That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people • Hacker News Board

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#251

Post by protomyth » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:32 PM UTC

ar0 wrote: post #55

rockshassa wrote: post #12

I just can't bring myself to feel the author's anger, in any capacity. He wants to position this as a jab against those who build their own PCs, but that is utterly irrelevant. What percentage of those 600 million five-year-old PCs do you really think are being thoughtfully maintained by modders? Does the author realize that most people do not want the responsibility of maintaining their own hardware? Or that they do…

I guess it depends on the interpretation of Phil Schiller's statement. You are basically arguing "for many people an iPad is a better computing device than a PC because there is less that can go wrong with it". Which I think is a very valid point, however it does not hinge on how old these PCs are - your argument works just as well for new PCs without properly configured backups and anti-virus protection. If you read…

> What the author of the article finds offensive - and which also put me off when watching the live presentation - was the suggestion that using old hardware is "sad".

Using old hardware is sad. I work in a depressed area and we constantly fix our students computers. 5 years is a long time on a hard drive and the forced Windows 10 upgrade has been a pain to people on 5 year old hardware. Its fine for technical people, but for the nontechnical that HD failure is devastation. Having your stuff stored on iCloud or the Google equivalent is a life saver.

The economics of apps on iOS and Chrome while painful for developers are great for normal people. With the better security and lessened management requirements, these computers make a fairly good replacement case. Technical people often forget what a pain in the butt Windows, OS X, and BSD/Linux are to maintain. Also, the iPads are lasting a fair bit (making for some interesting iPad sales numbers).

Chromebooks are viable, and if Apple sold an Apple TV with a keyboard and mouse (or other pointing device) that had Pages, etc., I would recommend that. As is, iPads are fine. Heck, if Microsoft had got their stuff together a Microsoft Continuum[1] style device would be great.

Plus, the author is using the "I have an agenda and will be twisting your word" version of a quote. I'm a bit sick of people pulling this stunt since its wall to wall in election coverage.

1) http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10/getstarted-con...

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#252

Post by js2 » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:33 PM UTC

Intermernet wrote: post #233

js2 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iphones are absolutely just for prestige I have an iPhone 6S (and previously an iPhone 5) on Verizon, through my employer. Personally, my wife has a Nexus 4 and my daugther a Moto G, both on T-Mobile pre-paid. Both of them tell me about crappy network coverage, poor camera image quality, and so forth. I'm not saying these aren't perfectly acceptable alternatives when you're on a budget or are frugal or these just are…

Network coverage has little to do with the phone (it can, but it's minimal). Poor camera and image quality are not purely Apple solvable. The Sony xperia range have brilliant cameras and image quality (unfortunately the Sony UI is sub-optimal in other areas). Also, An iPhone 6S would be more reasonably compared to a Nexus 6P, not a Nexus 4. The iPhone doesn't have a monopoly on quality,

> Network coverage has little to do with the phone

The network coverage part of my comment was in reference to freedompop. Not sure who freedompop contracts with, but I went with T-Mobile because at the time they were much cheaper than Verizon. Their coverage is also much worse in my area.

> The iPhone doesn't have a monopoly on quality

I didn't claimed that it does. They were examples of devices I have direct experience with. The iPhone 5 was a similar generation to the Nexus 4 and Moto G and was a better (but more expensive) device. The Sony xperia devices similarly cost more than a Moto G, do they not? And you just wrote they have a suboptimal UI, so for someone who cares about that, that might rule out those devices.

My argument is not that iPhones are the only quality devices. It's that spending more usually gets you a better product, not just a more prestigious one.

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#253

Post by akerro » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:34 PM UTC

rileymat2 wrote: post #60

waspleg wrote: post #41

I completely agree with the author of the article. Apple is the real-world incarnation of the economic premise of Huxley's "A Brave New World". This was just the mask dropping for a second to pander to the faithful. I'd like to add, as someone who works at K12 public high school, that I've seen the reality of the article played out. My building is 100% free lunch, most are extremely poor, and yet there is a sizable n…

I am not sure if I was suddenly without money, the iPhone would be what I would want to give up. The utility of the device is incredible: Mapping. Phone. Internet. Email. Alarm Clock. Calendaring. Photography. If anything we should work to get smart phones in the hands of the poor. It would be a great way to improve their lives for a somewhat modest cost. I am not sure it is all for looks. Maybe we could quibble abou…

>Mapping. Phone. Internet. Email. Alarm Clock. Calendaring. Photography.

Soo... It does exactly the same as my LG with Android 2.2 that costed me ~$70 2.5 years ago?

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#254

Post by widowlark » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:34 PM UTC

rileymat2 wrote: post #60

waspleg wrote: post #41

I completely agree with the author of the article. Apple is the real-world incarnation of the economic premise of Huxley's "A Brave New World". This was just the mask dropping for a second to pander to the faithful. I'd like to add, as someone who works at K12 public high school, that I've seen the reality of the article played out. My building is 100% free lunch, most are extremely poor, and yet there is a sizable n…

I am not sure if I was suddenly without money, the iPhone would be what I would want to give up. The utility of the device is incredible: Mapping. Phone. Internet. Email. Alarm Clock. Calendaring. Photography. If anything we should work to get smart phones in the hands of the poor. It would be a great way to improve their lives for a somewhat modest cost. I am not sure it is all for looks. Maybe we could quibble abou…

I think you're off base. There are plenty of devices out there (android, windows phone) which have all the utility of the iPhone, but cost half the price of the iPhone (or less). To suggest that an iPhone is the only device capable of these things and therefore is a fixed cost is incorrect, IMO

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#255

Post by frogpelt » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:35 PM UTC

This is so silly. Apple is a company that makes money when you buy their products.

If there are 600 million people who are using something besides one of their product they are going to say that those people should use their products instead.

Get off your high horse.

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#256

Post by vinceguidry » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:35 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #206

zanny wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was going to say this. If you are legitimately poor, you can get a used Moto G 2013 for $35 and activate it on Freedompop for some free data each month and use wifi wherever possible. That would be a phone on a budget. iphones are absolutely just for prestige, the same way Macbooks in universities are.

If you're poor and don't want everyone around you to know it, why would you buy the phone that screams "hey, I'm poor and got the cheapest possible phone!" Everyone has something they do to stand out from the people that surround them. It's cruel to suggest that folks living in poverty can only be deserving of assistance if they embrace their poverty and advertise it to the world. There are real costs to appearing po…

> It's cruel to suggest that folks living in poverty can only be deserving of assistance if they embrace their poverty and advertise it to the world. There are real costs to appearing poor in our society.

Can you offer an alternative? I can't see anything else being workable and not insanely expensive.

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#257

Post by timje1 » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:35 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #146

noxToken wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not sure if I was suddenly without money, the iPhone would be what I would want to give up. If you have an iPhone and then become poor, sure. You probably won't get ahead much by getting rid of your iPhone. If you're already poor, then an iPhone (not a smartphone) is definitely a luxury. There are capable smartphones for much cheaper then an iPhone that could get the job done. That's what GP was likely getting…

I bought an iPhone 3GS in 2009, that's 6 and a half years ago and my daughter now uses it at school. It even still connects to the App Store. Other than a cracked screen it works fine. Battery life isn't great, but it gets her through the school day. These things have incredible lifetimes and also keep their resale value very well. So in terms of value, I'm not convinced that iPhones are a frivolous luxury. In my exp…

iPhones are still pretty poor value for money compared to cheap androids, as long as you can get reasonable pay-as-you-go contracts as well.

I'm not sure how that situation changes in the US, where there doesn't seem to be the same market for pay-as-you-go sims that is found in the rest of the world.

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#258

Post by touristtam » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:35 PM UTC

ysavir wrote: post #35

Did you know there are over 600 million Honda Civics over 5 years old still on the roads? Hah! Clearly, their owners should replace them with Porsche 911s instead.

Porsche 911? Rubbish I say! You should seriously consider a Tesla if you are to have something better, than an internal combustion engine.

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#259

Post by rdancer » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:36 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #146

noxToken wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not sure if I was suddenly without money, the iPhone would be what I would want to give up. If you have an iPhone and then become poor, sure. You probably won't get ahead much by getting rid of your iPhone. If you're already poor, then an iPhone (not a smartphone) is definitely a luxury. There are capable smartphones for much cheaper then an iPhone that could get the job done. That's what GP was likely getting…

I bought an iPhone 3GS in 2009, that's 6 and a half years ago and my daughter now uses it at school. It even still connects to the App Store. Other than a cracked screen it works fine. Battery life isn't great, but it gets her through the school day. These things have incredible lifetimes and also keep their resale value very well. So in terms of value, I'm not convinced that iPhones are a frivolous luxury. In my exp…

To add some real-world numbers: The resale value has dropped about £100 per year for the entire line-up ever since launch. So if I can buy a second-hand used model at a price that I can currently afford, and re-sell it in a year's time for £100 less, and buy the next model. Meanwhile, I have had the best (if not the fastest) computer money can buy, with the latest operating system. For £1.91/week, the price of a bus fare or a cheap meal.

I can go up or down a model at any given time, as the hardware behaves as a commodity, and there is little penalty for trading, both price-wise, and restoring the settings and contents of the device. It is a good store of value, with the only cost of ownership the steady depreciation. And if you can buy below market and sell above market, extracting value from folks who are not as thrifty as you are, you can drive the cost even lower, or possibly even make a profit.

I have bought a "4" in spring 2011 (£350, sold for £40; 1 × battery replacement £10, 1 × screen & button replacement for free from a friend's junker), and a "5S" last year (£230, current re-sale value £170+). The actual cost over the five years has been £1.50/week, £79/year).

Re: That awkward moment when Apple mocked good hardware and poor people

#260

Post by majani » Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 2:36 PM UTC

petra wrote: post #231

waspleg wrote: post #41

I completely agree with the author of the article. Apple is the real-world incarnation of the economic premise of Huxley's "A Brave New World". This was just the mask dropping for a second to pander to the faithful. I'd like to add, as someone who works at K12 public high school, that I've seen the reality of the article played out. My building is 100% free lunch, most are extremely poor, and yet there is a sizable n…

One thing most of us here might agree on - beyond everything else - the iPhone is a status symbol - carrying some social value. So one interesting question is - how can this be disrupted(by a phone costing half the price) ? Is it even possible ?

It'll just run out of fashion with time. 10 years ago, flip phones, slide up phones and two ways were the status symbols. Fashion is cyclical, maybe we'll see the return of the flip? :)