Dear Apple and Samsung, $1,000 is way too much for a smartphone, consumers say

As far as functions, I agree. But they are more powerful, have faster processors, more memory and storage greater capacities, they have brighter screens with greater resolutions, batteries with longer run times and faster charging, and more "improvements" in those areas.

Nah! Sorry, but that's just silly. Designers are NOT intentionally and coding apps to specifically use more resources. Give developers more credit! This would suggest there is a HUGE conspiracy between developers most of whom are independent or who work for different, and competing software companies - not the hardware makers. It just makes no sense any developer worth his or her salt would intentionally make their app a resource hog.

An app may be poorly coded due to poor coding skills, but a competing product from a more skilled developers would quickly take the greater market share.

Where did I ask if you are being stupid?

Right, because the following makes sense? "Anything that has smart in front of it, isn't for smart people". I guess cars that save lives by automatically braking, alerting drivers to side traffic and lane drifting, adaptive cruise control, etc. are only for stupid people.

 

Those who pay 1000+$ are those that want the latest high end phones right away, not because they need but more because they want it.
if you can wait 1 year the price will drop fast.

 

While what you are saying in terms of hardware specs is correct, from a user standpoint they did not matter. When I had a Nokia Lumia 920 in 2012 it did have a lessor processor but the performance was similar if not better. It did have less RAM but again it did not lag in any way. The screen was better than any Android phone I have had despite being lower resolution. OneDrive storage made storage capacity less relevant thought I don't keep a lot of stuff on my phone to begin with. The battery life was similar and it was one of the few at the time with wireless charging. I could also do hands free Bluetooth texting in my car which I have not been able to do with any Android phone. All for $200. My current Galaxy S9+ is a $900+ phone. I understand that the point you are making is that the hardware advances justify the higher prices of today's phones but where end user perception is concerned I have a phone that I like less that brings nothing new of perceptible value to me for over 4 times the price. Not everyone will agree and they don't have to but as far as I am concerned I will NOT be paying $1,000+ for a phone.

 

Yes, but then you will be buying an obsolete, superseded, legacy, old and tired product!!!

@xxJackxx - I agree completely. You make an excellent argument to follow guest's suggestion and use the saved money for the kid's college fun, a family trip to Disneyland, or that $500 gaming graphics card you really "need"!

 

i have a Microsoft Lumia 950XL in a drawer because the battery is dead and MS dont sell it on store. this phone had awesome hardware and solid and ultra secure OS for a ridiculous price, bought it 250-300$, it performed as well and even better than the Android or Iphone available at that time. Pity MS stopped making phones.

 

I think not many phones from 2012 had NFC. NFC is handy when you go to shop and pay using smartphone mobile banking app. I don't know whether mobile payments are popular in US, but in my country they are becoming quite popular.
I think that for flagship smartphones processing power is less and less important, because mid-level smartphones have enough processing power. Additional features including, but not limited to: fast charging, camera, NFC are becoming more important.

 

I agree. And the demise of the Windows Phone is their own fault too. Had they not tried to shove that Metro UI down on Windows 8 users, they would not have revolted against all things Microsoft, including their phones - which actually were very good alternatives to Android and Apple. Oh well. One of these days MS might realize they are often their own worst enemy.

 

The Nokia Lumia phones at that time did. At least my 920 did. That said it was not a feature I used. A lot of newer phones have stolen a lot of features from that phone. I'd still be using it if it were an option.

 

Go back and read your (very lengthy) post responding to "stupid" and see if anything clicks about insinuations. I could argue against your post but I'm not going off topic. I disagree with your reasoning. You have your views I have mine.

 

They all steal from each other all the time - and they all sue each other because of it. But it typically does not take long before a new feature (if well received) on one phone is soon implemented on the competing phones. It may be slightly different to avoid patent infringement lawsuits, but the end results are typically the same - and even eventually become standardized.

 

If the first dude who made a car sued the others for plagiarism, we would still riding horses lol

 

LOL How true!

 

We asked, you answered: you're holding onto your phone forever
August 10, 2019
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/...-monthly-payments-vs-1-000-prices/1955946001/

 

They're still getting their $1,000. Just at $25-$35 a month plus overpriced service of about the same a month.

 

The only way phone manufacturers will change their attitude is if they suffer in their pockets. If you think it's too expensive don't buy it.

 

Which is exactly what is happening.

Global Smartphone Sales Continued to Decline in Q2 2019

Smartphone sales to decline in 2019

 

Opinion: Samsung can’t justify $1,400 prices when major OS updates are limited to 2 years
March 4, 2020
https://9to5google.com/2020/03/04/samsung-os-updates-problem/

 

The above mentioned SE 2020 for $400 has some very impressive specs and I think would fill the bill for all the functions mentioned above. So now can we say that we went from $1000 down to $400 for a phone that could fill almost anyone's needs.

 

paying more than 200 dollars for a device that will only serve you for two years since most only receive updates for two years is ridiculous and I even think it's a scam to consumers who buy thousand dollar phones that I guess they don't even know they will only receive updates for two years.So every two years you have to change your device and that's their business, they make everything in China where the labor costs are pennies, like the components and the manufacturing, which results in inflated prices for the phones. I think it's a complete fraud.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)