Hacker News Reader

Comment by dijit | Hacker News Reader

I never understood this argument.

Theres no “status” to a brand of phone when the cheapest point of entry is comparable and the flagship is cheaper than the alternative flagship.

Marketing in most of europe is chiefly not the same as the US though so maybe its a perspective thing.

I just find it hard to really argue “status” when the last 4 iPhone generations are largely the same and cheaper than the Samsung flagships.

At Elgiganten a Samsung S24 Ultra is 19,490 SEK[0].

The most expensive iPhone 15 pro max is 18,784 SEK at the same store[1].

[0]: https://nya.elgiganten.se/product/mobiler-tablets-smartklock...

[1]: https://nya.elgiganten.se/product/mobiler-tablets-smartklock...

View on HN

My take is that it's like a fashion accessory. People buy Gucci for the brand, not the material or comfort.

Rich people ask for the latest most expensive iPhone even if they're only going to use WhatsApp and Instagram on it. It's not because of privacy or functionality, it's simply to show off to everyone they can purchase it. Also to not stand out within their peers as the only one without it.

As another content said: it's not an argument, it's a fact here.

I have an iPhone so I guess I qualify as a rich person by your definition. I am also a software engineer. I cannot state enough how bogus that statement is. I've used both iPhone and Android, and recent flagships. iPhone is by far the easiest one to use. Speaking in more objective terms, iPhones have a coherent UI which maintains its consistency both throughout the OS and over the years. They're the most dumbed down phones and easiest to understand. I recommend iPhone to all my friends and relatives.

There's obviously tons of people who see iPhone as a status item. They're right, because iPhone is expensive and only the rich can buy them. This doesn't mean iPhone is not the best option out there for a person who doesn't want to extensively customize his phone and just use it.

Yes, by pure statistics you are probably rich compared to everyone else. The average software developer salary is way bigger than the average salary for the entirety of the US. Let's not even mention compared to the rest of the world.

Sure, some people pick up the iPhone because they like the specs, or the apps, or whatever else. That's why I said the majority picks it up for status, not all. But keep in mind nobody's judging the iPhone's specs or capabilities here. We're talking about why people buy it.

Ask any teenager why they want an iPhone. I'd be very surprised if even one said it's because of privacy. It's because of the stupid blue bubble, which is a proxy for status.

I'm pretty sure if Apple released the same phone again with a new name and design, people would still buy it. For the majority, it's not because of features, ease of use, specs, etc: it's status.

> iPhone and Android, and recent flagships. iPhone is by far the easiest one to use. Speaking in more objective terms, iPhones have a coherent UI

It’s not about if you’ve used android, it’s about if you’ve beeen poor-ish or stingy

To some people those are luxuries- the most expensive phone they buy is a mid-range Motorola for $300 with snapdragon 750g or whatever. They run all the same apps after all, they take photos.

iPhones are simply outside of your budget.

Its not an argument, just ask why people lust after the latest iPhones in poor countries. They do it because they see rich people owning them. Unless you experience that, you won't really understand it.

The cheapest point of entry is absolutely not comparable. The cheapest new iPhone on apple.com is $429. The cheapest new Samsung on samsung.com is $199 (They do have a phone listed for $159, but it's button says "Notify Me").

Granted, you may have been leaning very heavily on the dictionary definition of "comparable", in that the two numbers are able to be compared. However, when the conclusion of that comparison is "More than twice the price", I think you should lead with that.

Keep in mind, the iPhone SE is using a 3 year old processor, the Samsung A15 was released 5 months ago with a brand new processor.

Is this brand new cpu faster or more energy efficient?

Yes.

According to various sites, the Mediatek Dimensity 6100+ is a 6nm update to a core that was released 3 years ago (Dimensity 700 on a 7nm). It's 5-10% faster, likely due to the update from 7 to 6nm, as the cores are the same and run at the same speed. It contains an updated bluetooth chipset (from 5.1 to 5.2) and supports a larger max camera. The camera on the A15 is well below the max size of the previous chipset, however, the increased camera bandwidth should ensure that the camera feels snappier (a common complaint on low-end phones). The process improvement should increase efficiency as well, however, there are not benchmarks that are able to test this.

It's fashion and the kids are hip. But there is an endless void of Apple haters here who want to see it burn. They have nothing in common with 99.9% of the customer base.

I was thinking about this for a while, the problem is not about apple, it’s the fact that the rest of the industry is gutless, and has zero vision or leadership. Whatever Apple does, the rest of the industry will follow or oppose - but will be defined by it.

It’s like how people who don’t like US and want nothing to do with US still discuss US politics, because it has so much effect everywhere.

(Ironically no enough people discuss China in any coherent level of understanding)

You're absolutely right, I'm so glad that Apple was the first company to release a phone with a touch screen, or a phone with an app store, or a smart watch or a VR headset.

Apple doesn't release new products, they wait until the actual brave and innovating companies have done the exploration and then capitalize on all of their learnings. Because they are never the first movers and they have mountains of cash, they're able to enter the market without the baggage of early adopters. They don't have to worry about maintaining their early prototypes.

Apple doesn't innovate or show leadership, they wait until the innovators have proven that the market is big enough to handle Apple, then they swoop in with a product that combines the visions of the companies that were competing.

Apple is great at what they do, don't get me wrong. And swooping in when the market is right is just good business. Just don't mistake that for innovation or leadership.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com