The Thrifty Techie has assiduously avoided Apple products. As a vertically integrated business, Apple's products have always been significantly more expensive than other alternatives. Apple sold with the slogan: "It just works", which appeals to consumers who will pay for simplicity at the cost of customization. With this in mind, Apple's announcement of the iPhone 6 and iOS 8 lit up the Thrifty Techie's mental radar. Apple designers persisted through several iterations of the iPhone to insist that a 3.5" screen (with a retina display) was the perfect size for a cell phone. But the market for 4" smartphones which cost for more than $300 is shrinking. In fact, the iPhone now only occupies 32.5% of the smartphone market. So much was made about the iPhone 6 increasing its screen size to 4.7" and the iPhone6 Plus measuring 5.5". A screen larger than 4.0" seems much easier to type on a virtual QWERTY capacitive keyboard. One wonders if a 5.5" device is more a phablet which one does not pocket or clutch for prolonged period. Nonetheless, Samsung has scored with their Note line of cellphones and Apple designers look to emulate that success. What is more significant is Apple's emphasis on data security and personalization. Civil libertarians should appreciate Apple's insistence that it can no longer comply with responding to government warrants because of the iOS 8 passcode feature.
The new Apple operating system is downloadable for older devices and will also work on the iPad. This sense of personal data security should compliment the consumer acceptance of Apple Pay, an NFC powered mobile payment system. Now Apple can concentrate on selling some reluctant retailers, like Walmart and Best Buy, into paying for the expensive infrastructure to facilitate Apple Pay.
One of the costly monthly expenses for most households in America is their cellular phone bill. The CTIA Wireless Association estimates that average cell phone bill was $47 in 2012 but many individuals pay double that amount. The CTIA figures do not factor in the costs of handsets or choices for “reasonable” plans Smart phone consumers comprise 46% of the market (including 66% of youths aged 21-30). The CTIA figures do not factor in the costs of handsets or choices for “reasonable” plans. So there may be a low cost plan, but if one is required to carry a data package, monthly costs precipitously increase. Another reality is that the most of the major American cellular carriers push subsidized phones with strict two year agreements. Few cellular consumers consider the overall costs incurred with such a subsidized cell phone contract. Such customers are are more concerned about getting what they perceive is the latest and greatest handset for a couple of hundred dollars down (usually 1/3rd of the actual cost) while paying a significantly higher amount in the monthly cellular bill then they might pay otherwise. Tero Kuittinen, an independent market analyst from Alekstra, notes: "That psychology has worked for hundreds of years, and it’s still working.” Another factor to consider is the attachment that many people feel toward their cellular purchases. AT and T retained gripping customers for years because it retained a monopoly on i-Phones, which had a less generous plan and cost more than other smartphones, but those in the Apple cult craved it. It seems akin to the mentality which drives new car purchases that customers will overspend to get that “new car smell” for a durable that loses 20% immediately after purchase. T-Mobile took the lead among cell providers in weaning prospective customers from the subsidized cell phone model with their Simple Choice plan. But an alternate model which T-Mobile innovated but had more success in competitors emulating is the “Next, Edge, Jump” and “OneUp”. These programs which are essentially cell phone installment payment plans. Consumers lease a phone by paying a bit extra ($10-20 a month plus up to $10 for the privilege) for 20 to 24 months but with the ability to upgrade in six months to a year. But if consumers do not “jump”, then they will pay significantly more as there is no subsidy underwriting the purchase. This sort of gimmick may have some appeal to digerati would constantly want to upgrade without being locked in a contract, even though they are effectively locked in a contract. Alas, cell phone services are not fungible. Aside from the handset cost, choice of carriers are impacted by coverage. An inexpensive plan is worthless if one does not get range in one’s preferred calling area. Verizon Wireless has the best coverage but people pay a premium for the extensive coverage. But most customers may not need such extensive range. Cost conscious consumers should know that they can cut their cellular costs in half (or more), by using Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs), pre-paid cell plans and fremium cell providers like FreedomPop. But the reality is that according to Ovum, only 23% of cellular customer have opted for such frugal mobile phone service. As MNVOs and the ilk do not have the deep pockets for advertising, they have a dubious reputation. In fact, when breaking up with Sprint to switch to one of its MVNOs Virgin Mobile to save half on cell costs, the customer service representative thought that it was a compelling argument to sneer “Well, that’s a pre-paid phone”. As a customer who had been off his contract for over a year and did not need another handset, that was a less than convincing ploy. Usually, second tier cellular carriers offer less current handsets. Even though these cell phones may only have been on the market for six months, finicky consumers turn their noses at these out of data handsets. Sometimes, upgrades are prudent, such as switching from a 3G phone to one that also gets faster 4G or LTE coverage. But when a new release is buggy, or simply has minor cosmetic changes, a savvy consumer should question whether the latest is really the greatest.Of course, with Apple i-Phones, a consumer can not replace the rechargable battery himself, so it may only be good for around 18 months before starts to need replacement. Personally, I have always considered the cellular phone plan to be more important than the particular handset. In addition, I tend to baby my cell phone, so it has less wear and tear on the unit. But my experience switching cellular carriers from a Sprint HTC Evo with a 4.3" capacitive screen to a Virgin Mobile Samsung Victory (Galaxy II) with a 4.0" but with 4G LTE has demonstrated that the slight difference in display size impacts inputting on a virtual QWERTY. What may drive my decision to switch cellular companies again is whether FreedomPop allows for Bring Your Own Devices with their Freemium model roll out. I would not buy one of FreedomPop’s outdated and refurbished HTC Evo Designs for $99 (or later $149), but I would happily switch to FreedomPop to get 200 voice minutes, 500 texts and 500 MB of data for free. FreedomPop is relying on consumers to add on to their free base. I might get unlimited calls and texts with a half Gig of data for $10.99. But since FreedomPop will allow for tethering (hotspots) and they charge $10 per Gig of data, my old HTC Evo might be a supplemental hotspot for months that I need it. In another phase of its Un-carrier campaign, T-Mobile tried to wreck the international roaming racket. T-Mobile stopped charging more for international text for Simple Choice customers when sending to 100+ countries. Calls to Simple Global countries aside from the US are at $0.20 a minute. Most importantly, there is no outrageous international data roaming charges at standard speeds. However there are some caveats to this International Roaming largesse. Alas, T-Mobile considers 2G (or 128 kbs) to be an ideal speed for e-mail, social media, web pages and navigation but it such speeds would be painfully slow for graphic intensive applications. So T-Mobile also offers three speed boost plans for international travelers. One day of higher data speed (100 MB) for $15, one week (200 MB) for $25 and two weeks (500 MB) for $50. This would be good for international travelers keeping in touch at home but operating on a guarded basis . Since T-Mobile allows BYOD for GSM phones, it might pay for a traveler not taking a quick jaunt overseas to pick up an old unlocked GSM phone and sticking with T-Mobile. Or they could just use that unlocked GSM phone with local SIM cards. As America enters harder economic times, more consumers may try to beat the high cost of living by answering the call to cheaper cellular services.
Apple engenders an almost fanatical level of loyalty from its consumers. ATT solidified its market position as a strong second in the US cell phone market by being the exclusive of the iPhone for years when it first came out. But now, nearly every cellular carrier, including MVNOs like Virgin Mobile and Ting can offer their customers the iPhone without the iron clad two year contract, albeit without a handset subsidy.
Admittedly, I have never owned an Apple product. Not because I am a technological Luddite, but because I refuse to pay the stupid tax. Since Apple is a vertically integrated company, meaning that they control the design and manufacturing of phones, the marketing of the handsets as well as vet any software on their devices, everything goes through Cupertino. So one pays a premium for an Apple device, the software tends to be more expensive (because it is programmed in house or needs to be customized for Apple). Nearly all computer peripherals needed come from Cupertino. Apple wants to care for its own products (with so called geniuses) with exclusive (and more costly) insurance and care programs. In addition, they wanted to corner the market on media, by forcing media purchases through I-Tunes which used to lock it with DRM. Now it just makes it extremely inconvenient to take it out of i-Tunes. Apple is also currently engaged in an anti-trust trial for conspiring with five major publishers to raise the prices of e-books and undercut Amazon. For these reasons, I consider Apple ownership as people paying the stupid tax, however I appreciate that 18% of the cell phone market will willingly pay this premium for Apple's i-Phones because of the perception that "it just works" at practically any price. This vertical integration allows Apple to have a uniform user experience. So the home screens on every i-Phone will be the same. Steve Jobs had animus against Adobe and refused to let Flash Video on Apple devices. There may have been principled reasons about battery life which inspired Job's vendetta, but Walter Issacson's biography of Steve Jobs intimates that Jobs had sour grapes about Adobe after Adobe favored Windows based video editing products. These design decisions may have ensured the walled garden stability of the i-Phone but this forced i-Phone users to either jail break their phones or forgo many websites that use embedded Flash video. Now the internet imbroglio is a Flash in the pan as the internet has moved away from Flash video. Indubitably, Apple produces or popularizes innovative products. The GUI interface was iconic (sic) in inspiring other O/S's (such as Windows). Apple may not have invented the i-Pod, but it became widespread through their product. The i-Phone spread like wildfire amongst tech types because it was a stylish smartphone. The SIRI interface took consumers closer to having a cyber personal assistant. But other companies have caught up and offer more economical choices with more real world flexibility than Apple offers (like replacing batteries, adding SD memory, accessing internet sites, not being forced to buy into i-Tunes, etc..).
It is an interesting phenomenon that those in the Apple cult not only look down upon those who refuse to join the Apple cult but they also savagely turn on Apple enthusiasts who do not have the latest and "greatest" products.
N.B.- This is a satirical advertisement
And woe be people who those who do not buy into the Book of Jobs.
While the parody video is a reductio ad absurdum, it typifies the mindset of many in the Apple cult, who can not appreciate that what works for them may not be alright for others. This device devotion to the i-Phone despite better alternatives was satirized in certain scatalogical satirical videos. Of course, the Occupy Movement activists in 2011 exhibited quite a rarified mindset as these grungry, unlawful protesters who identified with the 98% railing against capitalism sported shiny expensive new i-Pads and i-Phones. Although Apple is a quintessentially liberal company, the powers that be in the District of Calamity (sic) gave unwarranted condemnation to Apple for legally minimized its taxes on non-US earnings by consolidating the funds in an Irish tax haven. It is a lamentable paradox that a taxpayer who is following the law is condemned by liberals enough, even though they were in legal compliance. While I choose not to pay the stupid tax by buying walled garden cellular or computing technology for a premium, I am troubled by attempts to pressure Cupertino with the power of government for not paying a stupid tax of an ambiguous "their fair share" by a Leviathan government led by showboating liberal Senate Democrats.
Even if we use Android, Blackberry or Windows products, it would serve well for consumers and citizens to "Think Different" and be the rebels against conforming to "Big Brother" as was intimated in the iconic Apple 1984 MacIntosh Superbowl ad.
