What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
185 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+125/obvious
- aakrzemi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+97STUDY: 95% of studies result in conclusions that are obvious to begin with.
- avcore, on 10/12/2007, -4/+79The stupid Razr was $500 when it came out and how often do we see those now?
- mikev, on 10/12/2007, -8/+81I'd buy a Ferrari if they were $1,000. :|
- cds0528, on 10/12/2007, -11/+80 agreed...
in related news, if apple lowered the price of the ipod to 15 bucks, more people would buy it - drouk1556, on 10/12/2007, -2/+53Don't digg him down. He may be right. The iPhone wasn't intended to be marketed to 12 year old girls, and the study doesn't provide a breakdown of demographics.
- subliminalurge, on 10/12/2007, -21/+55Completely inaccurate. I fully intend to have one in my pocket the day they come out. 600 bucks? Eh, that's like a month's bar tab... Big friggin' deal. Two year contract? Well, duh, if I'm going to buy it, I'd like to use it for a couple of years.....
Sure, there's a whole world out there crying about how they "just want a basic phone".... They cry about other things, too, like how they can't wait to get moved to the front counter from the drive thru window 'cuz it's so damn cold this time of year......
What's more, I'm fully prepared to toss it in the trash and fork over for iPhone v2 6 months later, complete with 3G networking.... And then iPhone v3 with video conferencing....
I'm not an Apple fanboy, I don't own a Mac. I don't even own an iPod. I'm just someone who is tired of PalmOS being the best I can find for computing power and connectivity on the go, and I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is to encourage what appears to be the first step in the right direction in over a decade. - eddigg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31Wow, they surveyed 379 people. That's got to be statistically significant! Bury this trash.
- flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30Speaking of obvious, this reminds me of the study that asked prisoners why they wanted to escape from prison.
- 1KrazyKorean, on 10/12/2007, -4/+28Ok I can see paying 500 for this phone because of all the features, but i cant see myself also switching carriers and signing up for a 2 year contract with cingular...
- kalleanka, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22I Like Shaved.
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21@hoppdawg
This phone has great potential for success and failure. There will be a big initial inrush, there always is with EVERY new Apple product. Why? For lack of a better word, fanboyism. You have thousands (not millions of people, thousands) who are ready and willing to drop the money the moment it pops up on the Apple store. From there, now you're into the general populace, there's another interesting study that alot of people haven't heard of. Of the 5 major cellular carriers in the top fifty major US cities, cingular (now AT&T) averages a rank of 5th in customer satisfaction.
Now statistically, a sample size of ~400 is well above the amount needed for a level of confidence in a survey, however the 400 people surveyed were not an even distribution. Which they said up front, the large majority knew what the iPhone was and what it did, and were familiar with other apple products. I'm not going to say the survey is rigged, it isn't, but it seems pretty poorly done for statistical purposes.
Flop or not is going to come down to 3 things. Price, plan, and usability. Price and plan kind of go hand in hand, but it's a balance, plans should have flexability, something the iPhone's hardware cost may not give Apple the option to entertain. If apple is betting on the fact that they and AT&T can charge 80-90 bucks a month for unlimited calling assuming that no one is really going to use it. Well maybe i don't want to spend 80bucks a month for minutes i'll never use. Lastly is usability, i don't think there's any question about the elegance about how the iPhone functions. But its got some serious real life drawbacks. I'll point out just one for brevity, it's a touch screen, well that's nice, but what if my hands are dirty, what if i'm the foreman at the job site. I've got the money to buy one of these, but i'd just ruin it with my daily life. The idea is novel but not practical.
Final verdict for me, flop, the iPhone will ultimately be a small niche product who's fans will declare it a success because initial sales will be large. Expect after 6+ months of release (just after the holidays) iPhone sales will plumit unless Apple drops the price into a more competative price range for the general populace. - samssf, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21@subliminalurge:
You spend $600 a month on alcohol? Good for you. I doubt many of us have that kind of money. Perhaps in your world everyone spends $600 a month on alcohol.
As for the iPhone and AT&T... screw them. I wouldn't switch to AT&T even if the phone was $200. - emmanuelsotelo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15When the iPod first came out, alot of people thought it was too expensive.
But look what happend, people ended up buying it because it was such a great product, and eventually the price came down.
If you think the price is TOO high, then simply don't purchase it or wait until there is a price drop.
Also, the initial high price adds to the iPhone's 'Elite' cool factor. - Rethcir, on 10/12/2007, -15/+27Inaccurate.
- epiccollision, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14lets see v60 $450 at launch razr $500+ Krzr $400+ black berry 8800 499.99 palm treo 750 $650...and the hp ipaq $749( at launch) lay of the crack ppl and do some research or did you fail at the internets
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Apple said they would support downloading software through ITMS - just like you can download games for the iPod today. They also said that Apple would be keeping control over who they would let write applications. So it's not like you can't download any applications, just a more limited number...
The thing to think about is, what do people buy for smartphones anyway? The ones I know are buying software to do things the phone is supposed to do in the first place (like better email clients). If the phone software does not suck in the first place, how many third party apps do you really need? - PAJK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14This is *****. Everyone thinks everything is too expensive. If you give them the option to pay less, what do you think they're going to say? I highly doubt the iPhone will have any sales problems. I know I'm getting one. The web browser is PC quality, and the WiFi just seals the deal. I haven't even accounted for the iPod functionality and camera.
$500 is perfectly the reasonable. The BlackBerry costs the same. - whitesaint, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I remember when the iPod came out in 2001, it had a US$399 price point. Reviewers on the web and in magazines would go crazy and say "no one is going to buy it it's too expensive." Looks like their doing the same thing for the iPhone now. If history is any indication, the iPhone will get sweeped up quickly by early adopters and those who just gotta have it. Eventually prices will come down, just like they did for the iPod. This study is lame.
- subliminalurge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12No, people started buying them because they saw the demo model in the store and said "Just this little wheel? That's all I have to do? Awesome! What about this other brand over there? What are all those extra buttons for? Oh, this simple little wheel will let me do all the same things? ***** yeah, give me one. Oh, better have one for my wife, too...."
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11A sample size of 379 is (approximately) statistically what you need to have a 95% confidence level, with an error of about 5 points +/-. (The size of the total population can have some bearing, not not all that much) This is assuming that they got there samples from the proper demographic, of course. http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
- desantim, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17I find myself to be an "Early Adopter" of technology, but i wouldn't pay that much for the iPhone... That is ridiculous to me... Apple has blatantly said they wouldn't support third party software or addins which willfully makes the iPhone a glorified closed ended cell phone that you have to rely on a single source for all your software needs. $500, for pretty interface isn't worth it to me. Don't get me wrong, it is a revolutionary device in my opinion, but for that price, I'll buy a windows mobile device and save a hundred dollars and live with one of my three ipods i've blown my money on already.. lol.
To each their own, but I can't imagine switching cell providers, getting locked into 2 years with that phone or the service, and it being a revision one device.
~m - krazytom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8but most of them heard of it...
I also like the fact that 26% said they would buy it, but only 1% of that 26% said they would pay $500 for it. 26% of 397 would be ~98 people and 1% of ~98 people would be ~1 person! Data holds strong when your 1% is represented by one person.
I want to be the president of this survey company. - idiggeverything, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12No *****.
- TheRealDeal, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Study: Apple iPhone 'too expensive'
Not for me it isn't... - offwhite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Apple does not want or expect everyone to buy the first revision of the iPhone. The early adopters who have the money for the announced price will have enough money to buy the second revision with all of the improved features, and then they can drop the price to allow for more people to purchase it. And they will likely release trimmed down versions just like the iPod so they can include even more people. I think if you have been paying attention the past few years this is the model they are using and it is working well for them. (And those used phones from the early adopters will quickly make their way onto EBay.)
- j_bellone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The BlackBerry costs $500 without a service contract. The iPhone is starting at $500 with a two-year agreement. Overpriced? I think so. For a phone that will not be able to run unsigned third party software (see: Palm applications, Blackberry applictions, and Windows Mobile applications) it is a true rip-off for any corporate world. Its not going to be corporate though. If Apple were going for the corporate they would not have chosen Cingular with one of the ***** data packages on the face of the earth. Then again, Verizon saw the bluff, and told them to stick it up their ass.
You're putting too much faith in the iPhone. Its an unproven product in a proven playground. This isn't five or six years ago when the MP3 player market was latent with crappy products, and, to introduce a semi-good product with crappy software would go over well. They are coming into a market where absolutely no player dominates but every player is a veteran. I wouldn't put that much faith in this product before you have it in your hands. I most definitely wouldn't get binded into a two-year service agreement with no apparently no ability to buy insurance plan. By the way, syncing a phone with iTunes? That's a joke. iTunes is already bloatware.
With that said. Its a cool toy. But business people need a phone that can actually handle what they want it to do. Finger gestures will get old fast when you can't run the software that you need to be able to run without paying Steve Jobs' and Co. a hefty price. Sorry. Not for me. Mind you, I am writing this off my Macbook, so this isn't Apple directed hate. Use the brain. Think it out. iPhone (as of right now) is a bad buy even before it comes out. - superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7The iPhone is the device Palm should have come out with about two years ago.
Instead, they split efforts between supporting Windows Mobile, and Palm on handsets. With no focus, they were just wandering in the desert. The Palm of old (when they still owned the OS) could have built something just as cool as the iPhone.
It should be an embarassment to the entire world of cell phone makers that Apple had to build this phone. - archcvd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5go ahead and pretend that it's not "economical" to buy this thing... but don't ***** yourself... when you see your friends with one and you're all starry eyed... your little Nokia[filled in random numbers/letters here] is going to look like a piece of [profanity]....
Apple is setting the new standard for phones. You can run from apple all you want, but sooner or later... Steve's going to get you (and your money) ! - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"If the phone software does not suck in the first place, how many third party apps do you really need?"
Off the top of my head an app that would allow for full wireless Exchange synchronization, a remote desktop client, an RSS app, an awesome mobile app), a Slingbox client, Orb compatibility, Skype, a multi-protocol IM client, apps that can read Word/Excel/PDF and other file types, third party media codecs, and I would kind of hate to give up my universal remote app and free games too. - galore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"They also said that Apple would be keeping control over who they would let write applications."
Well, if Apple wants to retain control then it really isn't mine after I buy it, isn't it?
If I am expected to pay a premium for a product, then I expect that this product doesn't come with big mommy retaining control over it. - crveatch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I hope you're being puposefully moronic, cause if not let me clue you in, Cingular is now AT&T.
- nick34, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I dont know about you guys, but i would pay that much for a phone that can hold 150 kabillion contacts.
- samssf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Buried for liking Bush.
- JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I remember a time when reception and (a lack of) dropped calls were selling points for cell phones. We were so gullible back then.
- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@therealdeal: "Not for me it isn't..."
Not for a lot of value-oriented people that can actually read spec sheets. Imagine that.
Mm. Kind of tiring to see Digg pan-handlers that don't know how to assess a unique-value-proposition.
zdiggler, yes, I mean you. Try this... find me a phone that retails cheaper than the iPhone, with the following three killer iPhone features: 400x300 screen or larger, 2 MP camera, Wi-Fi internet browsing (802.11 b/g/ and/or n). Let me know when you find it. You'll notice a smile on my face when you realize most phones that support Wi-Fi Internet browsing need to be the "unlocked" version., immediately eliminating your subsidy comments. Funny, huh? Also, you'll see me unmoved by criticism of Wi-Fi, as most people wanting Internet on their phone, have already experienced HIGH access fees, especially for 3G networks. Sitting in a coffee shop like Starbucks, or in the average home environment, let's pretend that's going to be more than sufficient. - noreturn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The BlackBerry costs $500 without a service rebate, and have things like GPS or 3G. And since they're geared towards business users, they sync with Outlook, not iTunes, with business users typically being the kind of people that would actually pay 500 bucks for a feature laden phone.
- dasluvaluva, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6As somebody who's tired of Sprint's BS (when Cingular is much better in my particular area), I'm willing. However, I wish they would allow a developer (Microsoft) to allow a Remote Desktop Connection client to be developed.
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Freaking edit time out. Anyway, I was going to add that if your population of people that could buy the phone is, say, 10,000,000 (not an unreasonable figure) then you could say with 95% confidence that 2.6 million want to buy it, but only 100,000 would buy it at this price, plus or minus 5%
- logic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I live in rural New Hampshire and can watch live tv on my windows mobile phone just fine thanks (EVDO + Orb/Slingbox)... but why would I?
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't see in the story how they picked the population but this part seems to indicate they did some qualification "most of whom had heard of the iPhone and have shopped for an iPod, " Standard survey practice it to start with a screener that asks questions designed to find people in your target population and weed everyone else out. Questions like, household income, do you use a cellphone, etc. I would be very surprised if they didn't follow this practice. without them divulging the screener or indicating the population it is impossible to know for sure.
- consonance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The responses to these results are boggling my mine.
1. If what craigj said is true, a survey of this size has a sample error rate of +/-5%. This is not ideal, but for our purposes, let's assume it's accurate. Why are you questioning the participants? Do you question the demographics of every poll you hear about, or do you want to know more because the results aren't what you like?
2. The question about the price a person would purchase the iPhone is not the question you think it's asking. Here's a better version: At what price level would your consumer surplus from buying the iPhone be equal to zero? Meaning, what do you think the iPhone is worth to you? Only 1% of 26% of survey participants would bu the iPhone at $500. When you do the math, you find that ~1 person thinks the iPhone is worth $500. That means that ~0.264% of people surveyed think the iPhone is worth $500.
But lo and behold, multiple 0.264% by 300 million, and you get 800,000 people. Add in momentum, and you've got a target audience of millions. Bear in mind that 1-5% of cell phones in the U.S. are smart phones. Now, if only I knew the number of people in the U.S. with cell phones, I'd know what to compare that 800,000 people statistic to. - monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Study: BMW too expensive.
- Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Study : BMW and Apple owners both smug *****.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3He just said it was a phone and an iPod. That's two devices right there.
Unless you meant the iPhone should also be your key and loose change? - auburnguy1000, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Hello Captain
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@spacecowboy
Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it untrue. Any college statistics course teaches you all the math you need to know to calculate things like confidence level and confidence interval. Not that i really remember how to do that still..
I hate to site wikipedia on a topic like this, but they provide a 25 term example that results in a cofidence level of 95% or +-5% about ANYTHING it predicts, regardless of the size of the population it predicts for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval
The only thing this method requires is a completely random sample set, therefore it does not apply to the study here, but since the study isn't necessarily random, we can't really tell anything about the distribution anyway. Never the less, 379 is plenty of people in any normal survey. Why do you think they survey a 100 random people and the like, if it wasn't enough to reflect larger populations, you'd take a bigger sample! - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@kellsworth
I feel i have to say this again.
379 people is significant. This II statistics so read carefully. In a truly random sample (for a standard Z style deviation), it takes roughly 30 people to estimate results of massive populations to +-3%. Where do you think all those survey numbers come from on the news, and why do you think they always say +-3%, statisticians calculated it.
The only problem is the group of people wasn't truly random, so it's actually impossible to know how the deviation will work out. - Nameless1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2In other news, the sun is hot.
- samssf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You moron. As said previously, the sample of 379 people is indeed sufficient for this study.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 187 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is