NSFW: Why Mark Zuckerberg needs to shut up about Apple | iMore

Mark Zuckerberg in front of the Facebook logo (Image credit: iMore)

NSFW is a weekly op-ed column in which I talk about whatever's on my mind. Sometimes it'll have something to do with the technology we cover here on iMore; sometimes it'll be whatever pops into my head. Your questions, comments and observations are welcome.

Mark Zuckerberg apparently thinks Apple is charging too much for its products, and said so in an interview this past week. The comment didn't come out of nowhere, however — Zuckerberg was reacting to a comment Tim Cook made about Facebook's core business model. Who's right?

Never mind Azealia Banks and Iggy Azalea (opens in new tab) — the real celebrity fight this week is happening between Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg. Zuck just threw shade at Cook in a new feature from Time magazine:

A frustration I have is that a lot of people increasingly seem to equate an advertising business model with somehow being out of alignment with your customers. What, you think because you're paying Apple that you're somehow in alignment with them? If you were in alignment with them, then they'd make their products a lot cheaper!

In September, Cook posted an open letter explaining Apple's position on user privacy. It included this comment:

A few years ago, users of Internet services began to realize that when an online service is free, you're not the customer. You're the product. But at Apple, we believe a great customer experience shouldn't come at the expense of your privacy.

Cook never called out Facebook by name, instead seemingly focusing on Google, Apple's biggest competitor in the mobile OS space. By doing so, however, Cook indicted the business model of companies like Facebook, Google and others — businesses that heavily rely on data mining of their customers' information.

Zuck's a smart kid: Obviously he understand Apple's business model. For the sake of this rhetorical argument, though, he's pretending that he doesn't.

Apple certainly could make cheap products. Apple just doesn't want to. That end of the market is saturated with lesser vendors offering lesser products with smaller margins.

Apple occupies the lion's share of the high-end smartphone and personal computer markets, offering products and a user experience that customers are willing to pay a premium for. And the company's balance sheets show it. Apple continues to rake in billions from quarter to quarter because they make products that customers are willing, anxious, and able to buy.

Certainly, not all customers are willing to pay the premium Apple imposes. There's still a lot of resistance to spending $649 on a premium smartphone or $1000 on a low-end laptop computer when there are plenty of other options that are "just good enough" and cost a fraction of that price.

But so far, Apple's approach has paid off. Compare that to Samsung's recent history.

Don't get me wrong: Facebook is hugely successful as well. The company made $3.2 billion in the third quarter of 2014 alone. Lots of people use Facebook, including me, and lots more people will use Facebook.

I accepted this a long time ago. Companies like Google and Facebook are able to do business by providing me with free services in exchange for doing what they will with with my information. Millions of other people have accepted this as fact, as well. But as a result, I am more careful with what I post and what I click on while using those services. I also know many people who have walked away from using them all together, or who take extra precautions to reduce the size of their digital footprints, because they don't want to be the product being sold. Who can blame them?

That doesn't preclude me from wanting a premium computer and smartphone experience, either. And to that end, I'm more than willing to pay Apple to own one of their products compared to the competition, because the overall experience is better.

Instead of being so openly dismissive of Cook's criticism, maybe Zuck should take it to heart: How can, and how should, Facebook continue to derive revenue from advertising while still being careful to protect its users' privacy? That's a question millions of Facebook users would like to know. Because what Facebook does makes us uneasy sometimes.

There's a basic conflict in the Facebook and Google revenue model that Cook has every right to point out. It's different from the way Apple does business: The company wants you to buy its gear and use its services, but charges you a fair price for them, and lets you keep your data to yourself for the most part (the relative pittance it makes with iAds notwithstanding).

This isn't now or ever going to be a "winner takes all" situation. The technology market is too vast and too complicated for one company to rule everything. It isn't about Google versus Apple any more than it's about Facebook versus Apple. There's room for more than one business model and revenue concept here, otherwise companies like Apple, Google, and Facebook wouldn't be making money.

There's nothing wrong with educating consumers about what's being done with their information, and helping them become aware of what it means to use a free service. One of the many reasons I am a happy Apple customer is because I don't feel like I'm the product. How about you?

96 Comments

This as*hole needs to shut up.. Facebook is the most disgusting social network right now.. And you are stuck with it just because all your friends are using it.. My wall is Ads, more ads, suggested friends, suggested pages, suggested post.. It's insane.. Hope ONE DAY someone will make something that will kill them.. I would love to see this company broke!
Here, Here YES!!!!! Sent from the iMore App
I agree. Facebook sucks big time. Would love them to go broke also Sent from the iMore App
Agree too!
Yea stfu mark. Your head is getting bigger than your ass. Sent from the iMore App
Very simple, erase it, stop using it. I did, and I am much happier without it.
As I was reading this post you hit the nail on the head with what I was thinking, Peter. Apple makes us these shiny products and says "If you buy these, look at the things we have for it to make your experience outside of just buying the product even better." The way Zucky described it was black and white. "It's too expensive." I absolutely understand what the trade off with Google is for my data. And I am more than happy to use Google's products because they work that well for me. But after a while of using Facebook and seeing so many things I didn't care to see on my News Feed, I asked myself what exactly was I getting in return for this? Absolutely nothing. The service Facebook provides (bringing people together?) is something that we've advanced with through tech even further in the past five years.
IMO zuckerberg is right about apple's prices for their products. this is likely the first thing i've ever agreed with him on but he's right. apple's products are just about double what they should cost, if they dropped their prices for their products windows would likely be wiped out of serious competition in 1-2 years.
Just Mercedes, BMW, Ferrari, etc., are double to triple what they cost. Maybe if they lowered their prices to Toyota levels, they would wipe the Japanese car makers off of the planet. Maybe even the American car makers. /s
What?? Sent from the iMore App
Ha?
Off topic, but since when were Mercedes and BMW in the same class as Ferrari?! Sent from the iMore App
He was referring to manufacturers that you pay for the name and not just value of the components.
You have the right to your opinion as does Zuckerberg and everyone else. However I disagree with Zuckerberg (and by extension you). We all don't agree, this allows for healthy discussion on topics. Could Apple make cheaper products, sure. Should they, no. The iPhone for example, you have 4 models to choose from ranging in price (on contract) from free for the 5c to $299 for the the 6 Plus. With these ranges I don't see the need for cheaper products from Apple with the possible exception of a notebook. There is a value added concept with Apple, and it has continued to expand, the software. No charge for OSX upgrades now and Works apps are free and do most of what people need to do. Apple charges for few cloud related services and while MS is working toward cross device integration, Apple is doing it at no cost.
I see the point of making items with lower price points, I would like that, but then we would pay for many of the extras that are free now. The only solution I see is if there are deep discounted prices, then for those devices there would have to be a charge. Would I like a cheaper cost iPhone, sure but then it would be like the competition where many things cost extra.
Believe it or not, outside of the U.S. Contracts are not widely use, and hence less subsidies, so going by the "on contract price" is not a good argument for Apple having "cheap" options, because even that "free on contract" is 400+ without one Sent from the iMore App
Only in developing countries there are no contracts but in developed countries like the U.S and the UK where I'm from contracts are the norm and I buy into Apple's business model. Sent from the iMore App
Contracts are very prevalent outside of the US.. Sent from the iMore App
What costs extra on an android phone that the iPhone gives for free?? I can't think of a single thing. The iPhone premium is truly not justified. Apple just has us believe our experience is greater than any other one out there. Sure there are advantages but I don't feel they justify the cost.
You don't think the better experience I am having (I AM having it, not believing I am) is not worth the extra money for time that involved with creating that experience?
When someone with an Android has problems with the hardware where do they go? Do they go back to the store they bought it and get the runaround. Do they call up the manufacturer and get the run around? When an Apple device has an issue you go into any Apple store and as long as it's still in warranty you can get tech support, replacement, etc. I suppose for the price of one iPhone you could just toss the Android away and buy another one JK "sorry coulnd't resist lol"
Yet theNexus, the new one without external storage is $649, right? Double what they cost? You're talking in batch part numbers, gross lots of 10, 100k too...correct? SoC development, iOS updates, R&D necessary to evolve the physical product itself, iTunes and the App Store; between media you watch, look at or read, listen to or store. As well, the data centers they've built to 'house' the iCloud Drive...
...not to mention to desk and laptop space. Unbelievable. The new (2012 forward) rMBPs are a dream comouter. As is the new Mac Pro. Neither of which YOU nor I could build 'cheaper' than they're doing. With the power, PCIe storage and ECC RAM/Xeon chips and a ½ dozen Thundebolt 2 ports...in a beautiful package about an eighth the size of the traditional 'desktop' that sits under the desk
Or their retina 13 & 15" laptops... Which have completely changed my comouting habits, enjoyment I receive using it and the precision trackpad, optomized software and negative bloat impact
In fact, Apple provides Damn fine 'free' software thats never been duplicated in either windows or android's Eco systems.
I do fear for Android though as they've got NO vertical or horizontal integration or aggregation. Windows, OS X ...they both have both
Windows is an OS so Apple making hardware cheaper does nothing to Windows. Most companies are so ingrained with Windows and Office that the only thing that MIGHT happen is more Mac hardware loaded with Windows.
Facebook and Google are the "freemium" apps of the Internet. Yes you get it for "free" but you still end up paying for it in the end. Apple on the other hand would be that awesomely cool iPad action game that may cost $9.99 but you know there will be none of those "in app purchases" along the way and you just get to actually own the game.
That is a perfect analogy. People see Facebook as being 'free' but it is not free, it is pay as you go and you pay a far higher price. Facebook is not worth 209 Billion because they have a 'FREE' product, they are worth that because of the information that they scrape and harvest from the users and sell. The same goes for Google, it is what you do that they sell on to companies and utilize for advertising. This is where they make money. There is no income from search. We don't pay for each search. It is the information that they take from those searches and tailors the advertising fed back to us that will entice us to purchase. In fact this is one of the reasons that they created their own browser, their own operating systems and 'give away' these things at zero charge. They are designed to harvest your data and allow them to sell things on. Your analogy was a great way of describing them as being 'freemium' while Apple devices is the paid for App.
No income from search? You really have no clue.
Yes and no. Facebook and Google are the ad supported version of the game instead of freemium. Apple is the ad free version with one caveat. The price isn't $9.99, it is $19.99. I don't see anything wrong with either model. While I don't care for Zuckerberg OR Tim Cook, I can understand why Zuck pointed fingers. Cook may have meant Google (hell he probably only meant Google), but that remark did target Facebook as well. Either way, neither affects my life other than allowing me to read an interesting comment section.
To figure out who the true customer is you just have to follow the money: With Apple, you are paying for paying for a piece of hardware so its pretty clear. Facebook's customers are advertisers who pay to place ads, and you and I are the "products" that Facebook is peddling. Its no different from broadcast TV.
Peter, you're absolutely right, I use DuckDuckGo instead of Google for like 6 months and I'm gonna quit Facebook as well. Apple is perfect in users' privacy and I'm ready and happy to pay more for quality, privacy and that's the point. People who care about themselves and their privacy will buy an Apple's products, thanks for this article and for sharing my minds :)
Sensationalism at its finest. Looking for the follow-up articles:
- Why Tim Cook needs to shut up about Facebook
- Why Tim Cook needs to shut up about Google/Android ;-)
There's a BIG difference between "less expensive" & "cheap". A big difference.
I don't want "cheap" Apple products.
Good riddance "Hackintosh".
I trust Apple w/my information.
I have for a long time.
I don't Facebook so I can't really give less of a shit...
Wah. Sent from the iMore App
The reality is I'd be more likely to use Facebook if they charged a small subscription. The google model is too close to getting telemarketing calls at midnight.
You pay with money, time, attention, or data. Money is easy to understand. Most of us can see the limits of our ability to pay. Time less so . Attention and data, almost none at all.
By the state of most of the developed world I would say most don't understand money either. Posted via the iMore App for Android
Spot on, Peter. I avoid Facebook and strictly limit my Google dependence for precisely these reasons. Apple just wants as much of my money as they can get; that's a business model I understand. The advertising model just has too large of a creep factor to me. I'd chalk it up to age and not understanding the new order of things, but my 12-year-old is a serious googlephobe, and is horrified that I still have a gmail address. He introduced me to DDG, which I really like, and Apple adding that as a search option was one of the happiest days of his life.
I deleted Facebook from my iOS devices when they tried to force me to have a separate app for FB messages. Not sure why, but that set me off. I've also stopped using Google's services altogether except for some legacy e-mail connections. After having my identity (plastic) compromised three times in the last year I'm going in all Apple wherever I can.
Mark should shut the Zuck up.
Anybody remember AOL, MySpace, etc etc? Yea, Facebook's business model is based on people sticking with it forever. It will eventually peak and starts declining if it hasn't already. It's just the nature of social networks, it is always constantly changing. Facebook is trying to invest in different areas, so they can stick around longer. It only takes one company to figure out a way to get on top of Facebook. Not even Microsoft or Google could kill Apple. It will take a massive disruptive product to get rid of Apple. Facebook? Just a tiny smart software solution could do it. The question is, who is working on it. App.net failed but it came the closest. I'd suspect Twitter might have something in the plans. Just look at what they're doing with their Timeline, it is starting to turn into Facebook. All they have to do is add privacy, better API support, and so on, and they can have a Facebook-killer.
"Ello" is trying hard to disrupt Facebook, but in though I am a member, I struggle to see how they are going to do it, or even what their business model is. A product like Twitter, but *owned* by a company like Apple could do it (which was really the point of "Ping"), but Ping was rejected by the media before it even got started. I still fail to understand why Apple didn't buy Twitter way back then. Perhaps they were rebuffed?
Despite Apple's successes with hardware and OSes, they're incredibly awful at social networks and web services. Buying Twitter would not make sense for a company like Apple, it does not fit in with how they work. Just like buying Tesla wouldn't fit in with Apple (a company that all Wall Street companies want Apple to buy).
Those companies were very one dimensional. Facebook is less so and will be less so in the future. They invest in other companies and so on and have some sort of direction, none of which the likes of MySpace had. I have no problem with them tracking my habits for advertising. It's advertising. there are limits sure but no company is perfect or is some saint. In no way is Apple worth the heinous premium they are charging for some of their devices/products. Android based phones have all of the same capabilities if not more and are far less costly on average. Their are also more secure options than Apple, and also more flexible. Apple makes good products but boasting about the billions they make year over year makes me side with Zuckerberg on this. Apple could be cheaper and still capture the same markets if not more and probably make billions more. You can't call out how much Apple is for the want of a secure connected life for everyone and blah blah blah and all that jazz and then boast about the billions they make. That's like an oxymoron. 'The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away' Pablo Picasso. I'm not being literal in saying that Apple or any other company needs to give their product away but there is a line for me, and others where I look at a company and say "You need to do more. You could do better." There's a difference between profit and greed. Many companies are far past the point of good profits. Posted via the iMore App for Android
I think Cook is right about Facebooks business model, but Zuckerberg is 100% right about Apple's products being too expensive. We mustn't forget that Apple has a margin approaching 30% on ALL of it's products, whereas the industry standard is closer to 3%. They literally make ten times the profit of everyone else on hardware. This was easy to justify back in the bad old days when Apple was small and barely managed to keep afloat. Now they are sitting on an obscene pile of cash, girdling the globe, and dominating the entire industry, they really *should* look at making their stuff more affordable.
Apple is in the business to make money, not to sell hardware at a low profit. You do understand 3% is not sustainable? Many OEM companies have left the market because it was not profitable: HP, Compaq, IBM, etc etc and they had far less profit margin at 10% or less. Samsung is already in trouble with a big profit drop on their smartphone revenue as they're getting hit by multiple low-cost competitors that are driving their profits down. If you think Apple hardware is too expensive, don't buy them. Vote with your money. The moment Apple starts seeing profits declining is the moment, they'll start loosening up on the profit margins. It's a smart decision to maintain the profit margins as long as possible.
Don't like it. Don't buy one. It's that simple. As previously stated BMW, Mercedes, etc... They sell what they sell at a premium. If you can't afford one, you don't get one. Why should Apple give crap about them. That isn't their market. You want a cheap phone there are plenty out there and you can still get on FB with one of those and plenty of people do. Why don't you call BMW tomorrow and tell them they should sell you a car at 20k and see how far that gets you.
It's funny you say "Don't like it don't buy it". The same can be said about Facebook. Don't like it don't use it. I don't understand why all these people who "don't use facebook" give a shit about what Zuck says about anything?
From my experience I disagree. I have had this Mac mini over 5 half years with 5 OS upgrades and it still performs the same as it did 5 years ago. I use it then turn it off, has given no hassle, slow down, virus or anything. None of my time wasted. For the price I paid for that mac mini I would of been on my 3rd Windows PC now or research on upgrading to maintain a level of performance. Cost is not only money, cost is also TIME, which you will never hope to get back. Time > Money.
I couldn't agree more with this article. It's why I don't use Facebook and minimize my use of Google. Rather pay with my money then gave my personal info used for who knows what. Sent from the iMore App
Once again, people may wish to peruse the terms in Apple's own privacy policy https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/#mn_p While I have little doubt Apple has less motivation than Facebook or Google to make use of your information and/or disclose portions to third parties, they claim every right to do so.
Soooo, Apple users can't take the crap they dish out. That's all I see. Posted from the amazing whatever device I can afford because I'm a broke college kid.
Nothing wrong with paying what you only afford. But it doesn't change the argument, it's independent of what you can afford.
It's understandable.
But soon you will be unbroke - post college kid. Wouldn't you then buy a "not cheap" product and look beyond .. Sent from the iMore App
That's my signature guys, it's on everything I post... Posted from the amazing whatever device I can afford because I'm a broke college kid.
I'd prefer Apples current price structure and receive a quality product than go for the cheap and get junk products that are trying to compete.
He's not wrong Sent from the iMore App
"Zuck's a smart kid: Obviously he understand Apple's business model. For the sake of this rhetorical argument, though, he's pretending that he doesn't." He is trolling.
So. Cook writes an open letter disparaging Google's and Facebook's business model (which opinion is obviously not shared by most consumers, including those who use Apple products, since Google and Facebook services are widely used on iOS as well as Android) and when one of those businesses responds in kind with a comment about Apple, the author of this article thinks that person needs to shut up?
And most of you here agree with the author.
Okay. Posted via the iMore App for Android
You're right we do agree with author of this article because Zuckerberg is being a hypocrite with that said I'm on Tim Cook's side here. Sent from the iMore App
Why does Zuckerburg need to shut up and not Cook? After all, Cook spoke first. It's fine to disagree with Zuckerburg and to agree with Cook. That's debate.
But saying that he needs to shut up is rude and ignorant. Posted via the iMore App for Android
I can't believe I had to scroll this far down the comments list to find somebody with a little sense. You can sit on either side of the argument, but the author of this article seems to think that only his preferred corner are entitled to an opinion. Why is TC allowed to preach his opinion but MZ is advised to 'shut up'? These tech blogs are sometimes as irritatingly partisan as the comments sections they spawn.
It never stops at being " little " cheaper.
It's like making someone addicted and them making him pay through his nose when there is no other option. There is nothing free ... Mostly people forget to see beyond the outside cover.
Any good hardware as good as MacBook or iMac or even iPhone (including software +hardware+ customer care) costs much more than what apple is charging for its products. So people need to look beyond the price labels. I practically got rid of windows machines and moved into apple ecosystem because of repeated failures and unreliable results they give. And every machine I have brought from apple has given a service of much more than expected. On tops its THE premium experience in terms of software updates. And you know what you are getting into. Company has build its loyal user base.
Rather than google I will put my trust in blackberry- if they survive. Standardized hardware and software with real security. Try running a website on google products or Facebook. All the times some lame page pops up, you have to cancel advertisements, pop up windows, malware ads, sites telling you that your phone or computer has virus and on trying to close it brings you automatically to play store to download an app. Every time you make a search on a shopping site , for next ten days more advertisements keep popping up for the same product on Facebook / Google pages : wonder how do they know about your shopping list or search tags and wonder where else they are selling it ??? Don't want the free or freemium at cost of privacy rights. Just remember; "there is nothing free in the world" Sent from the iMore App
All of you commenters who seem to be oh-so proud of Apple's spirit and culture, perhaps you should take a quote from the late Steve Jobs a little more to heart. 'Just do what’s right' This sentence was a piece of advice he'd given to Tim Cook shortly before he died. It means that having a principle and standing up for it (against both internal and external opposition) is always difficult and almost always results in negative repercussions. Nonetheless, if you truly believe that this particular principle is right, then your only honest choice is to stick to it, regardless of the consequences. If you don't agree with Facebook's policies, then leave. No one is forcing you to stay. If you don't, perhaps because you might worry about losing your 'friends', then you're just betraying yourself. I deleted my FB account 3 years ago, never looked back, and haven't lost a single friend whose friendship actually meant something to me.
You did good. If you are loosing friends by unfacebookjng then they were not much of it. But forums are meant to vent opinions and arguments. So let it grow. What else will I do sitting alone in the pub drinking a cheap ale ?? Sent from the iMore App
Oh-so whatever is oh-so passé.
I think Mark Zuckerberg is absolutely correct. Apple charges way too much. Sent from the iMore App
They do, but you really do get the benefits out of it. They have real customer support. That makes it worth the price imo, even if I think it's too much, it's worth it. Posted from the amazing whatever device I can afford because I'm a broke college kid.
I was one of those people who would check Facebook 20-30 times a day. One day I got pissed off over some ridiculous comments from a person who I rarely communicated with on Facebook and I told my wife I was going to experiment with shutting down my page and giving up Facebook altogether. She thought I was nuts and laughed at me. I figured I would give it a try and could alway reinstate my account later. That was six months ago. I don't miss Facebook a bit. Anyone of importance I still speak to on the phone or through text messages. I will admit, evey once in awhile, I look through my wife's Facebook account to see what's going on...it usually affirms the reason I shut my account down in the first place.
You don't "miss" Facebook, but you still look at your wife's account. Geeze. Posted via the iMore App for Android
Interesting that he felt compelled to close the loop and insert his company into Cook's implication. It comes across as a petulant, play ground response and instead of addressing the privacy issue instead tries to blame Apple for charging a price that companies like Samsung dream of. Obviously Cook's remark was calculated to set Apple apart from advertising models that by their very nature compromise your privacy. Zuckerberg sounds more like a douche flute with his "oh yeah?" come back. You would hope that someone at the top of such a large operation with so much of your personal information at stake wouldn't publicly display himself as so precious and undisciplined. Besides, the "Apple charges too much" whine is such an old, useless cry it is laughable. Next he'll complain that Apple is a closed system that is only used by hippies and liberals and it should be more like Microsoft.
Are you trying to say Samsung doesn't charge high prices? Because if you are you're drunk. Posted from the amazing whatever device I can afford because I'm a broke college kid.
Same here. I am totally fed up of Facebook but can't get rid of it as ALL of my friends are there. Sent from the iMore App
I'm on the same boat. So I installed a ton of Facebook blocker extensions on Safari. Including Facebook Disconnect that claims to stop Facebook from tracking the sites you visit. Also found and installed Google Disconnect.
he shloud do that
Every now and again one of the Larrys or Marks feels the need to justify their business model in the face of somebody's criticism. It's always more of a knee-jerk defense of their shady, mercurial business models than a statement about their value. Zuck's statement makes zero sense however it's interpreted. The most important way a customer declares "alignment" with a product or service is to spend their money purchasing or using it. Until "single white male salary $60,000-$80,000" replaces $, £ and ¥. as fiat currency, this will always be the case. If by "alignment" Zuck means "agreement about the value of the product" (what you get for what it costs) I would argue that Facebook's value could never be ascertained by a customer because they don't have perfect information about the "cost" - exaxtly how Facebook uses all of their data. Of course, this will never happen; the lack of transparency is what the Googles and Facebooks of the world require on for their business models to exist. Apple's business model does not have that problem. Their demands of you end once you exchange your money for their goods or services. Facebook could never achieve achieve that level of transparency and that is the reason why they will never have anywhere near the kind of "alignment" - or longevity - of companies like Apple.
Ever since MySpace fell off and Facebook took control of social media, people have waited for the next big social media empire to rise and give them a new reason to keep their eyes glued to their gadgets. That day may have finally arrived with a new social network called Ello. According to BBC News, it started as a small network for a group of friends. Now it has exploded and is getting at least 31,000 requests an hour from people looking to join. Starting a new social network doesn’t come without start-up problems. “We’re learning as we go but we have a very strong tech crew and back-end,” Ellofounder Paul Budnitz told the BBC. “It’s in beta and it’s buggy and it does weird stuff – and it’s all being fixed as quickly as we can.” What makes Ello different from Facebook is that they don’t have advertisements, they don’t sell your personal information, and they value your privacy first and foremost. These are all the right things you want to hear about a social network, but there’s a catch: “Like the app store, we’re going to sell features for a few dollars, ”Budnitz told BBC News. Sent from the iMore App
That is now. Twitter was good at one point too. What happens is that these networks get huge and costs have to be met. I wish Ello luck, but feel that if they make it they will have to find some way to pay the bills. Now, if people were willing to pay a subscription to not have ads or their data mined, that would work. How many would do that? Sent from the iMore App
I love my iPhone, but I also use Facebook. I don't give a rat's a$$ about what ZuckXXX has to say, more than I care about Cook's. But the privacy issue is real and I agree with you Peter that this very conversation should be forthcoming. I'd include the government snooping on its citizens in it as well. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Zuckerberg is correct in saying that Apple products are over priced because they really are. The ridiculous profit margins has on their hardware is criminal regardless of the user experience they offer especially given it's limited in many ways with iOS and it's full of its own flaws that make it a frustration to use at times compared to other competing products. Apple is a greedy monopolistic company and that's obvious, they don't care about about their consumer since they don't listen to what they want most of the time and then go alienate developers and tell them their coding wrong when they've made a excellent app that Apple thinks shouldn't behave that way. I don't understand why people get upset over companies like Facebook and Google that offer a service for FREE and use advertising to keep it FREE. How else are they going to pay they many staff that develop and keep those services running.
Free at what cost ? Making Maloney to run a company and pay the employees is very much different than having a profit margin of Billions. There is nothing wrong in earning money but if Facebook or Google are doing it by prying on their users then it's just not right.
Google is no more what it used to be : a clean search engine. And Facebook is 60-70% suggestions, adverts advices to buy or use apps games and what not.
Looking historically Google still had a clean background.
But Facebook has a criminal inception: started as a sexual harassment tool ( to compare and rate female ) later allegedly plagiarized web form from winkerl Sent from the iMore App
Winkelvoss brothers, and time and again newer controversies keep coming up about its use for propagation of communal ideas or stalking people. It's chaotic and unhealthy. Sent from the iMore App
You realize Apple has a profit margin in the billions as well? That is what for-profit businesses do. Sent from the iMore App
Did you actually read this article or you just like spouting off how much you dislike Apple because you can't afford their products?
He is so transparently self-serving. It makes me think of my favorite quote from the McCarthy era: "Have you no sense of decency?"
No, they are not over-priced. You just don't value what they offer. Try to understand the difference. And really? You can't understand why some of us don't want to be the product, but the customer instead? Huh. Now there's something that is really hard to imagine for those of us who have been around the block a few times.
I feel that his argument is wrong and that the quality and experience you get with any Apple device is worth the money. The only thing I think Apple could change though would be to offer 32gb of storage for the base model of all IOS products, they made 64gb cost what 32 used to so why not offer 32 as the cheapest option? With a lack of expandable storage I think that offering 32gb as the cheapest version would convince a lot of people to swap over from android
Because 32 gigs would be sufficient for a large portion of their user base and would cut down on people getting the upgraded size for an extra $100. Apple isn't stupid. Making the smallest storage option stay 16 gb pushes a lot of people to upgrade at the ridiculous rate of $100 for 48 more gigs. Also, the way human psychology works, it is a lot easier to justify an upgrade if it quadruples your storage rather than just doubling it. Sent from the iMore App
The only people who find Apple Products over-priced are the ones who can't afford it. Steve Jobs was right when he said, If they like the product they will buy it and if they don't like it they won't buy it. Pretty simple concept that made Apple the richest company in the world. They sell a great product and it's not you. Sent from the iMore App
Tick night, I agree.
I've got a 2009 iMac that I updated with a new ssd hard drive, processor and ram for less than $300.00.
This thing flies!
In the same time I've owned this, I had 3 windows laptops.
Had to wipe them each at least 2 times, because of bugs viruses etc.
Never had to touch the mac. Sold my last windows laptop bought a used 2008 MacBook pro, upgraded it as well and this thing also,fliesno bugs on either, no headaches etc.
Apple is more expensive in the long run, but what is time worth?
When I had to to wipe my windows laptops and reload everything I was always down in time.
Apple products work and work well.
Expensive only if you buy brand new!
My 2008 MacBook pro was $100 and I upgraded it for around $300.
Total spent equals a new windows cheap laptop today.
Thanks for letting me share.
So far that's true but if Apple should ever change that, I'll just go back to buying whatever. With tax, I paid $1000 for my iPhone 6+. I did so willingly. Sent from the iMore App
Of course it's a 128gb Sent from the iMore App
"There's still a lot of resistance to spending $649 on a premium smartphone" Define premium - objectively this doesn't really qualify: 4.7 inch screen, not full HD, ppi 326, 1.2mp front facing camera, no wireless charging. But I guess it puts Apple in a pretty good position to sell the replacement in a year with some of the following features (5 inch, full hd, 5mp+ front facing, higher ppi). So not only are (i)we paying a premium (gray iPhone 6 16gb $649) but being subjected to a fairly aggressive, somewhat over the line practice of planned obsolescence. Zuckerberg and Cook should both take each others advice to heart, but pls don't try to tell me Apple occupies the moral high ground in this spat.
You're obviously a hater. Just the build quality of every iPhone model ever manufactured makes them a premium brand and don't bring up Bendgate it was 6 phones out of millions.
Actually anyone who respects privacy and does not put spyware in their products has the high ground here. Which disqualifies Google immediately and also Facebook. All we really need to get rid of FB is a completely ad free equivalent that instead charges a small annual subscriber fee. Call it something like "Share!" And as part of the service make a YouTube replacement as well!
The thing about Apple is they are a niche' product/market, albeit a really large niche'. Apple knows exactly who their customer is and who they want. Their primary market is to sell a product to the 10%ers. They also get a lot of the younger millennials as well because they appeal to both of these market demographics. Facebook knows their market too. Their product is information. There is not a physical asset that they could liquidate if they needed too. One misstep and it could be all over for Facebook. Look at My Space, where did they go? Mark is a young tech titan that has had some success. Tim Cook has been around a long time and has seen this industry grow from day 1. Who would you bet on?
...and out of the wood work he crawls.
"Their product is information."
Really.
"4:00a.m., got up to take a large dump!" "Ugh, got to get down to the protest." Obviously, "coffee, " isn't your answer. Go back to bed.
WTF is Facebook?
You lemmings.
Wait, how is $1,000 for a laptop low end? Anyway, he's right. I believe that the iPhone costs something like $208 to produce? Why not price it at $450 or $500? The OnePlus One is a high-end phone that is (IMO) better than the iPhone, yet costs $299 off contract. Phones don't need to be as expensive as a mid-to-high end desktop. This applies to all phones, not just iPhones.
iPhones are overpriced, but I still get them anyway. What you guys are doing is being fanboys. Android users think the same way about Apple as Mark does.

Show more comments