Kinda weak article, anyways, Apple may seem overpriced, but you pay a high price for the entire ecosystem and support, no other android phone would have gotten 5+ years of software updates, or a...
Kinda weak article, anyways, Apple may seem overpriced, but you pay a high price for the entire ecosystem and support, no other android phone would have gotten 5+ years of software updates, or a battery life that good, or customer support that good. A newer phone is more of a luxury than anything, but if one can afford it, responsibly, why not?
Also, I have never used Apple products in my life.
The whole point of this article opinion piece is to ask, not "why not", but "why"? Why should you buy a newer phone? What's the point? It's not a criticism of Apple, as such. It's a reflection on...
A newer phone is more of a luxury than anything, but if one can afford it, responsibly, why not?
The whole point of this articleopinion piece is to ask, not "why not", but "why"? Why should you buy a newer phone? What's the point?
It's not a criticism of Apple, as such. It's a reflection on our urge to continually upgrade our devices even when there's no real benefit to doing so.
Because we're wasteful, shallow westerners who can afford it (plus the Asian people who do it for status). Or maybe you're a smartphone enthusiast and really need want that 89% Screen to body...
The whole point of this article opinion piece is to ask, not "why not", but "why"? Why should you buy a newer phone? What's the point?
Because we're wasteful, shallow westerners who can afford it (plus the Asian people who do it for status).
Or maybe you're a smartphone enthusiast and really need want that 89% Screen to body ratio, that popping up camera, that super amoled screen, the two cameras at the back, the water resistance, the face scan unlocking, the heart rate monitor, bluetooth 5, stereo speakers, the in-screen fingerprint reader (not talking about one specific phone, just flagship features, though this almost reads like the Oppo Find X)... etc.
I’ve realised that most of what I do on the phone is relatively passive consumption. I read. A lot. And I listen to music, audiobooks and podcasts.
The functional apps I open most frequently are my banking, fitness and various transport applications. None of them are massively processor-intensive operations.
He says it himself, he doesn't need more. But that doesn't mean no one needs more. Of course you can argue that in reality people don't need these trivial things, but I think you could argue that for most of technology, from super cars to refrigerators. You won't die without these things, but your life will not be as comfortable.
People often ask “why do you buy a $800 phone when you can buy a $300 one?”, well, why do you buy a $300 phone when you can buy a $150 one?
To some people the extra features (or extra status) are worth it. To some, they aren't.
The point is that most people don't need more. Once they reach a certain phone model, they don't need the extra features of a newer model, but they buy it anyway. One person might need a Model...
But that doesn't mean no one needs more.
The point is that most people don't need more. Once they reach a certain phone model, they don't need the extra features of a newer model, but they buy it anyway. One person might need a Model III, another person might need a Model IV, and someone else might need a Model V - but they all buy the Model VI and the Model VII and the Model VIII... just because they want the shiny new toys.
People often ask “why do you buy a $800 phone when you can buy a $300 one?”, well, why do you buy a $300 phone when you can buy a $150 one?
Exactly. Stop at the model you need, rather than keep going.
I’ll say this as a 6S+ user who has never upgraded to the newest iPhone, but why not upgrade when older models hold their value so well? I got over $250 for my iPhone 6 (128 GB) last October when...
I’ll say this as a 6S+ user who has never upgraded to the newest iPhone, but why not upgrade when older models hold their value so well? I got over $250 for my iPhone 6 (128 GB) last October when I switched to the 6S+, and that was for device only - no headphones, charging cable, or any accessories. It was 3-4 years old! Similarly if you’re on a monthly payment plan like most telecoms offer (at least in the US), you just don’t pay the full price of your last device when you upgrade. Now the downside of monthly plans means not having total ownership of an unlocked device, but somehow someway people can avoid paying the full price of a new phone every time they upgrade. I’ve never heard of anyone paying $2k for a phone.
As I wrote up-thread, the point of this article is to challenge this "why not" thinking, and instead ask why. Why upgrade if your current phone does what you want it to do?
but why not upgrade when older models hold their value so well?
As I wrote up-thread, the point of this article is to challenge this "why not" thinking, and instead ask why. Why upgrade if your current phone does what you want it to do?
Who buys anything for want rather than need? Why do smartphones have to be exclusively need-oriented? Why should anyone conform to your view of what smartphones are intended for or how people...
Who buys anything for want rather than need? Why do smartphones have to be exclusively need-oriented? Why should anyone conform to your view of what smartphones are intended for or how people should spend their money?
Noone has to conform to my thinking. I'm repeatedly trying to explain a point about this opinion piece that seems obvious to me: this writer is ruminating over his (and, by extension, other...
Noone has to conform to my thinking. I'm repeatedly trying to explain a point about this opinion piece that seems obvious to me: this writer is ruminating over his (and, by extension, other people's) drive to upgrade devices that don't need upgrading. Why do we do it? Do we need to do it? Can we, like the writer, choose not to upgrade a device that suits our needs just fine?
In the past, I would disagree, but it really does seem like the only reason to replace a perfectly functioning phone is if you bought a cheapo in the first place. Nowadays it seems like it's only...
In the past, I would disagree, but it really does seem like the only reason to replace a perfectly functioning phone is if you bought a cheapo in the first place. Nowadays it seems like it's only the camera and I guess screen-to-body ratio, neither of which are as compelling as some of the reasons we've had in the past to upgrade more regularly, like a brighter and clearer screen or much improved performance.
I seem to recall talk about Apple pivoting from designing phones to be replaced biannually to designing phones that can last a long time. Obviously they have a great history of keeping their phones up to date, and the new ones don't seem to be more durable, but I did get the impression that people saw some sort of pivot there. Did they say anything about this, or is there any indication the new iPhones are built to last any better than the previous generation? I'm not really finding anything.
Though I guess them releasing another year of -S iterations does indicate they're still on the 24-month cycle, matching carrier payment plans in the US.
I did find this article which, if I'm reading this right, says that people have been more likely to go to the most recent generation of iPhone when they upgrade, but that there is a trend of people holding on to their phones for longer. I believe generationally, the averages have been: 667 days, 697 days, and 727 days for the X generation.
Maybe it would be if the writer owned a Samsung Galaxy. But, seeing as he owns an Apple iPhone, that's what he wrote about, as the trigger for his ruminations about upgrading phones. Again, you...
Maybe it would be if the writer owned a Samsung Galaxy. But, seeing as he owns an Apple iPhone, that's what he wrote about, as the trigger for his ruminations about upgrading phones.
Again, you seem to be being overly defensive about even a non-existent imagined criticism of Apple.
Alternative interpretation: this is a clickbait article which contains no real substance. It could be boiled down to "don't buy stuff you don't need." What an incredible insight! Car runs fine?...
Alternative interpretation: this is a clickbait article which contains no real substance. It could be boiled down to "don't buy stuff you don't need." What an incredible insight! Car runs fine? You don't need a nicer one! Computer gets you on the internet? You don't need a faster one! House keeps water out and heat in? No need to move!
The only thing interesting about this article is the title which is clearly a provocation. I mean come on, it starts with "Sorry Apple." We're the title of this article "Thoughts on materialism" no one would have given it a read or a second thought. There's a reason everyone in this thread is responding to the title and not the piece: the piece is just a pithy truism that everyone's heard a thousand times before.
You posted a clickbait article with no substance, and now you're surprised that everyone's reacting to the clickbait instead of the substanceless article. You know better.
For starters, it's an opinion piece, not a news article. I thought the idea of buying new technology just for the sake of it, and how that reflects our consumerist society, and how it's driven by...
this is a clickbait article which contains no real substance.
For starters, it's an opinion piece, not a news article. I thought the idea of buying new technology just for the sake of it, and how that reflects our consumerist society, and how it's driven by all companies' philosophy of planned obsolescence, might form the basis of an interesting discussion.
However, people are seeing "Apple" in the title and reacting with knee-jerk defensiveness. :(
The author just did himself zero favors with the title on that front. "For the first time, I don't feel compelled to upgrade my phone" would have better conveyed that sentiment—but sleighting...
The author just did himself zero favors with the title on that front. "For the first time, I don't feel compelled to upgrade my phone" would have better conveyed that sentiment—but sleighting Apple in the title gets more clicks.
Which is too bad because maybe he has a point: this will be the first year since 2005 that I don't upgrade my phone. The XS just isn't enough of an upgrade over the X, and I don't like the size of the XS Max.
Doesn’t this actually speak to one of Apple’s strengths, if anything? Their post-sales support, operating system updates, and custom CPU designs allow them to have their devices operate far longer...
Doesn’t this actually speak to one of Apple’s strengths, if anything? Their post-sales support, operating system updates, and custom CPU designs allow them to have their devices operate far longer than you’d otherwise get.
What the author thinks is criticism is frankly in my view, a compliment. The 6S is so good for his use case, he doesn’t need to upgrade. I can’t begin to fathom how long the X and XS devices are going to last.
There is no criticism of Apple's products or ecosystem in this opinion piece. Why are people reading this as an attack on Apple? It's one man's reflection on why he should upgrade a device that's...
There is no criticism of Apple's products or ecosystem in this opinion piece. Why are people reading this as an attack on Apple?
It's one man's reflection on why he should upgrade a device that's already meeting his needs. Why do we rush out and buy the next model of any phone when our existing phone does what we need it to do?
Frankly this. I've received so much vitriol for merely choosing a phone brand, at this point I'm kind of defensively oriented to read most Apple commentary as an attack. It's not healthy, but it's...
Frankly this. I've received so much vitriol for merely choosing a phone brand, at this point I'm kind of defensively oriented to read most Apple commentary as an attack. It's not healthy, but it's a surprisingly accurate perspective.
I have my personal reasons for choosing the devices I do, and my opinions of why I do so are valid, because they're just that: opinions and preferences.
That's as may be. The pun on "sweet smell of success" is clearly the writer's attempt to be clever. However, the point of a title is to entice you to click on it and read the article. I did think...
the title is clearly designed to generate clicks;
That's as may be. The pun on "sweet smell of success" is clearly the writer's attempt to be clever. However, the point of a title is to entice you to click on it and read the article.
I did think that, here on Tildes, people might take a moment to read the article and understand the opinion being expressed there, rather than react merely to the title.
The title quite clearly praises the iPhone 6S, which is an Apple product. I haven't read the article yet so looking at the title neutrally, it's clear that if there is any criticism in that...
The title quite clearly praises the iPhone 6S, which is an Apple product. I haven't read the article yet so looking at the title neutrally, it's clear that if there is any criticism in that article, it's going to be about newer Apple models, not criticism of the entire product family and company.
I still have a 6S. iOS 12 made it run like a brand new phone, plus it still has a headphone jack. I more than likely won't get a new phone until this one breaks or becomes unsupported.
I still have a 6S. iOS 12 made it run like a brand new phone, plus it still has a headphone jack. I more than likely won't get a new phone until this one breaks or becomes unsupported.
I'm still using my note3 that I bought about four and half years ago. I'm on its third battery. It'll be due for another one probably within the next year. It's encased in harden carbonite...
I'm still using my note3 that I bought about four and half years ago. I'm on its third battery. It'll be due for another one probably within the next year. It's encased in harden carbonite (actually, I'm on my second otterbox), which I've dropped off of ladders and exposed to more dust, debris, concrete, pressure, and real world conditions than should be reasonable. I've had to factory reset it about once every year and a half to clear out some clutter and get things working again. And I'm actually a bit relieved that they seemed to have stopped pushing updates for the OS, because each new feature seemed to come at too high of a tax to system resources. I need a functional device more than I need shiny new features.
That said, after recently seeing some of those shiny new features on phones that can handle them properly, it is pretty tempting. Not tempting enough for me to shell out the cash for a new device, but tempting enough for me to wait for a decent price on a refurbished one in another year or two.
I'm not sure how Samsung et al.'s guidance has been running, but this is basically what Apple have been communicating to investors for the last year or so -- "we expect our customers to buy more...
I'm not sure how Samsung et al.'s guidance has been running, but this is basically what Apple have been communicating to investors for the last year or so -- "we expect our customers to buy more expensive phones less often".
So, the author's definitely not alone. It seems like a great step. I think there's still advances to be made in cameras that anyone could appreciate (the dynamic range stuff in the newest iPhones seems pretty neat), but otherwise -- cool.
We basically got there with laptops around Haswell, right? I don't think I've felt like a laptop was inordinately slow or had unusually poor battery life since 2013's crop came out, although nicer screens since then have certainly been appreciated.
I recently exchanged my aging 6S for a new X. I miss the 6S design. Fingerprint scanner, actual button, no dealing with iffy facial recognition tech. If I could pay for an updated (better...
I recently exchanged my aging 6S for a new X. I miss the 6S design. Fingerprint scanner, actual button, no dealing with iffy facial recognition tech.
If I could pay for an updated (better battery/processor/screen) 6S every few years I would.
I tend to replace phones only when they get damaged or when I lose them (which happens a little too often!). My current Moto Style is over 2 years old and going strong. Its predecessor didn't make...
I tend to replace phones only when they get damaged or when I lose them (which happens a little too often!). My current Moto Style is over 2 years old and going strong. Its predecessor didn't make it through a full 2-year contract before I lost it, but the phone before that lasted about 4 years before it got so damaged I had to replace it.
I'm happy to use phones that perform the functions I need for as long as they manage to keep performing those functions.
There's also the aspect that phones use resources and energy to produce, so holding a phone for longer reduces the environmental cost of my phone ownership.
Kinda weak article, anyways, Apple may seem overpriced, but you pay a high price for the entire ecosystem and support, no other android phone would have gotten 5+ years of software updates, or a battery life that good, or customer support that good. A newer phone is more of a luxury than anything, but if one can afford it, responsibly, why not?
Also, I have never used Apple products in my life.
The whole point of this
articleopinion piece is to ask, not "why not", but "why"? Why should you buy a newer phone? What's the point?It's not a criticism of Apple, as such. It's a reflection on our urge to continually upgrade our devices even when there's no real benefit to doing so.
Because we're wasteful, shallow westerners who can afford it (plus the Asian people who do it for status).
Or maybe you're a smartphone enthusiast and really
needwant that 89% Screen to body ratio, that popping up camera, that super amoled screen, the two cameras at the back, the water resistance, the face scan unlocking, the heart rate monitor, bluetooth 5, stereo speakers, the in-screen fingerprint reader (not talking about one specific phone, just flagship features, though this almost reads like the Oppo Find X)... etc.He says it himself, he doesn't need more. But that doesn't mean no one needs more. Of course you can argue that in reality people don't need these trivial things, but I think you could argue that for most of technology, from super cars to refrigerators. You won't die without these things, but your life will not be as comfortable.
People often ask “why do you buy a $800 phone when you can buy a $300 one?”, well, why do you buy a $300 phone when you can buy a $150 one?
To some people the extra features (or extra status) are worth it. To some, they aren't.
The point is that most people don't need more. Once they reach a certain phone model, they don't need the extra features of a newer model, but they buy it anyway. One person might need a Model III, another person might need a Model IV, and someone else might need a Model V - but they all buy the Model VI and the Model VII and the Model VIII... just because they want the shiny new toys.
Exactly. Stop at the model you need, rather than keep going.
I’ll say this as a 6S+ user who has never upgraded to the newest iPhone, but why not upgrade when older models hold their value so well? I got over $250 for my iPhone 6 (128 GB) last October when I switched to the 6S+, and that was for device only - no headphones, charging cable, or any accessories. It was 3-4 years old! Similarly if you’re on a monthly payment plan like most telecoms offer (at least in the US), you just don’t pay the full price of your last device when you upgrade. Now the downside of monthly plans means not having total ownership of an unlocked device, but somehow someway people can avoid paying the full price of a new phone every time they upgrade. I’ve never heard of anyone paying $2k for a phone.
As I wrote up-thread, the point of this article is to challenge this "why not" thinking, and instead ask why. Why upgrade if your current phone does what you want it to do?
Who buys anything for want rather than need? Why do smartphones have to be exclusively need-oriented? Why should anyone conform to your view of what smartphones are intended for or how people should spend their money?
Noone has to conform to my thinking. I'm repeatedly trying to explain a point about this opinion piece that seems obvious to me: this writer is ruminating over his (and, by extension, other people's) drive to upgrade devices that don't need upgrading. Why do we do it? Do we need to do it? Can we, like the writer, choose not to upgrade a device that suits our needs just fine?
In the past, I would disagree, but it really does seem like the only reason to replace a perfectly functioning phone is if you bought a cheapo in the first place. Nowadays it seems like it's only the camera and I guess screen-to-body ratio, neither of which are as compelling as some of the reasons we've had in the past to upgrade more regularly, like a brighter and clearer screen or much improved performance.
I seem to recall talk about Apple pivoting from designing phones to be replaced biannually to designing phones that can last a long time. Obviously they have a great history of keeping their phones up to date, and the new ones don't seem to be more durable, but I did get the impression that people saw some sort of pivot there. Did they say anything about this, or is there any indication the new iPhones are built to last any better than the previous generation? I'm not really finding anything.
Though I guess them releasing another year of -S iterations does indicate they're still on the 24-month cycle, matching carrier payment plans in the US.
I did find this article which, if I'm reading this right, says that people have been more likely to go to the most recent generation of iPhone when they upgrade, but that there is a trend of people holding on to their phones for longer. I believe generationally, the averages have been: 667 days, 697 days, and 727 days for the X generation.
Funny, then, that the title of this article isn't "Sorry Samsung, but the sweet smell of my Galaxy S6 is enough for me."
Maybe it would be if the writer owned a Samsung Galaxy. But, seeing as he owns an Apple iPhone, that's what he wrote about, as the trigger for his ruminations about upgrading phones.
Again, you seem to be being overly defensive about even a non-existent imagined criticism of Apple.
Alternative interpretation: this is a clickbait article which contains no real substance. It could be boiled down to "don't buy stuff you don't need." What an incredible insight! Car runs fine? You don't need a nicer one! Computer gets you on the internet? You don't need a faster one! House keeps water out and heat in? No need to move!
The only thing interesting about this article is the title which is clearly a provocation. I mean come on, it starts with "Sorry Apple." We're the title of this article "Thoughts on materialism" no one would have given it a read or a second thought. There's a reason everyone in this thread is responding to the title and not the piece: the piece is just a pithy truism that everyone's heard a thousand times before.
You posted a clickbait article with no substance, and now you're surprised that everyone's reacting to the clickbait instead of the substanceless article. You know better.
For starters, it's an opinion piece, not a news article. I thought the idea of buying new technology just for the sake of it, and how that reflects our consumerist society, and how it's driven by all companies' philosophy of planned obsolescence, might form the basis of an interesting discussion.
However, people are seeing "Apple" in the title and reacting with knee-jerk defensiveness. :(
The author just did himself zero favors with the title on that front. "For the first time, I don't feel compelled to upgrade my phone" would have better conveyed that sentiment—but sleighting Apple in the title gets more clicks.
Which is too bad because maybe he has a point: this will be the first year since 2005 that I don't upgrade my phone. The XS just isn't enough of an upgrade over the X, and I don't like the size of the XS Max.
Honestly, I thought he did it just for the sake of the pun on "sweet smell of six-ess/success".
Indeed, but for me, having the latest tech seems great, but I'd think of not buying an apple device.
Doesn’t this actually speak to one of Apple’s strengths, if anything? Their post-sales support, operating system updates, and custom CPU designs allow them to have their devices operate far longer than you’d otherwise get.
What the author thinks is criticism is frankly in my view, a compliment. The 6S is so good for his use case, he doesn’t need to upgrade. I can’t begin to fathom how long the X and XS devices are going to last.
There is no criticism of Apple's products or ecosystem in this opinion piece. Why are people reading this as an attack on Apple?
It's one man's reflection on why he should upgrade a device that's already meeting his needs. Why do we rush out and buy the next model of any phone when our existing phone does what we need it to do?
Because that's what we're used to. And the title sort of baits you into thinking that.
Frankly this. I've received so much vitriol for merely choosing a phone brand, at this point I'm kind of defensively oriented to read most Apple commentary as an attack. It's not healthy, but it's a surprisingly accurate perspective.
I have my personal reasons for choosing the devices I do, and my opinions of why I do so are valid, because they're just that: opinions and preferences.
Well, maybe people should read more and assume less.
Oh come on; the title is clearly designed to generate clicks; and we all know the subtext behind the article's title too.
That's as may be. The pun on "sweet smell of success" is clearly the writer's attempt to be clever. However, the point of a title is to entice you to click on it and read the article.
I did think that, here on Tildes, people might take a moment to read the article and understand the opinion being expressed there, rather than react merely to the title.
The title quite clearly praises the iPhone 6S, which is an Apple product. I haven't read the article yet so looking at the title neutrally, it's clear that if there is any criticism in that article, it's going to be about newer Apple models, not criticism of the entire product family and company.
And criticism is not attack.
Not even that. As I wrote up-thread: "There is no criticism of Apple's products or ecosystem in this opinion piece."
Certainly, I meant that that is the only sort of criticism the title implies, not that the article had such criticism.
I still have a 6S. iOS 12 made it run like a brand new phone, plus it still has a headphone jack. I more than likely won't get a new phone until this one breaks or becomes unsupported.
I'm still using my note3 that I bought about four and half years ago. I'm on its third battery. It'll be due for another one probably within the next year. It's encased in harden carbonite (actually, I'm on my second otterbox), which I've dropped off of ladders and exposed to more dust, debris, concrete, pressure, and real world conditions than should be reasonable. I've had to factory reset it about once every year and a half to clear out some clutter and get things working again. And I'm actually a bit relieved that they seemed to have stopped pushing updates for the OS, because each new feature seemed to come at too high of a tax to system resources. I need a functional device more than I need shiny new features.
That said, after recently seeing some of those shiny new features on phones that can handle them properly, it is pretty tempting. Not tempting enough for me to shell out the cash for a new device, but tempting enough for me to wait for a decent price on a refurbished one in another year or two.
I'm not sure how Samsung et al.'s guidance has been running, but this is basically what Apple have been communicating to investors for the last year or so -- "we expect our customers to buy more expensive phones less often".
So, the author's definitely not alone. It seems like a great step. I think there's still advances to be made in cameras that anyone could appreciate (the dynamic range stuff in the newest iPhones seems pretty neat), but otherwise -- cool.
We basically got there with laptops around Haswell, right? I don't think I've felt like a laptop was inordinately slow or had unusually poor battery life since 2013's crop came out, although nicer screens since then have certainly been appreciated.
I recently exchanged my aging 6S for a new X. I miss the 6S design. Fingerprint scanner, actual button, no dealing with iffy facial recognition tech.
If I could pay for an updated (better battery/processor/screen) 6S every few years I would.
I tend to replace phones only when they get damaged or when I lose them (which happens a little too often!). My current Moto Style is over 2 years old and going strong. Its predecessor didn't make it through a full 2-year contract before I lost it, but the phone before that lasted about 4 years before it got so damaged I had to replace it.
I'm happy to use phones that perform the functions I need for as long as they manage to keep performing those functions.
There's also the aspect that phones use resources and energy to produce, so holding a phone for longer reduces the environmental cost of my phone ownership.
I'm typing this on a 6S right now. It's been good for years and I've never had any problems or desired a newer model.