Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Media (Apple) Media Businesses Communications The Almighty Buck

Apple Legend Woz Blasts iPhone Price Drop 272

Posted by Zonk
from the cuz-the-price-is-crazy dept.
Stony Stevenson writes "Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak Saturday blasted Steve Jobs' decision to drop the price of the iPhone by $200 just two months after the product was launched. Said Woz: 'Everyone expects technology to drop in price. The first adopters always pay a premium. I am one of them. I am used to that. But that one was too soon, too harsh ... A lot of people from Apple, even a lot of people that worked on the Apple Lisa and Macintosh computers in the beginning now work at Google. The thinking over at Google is very much like early Apple days. The fact that they give people time off to work on their own ideas is exactly matches some of the things that made Apple great. I wish Apple did that.'" We just discussed the price drop last night.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Legend Woz Blasts iPhone Price Drop

Comments Filter:
  • Supply and Demand (Score:5, Insightful)

    by seanadams.com (463190) * on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:20AM (#20725389) Homepage
    I work in the hardware business and I can tell you it is difficult enough to get enough inventory built for an ordinary product launch, but for what has been called the most successful CE launch _ever_... there is just no way they could have met demand without boosting the initial price significantly. And the problem with keeping the price high too long is that your momentum will dry up, and people won't even be paying attention any more by the time it does drop.

    You can call it gouging if you want, but what if they'd instead just run out of stock immediately? Think "tickle me iPhone" - I don't think consumers would have been impressed by that.

    Jobs did exactly the right thing. Price no lower than where you meet demand, and only once production has ramped up (which usually takes about two months - go figure) THEN price it at the sweet spot. Also consider seasonal factors which made it necessary to do this before the Xmas shopping season, which for the gadget industry begins right now.

    I don't think that ANYONE, not one single person, who can afford a $600 phone and 2yr commitment to a $100+/mo plan, has a valid gripe about paying $200 extra up-front to be among the first to own it. If it was worth buying when you bought it, who cares what it sells for now? Were you hoping it would keep it's resale value or something?
    • by QMalcolm (1094433) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:23AM (#20725411)
      It's true. In the end, you were paying $600 for a phone. You can also get phones for $50. By paying WAY more, you either want to get it first or have the absolute best phone possible. Your phone still works. You got it first. If that $200 will actually harm you financially, you shouldn't have bought a $600 gadget in the first place.

      It sucks, but there's nothing WRONG about it.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by W2k (540424)
        The reason people are upset is probably that they are coming to realize they paid $600 for a shitty designer phone with an expensive lock-in contract, and by waiting two months, could have paid $200 less for the exact same deal. Still a rip-off, but maybe it'll be another couple hundred less in a year...
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by x1n933k (966581)
        I absolutely agree, it isn't wrong. However in a lot of cases it is the people who cannot afford these items who do end up purchasing them. I use to place a lot of calls for clients to T-Mobile and AT&T who would purchase expensive phones (Sidekicks comes to mind), sign a contract and would be in poor financial shape a few months down the line because they paid $300 for the phone, then $80 data/phone plan with a credit card.

        My point is that a lot of customers are lower-middle class who are spend hap
        • by onetwentyone (882404) on Monday September 24, 2007 @09:47AM (#20728095) Homepage

          My point is that a lot of customers are lower-middle class who are spend happy on credit they can't support. This is a major problem is North America, and companies can't help but to take advantage of that.
          You're telling me companies should be responsible for the self control and fiscal responsibility of the individual? Sorry but if someone puts themselves in a bad financial position through unnecessary "for me" purchases, they have no one to blame for themselves. Proper budgeting, hell even SIMPLE budgeting, should be something we teach our kids in school from early to out.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by tukkayoot (528280)

            You're telling me companies should be responsible for the self control and fiscal responsibility of the individual?

            No, it did not look that way to me. He said in his first sentence, "it's not wrong" and in his closing remarks that companies "can't help but tale advantage." It's ugly and one might say amoral, but ultimately the most culpable party in a situation like this is the individual buyer.

            Proper budgeting, hell even SIMPLE budgeting, should be something we teach our kids in school from early to out.

      • by DavidShor (928926) *
        It's perfectly rational for first adopters to be angry. Signaling is a large motivation behind buying an Iphone, purchasers want to show others that they have $500 to wantonly spend on a phone. When the price drops to $300, they are now indistinguishable from those who purchased at the lower price, and so the value that they recieve from the phone is much lower.

        I remember a class action lawsuit that sued Mercedes for making a little bought shitty model, on the basis that it cheapened the signaling value of

    • by not-quite-rite (232445) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:35AM (#20725479) Homepage Journal
      The pricing seemed quite a smart way of letting market forces apply feedback in the control loop for the sale of the iphone.

      As much as people cry about the price, it means that those early adopters payed a premium for what they wanted(an iphone straight away gimme gimme gimme), and those slower to take it up, will also buy and feel better about it due to percieved value.

      (I'm also happy because it means all the US early adopters took the brunt, while the rest of the world reaps the rewards :P)
    • Re:Supply and Demand (Score:5, Interesting)

      by RonnyJ (651856) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:53AM (#20725551)
      I don't think it's just the loss of $200 that bothers everyone, the price drop also makes the product seem a little less 'exclusive'.

      (I'm sure that's not the factor most people would be annoyed about, but I'm sure a fair few people bought it largely as a status symbol.)
      • I hear the claims of status-symbol this, and smug that thrown around Apple, but the truth is that normal, hard-working people, regardless of income level, use Macs, iPods and iPhones. The Nokia N95 costs several hundred dollars more than the iPhone, so if people wanted to impress, they'd buy that instead, no? Perhaps you aren't giving people enough credit here. People like myself (37-ish years old, $60,000/yr, Graduate degree, 2 kids, mortgage), seem to not mind paying a small premium as long as we are g
        • by pnutjam (523990)
          I love the BMW 3 series, because it is an engineering marvel, at any cost, and would never buy it as a status-symbol. I would buy it because it is a GREAT car and I could care less what the rest of you think.

          Flaunting the ability to buy an engineering marvel, at any cost is a status symbol. Just because a BMW does something better then a Hyundai doesn't mean it is better for it's intended use, some people treasure utility. And a $200 item is a luxury item in most of the US. There are many people who s
          • Flaunting the ability to buy an engineering marvel, at any cost is a status symbol.

            That may be your impression, but as stated he would just buy it because it was fun and so your impression is irrelevant to the actual choice he is making. As for "flaunting" since sedans all look alike anyway just the outward presence of it is hardly "flaunting"...

            And a $200 item is a luxury item in most of the US.

            Sneakers, TV's, game consoles, snowboards, heck even the iPod itself - the list of mass market items that cost j
        • by Applekid (993327)

          I hear the claims of status-symbol this, and smug that thrown around Apple, but the truth is that normal, hard-working people, regardless of income level, use Macs, iPods and iPhones.

          I think the source of the status-symbol business is really design. Apple products are pretty. I think money has less to do with it than ugly vs pretty. I take it like the fact that no fat and greasy nerd likes the pretty boy jock that's popular with all the ladies.

          I'll be the first to admit that with iPods being a lot of Apple's bread and butter these days didn't help that... especially when you have other less pretty, more functional, and more bang-for-the-buck products out there.

          The jock goes to the part

    • Re:Supply and Demand (Score:4, Informative)

      by Jeff DeMaagd (2015) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:58AM (#20725573) Homepage Journal
      I didn't buy one and I thought it was a kick in the gut. Just about everyone knows that CE devices drop in price over time, but the duration and percentage of the price drop is a bit steep. If they are pricing it for exclusivity, then dropping the price is a bad idea. Still, I wouldn't be buying it to show off, I try not to flaunt any of my consumer electronics stuff.

      I wanted one but just couldn't justify it. I'm glad I didn't and it doubly puts me off buying a launch product, I can wait a product generation if I have to, I renewed my contract elsewhere because I also wanted the product to mature before buying into it. It's not a good idea to buy a first revision product anyway. The adage has been well known in the Apple world, though it should apply to any brand product, wait a while to make sure there aren't any systematic flaws.

      BTW: the basic 2yr commitment was for a $60/mo plan. It's not well known, but it can be used without a contract, just that the per-minute costs are higher.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by tacocat (527354)

        I think this is a variation of Block Pricing which is supposed to be illegal in the US most of the time. But for someone in the Business and not Geek community, it's a nice thing to be able to do. The idea is to adjust the prices offered based on the individual's demand for the product. Overly simplified examples would be to charge more for food in expensive suburbs than others, raising prices for people who come to your store in newer more expensive cars, increasing the cost of cable TV during the footb

        • by DavidShor (928926) *
          Block pricing is known in economics as price discrimination. It is only relevent in monopolies, as otherwise, price collapses to marginal demand.

          But even so, price discrimination can't be too bad, as arbitrage soon destroys any signigant spreads.

          As for the legal status, I am pretty sure that it is legal.

      • by homer_s (799572)
        I didn't buy one and I thought it was a kick in the gut. Just about everyone knows that CE devices drop in price over time, but the duration and percentage of the price drop is a bit steep.

        So you would've been happier if the price *didn't* drop and the consumer paid more for a longer period?

        This just shows that you and Wozniak do not understand the role price plays in regulating supply and demand. I bet you also complain about "price gougers" after a hurricane hits.

        A higher price draws more supp
      • by bkr1_2k (237627)
        Apple has never tried to "price for exclusivity". It's just not what they're in business to do. The market for "being different" but they are the exact opposite of "different" in the media player market and hope to achieve the same in the CE market.

        People do buy things to show off. They do buy them to be "different" and they do buy things to be just like everyone else. The goal of being a "different" sheep is exactly the market Apple is shooting to hit with any of their products. That's the point of th
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Ripping Silk (582933)
      I'm in New Zealand, and today I saw a local 'parallel importing' house advertise iphones modded to work with the local vodafone GSM network, for the princely sum of... wait for it... $NZ1199.. that, at todays conversion rate is $US892 !!! These I would suggest come with no warranty or official support as they have been modified outside Apple specs. You'd hafta be keen !
      • by Ilgaz (86384) *

        I'm in New Zealand, and today I saw a local 'parallel importing' house advertise iphones modded to work with the local vodafone GSM network, for the princely sum of... wait for it... $NZ1199.. that, at todays conversion rate is $US892 !!!
        These I would suggest come with no warranty or official support as they have been modified outside Apple specs.
        You'd hafta be keen !

        Can you blame the guy while those Apple fanatics are enough delusional to claim "Woz doesn't know shit" just because he said 2 words about a $200 price drop?

        I would price it $1000 and still sell.

        There is a guy on The Register (which cult members flamed) made a basic calculation. He can buy high end Nokia N95 (3.5 G!), an iPod and a low end PC as a bonus with TCO of UK iPhone.
        http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/uk_iphone_at_last/ [theregister.co.uk]

        If I was a cell phone dealer doing grey-hat jobs, I wouldn't be that nice e

    • Re:Supply and Demand (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Dr. Slacker (31348) on Monday September 24, 2007 @05:54AM (#20726377)
      Give me a break. A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.
      • A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.

        There's no question that the Wii has been a successful game console, almost certainly the most successful of the current generation. But could it have been EVEN MORE successful, had Nintendo priced it at $299.99 and spent the extra revenue on additional production capacity? It's a moot point but an interesting one.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by seanadams.com (463190) *
        Give me a break. A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.

        Bad example - while both products are luxury goods, the Wii has totally different customer demographics. The Wii customer is far more price sensitive and will simply buy a different console if it's overpriced. So a higher launch price would have caused a _failed_ launch, and immediately earn the product a reputation of being overpriced. Capturing some extra revenue in the first couple months is fine if you can do it, but not if it kills
    • ... and another stupid Woz story results. Can't the guy get a second geek handler to keep him from looking like a dope every time the first one gets a cold or something?
    • It doesn't matter if you think there's no valid gripe.
       
      Apple upset its most loyal, most wealthy customers. Upset customers don't buy things. Loyal, wealthy customers not buying things is bad for business.
       
      You can waste your time complaining about these upset customers all you want--it won't affect this obvious logic.
  • Haha. (Score:5, Funny)

    by kraemate (1065878) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:22AM (#20725395)
    This guy has reason to be miffed. Didn't he buy, what, 4 of those iphones on the first day or something?
    • by anagama (611277)
      I haven't RTFAd, but the summary implies that Woz thought Apple should have gouged for a longer period. Is that a worthy thought for someone held in as high esteem as Woz? Sounds very accountantish.
    • >>The fact that they give people time off to work on their own ideas is exactly matches some of the things that made Apple great.

      Wait one second here! Are we talking about the same Apple Computer company because the one I know about routinely worked its engineering teams (all the way from the Apple ][gs, Lisa, Macintosh up through Newton) to the point of complete exhaustion and then at various times, during the "Black Friday" purges, suddenly ended people's careers. Frantic system development and high
  • by Stony Stevenson (954022) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:29AM (#20725439)
    A full transcript of the interview can be read here: Interview: Wozniak slams Apple for iPhone price drop snafu [itnews.com.au]
  • Just did? (Score:5, Funny)

    by biocute (936687) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:29AM (#20725447) Homepage
    We just discussed the price drop last night.

    Then instead of starting a new story, why didn't Woz contribute to that discussion?

    That is what makes Slashdot great. I wish he did that.
  • This is probably going to get me in trouble, but I really don't know why people care about Woz so much.

    There are hundreds of engineers that have done amazing things, and are still doing them.

    Why do people still care what he thinks/does?
    • by Don Negro (1069) * on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:56AM (#20725563)
      He's still relevant because out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story (which makes him one of the few, if any, who are still alive)

      He's he first man who built modern computer hardware, then personally wrote the software that ran on top of it, all the while providing an extensible hardware and software system that other engineers could (and did, wildly) build upon. He literally built a huge chunk of this industry by himself, and another huge chunk was built on his shoulders.

      • Woz was pretty damn awesome back in the day.

        But how is he now? Does his words still mean as much? Do you consider Woz-of-now equal with Woz-in-the-heady-beginnings-of-the-computer-revolution?

        That is why I ask the question: why is he still relevant?

        I guess blind idol worship exists in the geek world too....
        • For the same reason all "great founders" are somehow relevant. I don't know, does Linus still write code for the Kernel, or is he just the one to nod changes through? Doesn't matter, when he says something, people listen. He's an icon. Just as much as Jobs and Woz are.

          And that's why their word has weight. Not because they do something important. But because there are people who consider them important who will follow what they're saying, thus making them important. It's kinda self perpetuating.
          • by LKM (227954)
            You also would expect people like Jobs, Woz, Gates or Thorvalds to have some insight into this stuff; one, because they have a lot of experience doing it; and two, because they are among the few who actually were successful.
        • by Ilgaz (86384) *

          Woz was pretty damn awesome back in the day.

          But how is he now? Does his words still mean as much? Do you consider Woz-of-now equal with Woz-in-the-heady-beginnings-of-the-computer-revolution?

          That is why I ask the question: why is he still relevant?

          I guess blind idol worship exists in the geek world too....

          All of this because he said a couple of words about iPhone price drop yes?

          I like Macs, I pay for my software and even purchased iWork '08 right after it is available but the "Mac community" is really beyond fixing. I would trade some cult member group that believes in aliens rather than Apple cult.

          Answer to your question: He is one of the 2 (two) guys behind that "fruit logo" you see. Should he code some C++ cool,tricky code to become relevant to you or prove himself being relevant?

          He is Woz, one of found

      • by servognome (738846) on Monday September 24, 2007 @03:40AM (#20725771)

        He's he first man who built modern computer hardware, then personally wrote the software that ran on top of it, all the while providing an extensible hardware and software system that other engineers could (and did, wildly) build upon.
        Many people were doing similar things at the time. The difference was how Wozniak went about engineering focusing on usability and openness. Rather than making personal computers an engineering device (something you make), he made them an engineering platform (something you use)
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Viol8 (599362)
          "focusing on usability"

          Sorry , but many many more people at Xerox PARC did that much more and much earlier. Before you start regurgitating the Woz myth verbatim I suggest you go look up some of their achievments in GUIs and man-machine interaction before Apple was even a glint in Woz or Steves eye.
          • Sorry , but many many more people at Xerox PARC did that much more and much earlier. Before you start regurgitating the Woz myth verbatim I suggest you go look up some of their achievments in GUIs and man-machine interaction before Apple was even a glint in Woz or Steves eye.
            I wasn't referring to GUI, I was referring to the hardware hardware design.
            • by Viol8 (599362)
              Their hardware was far superior to his many years earlier. Woz was/is a good engineer , but he's visionary either in hardware or software design.
      • Here we go again with the Woz-n-Steve show with all the mythology about how they revolutionised computers.

        Err no , they didn't. At least not from a technological point of view. Xerox PARC did.

        Check out this link if you don't believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto [wikipedia.org]

        That was 1973 , long before Woz had even thought up the prehistoric command line drive Apple I.

        Sorry , how great was Woz again?
        • by LKM (227954)
          I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say. What exactly did Xerox revolutionize "from a technological point of view"? Did they make PCs mainstream? Did they create a UI that everyone can use?
          • by Viol8 (599362)
            "I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say"

            Shall I draw it in crayon for you?

            "Did they make PCs mainstream?"

            Wtf has the PC got to do with a technological revolution??? The thing was old tech when IBM brought it out!

            "Did they create a UI that everyone can use?"

            Yes actually. They invented it you moron. Apple simply used their ideas.
            • by LKM (227954)
              Well, I would encourage you to do three things: First, stop being such an ass. Second, try learning about punctuation. And third, go have a look at an actual Xerox Alto. You might be astonished to find out that it looks nothing at all like the Lisa's UI. It's graphical, yes. It's not, however, "a UI that everyone can use."

              So thanks for calling me a moron, but I actually suspect the person with a lack of knowledge is you, not me. Have a nice day, uninformed asshat.
      • by homer_s (799572)
        He might have been a very good engineer (I cannot judge - I'm not a good engineer), but he is certainly does not sound very smart here:

        I feel badly about the situation for everyone. I don't think Apple should have even done it. ***Maybe a very much more gradual price reduction,***

        So he favors consumers paying more for longer? So he is ok with the initial price, but he feels that Apple should charge consumers more than Apple wants? And he also wants Apple to settle for a lower volume (if the price is
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by chris_mahan (256577)
      Go read Founders at Work [amazon.com] (link to Amazon, no ref to me) and read the chapter on Apple. He's a f'ing genius.

      • I know he did amazing things back then. What I am asking is what makes him special lately?

        Genius isn't forever. Much like sporting ability isn't forever.

        He just reminds me of an athlete that did an amazing thing, but now is just sad and broken.

        And it's not to say that I don't respect what he did back in the day. He changed the world in a lot of ways.

        But people change, and the Woz now does not appear to be the same Woz that did those things.

        Hence I ask, why is he still relevant?
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by aviators99 (895782)
          He's still relevant because the computer engineering ideas he came up with back then still hold up today, and some board designers could still learn lessons from what he did. His designs are still works of art.

          In addition, his philanthropy and dedication to children in need (both materially and intellectually) should be an example to us all.
        • by chris_mahan (256577) <chris.mahan@gmail.com> on Monday September 24, 2007 @03:50AM (#20725819) Homepage
          Bad analogy. Sports require physical attributes that are well-known to deteriorate over time. Mental skills, unless degraded by disease or advanced age, do not.

          The genius of Woz is that he used pen and paper to create something that had not been created by people who used actual hardware. He understood the fundamentals completely, but let his imagination run wild on a "what if".

          How do you know he is still not doing that right now?

          Must skill and artistry, in order to be recognized as valuable, serve the corporation?

          Must Steve Wozniak, in order to be relevant in your world of Treasure, build another such financial behemoth as Apple?

          Surely you must recognize that there are many people around the world who pursue their interests with dedication, skill, and imagination with little care of the financial gains to be derived.

          Allow me to speculate. If Steve were independently wealthy, and no longer constrained to generate income to feed and shelter his family, would it not be a better use of his time to use his talents and breadth of experience to help his fellow man? Perhaps it is completely understandable that he should not relish the prospect of working at a soul-crushing cube farm. Perhaps it is acceptable for a man to stop trying to maximize shareholder investment when such a man has already done so amply, and rather dedicate himself to a different purpose.

          Perhaps he has indeed changed what he does. But that does not make him less of a man.

           
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            All excellent points and I agree with most of them. But I do disagree with your first one.

            Mental ability changes over time. Be it flexibility, adaptability, etc there is a marked change as one gets older. Once you throw in a bit of trauma, emotional distress, etc there are many things that can happen "upstairs".

            (Ever hear the old saw about most maths guys making their breakthroughs in their early days?)

            And when I use the term relevance, I mean why does his doing something great years ago automatically qu
            • Considering Woz left Apple during the Mac's very first years, he really has nothing to do with the current state of Apple. Unless, somehow, he secretly has been helping develop OS X and iPods. If the Apple II were still kicking, then yeah, maybe he would be relevant to the current state of Apple. Hell, Al Gore, the inventor of the Internet, is more relevant to Apple than is Steve Wozniak.
        • With his track record, I don't think being relevent today is neither here nor there - he's already done enough to be great for the rest of his life.
    • by Evets (629327) *
      Woz is no Dvorak. He keeps a low profile. It's a bit sad that this kind of a statement ends up making news, because it really isn't much of a statement at all.

      He's one of the guys who is largely responsible for making computers the mainstream tools that they are today, so he's worth listening to. Jimmy Carter still makes headlines when he says anything. So does Paris Hilton. Certainly a guy like Woz who has actually made a much more direct impact on each of our lives is deserving of attention from our
    • Yeah, he's like that Gutenberg asshat. WTF has ol' Johann done for me lately?
  • by plasmacutter (901737) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:33AM (#20725467)
    disclaimer, loyal user of mac computing platforms, self avowed telephone luddite! (if I want my phone to play videos and surf the web i'll run voip on a LAPTOP)

    In the news today, the long time apple astroturfing ground, slashdot, has run the third [slashdot.org] iphone [slashdot.org] ad [slashdot.org] in the past 48 hours, topping all records for coverage of apple products since the launch of macos X.4 tiger.

    Cowboy neal has yet to respond to questions regarding possible payola or hijacking of the firehose system : )
  • by rolfwind (528248) on Monday September 24, 2007 @02:53AM (#20725553)
    but, ultimately, the people who bought it were willing to spend $600. Plus that $200 is insignificant in the long run, you are spending, what? $60 on that phone for 2 years? That 400 + 1440 = $1840 vs 2040. Not that big of a deal. Subtract the $100 giftcard (hey, if you don't want to buy anything with it, it makes a great birthday/christmas gift to someone who does).

    I know, I hate when technology drops too, but the psychology of this is fascinating. It's similiar to gasoline - people watch the price like hawks and when its $.05 lower across town, they'll waste 20 minutes driving and another 1/4 gallon to reap "savings" that are not worth the cost in the end.

    And people are getting so stressed out over this, you have to wonder if they are the same people who'd buy some new (american) car during the first 9 months only to get stressed out over the end-of-year price breaks into the thousands or the fact that that car is worth a few thousand less once they sign the papers?

    Look at it this way: You got a nice product. As a bonus, out of the blue, you got a $100 gift certificate. Now that it's slightly cheaper, maybe you can get your spouse one, whatever.
  • the summary makes him sound like abe simpson
  • by bgspence (155914) on Monday September 24, 2007 @03:03AM (#20725589)
    No one outside of a small circle in Apple and ATT know what the real deal is. Apple is getting something for the phone and something each month for the service. ATT signed up using a spreadsheet with one set of assumptions. Some suggest Apple gets $200 per phone plus a bit of the monthly service charge. ATT's calculations could never guess Apple would change the equation this big so soon. It's not Apple's normal thing to slash prices. ATT will sell more services, but Apple probably gets a huge iPhone subsidy. I bet Apple took ATT to the cleaners with the deal.
  • by shird (566377) on Monday September 24, 2007 @03:39AM (#20725765) Homepage Journal
    I don't get it. What does the price drop on the iPhone have to do with working at Google over Apple? Did the price drop affect the employees of Apple in some bad way, that Google didn't/wouldn't? Are they going to lose their job as a result? The two stories seem completely unrelated.
    • That is the product of another horrible slashdot contributor's summary. In fact, the Google part has nothing to do with the iPhone, but in the true spirit of being an Apple-bashing slashdot nerd, this guy decided he wanted to be first to attack Apple with a completely out-of-context summary. I'm beginning to think it is time for me to move on to something else...anything good over on Digg?
  • by toQDuj (806112)
    So the iPhone became a lot less expensive now. And everyone complains? Why?
    I mean, the alternative is that Apple would have kept the price high, and made more money. That would have had some people complaining, for sure!

    Sometimes it seems you just can't do things right.

    B.
    • by LarsG (31008)
      Yeah, I really don't get that. If I were in a flippant mood, I'd say something like "ils sont fous ces americains, only in America would people complain about a price drop".

      What exactly were the complainers so angry about? iSuppli and pretty much everyone not affected by the RDF knew Apple had a large margin on the thing. That Apple would eventually lower the margin to be more in line with what the other handset mfgs has was a given. If you bought the phone, you evidently thought it was worth the $600. If y
      • by toQDuj (806112)
        Ils sont fous, bien-sur. (disclaimer: I'm not a French-speaking person :) ). Shooting themselves in the Fous, they are.
  • by iamacat (583406)
    A price drop does not harm you, it only benefits other people. I don't understand why Woz, a generally great guy, sympathizes so much with other people's simple jealousy. You thought the price was right when you bought it. What changes now? And you always can choose to only buy from stores with 30 day price guarantee.
  • by Animats (122034) on Monday September 24, 2007 @04:19AM (#20725959) Homepage

    Big deal. Early this year, I bought a 2007 Jeep Wrangler. If I bought the same vehicle today, it would be $3000 cheaper, because Jeep is now offering big sales incentives. And the warranty period was only three years when I bought it; now there's a lifetime power train warranty. (That has more to do with the breakup of Damlier-Chrysler and retaining customer confidence, though.)

    What's really annoying iPhone suckers, I suspect, is that their overpriced status symbol just stopped being an overpriced status symbol. The CEO of Rolex once said "We are not in the watch business. We are in the luxury business." That applies here.

    • You seem to enjoy your overpriced mode of transportation, so why not let others enjoy their phones and watches?
    • Vast difference (Score:3, Interesting)

      by SuperKendall (25149)
      Rolex is a true luxury, there are any number of devices that can provide exactly the same functionality, in a less impressive package. You are wholly paying for the "time casing" and the name.

      In the case of the iPhone, there are no other phones that do what it does - period. Frankly I would have been happy to pay $1k for the phone, because I plan to use it for many many years and I like having a phone I don't hate. A phone is the one thing I have to carry every day. You wouldn't wear clothes you hate ev
  • He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP. And frankly I find it difficult to take him seriously when he calls his biography "iWoz" when he had nothing to do with the Mac let alone any of the "i" products. Publicity hungry empty vessel. Who cares what he thinks: he has no particular insight.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by unitron (5733)

      He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP.

      Are you sure it wasn't the other way around, that Jobs had the good fortune to be in the right place at the right time to exploit Woz's talents?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by king-manic (409855)
      He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP. And frankly I find it difficult to take him seriously when he calls his biography "iWoz" when he had nothing to do with the Mac let alone any of the "i" products. Publicity hungry empty vessel. Who cares what he thinks: he has no particular insight.

      Without Woz, jobs would be a sleazy new age religious leader. Without Jobs, Woz would be somewhere in the up
  • RTFA guys (Score:4, Funny)

    by Edmund Blackadder (559735) on Monday September 24, 2007 @04:27AM (#20725995)
    Ok Apple fanboys, before you start flaming Woz and or biting your nails in despair over having to choose between Jobs and Woz, you should read the entire article.

    Woz was not nearly as confrontational as the slashdot summary suggests. Also, the summary combines to quotes from completely different and unrelated parts of the interview which is pretty confusing (no Google has nothing to do with Iphone pricing). Also, Woz said that he thinks that Apple is still more innovative, even though he said all these nice things about innovation at Google.

    So yeah, the slashdot summary was very sensationalistic and misleading. So no need to tear down that topless Woz poster from your bedroom wall just yet.
    • I pick Jobs over Woz because if Apple were run by Woz, it would be another geek-factory, like the rest of the industry, and Apple would have died years ago. But thankfully, Apple is an alternative, and not another choice that would be lost on most geeks. Not that Woz is a bad guy, he's just so obviously into binary, whereas the average human likes to click on pretty icons.

      With that said, how can anyone take this lead-in seriously. That was the most disjointed, non-sensical summary of a slashdot artic

  • To the whiners about the price drop: I see no rational reason for you to be upset. You are early adopters and you evidently decided favorably to the value proposition of the iPhone. People who complain about a price-cut being a bad thing simply amaze me: they are pinning their own impatience, foolishness, or buyers remorse on someone else. If you feel cheated, take some personal responsibility and accept that if you did not like the price, you should not have made the purchase! When prices are lowered,

  • Boo hoo (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by massysett (910130)
    Woz bought TWENTY iPhones? So he spent twelve thousand ($12,000!!) on phones as gifts, and now he is complaining that the price has dropped $200 and he can't get his instant refund? I knew the price drop would spark complaining, but a rich guy who spent twelve thousand dollars on phones is complaining? I don't feel sorry for anybody who willingly paid $600 for a frilly gadget, but a rich man buying twenty phones inspires the LEAST sympathy.
  • "Apple Legend" or "Embarrassing Uncle You Hope Doesn't Stop By When You're Entertaining Guests"?

    I know I made up my mind years ago (he's EUYHDSBWYEG, all the way), but why even troll for debate? Why not report facts instead of contentious, emotionally loaded rhetoric? Would this post be harmed in any way if the headline read "Apple Co-Founder Woz Blasts iPhone Price Drop"?

  • by nomadic (141991)
    'Everyone expects technology to drop in price. The first adopters always pay a premium. I am one of them. I am used to that.

    See? He's willing to face the financial hurt to enjoy the benefits of being an early adopter. I mean, $200 isn't really that much to me, but Woz has been out of a job for a long time, so that $200 really does hurt.
  • by Jahz (831343) on Monday September 24, 2007 @01:38PM (#20731473) Homepage Journal
    This thread has a level of trolling rarely seen. Way beyond the normal fanboy vs anti-fanboy crap. The iPhone is at least "good." Admit that and then criticize and nitpick if you want. Starting arguments by calling it a worthless piece of crap just shows people that you're a very angry troll and that your post is safe to skip. I have an iPhone... my sister doesn't want an iPhone but wants (for some reason) a smart phone. She said it was too hard to use. I gave it to her last weekend to play with and she figured out *almost* everything on her own. She still doesn't want one, but since we need to get her a phone regardless, I did the math for her:

    We're AT&T customers. She needs more text messages than 200 (around 400 would work). She also needs data.

    Including AT&T new customer / upgrade discounts, mail-in rebates, etc, the prices for the phones are:
    BlackBerry Pearl: $99.99
    BlackBerry 8700: $200
    Treo 750: $249
    BlackBerry 8800: $300
    iPhone 8GB: $399

    iPhone is the most expensive choice, right? Not so fast. Add in the annual data and text message charges, you get:

    All blackberry models:
    Monthly:
    BB Internet Service Plan: $29.99
    200 text/unlim M2M: $9.99

    Annually:
    Text: $119.88 (200+unlim/mo)
    Data: $359.88
    TOTAL: $479.76/yr

    Treo 750:
    Monthly:
    PDA Personal Plan MAX: $39.99 (inc 1500 text & web)

    Annually:
    Data/Text: $479.88
    TOTAL: $479.88 /yr

    iPhone 8GB
    Monthly:
    200 text: free
    200 more texts: $4.99
    Data: $20

    Annually:
    Text: $71.88
    Data: $240
    TOTAL: $299.88 /yr

    Now multiply out the first year of costs, including phone purchase price, data and text:
    BB Pearl: $579.75
    BB 8700c: $679.76
    iPhone: $698.88
    Treo 750: $728.88
    BB 8800: $779.76

    Wow! Surprise, after the 1 year basic costs necessary to use the internet with your smart phone, iPhone is just average cost! But wait, contract length for some of these is 2 years. Even if it weren't, who spends $250 or $300 on a phone that they'll only use for a year? So lets add another year to the cost analysis:

    Two-year cost of phones, including purchase price, monthly data, monthly text:
    iPhone: $998.76
    BB Pearl: $1059.51
    BB 8700c: $1159.52
    Treo 750: $1208.76
    BB 8800: $1259.52

    Oh wow! Looks like in the long run, the iPhone is cheaper than other popular comparable options! If you don't text at all, you can remove the text message options, but it doesn't make a difference in the ordering.

    STOP THE BITCHING ABOUT HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS!!
    iPhone has high UP-FRONT cost, but reasonable and sometimes even CHEAP long-term costs because of it's inclusive plan!

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley

Working...