Apple is not a luxury brand • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#21

Post by matwood » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 2:38 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #9

iamdave wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPod used to be a luxury item. It wasn't until places like Wal-Mart started the disconnect of labeling departments "iPods and MP3 Players" that it turned into just another gadget you'll probably find in a stolen laptop case.

As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for? Also I am not sure I follow the logic: because Walmart has a MP3 player section, suddenly iPods are must-have items?

I am surprised that people still buy them - what for?

I really like the matchbook, clip type shuffles for working out. They are super light, pretty much indestructible and have a built in clip.

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#22

Post by revorad » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 2:40 PM UTC

Confusion wrote: post #17

The biggest attention-grabbing-headline to content-supporting-that-headline ratio to reach #1 today.

It would be a fun experiment to replace the headlines on HN with topic tags, author and source.

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#23

Post by ThomPete » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 2:43 PM UTC

sudont wrote: post #8

ThomPete wrote: post #2

Yes apple used to be a luxury brand. That is until they developed the worlds first consumer iOS and started selling consumer hardware (entire iFamily). The real question is whether Apple will continue to develop osX for the workstation market. Personally I think that apple has been slacking on any interesting development for those of us who work professionally with computers. Where is the improvement & innovations in…

Automator, Time Machine, Spotlight. All are major developments, all are so well-defined that they’re banal. A good design is one for the ages, and I assume “improvement” is churn. Apple’s work with WebKit, LLVM and OpenCL is the interesting development for those working professionally with computers.

Banal to developers not to everyone else. Spotlight hopefully isn't the last word in document/app handling

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#24

Post by zdw » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 2:46 PM UTC

Not to get into semantics, but this meme has been going around for a while: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/05/luxury-vs-pr...

(link is from From DF a while ago: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2009/05/18/luxury-premium )

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#25

Post by geekfactor » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 2:55 PM UTC

xentronium wrote: post #20

geekfactor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ulimate design?

Well, I believe that apple are the only guys that get industrial design right, but I'm probably just a fanboy. Their software design is also arguably the best there is.

Ah. Thought there was a new app, "Ultimate Design," that I needed to investigate :-)

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#26

Post by rimantas » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 3:06 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #2

Yes apple used to be a luxury brand. That is until they developed the worlds first consumer iOS and started selling consumer hardware (entire iFamily). The real question is whether Apple will continue to develop osX for the workstation market. Personally I think that apple has been slacking on any interesting development for those of us who work professionally with computers. Where is the improvement & innovations in…

  > file browsing

Expect to see less of that from Apple. You don't usually think about files when on iPhone/iPod touch/iPad and I expect the trend to stay: the more consumer friendly system is, the less filesystem is exposed.

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#27

Post by macco » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 4:11 PM UTC

"Android is poised capture much of that growth." - UUh, the biggest lie ever told. :)

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#28

Post by weaksauce » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 4:23 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #9

iamdave wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPod used to be a luxury item. It wasn't until places like Wal-Mart started the disconnect of labeling departments "iPods and MP3 Players" that it turned into just another gadget you'll probably find in a stolen laptop case.

As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for? Also I am not sure I follow the logic: because Walmart has a MP3 player section, suddenly iPods are must-have items?

Well I have one in my car to hold and play all of the music I have ever owned without having to flip through thousands of CDs.

If they ever get rid of the large classic iPod it will force me to go to another mp3 device.

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#29

Post by bourdine » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 4:29 PM UTC

I worked in the citadel of machinery to promote luxury brands - in GQ, my wife - in Vogue. And we have a very simple view on this matter - if you share the view that there are luxury brands, and there are the usual brands, then propaganda reached up to you. And this discussion is very sad, because here assembled smart people, well aware that the main thing - it's functional, not design, and luxury designed for people who do not understand it.

Re: Apple is not a luxury brand

#30

Post by nickpinkston » Mon, Dec 27, 2010, 4:32 PM UTC

jey wrote: post #12

> Apple is no more exclusive than the GAP or Target or eating at Red Lobster. Definitely true, but he also undermines his own argument here: Yes, Red Lobster is not Chez Panisse and Apple is not Rolex, but to large parts of society Red Lobster is considered expensive and not worth it. It's not "exclusive", but it's still at the top of the "normal" bracket. There's a lot of middle class people who'd rather shop at Koh…

Yea, I agree. Just because a Corvette Z06 is a bargain compared to a Ferrari 430, doesn't mean most people won't still think it's too expensive.