Given the high rates of unemployment in the US and around the world (with possibly worse to come) this kind of consumer spending on luxury goods is pretty remarkable. Wonder how sustainable it is.
They often last for many more years than competitors' products, receive upgrades for longer, become obsolete less quickly, and Apple will repair them both under warranty and out of warranty. (Many competitors simply do not service their products.) And when you're finally done with your device, you can often still resell it on eBay and get even further value from it, again often for much more than with competitors' products of the same age.
Apple products on the lower end tend to be fantastic investments actually. And given how much we're working from home now, your primary devices for remote communication are hardly "luxury" and more "essential".
Haven't spent anything close to a MBP but I know people still using the 2015 model and holding up nicely. I guess price sort of correlates to build quality? Although same can't be said for resale value.
I did need to do a repair on the motherboard as it stopped charging but one repair after 7 years is crazy.
I’m planning on keeping my iPhone X past the end of the year, which takes it to a 3 year lifetime, which works out as ~$600/year which is amazing value.
My mother has a 6, and it still gets security updates for (IIRC) iOS 11.
It's her second 6, by the way. The battery on the first one started inflating, and they replaced it with a refurbished unit for the price of a new battery.
No other company plays in the same league as Apple when it comes to product support.
My two broken Macbooks in 3 years say otherwise.
This might have been true 5 years ago, but the countless complaints of keyboard issues with 2017-19 era Macbooks says otherwise.
Apple products are often obsolete in a few years, especially iPads and iPhones. Their entire line of laptops and desktops is now practically obsolete with the move to ARM. Apple products are luxury products for people who can afford to simply throw away a device when Apple decides it's stopping support. I have several Apple devices that still boot up just fine, have capable CPUs inside, but are completely useless because Apple just decided they weren't interested in supporting them anymore.
The iPhone 6s was released September 2015 and it will run iOS 14, due later this summer/fall.
My daily driver is a refurb iPhone 7 (released September 2016) and I'm running the public beta of iOS 14—it runs noticeably faster than it did running iOS 13 just a few weeks ago.
I’m pretty sure nothing from Samsung, Motorola or HTC that's 4 or 5 years-old can run this year's Android release. Or even last year's.
iPadOS 14 goes all the way back to the iPad Air 2, which was released October 2014—nearly 6 years ago.
Their entire line of laptops and desktops is now practically obsolete with the move to ARM.
Nope. All current Intel Macs will continue to be supported for years to come. Updated apps will be fat binaries—they'll run natively on Intel and ARM Macs, the same way fat binaries ran natively on PowerPC and 68K Macs back in the day.
macOS 11.0 Big Sur will run natively on both Intel and ARM-based Macs; so will next year's macOS 11.1. All of the important, mainstream apps (Microsoft Office, Creative Suite, Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher, etc.) will be updated to run on ARM-based Macs in addition to the existing Intel ones.
My last machine was a 10-year old 27-inch iMac that I still use as a server.
I have several Apple devices that still boot up just fine, have capable CPUs inside, but are completely useless because Apple just decided they weren't interested in supporting them anymore.
If they can still run Homebrew, there's lots of software, especially open source stuff, you can install and run. The core apps I use for web development like Vim, command line utilities, etc. work fine on unsupported Macs. If I had to, I could install FreeBSD or Linux and keep things moving.
Most indie developers allow you to download older versions of their apps if you're a registered user.
Macs that don't have 64-bit CPUs couldn't make the jump to 64-bit world, which Apple has been warning about for like 10-years.
At least android phones can still download apps from the google app store, older iOS devices are just cut off. I have a perfectly good original iPad that's basically useless. The iPad 4 is similarly useless.
>My last machine was a 10-year old 27-inch iMac that I still use as a server.
My current workstation is 10 years old, running Windows 10 like a champ. It's got one of the first 6-core CPUs in it, a recent graphics card, and 32GB of RAM which I may upgrade to 64GB because it's cheap - I have no real reason to get a new workstation, this thing is still running circles around most recent quad-core systems. Your 10 year old mac wishes it were this capable.
I feel really sorry for anyone buying a mac now, since they will be obsolete as soon as the ARM macs are out.
My 7 year-old iPhone 5s is still supported by Apple; it runs iOS 12.4.6 and I just installed a bunch of apps on it.
I feel really sorry for anyone buying a mac now, since they will be obsolete as soon as the ARM macs are out.
The first ARM Macs will start shipping in just a few months; the current Intel Macs won't be obsolete, since they too will get the new operating system and Universal apps will run just fine on both. What part of this are you not understanding?
There's a difference between not the latest and greatest (the ARM Macs) and current, supported machine, like any Mac that can run Big Sur.
I have a PowerPC iMac Mini somewhere—that's obsolete as far as Apple is concerned.
A necessity, not a luxury. Best security, best long term support, best re-sale value. If you're poor, an iPhone is the smartest choice. You need to AFFORD an Android device.
iPhone alone is ~50% of US market share: https://www.statista.com/topics/2711/us-smartphone-market/
Android splits the rest.
Presumably people are buying the best phone for their budget and needs. Per OP, "They don't own a PC, this is the only way to safely conduct e-commerce." How many people with an iPhone do you want to bet have a PC, versus how many people with a "junky low-end android"? I'll bet you vastly more iPhone owners have another computer.
Like it or not, HN is an English-language forum, run by a company based out of SF, and a lot of commentators presume that context. I try not to, just as I strive to use clear English for the benefit of ESL speakers. But it is the default.
iPad is the device to follow the stream of the school lesson.
iPad is what the manager got for his Zoom meetings.
A smartphone is probably one of the most essential and important devices in many peoples lives these days. Certainly one of the most used. There is the option of Android instead of Apple, but as someone pointed out one time, iPhones are cheaper than flagship Android devices if you account for the support lifetime of an iPhone being a lot longer than any Android device. And that's not counting the cheaper iPhone Apple launched recently.
Likewise, for many people, a computer would probably be considered an essential device. Sure there are cheaper Windows laptops, but the cost of switching ecosystems is potentially quite high, and if you're already in the i-device camp you're probably going to stick with a Mac due to its integration with all the other things you have (and had before the pandemic)
I would count iPads as largely luxury devices.
I have a lot of trouble characterizing tools as luxury goods. I don't consider my Dewalt tools "Luxury Goods" and they cost roughly twice what basic Harbor Freight tools cost.
You pay for longevity and performance. It's no different with phones/ tablets/ computers. If you want a phone or tablet that lasts 4+ years there is only one brand that offers that kind of device life.
Also, with Apple cranking out the base iPhone at $400, and the massive second hand market for iPhone, it's hard to argue many people associate the brand with luxury the way they do Coach or other luxury brands.
If anyone thought Apple was a "luxury" brand, the flop of the solid gold Apple Watch "Edition" sub-brand should have disabused them of the notion.
I still have my samsung after 5 years. I'm not sure why you'd consider it the only brand.
If you looked solely at Apple's revenue during 2008/2009 you wouldn't even know there was a crash, never mind one that was severe by any measure.
I don’t think these buying patterns are incongruous to reality on the ground. In other news, certainly alcohol and drug sales are up too.
For example, I don't think the volume they do in phones aligns with the typical notion of a luxury brand. The best-selling single smartphone model on the market is the iPhone. In analogy with the car market: BMW, Mercedes, Lexus do not have a best-selling model among them.
The iPhone is more like the Ford F-150, in terms of how it fits into the broader marketplace, than it is like a luxury car. The F-150 is not inexpensive! But it's not a luxury vehicle either.
Why am I bothering with this argument... because I think it leads to confusion about Apple's business, like the comment above. Apple does well because they sell products people want, on the high end of the range, but well within what a lot of people can afford.
As an example, pretty much every item of food is "luxury" if based on necessity alone. From bread to the cheapest vegetable in your location - except for items that might be the only locally available/affordable way of getting certain essential nutrients, you don't need that specific food for a healthy life.
But... if that food can only be grown on the other side of the world, and therefore is in short supply and/or very expensive relative to local wealth: suddenly maybe that vegetable, type of meat, or whatever is considered a luxury without becoming more of a dietary necessity.
Would the cheapest, most common Casio watch available be a luxury because I don't need to have the time on my wrist?
As to the subjective/contextual side: I don't know anything about pickups, but I consider my car a luxury to me, and yes that's more to do with necessity than cost - it's not a fancy car, I could afford a much more expensive one, but I very much don't need it. I've never used it in relation to work, I get my groceries delivered, etc. (But while I'd call it a luxury for my life, if asked what kind of car I have I'd never call it a "luxury car".)
$200 off the list price of the $399 iPhone SE. $8.33/month, with 0% APR for 24 months.
It has similar specs of a $1000 iPhone from a few years ago and is faster than any Android device you could buy for the same price.
Most carriers have the same deal.
If you don't live in NY or CA, those extra $600 a week can go very far, and have probably helped stimulate the economy greatly
California's unemployment benefit caps out at $450/week.
True. My girlfriend lost her job March. She is unemployed since then. We are not based in NY or CA. She has mentioned this to me several times that how much more she has in savings now. With all this time and some extra cash, I have asked her learn coding. She is working on her app idea.
600 a week is 2400 a month, which way over any entry level salary in Europe.
How inflated are the salaries in US? Or are people used to some really abnormal level of living?
And if you're on your own for it, it's the same, except you pay more and the quality of care is a lot lower because the "marketplace" plans are the absolute minimum the insurers can get away with and still comply with the law.
Yes, it’s called tax.
Entry-level tech compensation is ~$180K/year, mid-career = ~$600K/year. If you're not in tech you're screwed here - formerly middle-class professions like teachers/police/firemen live 4 to a 2BR apartment, or they buy houses an hour or more away. Even mid-career finance professionals get screwed - salary for CEO of a local (not nationwide) bank is in the ~$150-200K range, and barely competes with a new grad at Google or Facebook.
That's way high. A million-dollar house on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, assuming a 20% down payment, is ~4800/month including property tax. With a 10% down payment it would be about $5800/month.
To get to a $10k/month housing bill you need to buy a place that costs close to $2 million. The median sales price in Santa Clara county is closer to $1.3 or $1.4 million. Most people are paying a lot less than $10k/month for their house.
Low-end SFHs - we're talking a 3/2 built in the 1950s - go for about $1.8-$1.9M in Mountain View, $1.6-1.7M in Sunnyvale. A SFH like what you'd get in most of the rest of the U.S. - 4/2.5 or 5/3 on 1/4 acre lot, built somewhere between the 70s and 00s - will run about $2.4-2.8M.
Mountain View is one of the most expensive cities in the county, second to Palo Alto and maybe Los Altos. Most of the area is cheaper.
[0] https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/atd-U...
The minimum wage for adults worked full time in the UK (and similar in France) currently equates to 1,524EUR, which comes out as 1,807USD. Most salaried positions would yield more than that.
$2,400/month is the legal minimum wage in some cities. ($15/hour)
As an aside, we use new apps as a reward for various exceptional acts. My son looked at my phone not long after we started this and told me that I must have done a lot for my mom to have put so many icons on my phone.
Sucks because I want to upgrade to something a little bigger, and I don't want to pay an extra 10K just to have it right now. So I'll wait until January and see if the dealer is feeling more agreeable.
Usually RVs are bought in addition to other travel, they are more of a luxury item.
In the current environment where booking a hotel is considered by some risky RVs are bought as a necessity if one wants to travel.
I've seen plenty of newspaper items in the last few months about people who usually fly places for summer vacation putting that money into a used, or cheap new R.V.
Aside from not being able to fly out of the country, it apparently gives them peace of mind knowing they can take their quarantine bubble with them wherever they go.
I'm glad for it, though, we're going to put ours on the market in a couple weeks after our last planned camping trip for the year, a strong market will be good for resale. Hoping it weakens a bit over the winter, though, because before next season rolls around I'll want another.
Phones are luxury goods only up to a point. Especially once you're invested in an app store, it can cost a good deal to switch platforms. And it should be news to no one that having access to communications grows more, not less, important, the closer you get to stony broke.
I think you're incorrectly assuming people are good at any form of long term financial planning...
That's not luxury by any means, and is price competitive even with the cheapest of android phones.
Apple's lower price-point offerings might have old hardware, but its more than made up for it by just working & offering long-term support. Something no android phone can match.
I am also curious if increased internet usage in general is compensating for lower PPC as people are stuck at home.
https://www.bowdoin.edu/news/2020/07/bowdoin-to-provide-ipad...
But Facebook's ad engine allows micro-targeting, and is especially valuable to upstarts & small-businesses in times of changing behavior/consumer-loyalties.
To the extent big spenders free up inventory, Facebook has bidders-in-the-wings, offering just-a-little-less, and plenty of impressions among the 2.99 billion people who visit one of the Facebook family-of-sites monthly.
Remarkable either way because Apple stores were closed for most of the quarter.
My company recently announced everyone is staying home for at least the next 10 months, and is trying to get hundreds of iPhones for everyone who didn't have a company-issued phone before.
The company my wife works for is half at work, and half at home right now, but everyone is getting new phones, just in case.
If you're stuck at home you probably and in any case spend more time online and/or on your phone, which has to be good for whoever owns online app and music stores. (This also explains Facebook's good results).
All in all, it's not surprising that results are good for Apple. But it is not sustainable growth.
Seems likely a lot of this came from laptop and iPad sales for work-from-home, and home education respectively, as opposed to frivolous luxury consumer spending.
When I think of cutting back on luxury, I am looking for things with a very high incremental cost to incremental value ratio. Apple products could be one but it would be farrrr down the list speaking for myself and others I know.
If congress really does not extend benefits, there's bound to be a sizable negative effect.
The vast majority of Apple products and services are no where near "luxury" prices.
It is like leasing a car, except it is a hand computer.