Apple devices mostly aren‘t significantly more expensive than their counterparts by other manufacturers.
However, most of those offer cheaper alternatives that Apple doesn’t. While the most expensive Samsung S25 is more expensive than the equivalent iPhone, Samsung also sells models under 100€. That does skew the perception towards Samsung being more affordable.
Which it is, of course, if you don’t care about the extra amenities of more expensive phones.
Apple’s discounting strategy is generally to sell last year’s model, sometimes the model before that, with roughly $200 discounts for each year since its release. They sometimes release a lower spec model (the 16e is the current example, prior SE models or even the mini models from previous generations were part of this strategy as well) and that sometimes means the 2-year-old model isn’t kept available as long.
That’s where their 5-7 year support window really shines, in that they can just sell older models as discounted models, knowing that the new owner will still get 3-5 years of support.
The other thing is that the used market for iPhones is pretty robust. I can go buy used phones that are 3 or 4 years old and still get a good 1-4 years of additional support. At least in the U.S., if you told me my budget for a phone was gonna be $300 for the next 2 years, I think I’d probably buy a used iPhone.
As it currently stands, I’m still on Pixels on a 2 year cycle, but I also know that my “sell used to offset the price of my new phone” strategy also would be much cheaper if I did it with iPhones instead of Pixels.
This is one of the worse scams that Apple perpetrate with iOS admins iPadOS - yes, the devices get updates for as many years as specified. However, basically all apps available for iOS and iPadOS only support the two latest versions of the OS, meaning that once your device is out of support, it functionally becomes a brick after one year, as no apps will support it anymore.
Android has a worse record of keeping the OS up to date on devices, but app developers on Android routinely support 10 or more versions back of the OS, making this problem less severe.
I’m well aware of apple’s strategy and I myself am typing this on an iPhone 13 mini I bought refurbished.
However, for public perception of a brand as being expensive, used/refurbished models don’t really count. The cheapest phone Apple currently sells new (16e) is about 600€; 700€ directly from Apple. That’s not a cheap phone.
Samsung, as one of the most expensive android brands, still sells a variety of phones well below that, as low as 80€ for a brand new phone.
That obviously skews the perception towards Samsung being more affordable than Apple. Which they are. I cannot possibly get a new iPhone at 80€ or even a decent refurbished one.
But of course that still doesn’t mean iPhones are overpriced. You usually get what you pay for and similar devices by other manufacturers are usually just as expensive.
Well, depends on the price point but below 500-600€, yea, Apple has nothing to offer. At or above that price point, there obviously are counterparts to Apple devices and vice versa.
$111 and released 2 years ago. But still, closer than I thought. Amazon 3rd party seller is kinda cheating though.
But my question remains, are we upset with Apple because they haven’t provided a low budget option? There are so many good reasons to be angry with companies; “Their products are out of my price range” is like the lamest one.
The Samsung A06 was launched (in Germany) in May (2025) and you can get it for ~80€.
Anyway, we’re not talking about being angry with Apple, we’re talking about why Apple is perceived more expensive/less affordable than Android. The reason: they don’t have cheap/inexpensive phones (or anything inexpensive in any category). Apple is marketed as a premium brand, has premium prices, and we’re making fun of that.
That’s fair - but the prices aren’t really a premium are they? They’re just standard. What Apple is lacking is budget phones like Samsung. Less features, less performant hardware, less cost. What I’m getting at is that Samsung has many more “premium” options compared to Apple - yet because Apple’s options are only “premium” they’re considered the phone for rich assholes with too much money, so maybe we should just be making fun of those people instead, regardless of their phone.
but the prices aren’t really a premium are they? They’re just standard.
They’re standard for premium ranges.
The thing is, Apple markets themselves as a brand for wealthy, hipster kind of people, plus iPhones are very easily identifiable. Samsung never branded itself like that and with all the different (and third party) cases you usually don’t spot them on first glance.
We make fun of the people that buy the branding by making fun of the brand. And I usually don’t see people making fun of those who buy refurbished or used iPhones from five years or so, but of those who always have the newest generation.
Nothing else you mentioned matters. I provided you a link to a Samsung phone under the specified price, as requested. The rest of your comment was useless pedantry.
Okay. I was accused of making this claim but I don’t keep up with Samsung at all. Firstly, I found their product quality insanely abysmal. Secondly, their prices seem to have gone up. Thirdly, the bloatware they put on their phones could never be worth it at any price.
Apple devices mostly aren‘t significantly more expensive than their counterparts by other manufacturers.
However, most of those offer cheaper alternatives that Apple doesn’t. While the most expensive Samsung S25 is more expensive than the equivalent iPhone, Samsung also sells models under 100€. That does skew the perception towards Samsung being more affordable.
Which it is, of course, if you don’t care about the extra amenities of more expensive phones.
Apple’s discounting strategy is generally to sell last year’s model, sometimes the model before that, with roughly $200 discounts for each year since its release. They sometimes release a lower spec model (the 16e is the current example, prior SE models or even the mini models from previous generations were part of this strategy as well) and that sometimes means the 2-year-old model isn’t kept available as long.
That’s where their 5-7 year support window really shines, in that they can just sell older models as discounted models, knowing that the new owner will still get 3-5 years of support.
The other thing is that the used market for iPhones is pretty robust. I can go buy used phones that are 3 or 4 years old and still get a good 1-4 years of additional support. At least in the U.S., if you told me my budget for a phone was gonna be $300 for the next 2 years, I think I’d probably buy a used iPhone.
As it currently stands, I’m still on Pixels on a 2 year cycle, but I also know that my “sell used to offset the price of my new phone” strategy also would be much cheaper if I did it with iPhones instead of Pixels.
This is one of the worse scams that Apple perpetrate with iOS admins iPadOS - yes, the devices get updates for as many years as specified. However, basically all apps available for iOS and iPadOS only support the two latest versions of the OS, meaning that once your device is out of support, it functionally becomes a brick after one year, as no apps will support it anymore.
Android has a worse record of keeping the OS up to date on devices, but app developers on Android routinely support 10 or more versions back of the OS, making this problem less severe.
I’m well aware of apple’s strategy and I myself am typing this on an iPhone 13 mini I bought refurbished.
However, for public perception of a brand as being expensive, used/refurbished models don’t really count. The cheapest phone Apple currently sells new (16e) is about 600€; 700€ directly from Apple. That’s not a cheap phone.
Samsung, as one of the most expensive android brands, still sells a variety of phones well below that, as low as 80€ for a brand new phone.
That obviously skews the perception towards Samsung being more affordable than Apple. Which they are. I cannot possibly get a new iPhone at 80€ or even a decent refurbished one.
But of course that still doesn’t mean iPhones are overpriced. You usually get what you pay for and similar devices by other manufacturers are usually just as expensive.
So, there are no Apple counterparts for what “other manufacturers” make.
Well, depends on the price point but below 500-600€, yea, Apple has nothing to offer. At or above that price point, there obviously are counterparts to Apple devices and vice versa.
So we’re upset with Apple because they don’t make low budget options?
Please send a link to a new Samsung under 100€/$.
https://a.co/d/6KuHnDN
$111 and released 2 years ago. But still, closer than I thought. Amazon 3rd party seller is kinda cheating though.
But my question remains, are we upset with Apple because they haven’t provided a low budget option? There are so many good reasons to be angry with companies; “Their products are out of my price range” is like the lamest one.
The Samsung A06 was launched (in Germany) in May (2025) and you can get it for ~80€.
Anyway, we’re not talking about being angry with Apple, we’re talking about why Apple is perceived more expensive/less affordable than Android. The reason: they don’t have cheap/inexpensive phones (or anything inexpensive in any category). Apple is marketed as a premium brand, has premium prices, and we’re making fun of that.
I did a quick search - a nice option it seems.
That’s fair - but the prices aren’t really a premium are they? They’re just standard. What Apple is lacking is budget phones like Samsung. Less features, less performant hardware, less cost. What I’m getting at is that Samsung has many more “premium” options compared to Apple - yet because Apple’s options are only “premium” they’re considered the phone for rich assholes with too much money, so maybe we should just be making fun of those people instead, regardless of their phone.
They’re standard for premium ranges.
The thing is, Apple markets themselves as a brand for wealthy, hipster kind of people, plus iPhones are very easily identifiable. Samsung never branded itself like that and with all the different (and third party) cases you usually don’t spot them on first glance.
We make fun of the people that buy the branding by making fun of the brand. And I usually don’t see people making fun of those who buy refurbished or used iPhones from five years or so, but of those who always have the newest generation.
You perfectly defended my prior comment. Much obliged, nothing to add.
100€ is about $115. So it’s under 100€.
You gonna respond to anything else I mentioned or are you just gonna drop a useless pedantry and leave?
Nothing else you mentioned matters. I provided you a link to a Samsung phone under the specified price, as requested. The rest of your comment was useless pedantry.
Not sure you know what pedantry means but that’s alright.
deleted by creator
Samsung is in a contest with apple to see who can suck the most ass. So I don’t think that’s a fair example to ask for.
Most companies are.
I’m not the one claiming the existence of a new sub-100 euro Samsung.
Didn’t see any indication anyone would say that. If they did, that would be delusional.
It very much isn’t. At least here in Germany, you can get a brand new Galaxy A06 for 80€ (incl. tax). The phone released end of November '24.
I can’t speak to the quality of the phone but it does exist.
Okay. I was accused of making this claim but I don’t keep up with Samsung at all. Firstly, I found their product quality insanely abysmal. Secondly, their prices seem to have gone up. Thirdly, the bloatware they put on their phones could never be worth it at any price.
Yea, I wouldn’t personally get a Samsung, even if I was in the market for a cheap Android…