad when Android tablet at roughly half the price would give you the same functionality?

(btw I don't get it either. But I don't see anything special about iPad, hence my question)

<comment><USER89> Two reasons:

1) It had the best form factor these days. It was the lightest 9.7inch tablet. Nowadays, a Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 scores better.

2) iOS is a popular OS, so I wanted to have at least one device running it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> norea-armozel I can't see myself buying another phone after buying an iPhone 6 in 2015. I just don't see a reason to replace it until the battery can't charge anymore. By then I don't have plans on getting an equivalent phone. Maybe something cheaper but I think purchasing phones every two years or the like is bad from an economical standpoint. I'd rather spend my money I'm better food than a fancier phone but I'm weird.

</comment><comment><USER91> I wonder if the iPhone upgrade program will have these: [https://www.apple.com/shop/iphone/iphone-upgrade- program](https://www.apple.com/shop/iphone/iphone-upgrade-program) .

(I'm not affiliated with Apple. However, I do think that it's kind of neat that Apple has way for people to get the latest iPhone each year without having to buy it outright, or be locked to a specific carrier).

</comment><comment><USER92> I'd pay $1000 if I could throw it in to a wall without breaking it.

Until then I'll stick to buying previous generation hardware for 70% the price.

<comment><USER93> I hear you, I can't find a car I can drive through the bottom of a lake either.

<comment><USER92> I don't crash my car once a week.

<comment><USER94> But you throw your phone at the wall once a week? I think your problem requires a different solution.

<comment><USER95> How often do you remove your pants every week? Or pull your phone out of a loose pocket?

<comment><USER42> I've never had this problem. Perhaps I am more careful with my phone in general.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> The real expensive part in the US is the cell plan. Excluding the phone, the mainstream plans are $60+/mo with taxes. If you're paying $720 a year for cell service a $1k phone really isn't that much.

(I would never pay $60/mo but lots of people do)

<comment><USER97> Wow, I forgot how bad it was. I have unlimited data, unlimited calling/sms, and (as of recently) free roaming in all EU countries for €30/month ($36), with T-Mobile in NL. So that's $432/year.

A $1k iPhone on it's own would cost ~ $40/mo if you spread it out over 24 months.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> I fully expect that the high end phone will start at $1000 but why is NYTimes publishing this story as if it news? Apple hasn't published the prices of the phone and for now, the whole article is based on speculation.

</comment><comment><USER99> Price - yeah fine whatever.

My issue is I can't see the benefit I'm getting extra. My 7+ seems to be about the same really. Lifestyle wise this latest black rectangle is going to change literally nothing as far as I can tell.

</comment><comment><USER100> From the so far leaked rumors I don't see anything to justify the price. If anything there is a regression with the absence of TouchID. But I guess we will have to wait and see in two days.

<comment><USER101> >If anything there is a regression with the absence of TouchID.

FaceID fulfills that role.

<comment><USER100> Will it be as reliable and fast as TouchID?

<comment><USER102> TouchID is amazingly reliable and fast, unless your hands are sweaty or greasy at all. In this case, almost every single time I have to click the home button multiple times until it stops trying to read my print and show the pin prompt for manual entry. Even then, it'll sometimes register the previous click (which is supposed to just bring up the pin screen) as a fingerprint unlock attempt, and will attempt to fill in the pin again right in the middle of me manually entering it, making it fail 3 or more times before I can enter my pin.

I've tried disabling it completely in favor of the pin, but in all honesty the 90% of the time my hands aren't sweaty or greasy it works so much faster that I just deal with the 10% and keep it enabled.

These could just be sweaty guy problems, but I'm definitely looking forward to face unlock.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER103> This is a very good strategy in my opinion. The iPhone will be the Rolex of the smartphone market and purchased as a fashion item and a status symbol.

<comment><USER104> Finally!

/s

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> Aren't phones supposed to get cheaper every year?

<comment><USER106> They do, an iPhone 6s is cheaper now than when it was released.

<comment><USER107> lol

</comment></comment></comment><comment> Jean-Philipe AFAIR, when the iPhone hit the markets, they were coupled with pricy contracts, totalling easily north of 2k EUR in fixed costs.

</comment><comment><USER108> Another way to look at it:

$1000 for two years. After two years, sell the phone for $300-$400.

That's $25-$29 per month. Around $1 per day.

<comment><USER109> You can make that excuse for everything. I don't want to pay "Just $1 per day" on overpriced items. I'd rather pay $0.7 per day on a ok-priced item.

I hope all of this hostility from Apple will result in lower marketshare and a slow fade into oblivion. I use Apple products because they're the best, but if I have to spend $1.4k for a phone and $3.5k for a computer I'll hope MS and GOOG have somewhat caught up to the quality because it's getting tiring.

<comment><USER108> I wasn't making an excuse. I think $1 per day is quite a lot, especially when comparing it to a $200 phone. They are almost identical.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER110> As the Apple increases the price of the iphone, people purchasing it is becoming far less. Since the number of people purchasing the iphone decreases, increasing the prices keeps Apples profits up.

Apple is not an innovative company anymore, but trying to be a Bentley in the phone market.

</comment><comment><USER111> Why couldn't they build iPhones in Brazil? What happened there?

<comment><USER112> I didn't even recalled they wanted to make iPhones here, but this article [1] basically says that "its more expensive than building them in China" and that some tax incentive laws were being disputed by the World Trade Orgnization.

[1] [https://www.tecmundo.com.br/iphone/118381-decisao-foxconn- ip...](https://www.tecmundo.com.br/iphone/118381-decisao-foxconn-iphone- deixar-fabricado-brasil.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> This headline makes no sense. Apple has no $1k phone.

<comment><USER114> Keynote is tomorrow where it is rumored to be announced.

</comment></comment><comment><USER115> Is anyone planning on getting the phone at 1k?

<comment><USER116> Millions of people, most likely.

<comment><USER115> Any of us in HN though?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER117> What's wrong with people that they would pay $1000+ for a phone that is maybe only 5% better than a $200 one?

</comment><comment><USER118> iPhone has lost its glamour

</comment><comment><USER119> You may think this price is ridiculous, but iPhones are slowly dying for two to four generaltions already. The only people still on iPhone are the ones who consider it too hard to switch to Android (low IT skills), or the ones who feel some fan-like loyalty. The price matches that perfectly, exploiting the weak and stupid.

PS: Why do I call fans stupid? The company isn't 1% as loyal to you as you are to them. If you still continue to be loyal, it can't be a smart decision.

<comment><USER120> Eric Schmidt has said he uses an iPhone. Elon Musk uses an iPhone 7. Mark Zuckerburg uses a MacBook Air. Travis Kalnick uses an iPhone. Most people who I know that work as engineers at Google and Facebook in the US use iPhones. But sure, they are weak and stupid and you are enlightened.

The iPhone 7 which released last year is more powerful than the Galaxy S8. Android phones lag embarrassingly behind in terms of CPU performance, disk write speeds, and software updates. If those things don't matter to you, I suppose you could get an Android phone for the AMOLED screen(though the new iPhone is reportedly going to have that too) or customization.

But to say that the only reason people buy iPhones is because they're stupid is embarrassing, really. I mean Apple weren't the company that have customers refusing to give back a phone which literally catches on fire.

<comment><USER119> A) You don't know what an engineer is, obviously. So your examples had exactly zero impact. lol.

B) The Galaxy S4 with Android 2.2 is more powerful than the iPhone 7.

C) There are two reasons. Both may apply to you, though. Reality is really hard to accept, I know.

D) Macbooks are really good. That doesn't give any additional points to the iPhone, though. I use one myself and am happy with it. It is well designed and combines strong features from both Enterprise and Opensource world.

<comment><USER47> A) I am an engineer, and at my previous company almost every engineer (9/10) had an iPhone. You should also know better than to insinuate that Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, or Eric Schmidt aren't engineers, considering the companies they've created.

B) Citation needed.

C) What are the two reasons, specifically?

The biggest argument I hear about using Android is that it's customizable, but I would argue that 99% of people, engineers or not, wouldn't customize their phone enough to matter. I would much rather get an iPhone because, even disregarding or accepting the customizability argument, iPhones are less intrusive on your life (I don't want Google to know where I am at all times or know my phone habits), and get updates and work years after they are released. Those two _objective_ reasons alone are enough to warrant me buying an iPhone.

<comment><USER119> Look. Think about a guy. He stands behind a horse. The horse kicks him in the face. For most people this would hurt. But he doesn't process that feedback. How do you explain to him that it's a bad idea to get close to that horse from its back side?

If you can show me a strategy, maybe I can explain to you why iPhones are badly designed. it should be obvious by using it.

Examples:

a) you get a notification that you have a new mail, whatsapp message or similar. You open the app. Only then the App is able to actually start downloading the content. This is an example of Apps not really being able to work in the background. 80% of what you want to do with a computer you can't do with an iPhone.

b) The keyboard has no features to write more quickly, e.g. by swiping. Also the suggestions aren't learning from your input. This means each interaction is very painful instead of being done quickly.

c) Click on a Youtube link in FB or Twitter. It will not open the Youtube App, but it will open an app internal browser. From there you can manually redirect to the browser and only then you can open it in Youtube. There is no real event mechanism, or it isn't opened to App developers.

d) The costumizability results in you being protected by default, because App developers already have more freedom to provide sane defaults. Even if you never use customizibility yourself, you already gain from it.

<comment><USER47> Have you used iOS or are you making assumptions based on what you think you know? If it was obvious why iOS was badly designed then I wouldn't have to ask.

a) It depends on how the app works but in general you are right. But this is to save data, especially in cases where there are a lot of images. Some apps do download the content when it receives the notification as well.

b) Are you suggesting typing is that much more difficult than swiping on a keyboard? Even if that were the case, you can download a keyboard from the App Store that allows you to use a swiping motion on the keyboard.

c) That's more Facebook or Twitter's fault for not handling the same events as the built in browser, not the failing of the OS.

d) That doesn't make sense. You're protected because app developers have the _freedom_ to provide sane defaults? What about the bad actors that don't provide sane defaults or add malware? I'd rather trust the OS to enforce sane defaults than trust the app developer to, because at least the people that make the OS are generally competent, whereas app developers are more likely to not be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER121> I like paying $1,000 for a device like this because I want Apple (and competitors) to know I would absolutely spend $1,000 - BUT it had better hold up, perform beautifully, bring me something technologically compelling, and do some damn cool stuff.

At $1,000 sets a very high bar. Excited to see if they meet it!

</comment><comment><USER122> 1000 USD phone, still no audiophile option to listen to music. I am extremely disapointed with the direction Apple is going with all of this "we remove X because you do not need it anymore" approach.

<comment><USER84> I always thought the Audiophile option was an external DAC? Though the DAC that iOS devices have shipped with was traditionally quite strong.

I have an Oppo HA-2 and it works great with my iOS devices (though i use it as a portable amp for my work computer).

There's also the likes of Audeze who are shipping Headphones and Earphones with a Lightning cable DAC in addition to the usual 3.5mm TRS jack.

<comment><USER122> Quoting from the article I linked you:

>>Analysis & Recommendations >>As expected, the analog audio output of the iPhone 6S Plus is extraordinarily good. It has only >>half the distortion of the already extraordinary iPhone 6 Plus.

>>Apple has more smart people and more resources than any other audio company on the planet, so as >>we see when it comes to audio engineering, the iPhone easily outdoes many so-called "audiophile" >>products.

>>For enjoying music, you will probably get poorer performance if you waste your time and money >>with outboard DACs or headphone amplifiers; the iPhone already has the best there is.</comment></comment></comment>


Apple just told the world it has no idea who the Mac is for - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/charged-tech/apple-just-told-the-world-it-has-no-idea-who-the-mac-is-for-722a2438389b <comment><USER2> _Why can't you plug the Lightning headphones that come in the iPhone box into the new Mac? Why doesn't the iPhone come with the right cable for the new MacBook Pro? Why doesn't Apple make a screen that properly works with its own devices? Why did Apple highlight how great the Touch Bar is for Messaging, but didn't even port most of the new iMessage features to macOS properly? Do I have to carry two pairs of headphones now? How do I charge my Lightning cable mouse? Why remove the HDMI port, a standard that's still incredibly popular for plugging into TVs? Why remove the SD card, a popular slot for… creatives using cameras?_

Yikes. I mean... yikes. I hope Apple has some good answers to most of those questions.

<comment><USER3> I don't really believe there are good answers to those.

<comment><USER4> Probably the same one as the iPhone headphone jack, courage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'll give Apple a hint how to solve this conundrum.

a) bring back that key row, people prefer physical keys over touch-strips and -pads and -screens for a reason - you can use them without taking your eyes off the screen

b) for those applications where you'd benefit from a visual representation of whatever data you're manipulating the keystrip is rather limited in space, but fortunately nearly all laptops already include a touch-sensitive area under the keyboard...

c) ...so just put an OLED-display under the touchpad? Have it run iOS for ease of development, not that developing for iOS is easy but there are loads and loads of developers who already know the platform. Add some haptic feedback to make it usable eyes-off and for those who have bad eyesight and you've got your next 'amazing' gadget.

As an added bonus it should be possible to use any iOS device as a 'remote' for applications which utilize the touchpad-with-pictures. Call it DisplayPad and you're done for the next show.

The same could be done by Google (Android on ChromeOS or whatever comes after), by Microsoft, by... anyone, really.

</comment><comment><USER6> A user on reddit put it like this

>Apple used to be focused on making their devices better, now they're just focused on making them even thinner.

Think that is really accurate.

<comment><USER7> Thinner is one aspect of better and obviously not the only one. These machines are also faster, lighter (kinda important in a laptop), have better graphics, larger trackpad, a new screen that is much better, etc, etc, etc...

Like all products, they can be improved and compromising decisions had to be made during the design phase, but I find this Medium think piece really lacking in perspective and context.

<comment><USER8> >These machines are also faster...

And already a generation behind on the CPU front

>lighter (kinda important in a laptop)

Great, as long as the trade offs are reasonable (not convinced that they are)

>have better graphics

Yet still woeful in comparison to similarly priced machines from other vendors and, of course, OSX is a terrible gaming platform

>a new screen that is much better

Good

>etc, etc, etc...

What are those exactly? I can't think of anything to fill in the gaps, and we can certainly argue that taking away common interfaces is a bad move and the toolbar is little a gimmick.

<comment><USER7> Not a generation behind. Kaby Lake is still not available in the configurations these machines need. And even if they were, speed is comparable since the main improvement in KL is going to be video support.

Graphics are not only for gaming. Id say the Radeon cards they choose seem reasonable for the Macbook Pro line, pending further testing.

Lots of "etc": Much better sound, larger and more comfortable trackpad, faster memory and SSD, jump to Thunderbolt 3, better microphones...

Argue away, I think TouchBar is far from being a gimmick.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Really hits the nail on the head. This product is just confusing. It's not as if there aren't good things about it, but there are so many weird confusing decisions that it's like death by a thousand cuts.

It's baffling just to contemplate the number of new cables, dongles, and adapters I'd need to buy. I'd be shocked if it was less than $150 worth of _things that add no new value_.

I had planned to buy a new MBP this year. Based on this update I'll be waiting to see what they come up with next year.

<comment><USER10> > see what they come up with next year

Apple has a history of removing things (floppy, cd drive, ethernet port, firewire, etc) and not backtracking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Earlier post with over 280 comments:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12817332](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12817332)

</comment><comment><USER12> In The Hard Thing About Hard Things Ben Horowitz says there is two types of really successfull people in the business word: Chaotic visionaries and orderly executioners, called type 1 and type 2.

I think Apple is a perfect example for this, with Jobs having been the visionary and Cook the guy who implements these visions.

Horowitz stated that a company works only well with the visionary at the top. We can see how true this as Cook just is not creative. I am sure he works really hard and is really smart but he should have never gotten to where he is now. At first I thought he would only be a interim solution to manage Apple while they search for another creative genius but that seems not to be the case.

<comment><USER13> I thought Ives was the chaotic visionary now, with Cook the business leader. With such a string of success Ives has had I figure only a flop (imo like this) would give Cook the leverage needed for change.

<comment><USER14> I think it's one of two things:

1) Most of Apple design is now by committee, which is why the Settings in an iPhone are a maze of confusion, especially around iCloud. The iPhone was supposed to be easy to use. Maybe it still is as long as one pays for and trusts iCloud (didn't work out well for Jennifer Lawrence).

2) Ive isn't the the genius we all think he is. I think this is more likely the case. If I remember correctly, Jobs liked the "skeuomorph" design style (design based on the original object) but Ive did not. I do not think it is coincidence that iOS became much more "cartoon" looking after Jobs died. I personally do not like it. But I think it shows that Ive is in complete control. If he is, Ive is to blame why I have to provide tech support for iOS settings to my friends and family now. If you extrapolate this complexity to the rest of Apple, things are way off track from Jobs' vision.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> >The MacBook Air is dead, which is great news

I'm not sure why that is - partly because I've got one and like it. Also I guess now the Air 11" is gone we're supposed to but the 12" Macbook but it doesn't review as well - on the most obvious Amazon reviews the 11" has 81% 5* reviews and the new Macbook had 59%. It seems a shame that thin with few ports and shiny seems to be prioritized over user satisfaction.

</comment><comment><USER16> I honestly don't see how all this whining is justified, except for the fact that you need dongles to hook up your shiny new iPhone and EarPods to your MacBook.

• People wanted Skylake, they got Skylake.

• They got faster GPU and I/O and great battery life. The numbers on these are impressive, especially the I/O.

• They got 4 ports of the fastest and most versatile interfaces for external devices ever. The removal of all other ports is really no worse than when the VERY FIRST iMAC went USB-only back in 1998! [1][2] We all see how the rest of the industry followed, as it will again when everything becomes USB-C.

• The Touch Bar is actually a cool new input device that brings context- sensitive multitouch to macOS without bastardizing the traditional desktop UI as Windows does. You wanted innovation, you got it. What do people expect to happen to laptops at this point anyway?? I don't see any good alternative ideas being offered.

• Lastly, and I'm amazed at how this is being overlooked in every discussion: The move to 30-BIT-PER-CHANNEL SCREENS! I have an iPad Pro and the difference that a wide color display brings has to be seen in person to be appreciated. Accurate color representation in consumer devices is a field which has languished _for over 20 years._ I believe mad props are due Apple for pushing everyone ahead, and up until now I don't think there were any good laptops for actually creating and previewing P3 content, without connecting them to expensive external screens.

\----

Now the bad things.

I only recently purchased an iPhone 7 and a 9.7" iPad Pro. I love them to bits, especially their wide color cameras and screens, but I won't be able to connect them to an already-expensive new MBP, or use the new Lightning EarPods, without spending even more money on dongles and carrying around extra stuff with me everywhere.

Given the prices, I really think Apple should have softened this by at least bundling Lightning-to-USB-C with the new MacBooks. _WHY_ fight within your own ecosystem?

The naming is also a disaster. I don't really mind them calling the 9.7" iPad "Pro" (it's an amazing device) but putting out a "MacBook Pro" without a Touch Bar really muddies the waters and only creates confusion. They should've just called it a 13" MacBook, and given it a choice of more colors.

These are the areas where they are justifiably deserving of ire, but on the whole I think all this relentless negativity is a bit excessive and feels like the work of competitor-hired PR firms, but I hope it pushes Apple to address the actual issues.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#History)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy- free_PC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy-free_PC)

<comment><USER17> It's also much harder to differentiate "pro" and consumer products these days, especially with the x86 CPU and chipset development plateauing as it is now.

To have the same difference as there was between an early iBook and a Powerbook you'd have to pack the Macbook Pro with dual processor octacore Xeons, non-mobile graphics cards, etc. with all that entails (i.e. power draw, cooling, weight, price.) Few "pros" would be willing to return to lugging a 10lb "laptop" thick as an encyclopedia around, or pay twice as much.

<comment><USER18> iPad sales, while declining, is now double that of Mac. I thought this was clear enough, consumers aren't even touching their PC anymore, at least that is where the trend is heading. The iPad, at those price point has taken over the cheaper segment what 11" Macbook Air was originally for. So what Apple envisioned, is that anyone using a PC or Mac is either a prosumer or professionals.

And just like many other tech, Apple force their way in and make early steps for changes, Floppy, CD-ROM etc. No SCSI for iMac? Apple wanted everyone, or will force every USB to be USB-C type. And it is clear someday, 802.11ac / ad will be fast enough for wireless transfer between Professional Cameras. So they will get rid of SD-Card now.

Any Kaby Lake offers little to no performance improvement over Skylake. And if you are wondering, the 10nm 25W Mobile CPU wont arrive til 2018.

I honestly dont have any idea what people are complaining about in terms of tech.

For me, apart from... Price.....

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The new MacBook pros remind me of Walter Isaacsons bibliography of Steve Jobs. The first thing Jobs did when returning to Apple was cut all the products down to theee core products. In 2016, it seems to be going the other direction again.

</comment><comment><USER20> We're developers. Let's write new software. Let's build new tools.

<comment><USER10> Let's buy new brands of laptops?</comment></comment>


Startup Pivot: Small (data) Is The New Big (data) - <AUTHOR> http://insights.qunb.com/a-techstars-startup-pivot-why-we-pivoted-from-visualising-big-data-to-smarter-small-data

<comment><USER2> A point that a lot of nominal Big Data startups miss is that genuinely large- scale data management and analytics are not driven by visualizations at all nor fit in a web-driven SaaS-like environment. The purpose is to answer a complex question from unimaginably large volumes of data, not to draw charts and graphs. It is often too I/O intensive for virtualized clouds and the visualization component is almost superfluous to the purpose. Most of the problems that need to be solved in Big Data are low level, down at the computer science and infrastructure level. Many of the use cases are intrinsically poorly suited for web-based SaaS type offering.

To make matters worse, many high-value Big Data analytical problems are (literally) not meaningfully visualizable except for marketing purposes. It is rather tricky to visualize an analytic product when there are a hundred critical values that need to be rendered in some fashion for every pixel your monitor can display. A lot of high-value analytics have this characteristic but most of the nominal Big Data visualization tools ignore this case even though it is arguably the most important one.

Consequently, while labeling your startup "Big Data" is trendy and fashionable, there are very few genuine Big Data startups. Adding value in this market requires a combination of serious theoretical computer science chops plus very creative interface design. Few startups are actually addressing the needs of this market and are instead assuming the market wants the web app they have the skills to produce.

<comment><USER3> Agree! My personal experience: our customers at Keen IO constantly demand better visualizations and many expect a traditional analytics frontend like GA. However... our highest value customers pay for our API capabilities, not our line charts. Storage and querying at massive scale is the hard part and that is worth thousands of dollars a month, not tens or hundreds.

Stunning visualizations and a better web experience are definitely something we want to do when timing allows, but so far our true customer value is in the backend and our APIs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There's a lot of money to be made in the smaller verticals. I think for a startup, there's a lot of opportunity to allow people to just manipulate and sanitize data in simpler spreadsheets.

For example, one thing I'm being forced to implement myself has been a lot of string manipulation operations to sanitize different kinds of data I'm playing with in spreadsheets.

Even just having something misimported wastes a lot of time.

OpenRefine isn't bad, but can only get you so far. That being said, if I can come up with a complete solution myself, I wouldn't mind just adding it to the suite of tools I'm already offering :)

I'm also wondering about different kinds of tools already out there though.

<comment><USER5> I once made a simple program that would create excel spread sheets from the input of a barcode scanner. Took me about a day. It made a big impact on the company. Before, they would spend 2 days creating the spread sheet. My program had it done in minutes. They were drop shippers, and went from about 25 pallets a week, to 50 (and kept growing). All in a matter of less than one month. The program was less than 200 LOC.

<comment><USER4> Exactly! It's a simple concept for a programmer to think about. (A 2d array? How hard could this be?) but really it's crazy how annoying it is to do certain things. Excel has math down pretty well, but encoding other kinds of data or even compiling the data to a spreadsheet is a significant problem for most people.

<comment><USER5> The biggest problem that company had was fetching the image for each product (it fed from one API). They had to manually insert the image for each one. Imagine a pallet with 200 different products in it! All I did was create a web GUI where they would upload their orders, then the program would fetch all the data, insert the images in the correct row, and generate the file for them. But the file would be sent off to a workstation that was operated as a printer server/queue station. After that, the spreadsheet was automatically printed and the shipping department would get the document in a nicely formatted manner. It weird, but I get excited talking about it. Its the little wins that really count.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Excel is good enough for most problems that small and medium sized firms have. Big Data tools and techniques are only worth the effort when the problems to solve are big. That's not small business.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly my point, I'd like to post something on Excel as the real and ultimate data tool soon.

<comment><USER6> It's amazing how much of the world financial system is built on the back of Excel too. Probably the other extreme there - a little too much VBA where bigger and better tools would work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I think there is definitely an opportunity to help companies understand their GA data, but our company Keen IO is proof that Big Data is not too fat for startups. We're finding a big opportunity in helping developers build custom analytics backends and white-labeled analytics. We've found the big bucks are made supporting customers with truly big data challenges. We can provide the scalability and reliability that would be arduous and expensive for them to build in-house.

<comment><USER5> Let's say I have a data analysis startup. My market is dentists with three or _less_ offices. How would your Big Data solutions work for me?

(Real question. I am developing this business as we speak).

<comment><USER3> That's awesome! This isn't really a "Big Data" problem - dental transactions don't happen in the scale of billions per month. However, the transactions themselves are very valuable for the dentists --- that's great for you! You can provide insight without having to crunch a zillion data points.

This is an example of an industry vertical analytics solution. Our hypothesis is that analytics products will be created to support all kinds of use cases like this (insurance analytics, manufacturing analytics, distribution analytics, etc). We want Keen IO to be the platform on which people build those solutions.

The way we can help you is to first make it easy for you to reliably collect data from all your dentists (with client libraries). Then we expose all that data, and of our analytics capabilities (e.g. queries), by REST API. You can log into Keen IO and create a line chart, then copy and paste the javascript right into your site. Now you can build a completely white-labeled website for your dentists, while we take care of storing and querying your event data. Our scoped API keys will allow you to secure the data so a given dentist can only see data for her offices. You can also create an internal dashboard for your team so you'll able to do analysis across all the dentists. Hopefully you'll discover industry trends and benchmarks that you can use in marketing reports or to resell to the dental industry (assuming your dentists allow this!). I bet they would like to know how they compare to other dentists...

Anyway, this is too much fun. Let me know if you want to brainstorm more!

<comment><USER5> You mention collecting data, which has been a big issue in this market. The local dentists (this is an offline startup) use a closed sourced program that does not export data. The only way to retrieve any data is to use automation scripts that "read" from the screen and dump it into CSV files (they use excel a lot). Once that is done, the script calls another one that sanitizes the data and inserts it into the database (PostgreSQL, in this case).

I currently have a flexible API that allows me to make complicated queries by sending commands through an HTTP call. Say "GET /clients/where/__last- visit/20132009" and so on.

On the front end, I have a fairly custom dashboard for each dentist (they all have specific needs due to different business sub-specialties). The dashboard calls the API and creates the reports automatically. They are update _n_ amount of times a day, depending on the metric being observed.

Given this information, and the one you provided me, can you give me your insight into how different your offering would be?

My aim is to reduce complexity, and reduce business costs. Without eroding the service or client experience. I'm interested how my "small data system" would compare to yours in those terms. It may sound like I'm being pedantic, but I am genuinely interested in learning more. You could be the solution that saves me hundreds of hours of development time.

<comment><USER3> Hmm... that does make your data collection tricky. Ideally you have something that captures events as they happen, in a nice format, rather than waiting on summary report views.

Looks like you already built an API similar to ours, but if you ever reach scale/maintenance/availability bottlenecks then check us out.

Most of our customers use charts that query in realtime when the page loads or the user adds a filter or whatever, but batching reporting like you describe is a way to optimize the page load time.

Generally we want to help developers before they already built the solution themselves. I think your homegrown solution is probably exactly what you need right now to validate your product in the market. When you want to invest more in your architecture for improved performance, scalability, or reliability, then you can consider building v2.0 on Keen IO :)

<comment><USER5> I appreciate the response. The system is still fairly new, and in development. My options are still pretty much open. Just waiting on more paying customers (but aren't we all?).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can certainly relate to the challenges of working on a big data platform intended to immediately satisfy varied customers...

But mainly I want to say I'm super impressed with the Google Analytics 'storification'. I can imagine the difficulties in bringing that level of quality to myriad data sources, but I'm excited to see you succeed!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks that's awesome feedback!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Heads up: when JavaScript is enabled but analytics is not (eg. Ghostery blocking HubSpot), the site falls apart badly.

<comment><AUTHOR> Crap! Thanks for the heads up, do you have any idea how we could fix that?

<comment><USER8> Did not see your interest in fixing this until today.

Just verify the expected variables/methods exist prior to using them (lines 99,197,365 right now):

       if(hbspt) hbspt.cta.load(
       ^ added ^

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Maybe a few more buzz words and I may have clicked the link.

<comment><AUTHOR> Touché. Instantly new big data FREE for YOUR pivot might have done the trick, though.</comment></comment>


Student kicked out of Hack the North due to bomb joke - <AUTHOR> http://news.mlh.io/when-jokes-go-too-far-09-19-2015 <comment><USER2> Previous discussion about different URL (perspective of one of the students): [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10250371](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10250371)</comment>


Display your Terms and Conditions - <AUTHOR> http://www.samonsoftware.com/?p=123

<comment><USER2> You mention the real solution is an agreement people are willing to read. How about showing a colloquial, "human-readable" version of the Terms and Conditions with a link to the full legalese?

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly. But there are legal issues with that, if you say "Here is our legal agreement, here is another agreement I want you to read" in court people will argue they should only be held to the agreement they were asked to read.

I agree with you, but we cant solve the problem with having a 'legal' and a 'human readable' version, we need the legal version to be human readable (ok ok lawyers are humans also :) )

It's claimed that legal language is needed because it's more precise, that's not true.

Take a relatively simple legal case in which no facts are in disputer, ask 5 highly paid barristers for an opinion on the case and compare.</comment></comment>


How to Use the Plan 9 C Compiler [pdf] - vezzy-fnord http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/comp.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> I have stopped using #ifdef entirely in favor of #if. The problem with #ifdef is it will silently ignore a misspelled argument. If you use #if in conjunction with the -Wundef flag it will catch it.

This can be a major security vulnerability if the #define is enabling a security feature but it gets silently disabled because of a misspelling.

</comment><comment><USER2> HTML version: [http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/2nd_edition/papers/comp](http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/2nd_edition/papers/comp)

</comment><comment><USER3> Ken Thompson's C Compiler: [http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/new_c_compilers/new_c_compile...](http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/new_c_compilers/new_c_compiler.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER4> This is not a C compiler; the language it accepts bears only a superficial resemblance to any version (formally standardized or not) of C. The subset of C's original authors responsible for this needed to accept that C was both (a) extremely popular and successful and (b) to their way of thinking, inferior to what they would have wished. That's a tough place to be, but denial is worse.

<comment><USER5> Is there a particular reason that "using a subset of ANSI C" is morally worse than "inventing an entirely new language"? I think you're maybe ascribing some kind of ethical purity to ANSI that it doesn't really have, especially given the popularity of GNU extensions et al.

<comment><USER4> I'm drawing a distinction between adding extensions (which can still be problematic if they can't be disabled) and ignoring or rejecting parts of the language that are required for correctness. The simplest and most obvious example mentioned fairly early in the paper is const but there are plenty of others.

I can compile nearly any C program using gcc and get correct behavior. Obviously I can also compile a lot of other things using gcc, including things that are not found in C, and if I do so then I cannot expect any definition of C to specify the resulting behavior. But most C programs will not compile using the Plan 9 compilers at all, because they do not accept the C language by any meaningful definition. In the case of const, it's also true that many dangerously incorrect programs will compile when using Plan 9's compiler, even though any definition of C prohibits that explicitly. These are qualitative differences.

Let's be even more concrete. In case 1, we consider a language exactly like C (pick whatever C you want here), but with the following additional preprocessor symbols always defined:

        #define _FBEGIN {
        #define _FEND }

This language allows, but does not require, the use of alternate tokens instead of { and } around function bodies. Because the tokens are taken from a namespace reserved by the standards, every correct C program is also a correct program in this language, and will have the same behavior. I submit that one may reasonably claim that a compiler for this language is a C compiler that supports extensions, even though a very limited subset of incorrect programs will fail to compile in a different way than they would when submitted to a C compiler.

In case 2, we consider the same language except that in this case the use of { and } around function bodies is not accepted. Instead, one _must_ use _FBEGIN and _FEND. I submit that a compiler for this language is not a C compiler, as no (useful) correct C program is accepted by it.

What the Plan 9 compiler authors did, repeatedly, reduces to case 2. There is nothing unethical about creating a new language. There is something unethical about creating a new language and not only deliberately giving it the same name as a similar (very popular) language, but disingenuously acting as if it _were_ that language. At best, the implication that all other (again, very popular) standards and implementations of C are wrong simply for not being Plan 9's is obnoxiously smug.

<comment> vezzy-fnord Your entire rant is protracted and without substance. It boils down to comparing 9c to gcc and concluding that the former is not a C compiler relative to the standards of the latter. In which case, tcc, pcc and ACK would also be disqualified as C compilers under your definition.

<comment><USER4> gcc is merely an example of a C compiler. Feel free to substitute the Intel compilers, the Microsoft compilers, or just about any real-world compiler that gets used to ship real products. In other words, any actual C compiler.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > For different reasons, volatile and const are also ignored.

Yikes.

<comment><USER7> Const is mildly useful but doesn't do a whole lot. It's as much of a reminder to the programmer as anything.

Volatile's behavior is not really defined by the standard and is rarely useful in any case. I'm pretty sure that you can ignore it and remain a fully compliant C compiler.

<comment><USER8> volatile is mostly useful for telling the compiler not to optimize out a variable. For example, if you use memory-mapped I/O, you can mark a pointer to it as volatile to tell the compiler that the hardware will be changing it and it shouldn't make any assumptions about that while optimizing. That's lower level than most people go, though, so I understand that it's not useful for the average C programmer.

<comment><USER9> Plan 9's compiler does not have a very sophisticated optimizer (which is part of why it's so fast), so I suspect that they simply didn't implement anything which would have made volatile necessary.

<comment><USER7> Right, if every assignment writes to memory and every expression reads from memory then you've effectively made every variable volatile (according to how compilers typically interpret volatile), so ignoring the qualifier wouldn't hurt anything.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why I won't be taking United Airlines again - <AUTHOR> http://www.jayhuang.org/blog/why-i-wont-be-taking-united-airlines-again/

<comment><USER2> > I've been on over 30 flights, and never has a company come close to this.

As some one who has been on over 100 flights in 2012 alone I can tell you that your experience is not unique.

The one factor that I think you are over looking is you need to speak up about things and not have such a passive aggressive attitude.

If the seat sucks, simply find an empty seat somewhere else on the plane.

Good luck with your future flights.

<comment><USER3> You should have drawn the line with the couple and the baby. If the baby was brought on as a lap-rider, then that's where the baby goes.

Also, I find it somewhat hard to believe the FAs let you stand in the aisle during takeoff and ascent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Never had this experience on United, before or after Premier status (the latter being much better, obviously). Their customer service should have been more understanding, but if the complaint was in the spirit of the article ("..and this couple sitting next to me kept DRINKING WINE and USING THE BATHROOM!") I could see them perceiving it as a complaint from an unreasonably irate customer. Wasn't there, so I can't say. I can say, however, that pressing the flight attendant button is a better method of getting someone to come back to your seat rather than just waiting and hoping.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh I should have clarified. I definitely did not complain about the couple. It wasn't their fault, and it wasn't United's fault.

I did complain however, about their service. I did use the flight attendant button, forgot to include that. But overall, United handled it very poorly.

<comment><USER4> Fair enough, from everything you've said it sounds like you were in the right. Sorry to hear about the troubles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > Almost no flight attendants walked by that seat during the whole 15+ hours > of the flight, but I got up multiple times to look for an attendant

> The couple beside me ordered wine, and drank for most of the flight

> I won't even talk about the small "breakfast" they served just before > arriving in Sydney.

</comment><comment><USER6> Given the tone of the blog post and the various offensive remarks strewn through the post, it is likely that the author was being a dick on the plane and was given the broken seat by the flight staff _deliberately_.

<comment><USER7> You're making an impermissible correlation. Just because there's an element of vitriol in the author's language, doesn't imply that he wasn't also a victim in his story.

Inferring that the author's language is coarse and therefore he deserved what he got is tantamount to saying that those who aren't well-spoken deserve ill treatment. This is decidedly untrue.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm sorry about your shitty flight, but this rant does not belong on HN.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm surprised they let you sit in a different seat for take off.

</comment><comment><USER10> I hate that HN is now a stream of crappy "I hate <company du jour>" posts. Ugh.</comment>