Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 730 posts

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#691

Post by sctb »

gwatch wrote: post #401
wutwutwutwut wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep the base price for a Iphone 7 Plus in Sweden is 1100$. Not sure it makes sense comparing prices like this though. In Sweden the cost of an iphone does not compete with your ability to get access to health care or education for example.

I will take my cheaper iPhone and pay for my own health care. It costs me way less to pay for my own healthcare, rather than surrendering my private property (paying higher taxes) to the government. It is immoral to force me to pay for the healthcare of other freeloaders. In case you haven't noticed, in Sweden your welfare state is already crumbling. It is unsustainable over a long run, not to mention, immoral.

We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#692

Post by omnimus »

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.

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#693

Post by chimeracoder »

dragonwriter wrote: post #648
chimeracoder wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Emergency rooms only have to stabilize you, they don't have to treat you. It's a big difference. No, and you don't want an emergency room treating you, because emergency physicians aren't trained to provide anything other than acute care. That said, the point is moot, because once a patient is stabilized, if they need further care, they'll be admitted, and receive care from an internist. Afterwards, they'll receive…

> That said, the point is moot, because once a patient is stabilized, if they need further care, they'll be admitted, and receive care from an internist. No, they often won't , because while ER stabilization without regard to ability to pay is mandatory, subsequent admission and treatment is not. If the condition is not stabilized in the ER, they may be admitted for stabilization to fulfill the mandate, but there is…

> No, they often won't, because while ER stabilization without regard to ability to pay is mandatory, subsequent admission and treatment is not. If the condition is not stabilized in the ER, they may be admitted for stabilization to fulfill the mandate, but there is no mandate for admission for treatment after stabilization.

That's not really true, and it's a common misconception that arises due to the way the ER mandate is specified in law (explicitly, and via a single bill), as opposed to the confluence of a few different regulations.

In short, because of the intersection of ways in which hospitals are and are not allowed to discriminate against patients by insurance status, what ends up happening in practice is that the decision to admit a patient is rarely made with the patient's insurance status as a determining factor.

That's especially true for public hospitals, but it's true of many private hospital situations as well. (Note that this doesn't apply to the decision of which hospital to admit a patient to - a single ER which has more than one associated hospital may decide to admit a patient to the public hospital instead of the private one based on their insurance status).

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#695

Post by dogruck »

ashark wrote: post #670
dogruck wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people with inside connections, more power, or who make extra payments get the top docs. Regular folk get the rest.

If that's true, then it's more or less the same, no?

Agreed. Except I think the "free" setup is much more expensive.

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#696

Post by pcurve »

ihateneckbeards wrote: post #5

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

Apple and other computer makers have tried the social standing thing too with their products, but thye have always failed. It only works up until certain point.

I do think that there are markets for $2,000, $3,000, $4,000 iphone, but they must provide functional enhancements over $1,000 model, be it insanely good camera, insanely good display, 1TB storage, or 50% more battery life in same form factor.

With computers and devices, it's more about practical utility.

So why doesn't Apple do this? Because the market for $2-$5,000 phone is too small, and given Apple's reliance on parts maker, they can only have so much competitive edge. (i.e. if they can do it, then so can Android)

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#697

Post by Gaelan »

danielrmay wrote: post #230
Gaelan wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the Note is equivalent to Apple's Plus models.

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

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

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#698

Post by Broken_Hippo »

e12e wrote: post #662
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, or worse. I'm American. I live in Norway. Most folks I talk to from other countries - not just Europe - find the American health care system to be cruel and too expensive for the common person. And by the way, I do not buy subsidized insurance. I pay my taxes, and I have health insurance. My taxes pay for health insurance. There is nothing else to pay to get that, other than a small fee for the doctor out of poc…

Nit: "everyone" pays taxes - you get healthcare even if you don't pay any taxes (eg: college student without taxable income, unemployed not receiving benefits (yes, there's income tax on unemployment benefits)).

That's a very small bit of the population, but you are right. Nearly everyone gets health care, minus some classes of immigrants. I knew there were taxes on unemployment benefits (and i'm not opposed to that). But even the folks not paying employment taxes generally pay tax through food, transportation, entertainment, and other things.

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#699

Post by acty1 »

Isn't this more of a statement of the USD purchasing power than anything else?

I mean, when the first iPhone was released a decade ago, the USD had double the purchasing power.

But thanks to printing money, we get crazy inflation.

The latest iPhone only costs about $600 USD in 2007 dollars.

Re: With a $1k Price, Apple’s iPhone Crosses a Threshold

#700

Post by KozmoNau7 »

overcast wrote: post #535
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A few seconds of waiting is not "truly inconvenient"? I suppose you're either a zen master, or not doing much with the phone (possibly because it's "a tad slow")." No, he just isn't possessed by the ridiculous "must go faster, must go faster" mindset that plagues most people today. A website takes more than a second to load? ARGH it must be down, now my day is ruined! Just relax, if a small delay is enough to make y…

The entire computing world revolves around "must go faster, must go faster". How likely are you to stay on a website that takes a few seconds for each action? You're not. EVERYONE optimizes for it. Every 100MS of latency, Amazon loses 1% of revenue, and that's only ONE TENTH of a second. http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/08/radar-theme-web-ops.html You may have the patience of a saint, but the majority of the world does…

Well, there majority of the world consists of idiots, so there's that.
Post reply on HN