Jump to content

Are phones too expensive?


Feech

Recommended Posts

Not at all. Consider the technology in them, and they're actually pretty reasonable.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Yea, one year ago, I used to think the same thing. However, tablet prices are less expensive than smartphones now. But smart phones are not really dropping in price. And the reason has to be subsidies in my mind. Carrier subsidies are squashing true price competition for smartphones.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all. Consider the technology in them, and they're actually pretty reasonable.

 

If you think that consumers are literally paying $200 for on contract smartphones, then, no, they are not too expensive. However, if you understand that consumers are actually paying roughly $600 for on contract smartphones because of subsidies, then, yes, they are significantly overpriced.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 years ago high end devices off contract where going for about 550 to 650, 5 years ago high end devices where going for 550 to 650 and today high end devices are going for 550 to 650. How many other products have we bought 5 or 10 years ago still cost the same today? Considering the amount of tech that goes into these devices, I don't think that they are too expensive at all. To add though, I kinda wish phone subsidies would totally go away, I would rather pay more for the phone and have a lower cost monthly plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 years ago high end devices off contract where going for about 550 to 650, 5 years ago high end devices where going for 550 to 650 and today high end devices are going for 550 to 650. How many other products have we bought 5 or 10 years ago still cost the same today?

 

Not flat panel TVs or BD players. They generally cost *less* than they did 5-10 years ago.

 

;)

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no incentive for major phone makers to make phones cheaper with the subsidy system. The phone maker can charge their $700 a phone to the carrier and they know they will pay it because customers will go where the best phones are (in general). If carriers were out of the loop with phone subsidies, true competition would ensue and drive prices down. For now, if you were a phone maker, why in the would you stop taking the enormous profits that carriers are forced to pay you.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you think that consumers are literally paying $200 for on contract smartphones, then, no, they are not too expensive. However, if you understand that consumers are actually paying roughly $600 for on contract smartphones because of subsidies, then, yes, they are significantly overpriced.

 

AJ

 

The cheap tablets would be equivalent to the prepaid android devices. Not high end, but functional.

 

Price a 3G ipad once. That would be the equivalent device to compare to a high end Android or the iPhone. There are much cheaper units available.

 

So, given the specs, I don't think $650 or so is a bad price for something like a current iPhone or Galaxy S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Price a 3G ipad once. That would be the equivalent device to compare to a high end Android or the iPhone. There are much cheaper units available.

 

So, given the specs, I don't think $650 or so is a bad price for something like a current iPhone or Galaxy S.

 

iOS devices are not a good frame of reference, as the "Apple tax" greatly inflates their prices and adds to Apple's outlandish war chest.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The cheap tablets would be equivalent to the prepaid android devices. Not high end, but functional.

 

Price a 3G ipad once. That would be the equivalent device to compare to a high end Android or the iPhone. There are much cheaper units available.

 

So, given the specs, I don't think $650 or so is a bad price for something like a current iPhone or Galaxy S.

 

You apparently are not aware that apple is gouging customers with at least a 40% profit margin before it even ships to retailers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were no device subsidies, I would not be able to afford a phone ever. So I like the subsidy model.

 

Sure you could, Josh. But you might have to stick to lower end or used handsets. Or you could save up for a year to buy a high end handset. And that is how it should be. Not everyone can afford or is entitled to a high end smartphone.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why they are not cheaper. When you see that Google is offering a high end handset for less than $400 it makes me wonder. I'm talking off contract prices of course and not with the subsidy. Even without subsidies it seems like they are trying to gouge us. I look at my 10.1 tablet and think at the time I spent close to $600 for it, is my phone that much more expensive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were no device subsidies, I would not be able to afford a phone ever. So I like the subsidy model.

 

I think you would. You may have to wait a little longer but within 6 months you would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure you could, Josh. But you might have to stick to lower end or used handsets. Or you could save up for a year to buy a high end handset. And that is how it should be. Not everyone can afford or is entitled to a high end smartphone.

 

AJ

 

I'm addicted to smartphones. I must have my smartphone! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My other thought was eventually Android phones would be cheaper. It has happened but that was because of hardware compromises. The Android OS was free. There was no licence fee to tag on to every handset as opposed to the Window phone model. It never equated though to lower prices. A handset susidized is $200, 5 years ago it was $200, 10 years ago it was $200. i don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were no device subsidies, I would not be able to afford a phone ever. So I like the subsidy model.

Of course you could. Look at whatT-Mobile is startig to move towards. They do not subsidize, but they are going to offer financing. Meaning you just pay a payment on your phone every month. Basically this allows people with cash up front to buy the phone or others to pay an extra $20 on their bill, which should be similar to now when the fees mobile providers are passing on to us because of subsidies go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at a nice real tablet such as a Nexus 7 what real differences are in the tablet compared to a phone that is smaller. There sure isn't $300 difference.

The people who buy those ipads are nuts to pay that gouged price and end up with a very crippled device.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were no device subsidies, I would not be able to afford a phone ever. So I like the subsidy model.

 

Sure you could.

 

There are some pretty decent phones on Boost Mobile under 200.00

 

Is it an Optimus G or Galaxy S3? No, but if the carriers all moved to a non subsidy model (which they won't) the handset manufactures would have to adjust pricing. That even includes Apple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You apparently are not aware that apple is gouging customers with at least a 40% profit margin before it even ships to retailers.

 

Ok, let's try this again. Right now, the only device in the tablet market pushing the screen, processor, and build quality of the current crop of high end smartphones is Apple. All the cheaper stuff compromises something to drop the cost.

 

That said, even the Nexus 10 is up there.

 

I couldn't care less who makes it, but and yes, they are in it to make money. A business will sell a product for as much as the market will support. Don't like the price, don't buy it. If it sits on shelves, prices come down.

 

Either way, if you think making these devices is cheap, I challenge you to find some investors and build one.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, let's try this again. Right now, the only device in the tablet market pushing the screen, processor, and build quality of the current crop of high end smartphones is Apple. All the cheaper stuff compromises something to drop the cost.

 

Either way, if you think making these devices is cheap, I challenge you to find some investors and build one.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Nexus 7 Specs

7" 1280x800 HD display (216 ppi)

Back-lit IPS display

Scratch-resistant Corning® glass

NVIDIA® Tegra® 3 quad-core processor

16 GB internal storage

$200

 

EVO LTE

720 x 1280 pixels 312 ppi

Dual core, 1500 MHz

16 GB

$549

 

I don't see that much of a hardware difference to justify a $350 dollar difference. Nobody said it was cheap to build a device at the same time at some point making a device should become cheaper over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . Right now, the only device in the tablet market pushing the screen, processor, and build quality of the current crop of high end smartphones is Apple . . .

 

Really?

 

:popcorn:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, let's try this again. Right now, the only device in the tablet market pushing the screen, processor, and build quality of the current crop of high end smartphones is Apple. All the cheaper stuff compromises something to drop the cost.

 

That said, even the Nexus 10 is up there.

 

I couldn't care less who makes it, but and yes, they are in it to make money. A business will sell a product for as much as the market will support. Don't like the price, don't buy it. If it sits on shelves, prices come down.

 

Either way, if you think making these devices is cheap, I challenge you to find some investors and build one.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

EDIT: On second thought... removed my message and stepping out of the apple koolaid threads.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Just installed the update, and it's good!  As you recommended, I turned off both TA adjustments, and turned on displaying it when it's zero.  The value is basically spot-on.  It's bouncing between 18 and 19 for the Cameron Valley site, and it is in fact between 0.87 and 0.92 miles, as displayed in the app.  This is probably a better estimate of the TA values than any other device I own provides. As far as the -44 goes, I'll have to take it out and verify that it no longer records those cases. If this device didn't have that annoying reset problem, and got the Android 14 update (and in so doing supported TA on NR and continued to allow band locking), it would easily be the best device I own.  Easily.  And would be the device I standardize on for the 5G era.  I'll probably have to wait for a future device to come out with Android 14 and then see what happens. And I know I didn't have to, but I love SCP.  It is my primary tool for tracking the goings-on of the various networks and is very easy to use and work with across my 10 phones.  I am very happy to send a token of my appreciation your way now and then.  Thanks again! - Trip
    • Sorry, I misread your message -- yes, the app would show 0 if an invalid value was being reported. I don't think I had any MediaTek devices myself, but the beta testers have had a decent variety of devices over the years.   Sorry, I didn't word that very well in my last post -- I added an option to control display of LTE TA when it is 0. By default it will now be hidden (sadly a lot of devices do not show it) but anyone who wants to display it can adjust accordingly. There will be 3 user-selectable options related to LTE TA now -- the existing correction option, correction on LTE-TDD (which is independent/in addition to the existing correction option), and TA:0 display. In your case, I'd disable the TDD option and enable the TA:0 option; the defaults will be the opposite of what I think you need.   You did not have to do that, but I sincerely appreciate it, thank you! Beta update is rolling out now, let me know how it goes.
    • In order: This is very helpful to know.  Thanks. That makes a lot of sense, though it's showing me zero rather than nothing; it looks like if it's calculating a negative number, I'm seeing zero instead.  It makes me wonder how many devices you've tested against which use the MediaTek chipset.  This is only the second one I've used, and the first one was very, very old (didn't have B41), so it's possible that the MediaTek chip doesn't need the correction while others do.  Separately, I doubt that a real world case will ever see 1282, so I imagine any value above 1281 could be ignored. I would ask you to please not hide TA values of 0, or if you hide them by default, add an option to not hide them.  I am aware that, for example, the S22 doesn't report a valid TA value and always reports zero, but zero is a legitimate value and is useful to know when trying to identify sites. I'll look forward to your impending update, and I'm going to send along another donation if I can find the link.  Thanks so much, as always!  - Trip
    • I received the reports, thanks! You didn't catch it happening (it captures the diagnostics as soon as you hit send or long-click the connection banner on the main screen), and I had sent you an e-mail to clarify which value was -3.. but your screenshots confirmed my hunch that you meant RSRQ!   I know exactly what is happening here. Somewhere along the way, I learned that TD-LTE bands (33-53) needed a TA correction of -19 applied, and I confirmed it on several devices. Perhaps that is no longer universally true.. but what you're seeing SCP display matches that correction. Below 19 you see nothing, at 19 you see 0, and above that you see TA-19. The upper limit is 1282, which is why you see 1263. Your phone must report 1282 when the TA is unknown, which is not technically safe but I can work around that. Funny enough, I had a change to TA coming in the next update that had nothing to do with your issues.. TA:0 will be hidden moving forward, since several devices report 0 when it cannot be identified. I'll have an app update out shortly that addresses all of this, let me know how it works for you and thanks for the detailed feedback!
    • Mike, We ended up going out this morning to do errands in spite of the tropical storm.  I locked the phone on LTE B41, turned off the TA correction checkbox, and watched it carefully while out and about.  I have four screenshots for you. https://imgur.com/a/kCPTCnB First, I happened to get a screenshot of it doing the -44 dBm thing.  I also tried to send you at least one set of diagnostics showing the -44 dBm but I don't know where precisely in the process it collects the diagnostics.  Hopefully there's something useful in them. The rest of the screenshots are far more interesting.  All three were taken within seconds of each other in the CVS parking lot.  The phone's diagnostic screen shows a TA of 17, and oddly, the SCP diagnostics screenshot also appears to show a TA of 17.  But SCP's normal display is showing 0.  Not entirely sure what to make of that.  It looks like SCP won't show me a value other than 0 until I hit about 19 according to the phone diagnostic screen. It also appears that when SCP is showing a TA of 1263, that's the equivalent of a null value for the TA--no TA is calculated.  The phone diagnostic screen appears to show just "12" when that's happening; the SCP diagnostic screen shows 1282 in the TA section when that happens, a difference of 19, which is highly convenient given what I noted above about the TA value.  (I can't test that the phone diagnostic screen is limited to two characters and is thus truncating 1282 to just "12" as I suspect given where I am right now.  Had I known to be looking for it, I'd have tested in the middle of nowhere yesterday.) Anything catch your eye?  Anything I can do to help more?  - Trip
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...