11–20 of 416 posts
There are so many industries that get into shady territory: rental cars ("facility use fees"), hotels ("resort fees"), internet access ("mandatory equipment rental fees"), even SF restaurants ("SF mandate").
I'm saying Apple is wrong, and so are many other companies, and shouldn't we have fixed this with a law by this point?
Slightly misleading yes, but we're talking about $30 on phones that cost nearly a $1000. Accusing Apple of playing "marketing games" with carriers is a bit of a stretch.
I saw that on their page - I wasn't as offended about the pricing differential as the post, but I was groaning during the whole verizon pitch. I wonder how much verizon paid for that placement. It felt extremely out of place and very cringy IMO.
I agree with that. Apple should not appear to be in bed with any particular vendor. They have done a good job in the past maintaining their independence and it should continue. It’s just a chip off their armor but they are additive.
Why doesn't the US have universal laws that cover price transparency in general? There are so many industries that get into shady territory: rental cars ("facility use fees"), hotels ("resort fees"), internet access ("mandatory equipment rental fees"), even SF restaurants ("SF mandate"). I'm saying Apple is wrong, and so are many other companies, and shouldn't we have fixed this with a law by this point?
Our government is down at the moment, and on-call has no idea how to resolve the issue.
I saw that on their page - I wasn't as offended about the pricing differential as the post, but I was groaning during the whole verizon pitch. I wonder how much verizon paid for that placement. It felt extremely out of place and very cringy IMO.
At least they didn't force a U2 album on you this time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole presentation I was wondering how much Verizon paid as well. Between the pricing reveal and the conflation of their 28GHz deployment as a standard 5G experience, it seemed like it was the iPhone sponsored by Verizon.
I wonder if that means we'll start seeing iPhones with carrier branding.
Slightly misleading yes, but we're talking about $30 on phones that cost nearly a $1000. Accusing Apple of playing "marketing games" with carriers is a bit of a stretch.
Slightly misleading yes, but we're talking about $30 on phones that cost nearly a $1000. Accusing Apple of playing "marketing games" with carriers is a bit of a stretch.
actually it is on a phone that costs $699 i.e. a 4.3% price increase
I saw that on their page - I wasn't as offended about the pricing differential as the post, but I was groaning during the whole verizon pitch. I wonder how much verizon paid for that placement. It felt extremely out of place and very cringy IMO.
I agree with that. Apple should not appear to be in bed with any particular vendor. They have done a good job in the past maintaining their independence and it should continue. It’s just a chip off their armor but they are additive.