Would You Buy the iPhone 8 If It Cost $1,200? (9to5mac.com)

As we near the launch of the next iPhone, rumors are swirling about what it may feature. One of the most recent reports comes from developer and blogger John Gruber, who claims the iPhone 8 will have a starting price of around $1200. 9to5Mac reports: He last week said that he believed that what we've been referring to as the iPhone 8 would be called the iPhone Pro and that he actually hoped it would be really expensive: "I hope the iPhone Pro starts at $1500 or higher. I'd like to see what Apple can do in a phone with a higher price." As you might imagine, that generated quite a bit of discussion. Gruber has backed down somewhat from this position, and is now suggesting a starting point of around $1200: "$1,500 as a starting price is probably way too high. But I think $1,200 is quite likely as the starting price, with the high-end model at $1,300 or $1,400." His argument is effectively that Apple is constrained in what it can do in a phone because any technology included in the phone has to be available in huge volumes. If it were willing to sell fewer at a higher price, then it would have more options. There has been speculation that Gruber may have been tipped by Apple, and using his posts to prepare the ground for what would otherwise be a severe case of sticker shock. But Gruber denied this. If Apple does launch the iPhone 8 with a 4-figure price tag, would you buy it?

Comments

In my case I can confirm

[Chrisq]

Betteridge's law of headlines is true!

Wait, what?

[Ecuador]

Is the summary correct, is he claiming that you can do "more" if you don't mass produce something??? If Apple wanted to add some more exotic technology, they could simply lower their industry leading profit margin and instead of selling a $220 device for $650 they could sell a $400-$500 device for $800 or something like that.
To answer the question, I only have an iPhone (6 Plus) because my work provides it for development and although I am free to use it as a personal phone, I prefer a $200 Xiaomi Mi5 as it can do so much more. And Android is by far not my ideal mobile OS either (I still miss my Maemo/Meego N9 - damn you Stephen Elop for burying it), but I still find an Android phone more useful than an iOS one, even if I get the latter for free. So, no, $1200 would make it even more unlikely for me to get an iPhone. Which is a shame, as the apps that exist for both iOS and Android are most of the time better on iOS (for rather obvious - to devs at least - reasons), but there are many things you simply cannot do.

Re:Wait, what?

[Black.Shuck]

Is the summary correct...???

No, it's not.

Gruber is suggesting a Pro version might be able to help Apple spread its operations and logistics issues when it comes to sourcing components for the latest iPhone.

Apple's problem is not as simple as putting better stuff into the hardware. It's doing that 1 million times a day, every day, for every new version of iPhone that hits the shelves. He suggests a Pro version of the device at a high price-point would give them some breathing space when doing that.

Just imagine the logistics of just boxing and shipping 1 million of *anything* every day, let alone sourcing, assembling and testing something as complex and impressively well built (for this scale of engineering) as an iPhone.

Re:That reminds me.

[Gravis Zero]

My cellular phone has a charge that's measured in weeks, not hours. My cellular phone isn't a battery sucking brick that can't even have it's battery swapped. My cellular phone is for talking and on occasion texting. It was less than a hundred bucks and I spend very little on a monthly subscription. Your handheld computer (sold under the guise of being a telephone) may be "smart" but it makes fools of it's users.