[HN Gopher] iPhone Pocket
___________________________________________________________________
iPhone Pocket
See also _iPod Socks_ -
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45889602
Author : soheilpro
Score : 398 points
Date : 2025-11-11 10:17 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| gsibble wrote:
| How about no.
| gsibble wrote:
| One of the most innovative companies in the
| world......supposedly.....and they come out with this.
| cko wrote:
| "Users can create their own personalized color combinations
| with iPhone Pocket and iPhone."
|
| You don't think that's innovative?
| blitzar wrote:
| Might just have my mum knit me a custom one.
|
| True story: when I got the iPhone 5 the first case i used was a
| home made fabric slip. Fashion really does come and go in cycles.
| Loughla wrote:
| >3d knitted construction
|
| This genuinely has to be a gag.
| drcongo wrote:
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth".
| dzuc wrote:
| no, it's a whole garment knitting technique
| jebarker wrote:
| It certainly has that dual use.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I don't want to kink shame anyone, but I'd be concerned about
| getting all of that fuzzy caught in someone's throat. Unless
| I missed the version made of silk.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| This does look like a gag to me too, but 3D knitting technology
| is interesting. I have a pair of carbon-plate marathon race
| shoes made with 3D knitting. They're very light and very
| comfortable, with stretch in some axes and stiffness in others
| as needed, no seams but form-fit around my foot in compound
| curves.
|
| Instead of making the thing out of 2D pieces of fabric, even
| stretchy knit fabric, and sewing those planar shapes together
| into something 3D, they made this as one continuous knit object
| that adds and drops stitches to give it shape without seams.
| The machines and programs that manipulate the yarn and partial
| garments, tying knots at crazy speeds to create something
| 3-dimensional out of something 1-dimensional, are just
| astonishing. Equally astonishing is the fact that with two
| sticks and their hands, it's not that challenging for a human
| knitter to do the same. I think that "knit a sock" is one of
| the most challenging tasks to give a humanoid robot.
| jsheard wrote:
| They bought a bunch of 3D knitting machines to make Vision Pro
| headstraps, and since that isn't selling I guess they're using
| the excess capacity to make iPhone socks.
|
| You can briefly see them in this ad:
| https://x.com/tim_cook/status/1748337010191077462
| jitl wrote:
| no https://us.isseymiyake.com/collections/pleatsplease
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| 250$ for a sock...
| rjdj377dhabsn wrote:
| The pricing is insane. I could see $30-50 for premium materials
| and design.
| GaryNumanVevo wrote:
| Yes, it's designer sock with a famous fashion designer's name
| on it.
| gregoriol wrote:
| Looks like the swimsuit from Borat
| Y_Y wrote:
| Absolutely. They missed a great opportunity to call it the
| _Apple CockSock_.
| jawns wrote:
| > iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95
| (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
| xg15 wrote:
| Do they also sell Replacement Wool for $10/inch?
| bogwog wrote:
| Only if you're an Apple authorized service provider.
| baggachipz wrote:
| My Nana doesn't charge nearly enough for her crocheting.
| tonyarkles wrote:
| Honestly... was having a conversation with my aunt about this
| last week. Knitting, crocheting, and quilting are all high-
| skill activities and no one charges enough for it.
| threeducks wrote:
| Prices fall when supply exceeds demand.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Labor is easiest to underpay when passion/fun gets
| involved.
| dylan604 wrote:
| The vast majority of people making handcrafted do not
| charge enough for their items. If they did, nobody could
| afford them. Most items are priced based on the cost of the
| material with little consideration to the time to make
| them. I have a friend that is a very skilled knitter, but
| for large items like blankets and sweaters, there are weeks
| of effort involved. When broken down, "kids in Chinese
| factories" make more per hour.
|
| The great thing is that this type of person will tell you
| they are not in it for the money. As long as they can "buy
| more string" with the proceeds (or whatever their materials
| are), they are quite happy.
| wredcoll wrote:
| This is a prime example of the fact that ultimately
| prices are set by what people will pay, the cost of the
| item is functionally irrelevant.
|
| see also: half of apple's product
| dylan604 wrote:
| I don't think this is the answer you think it is. Every
| person that I know that knits or crochets is not doing it
| to make money, or even when selling items are not
| charging because they think that's all someone will pay.
| They do it because they like doing it. If they were doing
| it to make money, then the fun and relaxing nature of it
| is lost. If you've ever been to or around a stich-n-
| bitch, you'd understand. It's cheaper than a therapist.
| Plus, there's usually wine and baked goods. I'm in Texas,
| so it's not like the items knitted are used for more than
| 2 weeks out of the year. That doesn't stop them. To blame
| it on the "what people will pay" is grossly not
| understanding.
| wredcoll wrote:
| You're arguing against a point I didn't make.
|
| What you're saying is that these people don't do this in
| order to make a profit, they gain other benefit.
|
| _My_ point is that the cost /labor to produce an item
| has no real relationship to its sale price in a free
| market system.
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| > Most items are priced based on the cost of the material
| [...]
|
| If that, in my experience.
|
| "I've got some wool going spare" is a common anecdote.
| dylan604 wrote:
| My friend made a rule that no new yarn could be bought
| until the same amount of yarn from existing inventory is
| used first. An entire closet was dedicated to said
| inventory. Receiving yarn as a gift does not count.
| MandieD wrote:
| I used to joke that I made some of the most expensive socks
| in the world: 20 hours per pair, and I'm a run-of-the-mill
| IT ops person in western Europe - do the math.
|
| I have decided to up the cost by taking up fleece
| processing and hand spinning. Even on the wheel, it takes
| another twenty hours to clean, comb, and spin enough wool
| for a pair of socks.
|
| If I were doing this for income, I'd definitely get faster
| at all the steps.
|
| As I pick up more of the steps in making clothes, it's
| mind-boggling how cheap even "luxury" clothes like the 500
| EUR pants discussed above, much less my sturdy midrange
| jeans (Tom Tailor, 60 EUR, pockets that hold an iPhone 13
| mini, even in a ladies' cut), are.
| RataNova wrote:
| Nana's been lowkey running a luxury accessories brand this
| whole time
| nashashmi wrote:
| Fashion statement. Plus it is a Limited edition release. Plus
| it is weird. Plus it is apple. Price seems right.
| freefaler wrote:
| > iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95
| (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
|
| Really? Lot's of value there...
|
| Like a new OnePlus Nord N30 5G is around $250, and Samsung Galaxy
| A16 approximately at $200. And Samsung Galaxy A14 5G is between
| $120 to $160.
| peterspath wrote:
| Reminds me of the iPod Socks:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
| philipallstar wrote:
| That was actually quite a nice product, though. And 6 for $29
| was pretty good.
| MYEUHD wrote:
| Note that it's $49 when adjusted for inflation
| peterspath wrote:
| yeah, I loved them. Still have a couple of them with one of
| my iPods. Still going strong after all those years.
| polycaster wrote:
| > The socks were jokingly presented by Apple CEO Steve Jobs as
| a "revolutionary new product"
| gregoriol wrote:
| I still use an iPod Sock with my current iPhone
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| People were home knitting them anyway at the time. Some still
| do.
| h3x4d3c1m4l wrote:
| Apple doing Balenciaga shit
| kjrrp wrote:
| That was my first though. After "wait, it's not April 1st yet".
| ahoka wrote:
| Balenciaga would be an oversized black latex condom.
| GaryNumanVevo wrote:
| They literally sell a $400 Hermes apple watch band
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Or a 2000 euro Hermes Apple Watch with bracelet, but it comes
| with special wallpaper you don't get if you just buy the
| strap or 1000 euro bracelet separately
|
| The strap and bracelet are both _really_ nice though, do
| recommend if you aren't very price sensitive.
| hlpn wrote:
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth"
|
| Ugh
| silversmith wrote:
| Wait, it really does say that in the article. Wow.
| wredcoll wrote:
| Thats the point where I started double checking for april
| fools
| biophysboy wrote:
| Its just a stiff translation of a marketing term. If you look
| up Yi Mei noBu , you'll see a bunch of Miyake's clothes, where
| the whole gimmick is that they have no seams. A better
| translation probably would have been "inspired by the concept
| of seamless design"
| bobbiechen wrote:
| That makes much more sense, even "a seamless piece of cloth"
| would have been much less ridiculous.
| biophysboy wrote:
| A more literal one-to-one translation would be "one sheet
| of cloth", which also would have been better.
| hlpn wrote:
| That makes much more sense. Thank you.
| villgax wrote:
| Reminded me of the IKEA floor mat knit lol
| Aaron2222 wrote:
| So iPod Socks[0], but with a strap?
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
| justmarc wrote:
| LOL. Sorry. really. LOL.
| whizzter wrote:
| Drug dealers are going to be as upset at their style being stolen
| by hipsters as sailors were when hipsters decided that tattoo's
| were cool.
| Insanity wrote:
| If only they spent these resources on bringing "slide over" back
| to iPad in its original form.. :(
|
| This looks kinda lame. I already have a pocket for my phone, it's
| my.. pocket. Or I can throw it in any other pouch if I don't have
| pockets.
| xg15 wrote:
| > _I already have a pocket for my phone, it's my.. pocket._
|
| As Steve Jobs intended.
|
| (Like, really. I think the original "one more thing"
| presentation was also so powerful became he could just casually
| pull some next-gen tech out of his pocket)
| tensility wrote:
| More accurate to call it the iPhone Purse.
| tensility wrote:
| Meanwhile, can I have multi-message selection back in (iPad)
| Mail? Whoever decided to axe that feature apparently has a
| spam-free inbox.
|
| This company has become such a joke. Maybe Apple should start
| being concerned about building computers that Just Work well
| again rather than continuing to flounder after Cook's obsession
| with bad fashion.
|
| I suppose the underlying message here is that, if you can no
| longer innovate, shill overpriced purses instead.
| blokey wrote:
| I may be missing what you're after for ipad mail but isnt it
| under the "..." then "select" to select multiple messages?
| alfanick wrote:
| EAZZY MISTAKE /s
| philipallstar wrote:
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth,"
|
| Is this satire?
| diego_moita wrote:
| I respect Apple.
|
| It takes a lot of skill, talent and dedication to pull out a
| massive rip-off bullshit like this and have millions of fools
| buying it.
| paleotrope wrote:
| Do your iphones hang low Can you swing them to and fro...
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Best storage design out of Apple since the iRack:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcjLEwZqcQI
|
| I wonder if it fits an iBrator:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP9Ef_KQTTI
| xg15 wrote:
| On the bright side, it looks as if you could also use it as a
| decent slingshot.
| c0wb0yc0d3r wrote:
| Could this be some sort of joint venture? In other words, is
| Apple being paid to promote this in some way?
|
| I realize this is a "limited edition" item but it seems to me as
| being way off brand.
| y0eswddl wrote:
| The answer to your question is in the article :)
| gnarlouse wrote:
| It feels like a relic from the iPod Nano era
| jitl wrote:
| apple x designer fashion has been around a while
| https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-hermes/
| Retr0id wrote:
| iPhones are hefty these days, so it could double as a weapon.
| voidUpdate wrote:
| I had to check the address a few times to make sure this isn't a
| satire page, and I'm still not convinced it isn't
| plasticchris wrote:
| Wait it's not April?
| dylan604 wrote:
| You're not familiar with the internationally recognized Day of
| the Joker every 11/11?
| cnees wrote:
| I'm still waiting for them to collaborate with Levi's to bring
| iPhone sized pockets to women's jeans.
| RataNova wrote:
| Honestly, that would be the most genuinely useful Apple fashion
| collab yet
| dcrazy wrote:
| And like this product, it has a Steve Jobs tie-in. His on-
| stage uniform was Issey Mikaye turtlenecks and Levi's 501s.
| MarioMan wrote:
| Or maybe iPad-sized pockets: https://www.geeky-
| gadgets.com/igotabigasspocket-ipad-jeans-1...
| cnees wrote:
| On one hand, I want bigger pockets that fit my iPhone, and on
| the other hand, I want smaller iPhones that fit in one female-
| sized hand.
| tw04 wrote:
| I legit had to do a double take and ensure this wasn't an old
| April fool's post. The concept... odd but whatever. The price...
| seaparter wrote:
| Is it April already!?
| MandieD wrote:
| Hey, any of y'all want one in hand-spun, natural-colored wool (as
| in, as it was shorn from the sheep) yarn?
| buggeryorkshire wrote:
| This is actually Apple doing this? What is going on there?
| tensility wrote:
| Doubles as the sock outfit for the next Red Hot Chili Peppers
| tour.
| oidar wrote:
| This is the best idea since having a charging port on the bottom
| of a mouse. Finally, a product we can source from the US
| completely.
| moribvndvs wrote:
| I was out with my young coworkers and was absolutely baffled to
| see a bunch of them with slings for their phones. That was the
| only time I'd heard of such a thing until now. I kinda thought
| I'd drunkenly hallucinated it.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| I was just talking to my wife about this, literally 5 minutes
| ago. I just moved from the 13 mini to the Air and am hating
| that it doesn't comfortably fit in my jeans, to the point where
| I might go return it today. My young cousin was wearing her
| iPhone on a cross body sling, and I was commenting that we've
| gotten to the point where the phones are so big that you need
| bags or extra things to carry it comfortably.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| To a contemporary person their smartphone is probably the
| single most functionally important object they carry with
| them. People have always modified their clothes around common
| items, and then those modifications become subject to fashion
| trends and then eventually tradition themselves. Think like
| briefcases and wallets, but also japanese inro, european
| snuffboxes, decorative scabbards, etc.
|
| This is more like an ancient and near universal practice
| being applied to a modern tool, rather than a totally new
| thing in itself.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| For sure, I had that thought as well, that clothing is
| evolving alongside the things people are needing to carry.
|
| But, for me, it does seem like we're going in a
| functionally poorer direction. Just a few years ago I could
| have a computer I could fit in my pocket. I can't buy that
| anymore. The fact that people are selling modifications to
| these devices (cross body slings, cases with those weird
| pop up things on the back so you can hold it one handed) to
| me means we've missed the mark on design. For more than a
| decade we had a great one handed computer that'd disappear
| into my pocket. No longer.
| hamburglar wrote:
| I'm still clinging to my 3rd gen SE. My daughter had one
| too, but was forced to get a new phone recently because
| she had destroyed the old one. Got talked into a 13 mini
| and now I never stop hearing about how much of a pain in
| the ass FaceID is compared to TouchID. When Apple finally
| takes my button away I'll probably go to android.
|
| Note: the other thing I like about the SE is it was
| comparatively cheap. I will never get close to spending
| $1000 on a phone. Apple doesn't want me anymore.
| stetrain wrote:
| For the demographics whose mainstream clothing includes no or
| very small pockets, this has been true for many years.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| Absolutely, and the lack of decent pockets on women's
| clothing is probably a large reason I can no longer buy a
| computer I can fit in my jeans.
| AEVL wrote:
| Just some trivia (and an aside):
|
| The collaboration is with Issey Miyake. Steve Jobs black
| turtlenecks was Issey Miyakes:
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferhicks/2022/08/10/heres-...
|
| (As an aside, I swear by pants from the Issey Miyake Homme Plisse
| collection. Since investing in some pairs about 10 years ago, I
| have hardly worn anything else--no other pants match their
| comfort. The iPhone Pocket is of course ridiculous anyway.)
| nathan_compton wrote:
| The pants cost around 500 bucks? I don't necessarily believe
| that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational,
| but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth
| that much money unless they are lined with gold or something.
|
| I usually buy cheap clothes and mend them and ten years for a
| pair of pants isn't unusual for me. I probably haven't spent
| $500 dollars on clothes in a year ever in my entire life
| (except maybe the year I bought a suit for getting married).
|
| I guess I'm just genuinely curious how you found yourself in
| the position of even contemplating $500 for pants.
| baggachipz wrote:
| I believe the word for it is "rich".
| iamacyborg wrote:
| Pro-tip. You can buy them used for a significant discount to
| rrp.
| flyinglizard wrote:
| Don't rule out until you've tried it. High end clothing (not
| just brand name, but real advanced stuff) is pretty amazing
| in how it makes you feel. I'm inclined to spend on anything I
| interact with, and clothes is pretty big interaction.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Sure, but you need to have a certain level of wealth before
| even considering it. $500 is a ridiculous sum for a pair of
| trousers. I've had EUR80 or EUR120 Levi's at one point when
| I had a bit more expendable income but they only lasted me
| two years. I'm back on affordable jeans now (when outside,
| when inside it's pajama pants all the way lmao), I think
| they're EUR30 or so.
|
| I'm sure the branded ones are "better" but is it to scale
| with the price? Are Levi's 4x as good as cheap ones? Are
| these Steve Jobs ones 16x as good?
| NaomiLehman wrote:
| i don't think anyone is saying you should save up to buy
| $500 pants. you buy them if it's a rounding error of your
| bank statement
| tavavex wrote:
| I wonder if there's an "ignorance is bliss" effect here
| that makes trying it not worth it for the average person.
| Think about it - to my knowledge, almost everyone spends ~0
| seconds per day thinking about the comfort of their pants.
| But once you try something that feels as (allegedly?)
| supreme and heavenly as what you describe, you can't go
| back - you'll always feel that difference from now on, and
| now wearing something that you previously never paid any
| thought to would feel distinctly less comfortable. Kind of
| similar to how audiophiles train themselves to perceive the
| tiniest of flaws in the music they listen to and spend
| thousands of dollars to rectify those flaws, while everyone
| else keep ignorantly enjoying the flawed sound, not even
| being aware of the difference.
| nathan_compton wrote:
| I try my best to remain ignorant of these sorts of
| things. I prefer my bliss.
| cael450 wrote:
| Yeah, that is wild. I can't imagine spending that kind of
| money on pants.
| ricochet11 wrote:
| I once paid $1000 for some sneakers. I'm still regularly
| wearing them 7 years later. I've bought $50/$100 and they
| never last that long. It was an insane purchase at the time,
| done in a moment of jet lagged madness when my shoes fell
| apart in an airport. But over time it's turned out to be a
| great investment. Smart, comfortable, well made.
| lopis wrote:
| Which? I struggle to find any sneakers that last more than
| a couple years, while also avoiding the big brands.
| jonathanlb wrote:
| As someone who is on the lookout for long-lasting durable
| products, what brand and model sneakers did you buy? How
| often do you wear these?
|
| I've heard that Common Projects are pretty good at a $400
| retail price point, but it sounds like you got something
| else.
| alejo wrote:
| I got a pair of Santoni's leahther sneakers in 2017, for
| about $500. I still have them and while they worn out a
| bit, they are still nice.
|
| The most comfortable shoes I've ever owned. I remember
| describing them like "walking in clouds".
|
| Never bought any of them and all the other pairs I got
| from different brands in the $200-$400 bracket have been
| awfully disappointing
| wyre wrote:
| My understanding with Common Projects, is that if you are
| looking to spend $400 on a blank sneaker, they set the
| standard and have the most brand awareness, but now there
| are plenty of smaller brands making virtually identical
| sneakers with better materials and/or construction for
| the same price or less.
|
| Like with anything else, buying Common Projects you are
| paying for the brand (the subtle gold lettering on the
| side of their shoes).
| socalgal2 wrote:
| I'm happy to pay $$$$ for something that lasts but my
| exerience is some of the most expensive things I've bought,
| well known luxury brand names, had the lowest quality.
| rpdillon wrote:
| In my younger years, I really did believe that cost
| correlated with longevity, but as I've gotten older, I'm
| finding that most of the very affordable things I've
| purchased, including shoes and pants and jackets, have
| lasted 15+ years. So I no longer believe that paying a
| thousand dollars for an item of clothing is going to
| yield a material benefit in terms of longevity -- I think
| some of it is just marketing, but there are also other
| elements of comfort and fit. I'm just not very
| discerning.
| bombcar wrote:
| You're often much better off buying 10x of the thing than
| a thing that is 10x the cost; if it's a wear item, not
| wearing it all the time will greatly extend its lifespan.
|
| Almost all clothes is destroyed by the washer and the
| dryer, not by wearing.
| byw wrote:
| The trick to longevity in things is to acquire skills in
| repairing.
| nathan_compton wrote:
| Do you wear them like $50 shoes or like $1000 dollar shoes?
| I run around 18 miles a week on trails and I doubt your
| $1000 dollar sneakers would last ten years with that usage
| pattern.
| trenchpilgrim wrote:
| I do have a pair of $250 leather riding boots that have
| lasted me many years so far and I'm pretty sure will last
| that long, but they also require cleaning and polishing a
| few times a year....
| NickC25 wrote:
| I'm sure that if you got super high quality durable
| running shoes, and only used them for running, you'd get
| some good milage out of them before the shoes either wore
| out or wore through.
|
| I play tennis regularly and only go through a pair of
| shoes maybe once a year or every 18 months. I always pay
| extra for a higher quality and more durable pair because
| they last. I only use the shoes for tennis - I put them
| on when I enter the court and take them off when I end my
| session. The shoes probably run me $180-200 but totally
| worth it if they can last me 100+ hours.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| The maximum durability running shoes are $150-$200. No
| amount more than that will give you more durability and
| assuredly almost all $1000 shoes won't last as long as
| $200 Asics Superblasts
| nvch wrote:
| Xero offers 5000 mile sole warranty, and they cost even
| less
| nathan_compton wrote:
| One sad thing is that I am allergic to plastics and
| leathers and so my choice of shoes is drastically
| limited. The shoes I can wear aren't great for running
| and wear out in about 3-6 months, but I usually just keep
| running on them for about a year, until my toes start
| sticking out.
| kccqzy wrote:
| When you run 18 miles a week you should measure the
| lifetime of your shoes by mileage rather than time. I
| think 600 miles is about right for a pair of running
| shoes. It's just that some people run 600 miles in a
| year, others run that in ten years.
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| I have had $20 sneakers last that long. You don't need to
| pay $$$$ to have clothes last a long time, you just need to
| take care of your stuff.
| nluken wrote:
| Different strokes for different folks. I'm a fashion lover
| but a fan of cheap cars, and I could equally say something
| similar about people who drive new luxury cars when there's
| plenty of reliable functionality to be had under $10k.
| There's a lot of craftsmanship that goes into nice clothes,
| and you can get way more expensive than $500. And fashion is
| a form of art in a way. What makes a painting worth thousands
| of dollars?
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| I always have a hard time telling is it craftsmanship and
| superior materials or marketing
| neom wrote:
| For clothes as a rule of thumb if you're not interested
| in doing a lot of research, items made in Portugal or
| Japan are more often than not priced fine enough, yes
| you'll pay some markup for a designer, but on average
| should last if you look after them.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _I don 't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on
| a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to
| imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money_
|
| Maybe he's amortizing them.
|
| He says they've lasted ten years, so that's $50/year.
|
| If they last another ten, that's $25/year.
|
| Oh, great. Now I've invented Pants-as-a-Service.
| kulahan wrote:
| $500 for something you might wear for a decade straight? A
| brand-new pair of Levis at JC Penny is gonna run you like $90
| anyways. It's not _that_ much more expensive.
|
| But also, quality has diminishing returns in basically every
| category. At the low end, it's extremely efficient to improve
| the quality of your product and charge a bit more. At the
| high end, you can't make any more inexpensive moves to set
| yourself apart, so you use higher end materials, fabrication
| methods, and workers.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > $500 for something [...] run you like $90 anyways. It's
| not that much more expensive.
|
| To be honest, I did abandoned school as quickly as I could
| and my math skills aren't that of my peers, but 5x times as
| much is pretty "much more expensive" for most people out
| there, not sure how someone can say else with a straight
| face. $100 vs $500 would easily be a "Can I eat properly
| the entire month?" decision for a lot of the population.
| ethbr1 wrote:
| Wrong comparison.
|
| The right comparison is " _For people who can spend $500
| on a pair of pants_ , what is the financial difference
| between $100 and $500?"
|
| For most of that subpopulation, not much.
| Brendinooo wrote:
| > A brand-new pair of Levis at JC Penny is gonna run you
| like $90 anyways
|
| I'm seeing a range of around $33 to $60 at the moment, with
| other brands dipping under $30.
|
| https://www.jcpenney.com/g/men/jeans?id=cat100250010
| kulahan wrote:
| Every pair on that page is ~$70, but some are on sale. I
| overassumed a little on inflation for them, I guess.
| Brendinooo wrote:
| It's part of their pricing strategy. There's always a
| sale. Consumers think they're getting $70 pants for $40
| instead of thinking they got $40 pants.
|
| Ron Johnson of Apple Store fame famously tried to change
| this when he became JCP's CEO and...barely lasted a year!
| accrual wrote:
| Lenovo also strictly follows this strategy. All new
| laptops are marked up 200% on release date, but don't
| worry, code THINK_${CURRENT_MONTH} will reduce it down to
| market price. I think their goal is to make the user feel
| scarity/time pressure via the coupons.
| kulahan wrote:
| Right, but that's not available on every pair of pants
| 100% of the time, so the price is the price, not the sale
| price.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| When I go into the store four years ago, Levi jeans are
| $100. Yet even Macy's website shows them for $60 now?
|
| Maybe there was some _significant_ quality degradation.
| They recently added elastic fibers to like their entire
| khaki shorts line, which makes them dramatically less
| durable. I bet they did the same here.
| stackskipton wrote:
| What in Silicon Valley salary is this statement?
|
| Median weekly salary is 1159 according to BLS. That's 7% of
| weekly salary vs 43% of weekly salary.
| kulahan wrote:
| It's a few hundred bucks. If you're in the category of
| buying luxury pants, this is not much money. I really do
| not care how affordable it is for people making minimum
| wage, and am _obviously_ not talking about their
| perspective.
| sejje wrote:
| Yes you were, when you brought (fake) JC Penney prices in
| for comparison.
| kulahan wrote:
| Nope, I was pointing out that even the cheapo jeans are
| still pretty expensive.
|
| Also, stop being weird and antagonistic - they weren't
| "fake", it's called a "mistake" you brick.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| HN is full of very wealthy people, I don't think pointing
| this out is that useful. It's pretty obvious who the
| target audience is there.
| hopelite wrote:
| I can wear a $40 pair of jeans that I really like and keep
| buying for its style and durability and invest the $460
| remaining dollars and in 10 years I would have about $1200
| umpalumpaaa wrote:
| I never knew what a difference good pants can make. I usually
| just bought my pants from H&M/other retailers or Amazon. I
| usually bought what I considered good value pants for like
| $30-80. I then, out of curiosity, bought pants that were 2-4
| times as expensive (~$150) and it really made a difference. I
| never really liked the pants I had... they never fit right...
| they felt very uncomfortable. The new pants I got about 2
| years ago (the more expensive ones) were very very different.
| Very comfy. They also had a lot of nice features that I never
| knew I needed but that I now want by default...
|
| - A button that just "clicks". Most pants I usually owned had
| a traditional pants button. Those more expensive ones had
| buttons that just "clicked". Away goes the worry about a
| button falling off while you are on the go. - Pockets with
| hidden zippers: My pants have pockets and in those pockets
| are smaller pockets with a zipper. Perfect to store things
| that are small and easily lost.
|
| There are more "features" but those are the important ones.
| The most important feature is just the material that is used.
| I barely feel it. Also the company that makes those pants
| makes other things as well. I ordered a lot of cloths by now
| and the amazing thing is that everything they make fits me
| perfectly. I don't know how they do it... When I usually buy
| pants I have to try on like 10 pants to find one that fits.
| Even if I pick the "correct" size.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Alright, after that lead-in, you really need to tell us
| what the pants are.
| umpalumpaaa wrote:
| It might be a well known brand to many folks - I am not
| sure since I am new in the US. My pants are all from
| Rhone Apparel.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Never heard of them. I'm always interested in a good
| value. I rarely buy the cheapest or the most expensive
| item, so if Rhone is decent then I may give them a try.
| Thanks for the tip!
| umpalumpaaa wrote:
| They are also in some stores (Bloomingdale if you want to
| check them out in person... but as I said: They usually
| fit haha)
| znpy wrote:
| > I never really liked the pants I had... they never fit
| right... they felt very uncomfortable. The new pants I got
| about 2 years ago (the more expensive ones) were very very
| different. Very comfy. They also had a lot of nice features
| that I never knew I needed but that I now want by
| default...
|
| I managed to get the same experience for free by losing
| weight.
|
| I lost around ~9-11 kilos over the last year and a half and
| went two sizes down in pants (went from european size 50 to
| size 46, with a few more kilos to lose until i can wear
| 44).
|
| It's incredibly nice to be able to pick pretty much any
| pair of pants/jeans my size and have it fit pretty much
| perfectly.
|
| The pants I wear are still usually either from OVS
| (https://www.ovs.it) or from Doppelganger (https://www.dopp
| elganger.it/it/uomo/abbigliamento/pantaloni....) but they
| fit me almost perfectly.
| SkiFire13 wrote:
| > My pants have pockets and in those pockets are smaller
| pockets with a zipper. Perfect to store things that are
| small and easily lost.
|
| I had one with these as well, although probably not of the
| same quality, and I always feared the zip scratching the
| screen of my phone when putting it in my pocket.
| amelius wrote:
| You are comparing cheap pants to average pants. Expensive
| pants are >$500 but they don't add much value over average
| pants.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I prefer not wearing pants.
| onion2k wrote:
| _I don 't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on
| a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to
| imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money unless
| they are lined with gold or something._
|
| I don't think Steve Jobs went shopping for pants. Nor do many
| of the people who buy this sort of garment. They either have
| an assistant who buys things for them, whose goal is to keep
| them happy and not blow a predetermined budget, or they go to
| a store and sit in a nice suite where a personal shopper
| suggests things to them. In either scenario the price of
| individual items probably don't even get a mention.
| kridsdale1 wrote:
| Steve was a notoriously picky shopper and obsessed with
| details. In the biography it says they went without a
| dishwasher or something in his house for half a year
| because he could never be satisfied with the geometry or
| finishing. So his billionaire wife washed dishes by hand.
| onion2k wrote:
| I don't doubt it, but I don't think Steve was out there
| browsing at Lowe's either. You can be very picky and
| still not shop the way the rest of us shop.
| astrange wrote:
| Palo Alto has its own reality distortion field that makes
| billionaires pretend they're 1950s middle class families,
| so he probably did shop at Ace Hardware.
| cons0le wrote:
| statistically, inheritance
| NaomiLehman wrote:
| decent hand-sewn raw denim made in the EU/US jeans are
| minimum $500. and i'm talking non-designer. just fair wages
| and good materials.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| > but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being
| worth that much money unless they are lined with gold or
| something.
|
| It depends on how much you earn. I don't mind spending tens
| of thousands on Loro Piana cashmere because it's _really_
| nice, but at my income level the price difference between
| that and Zara is pretty much immaterial.
|
| Keep in mind that HN is packed with people with salaries
| above $1M/yr and entrepreneurs with way higher income levels.
|
| A few years ago I too would've considered $500 for pants to
| be absurd, at this point I just go to a tailor and pay
| slightly more than that but save tons of time in the long
| term and always have perfect fitting pants. The time savings
| alone are tremendous, after getting a pair fitted properly I
| can just order new ones whenever I need without having to
| spend hours going through shops looking for the right pair of
| pants.
| frmersdog wrote:
| In this job market, in this political environment, with
| Luigi Mangione a Bonnie-and-Clyde-tier folk hero, the bit
| you quoted was perhaps a clue to the lack of wisdom in
| humblebragging that you spend a family's annual food budget
| on 5 pounds of spun sheep keratin.
|
| I imagine that I will be the bad guy for pointing this out.
| (Perhaps even to myself, considering that there's certainly
| utility in rich people yapping incautiously about the
| reasons others might want to turn on an Enes Yilmazer video
| and figure out where the panic room is.)
| walletdrainer wrote:
| This feels like Reddit leaking over a little bit.
|
| Let me remind you that this is a forum operated by a VC
| fund looking for people to give lots of money to so they
| can build billion dollar businesses. Those who succeed
| are routinely celebrated here, but actually discussing
| that money being spent rapidly becomes judgmental.
|
| Hard to reconcile it being super cool to build an unicorn
| (a cute term we've come up with to describe billion
| dollar startups which have made their founders
| tremendously wealthy), but somewhat disgusting to
| actually have or spend that money.
|
| News. _ycombinator_.com seems like the wrong place to
| complain about capitalism.
|
| FWIW I don't even get a Silicon Valley salary, am not in
| any way extraordinary, but have spent 10+ years building
| 100+ small online businesses out of which none have been
| particularly successful (but in total the little streams
| add up)
| botanrice wrote:
| Sorry for jumping on this off-topic but I'm a junior
| engineer hoping to build out some of those small online
| businesses but I've been a bit unsure of how to go about
| it. When you say small online businesses do you mean like
| micro-SaaS kind of things? Or like tangible items? Sorry,
| just curious :)
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Micro-SaaS and digital products. Just figure out a good
| stack to work with for billing and try to crank out one
| little thing a week that will be useful to someone.
|
| One of my best projects just sells some pdf files you can
| submit to the government to achieve a thing you would
| usually unnecessarily hire a lawyer for.
|
| Another in a similar vein simply offers an easy-to-fill
| PDF version of a government form that does not exist
| online, and a nice HTML interface that will help you
| mostly automatically fill it.
|
| Most of these took less than a day to build and take next
| to no maintenance. Both of the above earn more than $100k
| annually.
|
| Just make sure your customers can get in touch with you
| very easily so you don't end up with broken websites
| running on autopilot charging customers for broken stuff,
| I made that mistake once and ended up having to call a
| bunch of people to apologise when I discovered what had
| been happening.
| basisword wrote:
| He wasn't 'humblebragging'. He was answering a question
| on an anonymous forum honestly.
| boston_clone wrote:
| > at my income level the price difference between that
| and Zara is pretty much immaterial
|
| this is probably just regular bragging, right?
|
| now, discussing how donating $100 versus $10k to a cause
| or community being negligible to their economic security
| would at least front-load some humility, but capitalists
| gon' capitalist. oops!
|
| thank god this is Hacker News though, and not some safe-
| haven for boring rich people!
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Can you describe a way of communicating that same point
| without it being bragging in your eyes? I guess I
| could've engaged in the gymnastics of saying SWIM like
| they used to do on some drug forums :)
| boston_clone wrote:
| Sure, you could just omit that entire sentence, no?
| Retains readability but avoids unnecessary specifics.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| I think without that sentence it fails to communicate the
| absurdity of trying to figure out a generic answer to
| whether or not something is worth it.
|
| With a total rewrite I could certainly have communicated
| that point in a much more clinical manner. I just don't
| see the point.
| marknutter wrote:
| No it doesn't. He's establishing the fact that he can
| afford very expensive clothes and why, from personal
| experience, he believes them to be worth it if you can
| afford it. If you omit the entire sentence the whole
| meaning of the post changes. I think you may just be
| upset because he's wealthier than you.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Also later tried to briefly establish the fact that had I
| been offered such products a couple of years ago, I too
| would've found the pricing completely ridiculous.
| alistairSH wrote:
| You could have omitted "but at my income level the price
| difference between that and Zara is pretty much
| immaterial." and come across more matter-of-fact than
| brag. IMO.
| vouwfietsman wrote:
| "I have spent more than $500 dollars on pants before,
| because I'm lucky to be in a position where for me these
| things are a matter of taste and whim, rather than
| budget, and don't really affect my finances too much
| whether I do or don't buy them."
|
| I don't think I have to explain to you how the gap
| between what you said, and what I wrote above, is what is
| causing offense here. You likely deserve 100% of your
| success, but its just common sense to obscure the
| specifics of it if you are way out of band in relative
| terms.
|
| Its like saying: "You know, I never really get ill" at
| the cancer ward. Sure, its true, but read the room.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Well, after all it's HN and this is the kind of content
| that attracts much of the users. I'd certainly be more
| careful with that wording on a website that caters to a
| very different audience, but it's not long ago when
| indiehackers posts of people "bragging" about their
| successes were consistently at the top of the front page.
|
| Not convinced I misread the room, especially considering
| the upvotes.
| RandomBacon wrote:
| I'm just a lowly peon and don't make anywhere near that
| kind of money, but I do _NOT_ consider that bragging in
| this context.
| alistairSH wrote:
| "I buy more $10,000 cardigans than you buy Hanes
| undershirts" is kinda the definition of bragging. What a
| weird ass corner of the internet where it's just assumed
| everybody earns $millions. Like, lol, no outside SV,
| London, and NYC, that's truly exceptional. Like, the
| average CEO in the US doesn't even clear $1 million
| (according to Google's AI search results).
| RandomBacon wrote:
| > "I buy more $10,000 cardigans than you buy Hanes
| undershirts" is kinda the definition of bragging.
|
| Except that's not what they wrote / how they framed it.
|
| Perhaps that's just how you perceived it. I think that
| speaks more about you, than it does about them.
| tweetle_beetle wrote:
| You can construct a philosophical argument that value is
| all relative without having to casually drop anecdata
| demonstrating that you personally spend many hundreds of
| times more on an everyday object than is typical without
| consideration.
|
| Simmel managed it ok. [1]
|
| [1] https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Simmel/Simmel_1900.html
| basisword wrote:
| Nope, he's stating how he feels about something.
| burningChrome wrote:
| The irony is the majority of people on here are the ones
| screaming "tax the rich" at Mamdani's acceptance speech,
| but then are the same ones upvoting this guy, his 10M net
| worth and defending him being rich.
|
| The world is a very confusing place these days.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| To make it even more confusing I'm a rich guy cheering
| for people like Mamdani.
|
| I pay lots of taxes, probably in top 0.1% of the world on
| a % basis. I don't have to, I'm not a US or French
| citizen so I could easily just choose to relocate a
| couple of minutes away and pay essentially no taxes.
|
| If I did choose to stop paying taxes, I'd do so in order
| to donate a similar amount of my income to some charity.
| I'm just not sold on that being so much more efficient to
| be worth the hassle. OTOH, it'd definitely greatly
| improve my philanthropy credentials which would very much
| be worth it to some for purely selfish personal reasons.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Luigi wouldn't have been famous if he offed a guy for
| wearing tailored pants and a rolex, he's famous because
| the CEO was a scapegoat of everything wrong with health
| insurance.
| awakeasleep wrote:
| I don't make nearly that kind of money, but I don't think
| people who do should keep it a secret like you're trying
| to enforce some norm of secrecy on him
| tavavex wrote:
| > you spend a family's annual food budget on 5 pounds of
| spun sheep keratin
|
| Maybe they're obscenely rich, or perhaps they're just
| living up to their username?
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Thankfully this username was related to a post I created
| this account to comment on, not me personally :)
| basisword wrote:
| >> there's certainly utility in rich people yapping
| incautiously about the reasons others might want to turn
| on an Enes Yilmazer video and figure out where the panic
| room is.
|
| Can you explain what you mean by this? I hope I'm
| misunderstanding it.
| carabiner wrote:
| What is your NW?
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Less than $10M with the mortgage, my income will hit $5M
| this year pre-tax for the first time (almost half of that
| goes to the government)
|
| Valuing my vast and eclectic empire of small websites
| earning between $1k and $300k per year is tricky because
| it'd presumably be tremendously hard to sell them all at
| once. Of course some reasonable multiple would arrive at
| some much higher number than my bank account+physical
| assets.
| tavavex wrote:
| > Keep in mind that HN is packed with people with salaries
| above $1M/yr and entrepreneurs with way higher income
| levels.
|
| Is it really _packed_ with those people? I know there 's
| some, but I imagined that the average user here is probably
| some senior engineer in his 40s making six figures - not an
| executive or some industry-leading employee, and not the
| top <1% entrepreneur who manages to walk away with
| multimillion dollar profits. If that really is the common
| audience here, then I'm living in a whole different
| universe from what the average would work out to.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| You don't have to be "industry leading" to reach that
| kind of comp working for big tech.
|
| I could be totally wrong, but in a world where plumbers
| and the likes can walk away with multimillion dollar
| profits you probably don't have to be top <1% to pull
| that off either. Not taking shots at plumbers, but the
| point is that even something boring can and will pay off
| if you work hard at it.
|
| My own work couldn't be more boring, I'm not particularly
| smart or talented. I just grind out _many_ little
| varyingly useful websites with card payment forms.
| astrange wrote:
| $1M/year in big tech is like director level? That's not
| "industry leading" but there aren't that many of them.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Most people don't work for big tech. Most people who work
| for big tech don't make so much. And not most plumbers.
|
| Many people under estimate their skills and luck.
| brailsafe wrote:
| > My own work couldn't be more boring, I'm not
| particularly smart or talented. I just grind out many
| little varyingly useful websites with card payment forms.
|
| Are you talking like one-off niche utilities/services
| that another busy person would happily pay a small amount
| to solve an immediate problem with and don't necessarily
| require a ton of backend scaling/maintenance, or
| subscription type stuff? When you say "many", is that
| >100?
| walletdrainer wrote:
| 100+ sites, most took less than a day to build.
|
| So far the most profitable category has been sites which
| simplify some government processes, e.g. helping you fill
| a form or even just basically selling a PDF version of a
| form that a government only provides on paper (with a
| nice web UI to help you easily fill it).
|
| Little scaling or maintenance, I can host everything on a
| single dedicated server but have a few so I don't have to
| worry about things breaking.
|
| Most of the work is just locating these niches, but
| honestly it's easy to find at least one a week even if
| I'm being lazy. If I was really trying very hard I'd
| probably be at 1000+ sites right now.
|
| One simple example would be helping people change their
| name in the UK with a deed poll, which basically amounts
| to a pdf saying "hey my name is now [enter name here]". I
| didn't do this particular one even though I probably
| should, I found out about it pretty early on and I was
| (wrongly!) dissuaded by the competition.
|
| Edit: I specifically should not have been dissuaded by
| the competition because it'd take an hour or two to build
| a decent website with the necessary information, and
| despite the competition there's a decent chance my page
| would start ranking pretty well within a couple of years.
| I'll probably do this one tomorrow.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Not that those people aren't here, but I don't think they
| are the average. I think the average person here is an
| un/under-employed tech enthusiast who dreams of startups
| but spends his time here instead of actually working to
| make it happen. I'm not in that group by the way, I
| stopped dreaming about startups 10 years ago.
|
| Bored developers are probably another large fraction.
| gr4vityWall wrote:
| > Keep in mind that HN is packed with people with salaries
| above $1M/yr and entrepreneurs with way higher income
| levels.
|
| Are you sure about that?
|
| I would be surprised if it was much above the US salary
| average, considering the global audience of HN.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| I could be totally wrong!
|
| However, at the very least I think we can agree that it's
| a site chock-full of _aspiring_ multimillionaires.
| freddie_mercury wrote:
| There's some weird online effect where people assume
| everyone they talk to on the internet makes essentially the
| same exact amount of money they do.
|
| I've noticed this most in a forum for a country I used to
| live in where foreigners would come in and post "What's an
| affordable hotel/restaurant/bar/travel experience".
|
| Uh, I have no idea what "affordable" means to you!?
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Occasionally I read the local subreddit /r/monaco, and
| see posts like "how much should my weekly food budget
| be?" with no further information included.
|
| In a place where "normal" genuinely ranges between a
| couple of euros at McDonald's and 500+ euros a day in
| fancy restaurants (easily 1000+ if you drink wine) it
| always feels like a particularly outrageous question.
|
| There are many places in the world where that's not a
| very unreasonable question, but this certainly isn't it.
| mmooss wrote:
| They save you from buying 10 pairs at $100. They not only are
| durable, including not fraying, etc., but keep their form and
| color, and they have a beautiful form and color to begin
| with. You get what you pay for (if you buy the right $500
| pants).
|
| Someone outside IT might say, why pay for a Macbook when you
| can buy a $100 Chromebook? Why use Vim or Emacs when you can
| use Notepad/TextEdit (though those all cost the same!).
| rvba wrote:
| Someone in IT will probably say "why pay for a Macbook,
| which is a toy, without even real MS Office, when you can
| buy a chinese configuralble laptop for same price that will
| have 256gb of RAM and a 5090"
| thrw045 wrote:
| This is kind of getting into the weeds a little bit but for
| me and a lot of others luxury items can be fun to own. You
| can get an affinity for certain designers style, whether it's
| Gucci, Louis Vuitton or Balenciaga. The items are
| ridiculously expensive sometimes but it's kind of a tough
| line to balance because the fact that they cost so much make
| them more special. So how cheap should they be before they
| don't feel as special anymore? Is it all a bit irrational? I
| guess. There isn't a clear definitive defense for luxury
| items I think other than the feeling they can give. Some
| people can spend all their income on luxury items rather than
| other discretionary items because it's the most fun to them.
| I_dream_of_Geni wrote:
| Gee... And I thought $5 spent at Starbucks was outrageous...
| iamacyborg wrote:
| Big fan of the Homme Plisse stuff but I do wish it wasn't
| polyester.
|
| It is a nice way to wear essentially a fancy pair of joggers
| while people assume you're being somewhat smart though.
| thevillagechief wrote:
| I got excited until I saw they cost $600? Once in a while I'm
| reminded we exist in very different universes. Still trying to
| justify splurging on common projects 2 years later.
| sincerely wrote:
| in my experience as a tech guy who got into fashion and then
| after several years went back to not caring: Sneakers are the
| product category with the least differentiation in value-for-
| money between the high end (especially designer, but also
| not-designer-but-still-expensive like common projects) both
| in terms of aesthetics and quality/durability. You're paying
| $300 more for a 10% better product. Jeans, outerwear, knits,
| boots, you can more easily justify that cost
| theF00l wrote:
| As a tech guy who found an interest in design and ancillary
| fields recently, I am curious to know more. I assume
| leather, merino wool, cashmere do provide extra value. But
| other than that I have no knowledge. Eg why would 500 pants
| be better?
| ZephyrBlu wrote:
| Material and cut/design.
|
| Material is not just about quality, but rarity or
| uniqueness. For example, japanese denim can get very
| expensive in part because it's very low volume. For dress
| pants, it might be a particularly interesting fabric.
|
| A lot of more expensive pants also have interesting
| designs or proportions that are very unique or hard to
| find elsewhere. There is a lot of cool stuff you can get
| for under $500 USD though, that is still pretty
| expensive.
|
| Some examples around that price range:
|
| -
| https://stoffa.co/collections/trousers/products/lavender-
| woo...
|
| - https://www.lemaire.fr/products/twisted-belted-pants-
| bl760-d...
|
| - https://www.blueowl.us/collections/pure-blue-
| japan/products/...
| booleanbetrayal wrote:
| I am wondering what you call consumption that feeds $499
| designer margins on polyester like that, while so many people
| can barely afford to scrape by day to day.
| shermantanktop wrote:
| Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what appears
| to be a universal truth. In all types of economic and
| political systems (after we left the forest, and probably
| while we were still in the forest), some people have been
| desperately poor while other people are not. What would be
| interesting is a single counterexample of sustained "income
| equality."
|
| That said, our current _degree_ of inequality and the
| particular way it is distributed seems to be unusual and
| remarkable. But pointing to someone having a hard time is,
| IMO, not a critique of that.
| booleanbetrayal wrote:
| Yes, yes ... It's the same as it ever was, only so much
| more so!
|
| Beyond just critiquing the disparity here, I feel like the
| psychology that treats capital in such a frivolous way,
| shifting it about already privileged pockets of society,
| rather than apply it to any sort of material good is rather
| abhorrent. That's just my take.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| >Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what
| appears to be a universal truth. In all types of economic
| and political systems (after we left the forest, and
| probably while we were still in the forest), some people
| have been desperately poor while other people are not. What
| would be interesting is a single counterexample of
| sustained "income equality."
|
| There's actually tons of data. Almost every western country
| has a much better "Gini Coefficient" than the US.
|
| It isn't a universal truth. That's bullshit.
| tacker2000 wrote:
| Sorry but 500 eur for polyester pants? Not even cotton?
| OJFord wrote:
| You misunderstand, it's 20EUR for the trousers; 480 for the
| name printed on them. (And why you even want a name/logo
| printed on them...)
| walletdrainer wrote:
| Show me one Issey Miyake clothing item with a name/logo
| printed on it.
| sunnyps wrote:
| Have you tried Costco pants? They're pretty good.
| qwerpy wrote:
| I had a coworker who lost a lot of weight and showed up at
| work one day wearing new clothes and looking sharp. The pants
| were from Costco. I have since gone and bought a few pairs of
| pants from them. They feel fairly high quality, made of
| sturdy and comfortable materials, and are wife-approved. And
| of course they are very inexpensive.
|
| I'm sure expensive pants have their benefits but no matter
| how much money I have, I will always baby expensive things,
| and it's very inconvenient to baby clothes (e.g. must be dry
| cleaned, can't use a washer or dryer, can't risk getting
| stains on it). There are good reasons why dads gets their
| clothes from Costco.
| silisili wrote:
| I always liked this story because they seemed to connect person
| to person.
|
| Sadly, Jobs died in 2011, and Miyake in 2022.
|
| I guess you could call this a small homage, but it feels
| different in that their founders are gone and it's just corp to
| corp dealings now.
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| I will look suspiciously at my Le Sel bottle after this collab.
| ireflect wrote:
| These ones, right?
|
| https://us.isseymiyake.com/products/hp56-jf362
| m463 wrote:
| I looked it up, and Issey Mikaye seems to have died in 2022.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issey_Miyake
|
| I wonder
|
| ... would jobs have approved?
|
| ... would issey miyake have approved?
| bborud wrote:
| I'm pretty confident the answer on both counts would be "no".
|
| (This teminds me of a show I once saw where various design
| students were given the task to design things. Philippe
| Starck was the judge. One of the students made a iPhone cover
| and Starck almost blew a gasket. I don't remember exactly
| what he said when he saw it. But he pointed out that the
| iPhone itself was a beautiful design so defacing it with an
| ugly piece of plastic was just a horrific waste of resources.
|
| He also said something about objects having to deserve to
| exist -- though that was probably in a talk he gave at some
| point. Where he pointed out that his famous Alessi sitrus
| press was a good example of a pointless object that shouldn't
| exist. At least it looked good, but it was a pretty poor
| sitrus press).
| jbverschoor wrote:
| It's an iPhone Socket!
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Awww... I was so much hoping for an iPhone that will fit into my
| pocket. The 1st iPhone SE was the perfect form factor. But no,
| Apple's phones just had to grow and grow and grow like cancer ...
|
| In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry
| your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed
| to make phones that are convenient to carry.
| ngruhn wrote:
| I share the frustration. But apparently small phones don't
| sell.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| _opens cupboard_
|
| iPhone 3GS
|
| Galaxy S3
|
| Sony XZ1 Compact
|
| iPhone SE 2016
|
| iPhone SE 2020
|
| iPhone SE 2022
|
| Unihertz Atom
| eddieroger wrote:
| There's one data point. I would bet, though, that Apple,
| Sony and Samsung have plenty more data points of devices
| that didn't move and thus they stop making smaller devices.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Yup, keep in mind the generally Western audience on HN is
| only a small minority of the total market, which is...
| hundreds of millions of people for the iphone alone.
| baal80spam wrote:
| This is the correct answer. I don't think anyone believes
| that Apple doesn't manufacture smaller phones out of
| spite? They are just not popular enough.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| That must be why all those vacuum robots and smart TVs
| phone home to China. Because people really love
| appliances that spy on them. Good thing Samsung patched
| their fridges to add advertisements and spyware, because
| that's what their customers (in the US) were really
| waiting for.
| dingaling wrote:
| "They are just not popular enough."
|
| The various Mini models accounted for 3 to 6% of sales,
| which was still _millions_ of units.
| VagabundoP wrote:
| Pixel 5 is a nice size. I like smallies too.
| craftkiller wrote:
| Pixel 1 was the ideal phone. Not too large. Completely
| flat back. Screen didn't bulge above the sides so you
| could drop it without shattering the screen. Google's
| design has only gone downhill since then. (The pixel 5
| looks pretty nice, but it seems to have the bulging glass
| and the beginnings of camera bumps)
| pmontra wrote:
| The Unihertz Atom is probably too small but it really fits
| the niche its web site targets. I might consider it for my
| bike.
| pandemic_region wrote:
| Stop hogging the mineral resources and recycle them
| already!
| stockresearcher wrote:
| Apple sold 10-15 million of the minis each year, with a
| marketing budget of approximately zero.
|
| The problem is that everyone believed Tim Cook when he
| claimed that this is a failure.
| nozzlegear wrote:
| How much did it cost Apple to make those minis? Do we know?
| stockresearcher wrote:
| I surely don't. But if it wasn't profitable, then Apple
| sucks at supply chain management (which is something I
| don't believe).
| criddell wrote:
| > small phones don't sell
|
| It's all relative.
|
| If Google sold five million iPhones Mini it would be
| considered a smash hit. But because it's Apple it's
| considered a flop because of the ridiculous sales numbers of
| their other models.
| rekoil wrote:
| I wish the iPhone 12/13 mini had been a few mm thicker for a
| bigger battery, and had been in the Pro class of devices. As it
| stands they didn't have a good enough battery to last a day,
| and most people interested in smaller devices had probably just
| picked up the new SE that was released just half a year
| earlier.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| I believe the issue is that with Jobs gone, Apple's design
| team is now apparently unable to continue their job. Instead
| of developing their own UI paradigm for small screens, they
| keep copying from Google Pixel both the UI ideas and the
| screen size. And now that they ran out of useful ideas, they
| turned everything transparent. Why make the iPhone look more
| like Apple Vision when people so obviously hate the latter?
| [1]
|
| My prediction is that the age of AI and LLM assistance will
| make tiny devices the norm. Like those AI pins. Like Siri
| inside AirPods. Like Meta's AR glasses. But it seems that
| Apple is losing the race here. They lost their edge when it
| comes to developing new user interface paradigms.
|
| EDIT: [1] Bloomberg claims 10-15% return rate, which would be
| massive: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-02-1
| 8/apple-... (for comparison, Galaxus reports 2% as normal for
| Smartphones and <5% for Meta's Quest)
| bottlepalm wrote:
| The most important thing Jobs did (and he mentioned this)
| is to say No to great ideas. Like this, like iPhone Air,
| like Apple Vision Pro, etc.. Apple without Jobs is now much
| like it was before Jobs in the 90s, only this time it has a
| lot more momentum than it had before. Still though Apple is
| back to throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.
| Lu2025 wrote:
| > Why make the iPhone look more like Apple Vision when
| people so obviously hate the latter
|
| They are normalizing Apple Vision look so it looks less
| weird when you switch.
| NickC25 wrote:
| >Apple's design team is now apparently unable to continue
| their job
|
| Honestly id say this is a mix of both Jobs and Ive being
| gone.
|
| Now under the operational maximalist that is Tim Cook, they
| just revert to old designs every few years and call it
| revolutionary. See: edges on the iPhone. First, rounded
| edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard
| edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, rounded
| edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard
| edges. WOW, revolutionary!
|
| All the while stripping actual functionality out of the
| devices and removing useful features like headphone jacks.
| There hasn't been real product innovation at Apple in over
| a decade.
|
| But I digress.
| volkl48 wrote:
| As someone who's spent a while playing with one (that I
| didn't buy) and who hasn't picked it up off the shelf in
| months:
|
| I don't think most users were returning it because they
| hated the UI or even the device in the usual sense. (There
| are certainly issues I could detail, but they don't feel
| like the core problem).
|
| The core problem is just that it just doesn't
| really....accomplish anything.
|
| Once you get past treating it like an expensive Google
| Cardboard ("neat tech demo") - it's very hard to figure out
| what the point of the thing is. What problem does this
| actually solve for you/what thing is it actually better to
| use this for than other existing solutions.
|
| Extremely high price tag with no "killer app"/function that
| makes anyone who tries it "get it" quickly and want one, is
| a pretty impossible sell.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| _In Soviet Russia, pocket fit phone._
| echelon wrote:
| > speaks to the bond between iPhone and its user
|
| With this phrasing, does it feel like iPhone owns its user?
| flanbiscuit wrote:
| I was also hoping it was a small phone announcement but it not
| being part of a keynote didn't give me high hopes.
|
| I've been on Android since day 1 but I'm thinking about
| switching to iPhone. If they ever made foldable (clamshell
| style, not book style) phone I would buy it immediately. I just
| want a small phone.
|
| Yes I could get an Android foldable that already exists but I
| like to stick with Pixels and they don't have one yet and I'm
| kinda of done with Pixels. They are crap quality.
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry._
|
| I loved the iPhone SE and small phones generally, but at the
| same time I realize Apple's not failing at anything. They're
| giving the market the size people actually want. The smaller
| phones don't sell nearly as well. Most people prefer a bigger
| phone even if carrying it is less convenient.
|
| I've just accepted my phone will be bulky now, so I double down
| and attach a magnetic wallet to it, and carry it in my hand or
| jacket pocket or bag rather than my pants pocket like I used
| to. During meetings it lies on the table rather then in my
| pants pocket. C'est la vie.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| "iPhone 16e Sales Lag Behind SE Models"
|
| Ooops ?
|
| https://www.macrumors.com/2025/06/03/iphone-16e-sales-lag-
| be...
|
| Looks like the market did like the SE size.
| masklinn wrote:
| > Unsurprisingly, the primary reason identified for the
| iPhone 16e 's weaker debut is its higher launch price.
|
| Adjusting for inflation, the SE (EUR479 in 2020) was EUR588
| and the SE2 (EUR519 in 2022) was EUR567. The 16e is 699, a
| 25% increase.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| And in Germany, the iPhone 16e 128GB in white currently
| sells for EUR537 at "Netto Marken-Discount", a
| supermarket chain famous for its low price. "Marken-
| Discount" = "brand name rebates"
| masklinn wrote:
| That is utterly worthless without knowing what the SE and
| SE2 were sold for in the same context. The 16e's MSRP in
| germany is 699.
| i_am_jl wrote:
| Small phones (to an extent) are less expensive than
| larger phones to manufacture.
|
| The thought that "Small phones are only more popular
| because they're less expensive" seems to willfully ignore
| that the phones are less expensive because their inputs
| are less expensive, because they're smaller.
| frereubu wrote:
| I wonder about the idea that they're less expensive. True
| in terms of materials, but possibly not true if the
| smaller production run means you can't offset the capital
| costs of manufacturing the parts.
| i_am_jl wrote:
| That's fair. I suspect that as phones get more "premium"
| the margin from a small phone shrinks faster than a
| larger phone.
|
| HTC has been making cheap (very cheap) and small phones
| for the discount market. Foldables exist in the premium
| space, but the price tags appear to bake in a higher
| margin for a device that won't sell the same volume.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| IMO the e series is/could be used as an anchor to ratchet
| other phones higher in price.
| gruez wrote:
| >Looks like the market did like the SE size.
|
| That's not a compelling argument when the same chart also
| shows the iPhone SE 2022 lagging behind iPhone SE 2020,
| even though they have identical form factors.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Good point. Thx.
| nehal3m wrote:
| Sure, but between the SE2020 and the SE2022 was the
| iPhone 12 line-up which included the 12 Mini
| layer8 wrote:
| When the SE2022 came out, most people preferring smaller
| iPhones were already using either an SE or a mini, and
| the SE2022 didn't offer much compelling reasons to
| upgrade from an SE2020. The SE2020, on the other hand,
| launched before the first mini, and after four years of
| waiting since the SE1.
| Retric wrote:
| While small iPhones don't sell nearly as well as larger
| sizes, I suspect they are still a very profitable product as
| Apple keeps releasing them.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Not small like they used to be. Not like the original SE,
| nowhere even close. The options now are basically big,
| bigger and biggest.
| mrweasel wrote:
| The iPhone sales figures where probably a disappointment,
| for Apple. Had it been released by any other company it
| would have been viewed as a huge success. The sales numbers
| are just pretty poor, for an iPhone.
|
| I think Apple has such high expectation to sales figures
| that even if a smaller iPhone comes in, even as the 10th
| best selling phone, that's maybe only 5% of all iPhone
| sales. Massively successful as a phone, millions of people
| bought it, but to Apple, the SE is a side hustle at best.
|
| My daughters friends made fun of my iPhone SE3, they had
| never seen a phone that small.
| robertoandred wrote:
| Huh? They haven't released a remotely small phone in years.
| Retric wrote:
| There was a 4 year gap between the iPhone SE1 and iPhone
| SE2, it's been less than 4 years since the SE3.
|
| It's not clear if they decided to move just add E models
| to their lineup, or given up on SE models entirely.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's very clear that the "e" is a yearly model (that's
| why it has a number) and has replaced the SE line.
| Retric wrote:
| We don't have the iPhone 17e, so for now there's no way
| to tell if they will do this every year or what.
|
| Similarly people have called the 16e as a replacement for
| the SE line, but that's a cost assessment not one based
| of form factor. It could be most people bought the SE
| because it was cheap, but without two different form
| factors at identical prices there's no way to tell.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's a replacement in the sense that they discontinued
| the SE when they introduced the 16e. I agree that it's
| not a very close replacement in practical terms, but
| that's also why the designation changed.
|
| Regarding the 17e, the supply chain rumor mill keeps
| mentioning it, so it definitely seems to be a thing.
| layer8 wrote:
| Apple doesn't have any small iPhone offering anymore since
| they discontinued the SE3.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| What "the market wants" is a maximally addictive device. It's
| a really low bar even if highly profitable. Bigger screens
| make it more exciting and addictive.
|
| Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers can't
| make small phones because they're small and can't pay for it,
| and large manufacturers can't make it because...(checks
| notes)...they're large and don't want to pay for it even if
| there's demand.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Can you write down the actual detailed argument?
|
| Just opining that it's weird can't possibly be convincing
| against a consensus amongst all the large smartphone
| manufacturers.
| cantor_S_drug wrote:
| Can Apple lock-in those people who definitely want small
| phones by some prepaid arrangements which the users can't
| back out? That would be market working. Is there a reason
| why they don't do this?
| crazygringo wrote:
| That's a weird take. Large screens aren't primarily more
| "addictive", they're primarily more _productive_. They work
| as a better e-reader, a better text editor, better for
| watching a movie on a plane, better for reading maps, I
| could go on and on. (And if a company were incentivized to
| truly make an "addicting" phone, it would be Meta that
| would benefit from the social media ads, or TikTok. Not
| Apple.)
|
| Large manufacturers _can_ make them. But there isn 't
| _enough_ demand to make them profitable enough. It 's not a
| question of whether they "want to pay for it", it's just
| simple economics. They're businesses, not charities. I like
| small phones, but I understand manufacturers are doing
| what's economically rational given market preferences and I
| don't blame them for it.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| > they're primarily more productive.
|
| But why are we needing a phone to be productive? And they
| were already a distraction from the world around us when
| they fit in a single hand.
|
| I know I'm probably abnormal, but my phone is a phone
| first, camera second, and "work" device fifth.
|
| As a society, our boundaries around communication and
| instant contact to anyone have collapsed. Now if you
| don't respond to a message within a few minutes, you get
| multiple follow ups. If you don't pick up the phone when
| a friend calls you, they don't leave a message, they
| text, then call again, then text again.
|
| We've gone from being able to leave the house, and no one
| can contact us for a few hours, to no matter where we are
| people are trying to contact us. So they may be more
| "productive" with larger screens, but we never asked
| whether they SHOULD be more productive.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Why do you need phones to not be productive?
|
| Being able to instantly communicate via photo and video
| makes a lot of people's lives easier. For example,
| getting quotes for a house repair to save on travel time
| and energy getting estimates, showing before and after
| pictures to document performed work, and myriad more
| examples.
|
| If someone is contacting you too much, that's a problem
| solved by asking them not to harass you, not by putting
| limits on the device for everyone else.
| hamburglar wrote:
| How did you translate "I want a smaller phone available"
| to "putting limits on the device for everyone else?"
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I didn't. I use a 13 mini, and will for as long as I can
| because it was the smallest phone that was sufficiently
| productive for me.
|
| My response was to these statements:
|
| > But why are we needing a phone to be productive?
|
| > So they may be more "productive" with larger screens,
| but we never asked whether they SHOULD be more
| productive.
| hamburglar wrote:
| And somehow you inferred that because one person doesn't
| need their phone to be productive in that way, that they
| want to limit everyone?
|
| I use my phone for web browsing 99% of the time. I don't
| need it to have AI processors or loads of brand new tech.
| I want it to be cheap, functional, and expendable. So I
| definitely question whether a phone _needs_ to be super
| "productive" in that sense too. But people who want their
| aircraft carrier phones that don't fit in their pockets
| and cost over $1000 can have that too.
| victorbjorklund wrote:
| Why do you need an iPhone for that? Wouldn't any old
| phone work then?
| nine_k wrote:
| There is a number of small Android phones, so apparently
| there is demand in that niche, and smaller companies can
| address it and make money.
|
| But this is because Google is a software / service
| company, so it keeps Android open.
|
| Apple is a hardware company, and always has been. They
| have a relatively narrow lineup of devices which they
| support for a very long time, compared to Android
| devices. So Apple are not interested in fringe markets;
| they go for the well-off mainstream mostly.
| rpdillon wrote:
| There are studies that show that engagement with
| smartphones is higher when the screen is larger. Seems
| like Apple's been doing their homework.
|
| > However, a follow-up phantom model analysis using
| 10,000 bootstrap samples at 95% bias-corrected confidence
| intervals revealed that the overall magnitude of the
| hedonic path (i.e., LS-PAQ-AT-IU; B=0.14, SE=0.06,
| p<0.01) was larger than that of the utilitarian path
| (i.e., LS-PC-PEOU-PU-IU; B=0.07, SE=0.03, p<0.01) even
| though participants were given a task-oriented, rather
| than entertainment-oriented (e.g., gaming, movie
| watching), assignment during the experiment. This implies
| that users are likely to put greater emphasis on the
| affective dimension of the technology than on its
| utilitarian dimension, despite the practical, purposeful
| nature of the assigned task. Given that user affect
| (e.g., positive or negative feelings) toward a technology
| is typically attributed as the central characteristic of
| the technology (regardless of the accuracy of the
| attribution),55 the practical implication of this finding
| is that smartphone manufacturers ought to take full
| advantage of the positive effects of the large screen on
| PAQ when designing their products. However, the more
| challenging design implication is that the optimal level
| of screen size that does not jeopardize the anywhere-
| anytime mobility of smartphones should first be
| identified, since screen size cannot be indefinitely
| increased in the mobile context. Thus, the remaining
| question to be addressed in future research is the
| optimal size of the mobile screen.
|
| https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4080862/
| fxtentacle wrote:
| My guess would be that all those people that wanted small
| phones had an iPhone SE and now all their data is locked
| into Apple's walled garden and that's why they will
| begrudgingly buy a larger phone, even though they would
| have preferred a smaller one.
|
| In short: Apple can get away with ignoring what those
| customers want.
| gibspaulding wrote:
| I mean, I would assume most folks who liked the SE still
| have one. The SE 3 just stopped production this year and
| should have several years of software updates left (the
| SE 1 just ended software support this year, 7 years after
| it was discontinued.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| The 3 is not really an SE. It's an iphone 8
| mistercheph wrote:
| When people say SE in the context of wanting skaller
| phones they generally mean SE 1, which has about the same
| form factor as iPhone 5.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Not hard to take your data anywhere you wish.
| mceachen wrote:
| Not hard only when you know exactly what you need to do
| already on both sides.
|
| There is zero chance I could convince any of my in-laws
| to switch away from iOS. Data isn't what they care about.
| It's all about blue bubbles and a decade of familiarity
| with iOS (and it's irrelevant that the UX between Android
| and iOS have drifted to be so similar).
| skinnymuch wrote:
| Android still looks too ugly for me. It seems like I'll
| always be missing WebOS while sticking with iOS.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| It couldn't be easier to export or import your data,
| connect and disconnect your accounts, etc. I'd like the
| angry hackers who are down voting me to explain which
| barriers exactly Apple puts against data portability.
|
| I don't understand why you're brining up your in-laws in
| your response if they don't care about data.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| > Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers
| can't make small phones because they're small and can't pay
| for it, and large manufacturers can't make it
| because...(checks notes)...they're large and don't want to
| pay for it even if there's demand.
|
| Large and small companies sell smaller Android phones.
| pmontra wrote:
| It's very difficult to find something around 140 grams
| and 140x80 even giving them some slack about the
| thickness. The Samsung S25 [1] is about there but I
| currently still use an A40 [2] because of the size and
| weight. I'd give away a couple of cm of height. A zero
| bezel 120mm phone would be ok. 120 grams are a dream.
|
| [1] https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s25-13610.php
|
| [2] https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_a40-9642.php
| fragmede wrote:
| The problem is Apple's monopoly on devices that run iOS.
| In an alternate reality, Apple licensed out iOS, and
| alternative designs could flourish. The Android ecosystem
| still has keyboard phones a la Blackberry. Caterpillar
| makes an Android phone with a FLIR camera. It's a
| gimmick, unless you work somewhere where it's not.
|
| In this alternate history, there's a tiny design firm out
| of Carmel, south of Cupertino, doing bespoke runs of an
| iPhone 4 with A18s and eSIM capability and they're always
| sold out.
| addaon wrote:
| > In this alternate history
|
| In this alternate history, who would have invested the
| billions of dollars in developing the processor line all
| the way up through the A18 if it's not available as a
| market differentiator?
| fragmede wrote:
| Why, P.A. Semiconductor, of course! Yeah I'm just making
| shit up in my alternate history, but even in our reality
| there are several SoC manufacturers; Qualcomm, Broadcom,
| MediaTek, NVIDIA, AMD, Marvell, Rockchip, Allwinner.
| There are a lot of things out there if just want to run
| Android on a thing. Even more if I'm just trying to run
| Doom.
|
| I want an SE4 with touch ID and a 4 inch screen and an
| A18 processor in it, not the monstrosity that is the 16e.
| If things were more open; what I really want to see is
| what we almost get to see with Kickstarter. If I could
| find one million people to do a first run who're willing
| to pay $750 for a first run edition, just to simply break
| even, and then make money off subsequent runs as demand
| does or does not exist.
| addaon wrote:
| > Qualcomm, Broadcom, MediaTek, NVIDIA, AMD, Marvell,
| Rockchip, Allwinner
|
| Five of these are race-to-the-bottom business models. One
| is use-the-legal-system-to-retain-your-customers. The
| last two don't make cell phone class parts, and probably
| wouldn't be interested in the margins.
|
| I mention this to make a point -- the quality of the A18
| that you (reasonably) want in a smaller, niche-market
| phone isn't a coincidence, it's a consequence of the
| designer being able to justify the investment because it
| acts as a market differentiator. PASemi would never have
| been able to do that on its own, any more than MediaTek
| has -- customers have no brand faithfulness to cell phone
| processor manufacturers, so as long as the OEM can freely
| move between them the distinction must be on price, at
| the cost of performance. There are upsides to the more
| open market you imagine in your alternate history, but it
| would come with the downside of the high end of the
| market being less developed, and flat out worse, due to
| less segmentation being possible.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Qualcomm and Apple processors have similar performance.
|
| Most customers have no brand faithfulness to desktop
| processor manufacturers. Why would this stagnate phone
| processor development when it did not stagnate desktop
| processor development?
| addaon wrote:
| > Why would this stagnate phone processor development
| when it did not stagnate desktop processor development?
|
| Hasn't it? See the impact the M1 family made.
| prewett wrote:
| > I'm just making shit up in my alternate history
|
| Isn't that the whole point of alternate history?
| pmontra wrote:
| That happened with the Mac in the mid 90s and Apple
| closed the deals immediately when the clones started to
| sell well, because they were better machines than the
| ones Apple sold. If Apple didn't stop the clones they
| would be a software company by now and we'd probably have
| a PC market with 90% of Mac compatible machines and 10%
| of Windows PCs + Linux.
|
| The first link I googled about it is
| https://tedium.co/2025/09/02/apple-macintosh-clones-
| history/
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Your weight requirements are more restrictive than your
| size requirements. GSMArena's phone finder found foldable
| or rugged phones which satisfied size but not weight. And
| Unihertz phones appear well known where small phones are
| discussed but are not in GSMArena's database for some
| reason. The Unihertz Jelly Star satisfied your
| requirements. But the screen is smaller than the 1st
| iPhone's even.
| wat10000 wrote:
| It's not that they _can 't_. They want to make money. When
| given the choice between making more money and less money,
| they'll generally choose more. They think making a smaller
| device would make less money. The sales numbers for
| previous attempts back this up. There's an enormous fixed
| cost for developing a new model, and it's not worthwhile
| unless that results in enough additional sales. There's
| demand, for sure, but how much? They think not enough, and
| I suspect they know what they're doing here.
| the_gipsy wrote:
| Mind that there is also a feedback loop: applications only
| work correctly on bigger phone screens.
| layer8 wrote:
| That's not completely correct. In particular, the mini
| resolution corresponds to the Display Zoom options on
| current iPhones, so applications are still expected to
| support them, not to mention that iOS will support the mini
| models for 2-3 more years to come.
|
| In addition, the outer screen of next year's iPhone Fold
| will be shorter than the mini, so applications really need
| to be flexible here.
| jama211 wrote:
| They might technically support them, but no one tests
| them properly and they're certainly not a good user
| experience. I've personally made apps where I have never
| tested them on such zoom levels if I'm perfectly honest.
| layer8 wrote:
| It isn't always great, but I haven't encountered anything
| unusable yet. The SE1 is more of a problem nowadays.
| yapyap wrote:
| Can't really want a smaller modern iPhone if no one is
| selling it.
| hshdhdhj4444 wrote:
| Foldables...
| threetonesun wrote:
| Is it too big as a phone/SMS device? Yes. But as long as it's
| smaller than an equivalent digital camera or handheld gaming
| device or portable GPS it's still appropriately sized for how
| I mostly use it.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's not appropriately sized for one-handed use, unless you
| have large hands.
| jama211 wrote:
| Life with modern large smartphones gets a lot easier if
| you just give up on the one handed use paradigm. I use my
| devices during the day mostly hands free via where I can
| for passive stuff like setting timers or listening to
| podcasts, or controlled via my smart watch. I'm only
| pulling out my actual phone because I want to use an app,
| type a whole ass email, or google something in a web
| browser. I accept I just use two hands for that and then
| put it away again. If anything it keeps me from picking
| it up unless I want to use it properly, which isn't such
| a bad thing.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's not just one-handed use, but also pocketability and
| lower weight, which just feels nice. I have no trouble
| using apps. The iPhone mini still has a few years of life
| left, so I'm not in a hurry to change.
| threetonesun wrote:
| Depends what you're using it for. Typing? I agree, it's
| not, although I'd argue the original wasn't either, but
| other people thought the original was too small.
|
| However as a camera? With the new camera button position
| it works pretty fine with just one hand. As a thing you
| tap and while it's in a mount? Also an appropriate size
| for one handed use.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| Maybe there's room in the world for a device people want,
| even if it's not the device the majority want? I mean I know
| Apple is just a small startup company with only a $4 trillion
| valuation, but maybe they could just do one thing that isn't
| maximally profitable once in a while.
| ntoskrnl_exe wrote:
| >maybe they could just do one thing that isn't maximally
| profitable once in a while.
|
| They tried that this year and called it iPhone Air
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Right, forgot to mention it should also be somewhat
| practical.
| frereubu wrote:
| I get you're referring to the profitability, but the
| iPhone Air is just thin, not small, which is where this
| conversation started.
| kridsdale1 wrote:
| I bought a Pro Max for myself and an Air for my wife, who
| had a Mini before.
|
| The Air is DAMN SMALL. You really should try holding it.
| Yes the 2D dimensions are as large as a normal modern
| phone but it's hardly there otherwise. It's a good
| compromise.
|
| I'd want it myself but I shoot ProRes Video.
| jml78 wrote:
| Based on sales of the air, it won't be around in future
| years.
| DiggyJohnson wrote:
| The issue is the 2D footprint compared to older models
| like the iPhone SE and iPhone 13 Mini. The iPhone Air is
| still significantly larger.
| frereubu wrote:
| It's entirely about the 2D space in terms of being able
| to easily hold it in one hand and reach the whole screen,
| as well as other things like how it fits into pockets. I
| have large hands and an iPhone 13 mini, and it still
| feels too big for me to use comfortably with one hand.
| crote wrote:
| > Yes the 2D dimensions are as large as a normal modern
| phone but it's hardly there otherwise.
|
| The 2D dimensions are _literally_ the only thing I care
| about. I 'm going to barely notice the weight difference.
| The actual thickness is a lie with the giant camera hump.
|
| What I _do_ care about is whether I can operate it
| single-handedly: I want my thumb to reach the top of the
| screen (so I can drag down the notification bar and click
| nav stuff) while the bottom of the phone is resting on my
| pinky. I could easily do that on my Galaxy S III Mini, it
| was comfortable with my Moto G 2, it was _just about_
| doable with my Nokia 6.1 - and it is impossible with my
| Pixel 7. At no point did I I actively _look_ for a larger
| phone: going for a larger model has always been an
| unavoidable compromise.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| Ya got me there.
| brulard wrote:
| It felt more like: keep the size, reduce the battery life
| CrimsonCape wrote:
| You missed the part where he said "make a device people
| want."
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I'm curious how well it is selling. Early on there was a
| lot of enthusiasm, but I haven't heard much since. I
| don't know if I'd want a phone with less battery life,
| but my understanding is the Air's battery is actually not
| much smaller than last year's pro?
| layer8 wrote:
| It doesn't seem to be selling well:
| https://www.macrumors.com/2025/11/10/next-generation-
| iphone-...
| jsheard wrote:
| Neither is Samsung's similar Galaxy Edge apparently, to
| the extent that the product line may have already been
| cancelled after just one generation. Both companies
| probably should have sat on that idea until they could
| offset the physically smaller batteries with the much
| denser silicon-carbon technology.
| layer8 wrote:
| The battery is actually fine, better than the iPhone
| 16's. The single camera and the pricing are the main
| problem, along with assorted minority showstoppers like
| single speaker and large size. It's also not that much
| lighter, actually heavier than previous iPhones like the
| 12. People who are fine with a single camera and want
| less weight can also get the 16e for a much lower price,
| and then at least get stereo speakers. Add to that the
| very strong offering of the iPhone 17 this year.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > Foxconn has reportedly dismantled all but one and a
| half of its production lines for the iPhone Air , and all
| production is expected to be stopped at the end of the
| month
|
| Ouch! That sounds pretty bad, indeed.
|
| I was originally a little interested in the Air because I
| wanted to downsize from my previous 15 Pro Max. I
| ultimately decided that the Air was only thinner, and
| still big in the dimensions I wanted it to be smaller in.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| The iPhone Air was a turn in the wrong direction.
|
| What people like me wanted was an iPhone 13 mini that's a
| bit thicker so it can have a bit more battery capacity.
| And with the 120 Hz PWM nausea fixed.
|
| The iPhone Air has worse battery life. And it has a
| larger screen. And it's worse to handle one-handed.
| Coming from the 13 mini, it's not an improvement.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| I bought an Air, coming from a 13 mini, and I largely
| agree with you on all those points except the battery
| life. I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying the Air has
| bad battery life, which maybe it does compared to the 17
| or 17 Pro etc, but the past week I've been test driving
| it it has more than all day battery life for me. My 13
| mini needed a recharge in the middle of the day (battery
| was worn down to about 83%).
|
| Otherwise, yeah, you're right. I'm pretty sure I'm going
| to return it this week before my 14 days are up.
| ntoskrnl_exe wrote:
| Totally agreed.
|
| The one thing I don't see criticized enough is the lack
| of a SIM card slot in international models. I understand
| they physically couldn't fit it in, but I bet it's a deal
| breaker for everybody who has no experience with CDMA
| phones, so basically everybody outside of North America.
| decimalenough wrote:
| > _it 's a deal breaker for everybody who has no
| experience with CDMA phones, so basically everybody
| outside of North America._
|
| Huh? CDMA is long dead, and the technical capabilities of
| physical and e-SIMs are identical. SIM = Subscriber
| Identity Module, all it does is encode your identity.
| ntoskrnl_exe wrote:
| _As far as I know_ , CDMA, compared to GSM, didn't have a
| SIM card equivalent. The identity information was baked
| into the handset and if you wanted to move your number
| from one phone into another, you had to get in touch with
| your carrier.
|
| eSIM reintroduces this problem. Those who experienced it
| 20-odd years ago with CDMA may feel like home. But
| elsewhere, where it's always been a norm to have the
| easily transferable physical SIM card, it might be viewed
| as too much of a hassle.
| vel0city wrote:
| Eh, I think it depends on the carrier.
|
| My wife didn't have international data with the carrier
| she had previously. When we traveled out of the country
| at first she was thinking she wouldn't care and would
| just get by with wifi. After a couple of days she changed
| her mind and wanted to have some kind of service. It was
| extremely simple to find a provider through the hotel
| WiFi, prepay for a week of service, download the SIM to
| the phone, and boom she was back to having service.
| Manged to get it all done at breakfast.
|
| So long as the carrier is simple to get an eSIM it
| doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Its trivial to
| transfer an eSIM on Android assuming both devices are
| still functional. Its pretty easy to load an eSIM,
| compared to having to somehow call the phone company and
| have them manually enter the IMEI or whatever from back
| in the day. The only somewhat pain point is when your old
| device is smashed and you don't have any internet. In
| that case, having a physical SIM is better, I agree.
| wat10000 wrote:
| I'm all for that when it comes to things like accessibility
| technology that allows people to do things they otherwise
| couldn't. But screen sizes? You can use a larger screen,
| you just prefer a smaller one.
| jms703 wrote:
| Shareholders would never ever be ok with a company not
| trying to be maximally profitable.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| That's why Tesla stock tanked as soon as the FT wrote
| that "$1.4bn appears to have gone astray." ;)
|
| https://www.ft.com/content/62df8d8d-31f2-445e-bfa2-c171ac
| 43d...
| rootusrootus wrote:
| What's Tesla's forward PE? Close to 200? I don't think we
| can use them as an example of anything resembling a sane
| market.
|
| Edit: Found a link to the article content, I gather
| that's basically the point you're making?
| randmeerkat wrote:
| > What's Tesla's forward PE? Close to 200?
|
| Nope, close to 300 actually...
| rootusrootus wrote:
| That's trailing PE. A standard response to that
| observation would be that the market is forward looking.
| So I try to stick to forward PE when discussing price.
| 200 is still insane in any case, it's an order of
| magnitude higher than, for example, GOOG.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Yes, the point I was trying to make is that companies can
| get away with not being maximally profitable. There's
| nothing legally stopping Apple from accepting a slightly
| lower profit margin on the 5% of sales volume that might
| go to smaller iPhones if they would offer them. But it
| might brighten the day for millions of customers.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Tim Cook told people they should sell their shares if
| they wanted Apple to abandon environmental sustainability
| policies. And he identified accessibility as a similar
| issue.[1]
|
| [1] https://www.macobserver.com/news/tim-cook-rejects-
| ncppr-poli...
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| They are making 5 different iPhone models of varying sizes,
| features, prices.
| mihaaly wrote:
| All big. 5 the same size category, barely different.
|
| Then they push a tiny-tiny device, the watch. Inbetween?
| Empty desert.
|
| They do not do things smartly but by force. Like the
| omission of physical home button, notch, no jack, clud
| first, and a lot of other things forced on us. Some
| decide to live with, or even adapt the love of it,
| despite never ever asked for it. Using the force like
| Darth Vader.
| MBCook wrote:
| Not in Tim Cook land. If a product is profitable that's not
| good enough, it has to be very profitable.
| jama211 wrote:
| A CEO that maximises for shareholder value? Shocking.
| MBCook wrote:
| But is he?
|
| We don't know. If having such a phone keeps someone in
| the Apple ecosystem that may be more valuable. All their
| services they're always pitching. People with iPhones are
| more likely to buy iPads and Macs.
|
| Maybe the get tired of the tiny screen or want a better
| camera and move up in a few years.
|
| The value of a customer over a longer time horizon,
| perhaps 10 years, may be better if you let them buy the
| phone you make $250 on instead of $450.
|
| He's maximizing value for the quarter. That so often
| steers companies wrong.
| n2d4 wrote:
| If each iPhone model served only 3% of total iPhone users
| like the iPhone mini did, you'd end up with 33 iPhone
| models
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| Good.
| ebbi wrote:
| Good, in some ways. But do people want to pay higher
| prices for these iPhones to cover the costs that have to
| be amortized over a lower volume of devices?
|
| I highly doubt it.
| andrewmutz wrote:
| If Apple didn't run such a closed ecosystem, other
| hardware vendors would step in and be happy to sell a
| form factor that 3% of the market uses.
|
| I keep trying to use Andriod to get more choice on form
| factor, but one thing always brings me back to an iPhone:
| texting incompatibility. Apple has me locked into their
| ecosystem because I can't get a decent quality video
| texted to me.
|
| As an Apple fan since the 90s who remembers how Microsoft
| abused its market dominance for decades, it's
| particularly ironic that Apple continues to use this
| technique against other companies.
| mike_d wrote:
| Apple developed iMessage to work around the problems with
| SMS and MMS, as well as decrease load on carrier
| networks. There is no closed ecosystem, you can still
| receive messages and videos from iPhone users, just at
| the quality your hardware and software can support.
|
| Google later decided to come up with a completely
| different implementation called RCS to deal with the same
| problems. Rather than work with Apple on bringing an
| iMessage app to Android or licensing it, they instead
| tried to pressure Apple with a public advertising
| campaign to adopt what is frankly an inferior solution
| that doesn't even have reliable end-to-end encryption.
|
| Your complaint is basically that you bought a Toyota and
| it does not have BMW's laser headlights that adjust
| brightness and angle automatically. You still have
| headlights, you just didn't spend the money to get the
| good ones.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Apple's strategy to use iMessage for lock in is public
| record.[1]
|
| [1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/9/22375128/apple-
| imessage-an...
| mike_d wrote:
| Yes because Google offered nothing of value in return.
| Like in my example, nothing stops Toyota from offering
| enough money to license BMW's laser headlights.
| andrewmutz wrote:
| It's a poor example because laser headlights don't have
| network effects.
| andrewmutz wrote:
| Does Apple allow non-Apple devices to send and receive
| messages from the iMessage network? Under any conditions?
| johnmaguire wrote:
| > Rather than work with Apple on bringing an iMessage app
| to Android or licensing it
|
| This seems like an unfair take - Apple is on record using
| iMessage specifically to deteriorate the experience
| between Android and iOS users. I don't see them working
| with Google to bring iMessage to Android.
| Zak wrote:
| Google tried the same thing Apple did long before RCS
| when it made Hangouts the default SMS app for Android.
| Conversations could be upgraded from SMS to Google's
| internet-based chat protocol if the other person had an
| account; it was even available for iPhones, but it
| couldn't be an SMS client.
|
| Carriers didn't like it and Google caved.
| mike_d wrote:
| Lets be honest, Hangouts (which of the three versions)
| was a crappy chat app that they wanted to boost the usage
| of. It wasn't intended to be a functional SMS
| replacement.
| Zak wrote:
| As a former regular user, I don't remember it being
| notably worse than any of the other options. It was
| definitely preferable to SMS.
|
| Maybe there was some glaring flaw I'm not remembering,
| but Google certainly had the resources to make it more
| competitive if they'd wanted to.
| vel0city wrote:
| > just at the quality your hardware and software can
| support.
|
| I assure you, Android phones have been able to render
| video of far higher quality than what Apple devices would
| send to them through MMS.
|
| iMessage is a cloud ecosystem. I cannot install iMessage
| on my Android device.
|
| > Rather than work with Apple on bringing an iMessage app
| to Android
|
| Apple has been free to release this app at any time.
| There is nothing Google is doing that prevents it from
| being made. The only people preventing this app from
| existing are the people at Apple.
| Nition wrote:
| > If Apple didn't run such a closed ecosystem, other
| hardware vendors would step in and be happy to sell a
| form factor that 3% of the market uses.
|
| There aren't any decent small (less than 6") Android
| phones either.
| andrewmutz wrote:
| There is a wide variety of form factors available in the
| android ecosystem. Whether or not they fit your
| definition of "decent" just depends on how much you
| prioritize size:
|
| https://www.samsung.com/us/smartphones/galaxy-z-flip7/
|
| https://www.unihertz.com/products/jelly-max
| Nition wrote:
| I don't really count foldables but I hadn't seen the
| Jelly Max. I stand corrected, looks like a great phone.
| the_pwner224 wrote:
| Foldables get this job done well. My (OG) Pixel Fold is a
| great size & aspect ratio while folded, easy to use one-
| handed, but has a giant screen when you open it up. The
| newer Pixel Folds and the other foldables on the market
| have all grown the screen vertically but they're still
| more compact than most flagships.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| I wouldn't. I personally think iOS kind of sucks, and I
| only keep using it because Android developers don't
| support devices long enough for me. Third party
| developers would be as much a mess as they are in the
| Android world and at that point I'd rather have a phone
| with a good OS.
| vel0city wrote:
| > I can't get a decent quality video texted to me.
|
| It seems this gap has significantly closed, assuming both
| sides have RCS support. I've got a number of decent
| quality videos sent through RCS from friends through RCS.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| 3% was the iPhone 13 mini? It sold the least of the 4
| relatively small phones Apple introduced in under 18
| months.
|
| How many Android phone models exist?
| hnuser123456 wrote:
| On the Samsung US store alone, currently 12 models (not
| counting renewed phones)
| OJFord wrote:
| Not to mention the SE (variant of the 4 I think?) was way
| more popular. Dismissing the whole concept just because
| one implementation at one time was a relative flop (and
| as you point out, that's still a lot of sales).
|
| Also, they're happy to have Pro and non-Pro SKUs etc.,
| just averse to smaller for reason.
| BuckRogers wrote:
| It's a self-fulfilling prophecy to launch the iPhone mini
| during Covid, offer it 2 years, and say no one wants
| them.
|
| The haters dismiss the SE point by saying it was the
| price, not size. But it does prove that no one avoids
| phones due to being "too small".
|
| The size increase is because of cost optimization. Where
| it's wrong is that everything else meant for humans comes
| in small, medium, and large. Phones? Just large and XL.
| rglullis wrote:
| I don't get this logic. Putting aside that to get 33
| different models you would come up with 5-6 different
| form factors, each of them on a distinct point in the
| tradeoff scale, why do you think that something is only
| worth doing if it can be put on an uniform supply-demand
| curve?
| nomel wrote:
| What percent of the iPhone sales do you think it took to
| pay off the significant engineering and factory/tooling
| setup costs? I bet it's more than 3%.
| rglullis wrote:
| How much of those costs are already sunk regardless of
| the split in your product line?
| throwup238 wrote:
| Apple made nearly $190 billion last year selling just
| iPhones.
|
| If you think it costs more than $5 billion to design a
| phone and set up a production line, you are _wildly_ off
| base. That's the kind of money companies spend to build
| silicon fabs or release half a dozen new car models, not
| consumer products made by a contract manufacturer.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| I bet the iphone mini still outsold several macbook skus
| scosman wrote:
| They made it, it didn't sell well. Last I checked zero
| Android manufacturers were still creating high quality
| small phones (<5.5"). The Android community has resorted to
| petitions like https://smallandroidphone.com
|
| Some people definitely want it, but when not even one
| Android manufacturer will create a model when they can get
| 100% market share, it looks like there isn't enough demand.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Foldable phones sold well enough Samsung introduced their
| 7th generation this year.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| You've hit the nail on the head. There are still some
| manufacturers that make small phones, and some that make
| high quality phones, but zero that make high quality
| small phones. Apple used to be our last respite, now we
| have nothing.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| They used to make the "mini" but that's because Jobs had
| taste and it's what he, specifically, wanted in his pocket.
| Now Jobs is gone and... no more mini.
|
| But I'll keep my iPhone 13 mini going as long as I can.
| nailer wrote:
| I own an iPhone 16 pro, but I'm constantly thinking about
| switching to an iPhone 13 mini with an aftermarket
| battery conversion to make it last all day. The only
| thing that holds me back is that I can't easily convert
| it to USBC.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| My battery is on its last legs, and I was going to pick
| up an iFixit one at some point and do the swap, but I
| believe theirs is the OEM configuration/capacity. Is
| there another option for an actual higher capacity
| battery?
| the__alchemist wrote:
| I think it's possible this is a good summary explanation,
| but isn't this a bit like saying "We only make shirts in
| medium because it's what the majority wants."
|
| I would switch from Android to Apple if this fixed this
| problem.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| Come to think of it, the only reason I switched from
| Android to Apple was because the 12 Mini wasn't massive
| and was actually a decent phone. If I have to get a
| massive phone again, I might as well go back to Android.
| Drew_ wrote:
| Same story for me, but with the 15 Pro. The Pixel 7
| phones were huge so I just switched to my first iPhone.
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| > They're giving the market the size people actually want.
|
| Some people clear still want those small phones, just not
| enough for Apple's profit margins.
| jama211 wrote:
| Considering the sheer ramp up for manufacturing at the
| scale of iphone sales, and how unpopular tiny phones are,
| it's completely understandable they're not interested in
| catering to the < 1% of users they'd gain by making a small
| phone. You have to remember lost sales only truely include
| people who literally leave the platform or never upgrade
| again instead of just grumbling and buying the new phone
| anyway.
| torstenvl wrote:
| What ramp up? It's been less than a year since they
| discontinued the SE 2022.
|
| Apple could have kept improving the CPU and camera and
| not much else and would have had a steady stream of
| income from those of us who want to use our actual
| pockets (not a weird swaddle) to carry our phones.
|
| The iPhone SE accounted for 5-12% of the market,
| depending on year. The iPhone mini accounted for about
| 5%. Let's conservatively call it 13%.
|
| Apple had iPhone revenue of $205bn in 2022. The average
| smaller iPhone is about .5-.67 the cost of a flagship
| model.
|
| So fuzzy math, but .13 * .5 * 205000000000 = a $1.3bn
| market for iPhones you can use with one hand.
|
| Thats nothing to sneeze at. Way more of a market than
| something like a Magic Trackpad.
| nvllsvm wrote:
| > They're giving the market the size people actually want.
|
| No - call it what it is. They are catering to the largest
| market segments and ignoring the smaller segments who desire
| smaller phones.
|
| Reasoning as to why is another thing, but it doesn't negate
| the existence of the segment who does want one.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Much like there is a segment of the population who wants a
| brown diesel station wagon.
| wffurr wrote:
| With wood paneling!
| unsigner wrote:
| An Apple Watch with a cellular connection, paired with
| Airpods, fulfills some of the role of a small iPhone - you
| can make calls, listen to music, and even do some light
| texting if Siri likes your accent.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| No camera => not a phone replacement for most of the
| market
| MangoToupe wrote:
| I love my apple watch but I can safely say i've never
| done any of the above with it. It's too much of a pain to
| switch the bluetooth headphones to it and the screen is
| too small to do much actual computing with it. The
| fitness aspects are totally worth the money, though.
| DrProtic wrote:
| There is one, shame it's 3%.
| simplesimon890 wrote:
| If Apple produced an Iphone SE with battery life that lasted,
| by making it a little thicker, then people would buy it IMO.
| The problem with the small phones is they arecreated on the
| premise that they should be crappy phones.
|
| Of course everyone has a different version of what they
| consider crappy but bad battery life has got to be at the top
| of most people's crap-o-meter
| kridsdale1 wrote:
| iPhone 13 Mini was as you say. In every way as good as the
| full size iPhone but small. I hear it was quite an
| engineering challenge. I love the thing. The people of
| earth did not buy it.
| mulmen wrote:
| People did buy it though. Apple sold a non-zero number of
| iPhone 13 Minis. They simply decided that number wasn't
| big enough.
| BuckRogers wrote:
| It was a self-fulfilling prophecy to launch the iPhone
| mini during Covid, offer it 2 years, and say no one wants
| them. Especially when the SE proved people have no
| aversion to a normal sized phone meant for human hands.
| wffurr wrote:
| I am clinging to mine in the vain hope they something
| similar gets built before it loses security updates.
| jsheard wrote:
| I don't think they even set out to make a small phone with
| the SE, they set out to make a _cheap_ phone. They achieved
| that by reusing older generation iPhone tooling which just
| happened to be smaller, as was the style at the time. When
| they refreshed the SE line it too got larger as it graduated
| to using later generation tooling.
| whynotminot wrote:
| Yall forgetting they literally made an amazing iPhone Mini
| that no one bought
| MajorBee wrote:
| I bought :( Loved the thing, but yeah batter life wasn't
| the best. Also noticed that app developers would
| sometimes not take into account the smaller viewport on
| the Mini, and so app views would sometimes look too
| squished or out of place. That 's a minor grouse though
| compared to the subpar batter life.
| layer8 wrote:
| I don't know what they set out to do, but the marketing
| material specifically emphasized the compact form factor.
| (I'm reluctant to call it "small", because the iPhone 5
| didn't seem small to me at the time.)
| Zak wrote:
| I suspect the iPhone Mini didn't sell well for reasons beyond
| people generally preferring larger phones, and suspect it
| might sell better today.
|
| The biggest issue is that it was introduced in 2020 when many
| people were in lockdowns. A phone's portability was not as
| important, and people mainly using their phone at home on the
| couch likely preferred large screens more than usual.
|
| The second issue is that the screens used slow pulse width
| modulation for dimming and could appear flickery for some
| users.
|
| Finally, battery life was uncompetitive. Sony Xperia Compact
| models introduced years earlier had larger batteries. My
| guess is accepting a tiny bit more thickness would solve this
| problem.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| And yet, they sell, so people do want them.
| crote wrote:
| > They're giving the market the size people actually want.
|
| Are they, though?
|
| In my experience the smaller phones are almost always
| _substantially_ worse products: they have several gigabytes
| less RAM, usually half the storage of the alternatives, often
| lack features like wireless charging, have a slower CPU, have
| a worse camera, and in general are made using cheaper
| materials.
|
| We don't know what the market wants, because _the market was
| never able to make a fair choice_. It wasn 't "big phone vs
| small phone", it was "big full-featured phone vs shitty
| watered-down small phone" - no wonder people "chose" for the
| big phones.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| I had a look for covers, and I could only find silicone (?) or
| plastic sleeves and the 'handbag straps'. I think / suppose a
| lot of people just have their phone in their hand or on a table
| all the time, so why make it pocket sized?
| nozzlegear wrote:
| > In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to
| carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they
| failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
|
| Can any woman with a purse or man with a fanny pack chime in
| and let us know if they've ever thought about putting their
| phones in their bags before?
| dpoloncsak wrote:
| Is this supposed to dispute the claim? A man putting his
| phone in his fanny pack would also signify apple's phones are
| inconvenient to carry. Apple releasing a 'solution' is them
| admitting it
| nozzlegear wrote:
| No, it's supposed to point out that there exists an entire
| set of people who have been putting their phones in bags
| for as long as phones have existed. We mostly don't hear
| from women here on HN thanks to old gender biases in tech.
|
| > Apple releasing a 'solution' is them admitting it
|
| Apple released a collaboration with a fashion brand.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| i'm not sure i get the point here. at some point, i don't
| want to be carrying something by holding it in my hand. i
| might need to use my hand for something else. so I put the
| item down, or put it in a container that I bring with me
| (pocket, shoulder bag, etc). Are they 'admitting' that
| people move around with things and sometimes have more than
| one purpose for their hands during an outing?
| keyringlight wrote:
| Yes, I do this because when I'm using my bike to get into
| work as it often involves more than one set of clothes and
| swapping everything between different pockets is annoying so
| I have a big 'unipocket' fanny pack, my 6.7" phone is still
| cumbersome in there making digging out other items annoying.
| And when I'm wearing some pairs of pants and the phone isn't
| angled just right it will dig into my hip while walking up
| stairs until it's adjusted. (and that's with a relatively
| budget android phone, smaller devices are a tiny niche of old
| less powerful devices that barely have support)
| phantasmish wrote:
| Blazers and sport coats.
|
| They're purses you can wear that also tend to make you look
| better.
|
| They're friggin' great, and even the largest smart phones
| easily fit their hip pockets.
|
| No more keys poking you through jeans pockets. No more
| sitting on your wallet. Even room for a smallish paperback
| book.
|
| We never should have moved away from them. They're a utility
| garment.
| maleldil wrote:
| What if you're in 30 degC weather?
| phantasmish wrote:
| High twist wool, unlined, adds basically zero heat
| ("summer weight wool" is a term that may include all
| these qualities). Doesn't even do much to block wind (but
| does block the sun, a bit!). Totally fine in that range.
| That's before resorting to something like an unstructured
| linen jacket (ever seen Lawrence of Arabia? Those guys
| are wearing _plenty_ of clothing in the heat, a linen
| jacket is nothing) or warm-weather cottons like a
| seersucker (I've not bothered with any of that for
| jackets, myself, as light wool does fine for me, though I
| have several other pieces in linen).
|
| Hell I own _sweaters_ that are totally comfortable up to
| about that point, and higher if there's a breeze. It's
| all about construction and fabric.
| eigencoder wrote:
| I have a fanny pack. I usually put my phone, a notebook, my
| wallet, some band-aids, and a couple diapers. Sometimes I add
| a charger if I think I'll need it. It's quite convenient, and
| I basically don't put anything in my pockets. Phone sits on
| its charger or in the bag, usually.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| The worst part of this is the UI bloat that came along with it.
| Since there's no longer a need to consider smaller phones,
| everything got bigger and more padded also worsening the
| information density on larger phones.
| sixtyj wrote:
| When I had to buy an iPhone 13 because support for the 5s
| ended, my hands hurt from the big phone...
| xattt wrote:
| One of the subtext reasons is that women's' clothing lacks
| proper pockets for whatever sexist reason, so a pocket you wear
| on the outside can seem like a great idea.
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| Surely you're not suggesting that modern women's fashion is
| governed by some vestigial sexism and not actual desires and
| wants of consumers who are otherwise spoiled for choice when
| it comes to any other property of their garments, whether
| functionality, style, colouring, percent coverage of any and
| all body parts, etc.
| grishka wrote:
| Phones have grown, but people are the same size as ever. It's
| as if the industry has collectively forgotten what ergonomics
| is. It's especially frustrating for me as someone who is a
| comparatively compact person _and_ who still considers the
| phone a secondary device mostly for use outside.
| stetrain wrote:
| The industry has given consumers the choice, and they
| overwhelmingly prefer to spend their money on the larger
| phones.
| grishka wrote:
| The choice in the form of the iPhone mini that sold by
| millions but is somehow still considered a failed product
| by Apple, yeah. And nothing comparable in the Android
| world, where all manufacturers pretty much move in
| lockstep.
| stetrain wrote:
| The choice has happened over many years. Incrementally
| consumers were offered the choice of the same size phone
| or larger, and they kept choosing larger.
|
| If the smaller iPhones and Android phones of 10+ years
| ago had continued to sell well as larger models were
| introduced alongside them, they'd still be selling phones
| that size today.
| dpark wrote:
| I wonder what percentage of people who complain about not
| being able to buy smaller phones actually ever bought the
| smaller phones when they were available. Are these people
| carrying 3rd gen iPhone SEs right now? I suspect no.
|
| It's not as if Apple dislikes money. If they believed the
| market for small phones was large enough, they'd still be
| selling small phones.
| grishka wrote:
| I did! As much as I could as someone who can't stand iOS,
| anyway. I used the Pixel 1 and then the Pixel 4a, for 4
| years each.
| dpark wrote:
| I have sympathy for folks who want a small phone and
| legitimately would buy it if available. Unfortunately the
| set of people who will actually buy a smaller phone seems
| to be very small, which is why all the manufacturers have
| just stopped. Apple with their two sizes seems to be
| trying harder than most manufacturers.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| I was still using my iPhone 13 mini until last week when
| I bought an Air. As a city dweller without a car, I'm
| constantly in situations where I'm carrying something in
| one hand and need to pull out my phone for something. Now
| with this huge form factor I can't comfortably do that.
| For example, I was traveling internationally and was
| carrying my duffel bag in one hand and needed to get
| information out of the Airbnb app on my phone, and I
| almost dropped it. The mini would have been (and was
| always) fine in these circumstances.
|
| The Air doesn't even fit in my jeans comfortably, I have
| to carry it in my jacket now (what do I do in summer?).
| I'm considering returning it and switching back to my
| mini until it just can't run anymore.
|
| Apple needs to realize the user base that wants a
| portable, one handed phone isn't the same market that
| wants a cheap phone. I paid more for a worse spec'd phone
| (Air vs 17), solely hoping it would be easier to use as a
| mobile, out in the world device. It's not. If they
| launched the same exact mini with a processor bump at $1k
| or more I'd be fine paying it.
| dpark wrote:
| > Apple needs to realize the user base that wants a
| portable, one handed phone isn't the same market that
| wants a cheap phone.
|
| The reality is that "I want a small phone" for most seems
| to mean "I would prefer that the phone is small but this
| is actually the least important factor for my purchase
| decision". The set of people who bought the mini was
| quite small, estimated around 3% of sales.
|
| _You_ didn't even buy the smallest phone. You got
| seduced by the thin phone but the 17 and 17 pro are both
| physically smaller devices corner to corner and would fit
| in your pocket better.
| throwforfeds wrote:
| For sure, I admit I'm an outsider in most of my life
| choices, including retail decisions. But for about 13
| years there I was able to purchase phones that worked one
| handed before the market completely shifted away from
| that.
|
| I purchased the phone that was the lightest, thinking
| that maybe it's thinness would make it nice to hold in
| one hand (it does), but it's still too big. And so back
| it goes for my 13 mini until that thing can't hold on any
| longer.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| SE, 12 mini and 13 mini user here. Yes, I bought them.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| I'm one of those people. I'm carrying a second gen se.
| Kerrick wrote:
| I was still on my iPhone 12 mini until about a month ago.
| I was ready to buy an iPhone 16 Mini on launch day if it
| existed. My wife was on her iPhone 13 mini until about a
| week ago, and would have bought an iPhone 17 Mini if that
| was on offering instead of the iPhone Air. Apple's
| continued refusal to offer a newer Mini, combined with
| the iOS 26 bug & accessibility nightmare, got us to
| switch. We now each carry a Sunbeam F1 Pro.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| The people who complain about wanting phones to be
| smaller are like me. We don't buy phones that often.
| Manufacturers will never cater to us, because I didn't
| replace my Pixel 2 XL until this year.
|
| I can never compete with the market that replaces their
| phone every year. Nobody can. _They_ are the ones that
| keep buying giant phones.
|
| >It's not as if Apple dislikes money. If they believed
| the market for small phones was large enough, they'd
| still be selling small phones.
|
| Apple, like almost every business that size, only does
| things that are profitable _enough_. It 's not enough to
| sell 1 million phones for a good profit, they try to
| avoid doing that.
| dpark wrote:
| > It's not enough to sell 1 million phones for a good
| profit
|
| This is true but also not the entire story. Apple also
| has to consider:
|
| * How many of that million would we sell anyway in a non-
| mini version?
|
| * What will the margin be on these relative to our other
| phones?
|
| * How much of our engineering resources will be siphoned
| into creating yet another variant that we could use for
| other efforts or to make our flagship phones better?
|
| * What's the long term support cost for yet another
| variant?
| grishka wrote:
| You seem to have missed my point about manufacturers
| moving in lockstep.
|
| Most people use a phone for at least two years. The way
| it happened in the 2010s, by the time someone is looking
| at buying a new one, _all_ available phones on the market
| have already grown larger compared to their current one.
| So, they get sad and buy whatever is available.
| stetrain wrote:
| Which is perhaps why Apple tried the iPhone Mini, to go
| back and see if they were missing a large market segment.
| Their answer was that some people bought it, but not
| enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
|
| There isn't a grand conspiracy to make everyone sad with
| big phones they don't want.
| dpark wrote:
| > Their answer was that some people bought it, but not
| enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
|
| This is the key thing. It's not that no one wants it. But
| it's a lot of engineering to produce another distinct
| hardware model and the market is tiny compared to the
| larger models.
| grishka wrote:
| Anecdotally, I, personally, know several people who
| bought the iPhone mini, some of them still using it.
|
| I still blame Apple for considering that 3% of total
| iPhone sales is a failure. And then launching the iPhone
| air, as if it will do any better...
| stetrain wrote:
| And I know several people who bought and are passionate
| about small, lightweight 2-door cars with manual
| transmissions.
|
| Sometimes that isn't enough to justify dedicating a mass
| production line to that product.
| grishka wrote:
| But it somehow _is_ enough to do that for things like the
| Mac Pro or the Mac Studio that are clearly niche products
| compared to the rest of the Mac lineup?
|
| I'm not sure it's fair to compare cars to phones or other
| tech products. Phones are not very repairable these days,
| but even if you manage to keep a 15-year-old phone
| working, the unnecessarily ever-changing protocols, APIs,
| and standards will render it unusable for most practical
| purposes. So you're kinda forced to upgrade every now and
| then. A 15-year-old car though? It takes the same fuel
| and drives on the same roads as brand-new ones. And spare
| parts are most certainly still available.
| rkomorn wrote:
| I think there are a bunch of related questions though:
|
| - Are the Mac Pro and Mac Studio getting yearly updates?
|
| - Are they as intricate to design and manufacture as
| phones?
|
| - Are they liable to eat into sales for more profitable
| models?
|
| Personally, I'd be happy to get a new Mini if they made
| one, but I'm not shocked that they're not catering to
| that market.
| stetrain wrote:
| The Mac Pro that famously gets very infrequent updates
| and is far behind the rest of the line on CPU generarion?
| I would not be at all surprised if Apple kills it off in
| the near future.
|
| The comparison to cars is the market. A company makes
| products it wants to and that it thinks will pay back
| their investment, and that will be the most profitable
| choice among the choices of product they could make.
|
| Sorry, you aren't going to debate your way into Tim Cook
| choosing a less profitable product to make.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| Apple will have like 15 macbook skus but a small iphone
| is the straw that breaks the camels back.
| stetrain wrote:
| They don't have 15 different Macbook chassis sizes. Most
| of those SKUs are swapping SoC and memory configurations
| on the same board and chassis design.
|
| By that logic the iPhone 17 (base model) is at least 24
| SKUs.
|
| If for example the 15" MacBook Air ended up being less
| than 3% of Mac sales, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple
| killed it off.
| dpark wrote:
| Estimates are that the mini was only about 3% of total
| iPhone sales.
| gonational wrote:
| Literally this.
|
| I'm typing this on an iPhone SE 2022 (the last one with a home
| button). I'm done with iPhone as soon as I am no longer able to
| use this model. I don't like the new, oversized pieces of junk,
| and I also like the home button as opposed to the new Face
| ID/swipe up workflow.
|
| For people that have good visual acuity, the smaller screen is
| ideal; it's such high resolution that you can fit a lot of
| things in a small area. For people that turn the font size up
| to 600, the bigger screen is obviously ideal, but nobody really
| wants to have to hold something that is bigger if they don't
| need it for the screen size. That's the market I fit in and
| Apple has abandoned at market, along with all common sense (re:
| liquid glass, the recent Apple/Google Gemini deal, etc.).
| chaostheory wrote:
| The current form factors are what people are buying. Even the
| Apple design team is surprised. I think even iPhone Air sales
| aren't as good as they projected
| kmoser wrote:
| > In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to
| carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they
| failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
|
| Marketing 101: Create a customer. Even if phones were small
| enough that there was no need for such a product, Apple's
| marketing team would convince you that you needed this product
| for [reasons].
| jama211 wrote:
| It's no such admission anyway, it's just a random fashion
| accessory. Everyone takes everything apple does too seriously
| lol.
| aczerepinski wrote:
| Same. I got so excited by the thought of a new iPhone that
| would fit in my pocket, but clicked on the link to see... phone
| socks?
| pmontra wrote:
| > I was so much hoping for an iPhone that will fit into my
| pocket
|
| Yes, and I was about to write "so some Android manufacturer
| will copy Apple and deliver a phone of the size that was common
| 10 years ago."
|
| Almost all of them are too large and they weight too much. 200
| grams, why?
| stetrain wrote:
| > In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to
| carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they
| failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
|
| I think it's an admission that consumers prefer phones that are
| large enough that they have become inconvenient to carry in a
| pocket.
|
| Some people have never had pockets big enough to comfortably
| fit even a smaller smartphone and have been carrying them in
| bags this whole time.
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| It's a fancy colostomy bag for all your digital shit
| dpark wrote:
| This is solving an entirely different problem than you imagine.
| This is solving the problem of "no one can tell I use an iPhone
| when it's in my purse/pocket". This is a conspicuous bag that
| loudly announces "I'm carrying an iPhone". That's what it's
| for.
|
| Also, can you actually not fit a phone in your pocket? I can
| fit the biggest iPhone in my pocket just fine in all of my
| pants. Conversely my wife cannot, but that's because women's
| pockets are vestigial. She couldn't fit the 3GS in most of her
| pockets either.
| port11 wrote:
| The price is incredible. _Many_ phones on the market are
| cheaper than this accessory. Maybe the true market need is
| "people don 't know how much disposable income I'm willing to
| throw at nonsense".
| dpark wrote:
| Of course. Conspicuous consumption requires a high price.
| No one is impressed by the $15 cross-body bag you buy from
| Amazon.
| jama211 wrote:
| It's just fashion mate. There are handbag brands that start
| at $4,000 on the cheap end.
| naIak wrote:
| Reminds me of the threads here regarding fake diamonds.
| How they don't understand why people would buy a real
| diamond when a fake one is so much cheaper. Or how proud
| they are of having a fake diamond that cost them a
| nickel. I swear there are lots of people here who are
| legit autistic.
| port11 wrote:
| I'm not sure I follow but I'd never but a real, likely
| 'blood' diamond. I'd happily pay for the lab ones because
| it's cool man-made science. AFAIK I'm not on the
| spectrum.
|
| I've bought plenty of nonsense, but this is some fabric
| to hold your phone. Come on...
| milutinovici wrote:
| Yeah, and they serve the same purpose.
| port11 wrote:
| Oh, I get it, I've worked fashion retail at H&M. The
| nonsense designer collections would sell out fast, even
| though it's a) still H&M and b) made in the same
| sweatshops. People like status items. But come on, this
| is some thread wrapped around a phone. Even Kanye's
| idiotic shoes had a better price-to-value ratio.
| Ar-Curunir wrote:
| Anecdotally, just this past month I had a pair of good
| quality jeans from J. Crew wear out and tear at the pocket
| due to friction from my iPhone 13 Pro Max. The jeans are
| fairly lightly used.
|
| I would love a smaller phone that doesn't kill my pants...
| dpark wrote:
| Are these super skinny jeans? I'm trying to visualize how a
| phone would tear your pocket.
| Ar-Curunir wrote:
| Not particularly. It's just a very big phone.
| dpark wrote:
| Not to be flippant but next time don't buy the Max. I
| don't know how to reconcile "I wish my phone were
| smaller" with "I buy the biggest phone".
|
| Apple is doubtless doing the same kind of "they say they
| want this but they buy that" calculation that automobile
| manufacturers are doing. "People say they want fuel
| efficient cars but they actually buy SUVs And giant
| trucks."
| walletdrainer wrote:
| > I can fit the biggest iPhone in my pocket just fine in all
| of my pants
|
| New pro max fits perfectly fine in all my dressier trousers,
| it is rather big for some joggers though. Especially with
| Cuccinelli joggers it's hard to get the phone to reliably
| stay in the pocket because they're just not deep enough, so
| the top of the phone sticks through the opening.
|
| The very easy solution to this has been to just buy joggers
| with reasonably sized pockets, Lululemon does not have this
| problem for example.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Why sell someone a small phone when you could sell them a large
| phone and a watch?
| jajuuka wrote:
| This isn't a pragmatic item though. It's a fashion item.
| Similar to when Apple made the real gold Apple Watch. It's not
| a statement on the broader market, it's Apple associating its
| brand name with high fashion and prestige. They've done this
| for many years.
| lynndotpy wrote:
| Yep. If someone is looking for a more functional item similar
| to this, Fjallraven sells a "Greenland Pocket" which I used
| to solve the "too much phone" problem. (And, unsurprisingly,
| costs many times less while doing much more.)
|
| (I'm not associated with Fjallraven, I just enjoy this bag
| and think it makes the functionality of the Apple Pocket look
| even more ludicrous in comparison.)
| qudat wrote:
| I was hoping for a zfold
| frereubu wrote:
| This is not any kind of admission about phone sizes. This is an
| "exclusive" tie-in with a high fashion brand, nothing more.
| evilmonkey19 wrote:
| I remember there was the iphone12 mini but it failed as people
| didn't want it. It was quite good honestly.
| graypegg wrote:
| Apple can pry my iPhone 13 Mini from my cold, dead, normal-
| sized hands.
| pantalaimon wrote:
| I'm surprised trouser pocket sizes have not adapted to the
| larger phones.
| charcircuit wrote:
| iPhones have always fit in my pockets. Even in different
| types of pants and different brands. This is already the case
| and I don't understand how the iPhone isn't already pocket
| sized.
| bambax wrote:
| I too was expecting a small iPhone. But this giant sock is
| hilarious. What are they thinking.
| oldsklgdfth wrote:
| Reading this on a first gen SE. Still works great.
|
| Since it can't get the lastest OS many apps don't install,
| effectively making it the type of dumb phone I always wanted.
| duxup wrote:
| >that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
|
| It would appear people simply don't want them based on mini 13
| and other sales.
| phantasmish wrote:
| I want a tiny phone.
|
| But I have kids, and am less willing to compromise on camera
| quality than I am size.
|
| I'd pay the same price for a smaller phone if the camera
| specs (and ideally battery life--go ahead and make it a
| little thicker, they're too thin anyway) were the same as the
| larger phones, but they're not.
|
| I bet those kinds of differences are what do it for a lot of
| folks. They're like me and would prefer smaller, all else
| being equal--but all else is typically not equal, even
| compared to standard iPhones and not the ultra-high-end ones.
| duxup wrote:
| Me too, I loved my mini 13.
|
| But overall people didn't.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| I also thought it was like Gameboy Pocket - another small form
| iPhone. Yeah not too excited about whatever this sling is. I
| already have pockets
| WD-42 wrote:
| I too thought we were finally getting a reasonable sized phone
| again.
|
| Instead it's an overpriced Apple branded jock strap.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| "But no, Apple's phones just had to grow and grow like cancer
| ..."
|
| Larger screens are better for advertising
|
| Maybe there are more eyeballs on mobile than on larger form
| factors
|
| Mobile OS are, with few exceptions, exclusively corporate-
| controlled. The corporations controlling the OS are enagaged in
| advertising services
|
| Might make sense for them to try to increase mobile use for
| more tasks. Perhaps increasing screen size will help
|
| I still have an old iPhone 4. Is it still possible to jailbreak
| and install some old software for experimentation. I'm not
| interested in using it to access Apple servers. All computers I
| own access the web through a TLS forward proxy. I see no
| advertising
| dz0ny wrote:
| Yep We need iPhone mini. Every year the phone is bigger which
| is worse. Android is the same.
| calebm wrote:
| Same... back in my day, people worked to reduce the size of
| mobile phones. Call me old fashioned, but I still prefer small
| phones, which is why I still have an iPhone 12 mini.
| DanHulton wrote:
| Absolutely this. I was so excited for a second that they were
| re-branding and re-launching the mini. My 13 is getting long in
| the teeth, and won't be supported for OS updates in a few more
| years.
|
| Instead it's an ugly, phone-only purse.
|
| Bleh.
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| Had to make sure it wasn't April 1st.
| btbuildem wrote:
| Checked the ULR twice
| esafak wrote:
| Suttle joke?
| area51org wrote:
| For all intensive purpose's their one in the same.
| jagged-chisel wrote:
| With all the things going on in the world, you also had
| to do this. All of it at once. You're a monster.
| rpdillon wrote:
| Well played!
| christophilus wrote:
| I once went swimming with some intensive porpoises.
| RataNova wrote:
| It reads like satire until you hit the part where it costs $229
| and realize... nope, this is 100% real
| manarth wrote:
| > it costs $229
|
| :o
|
| _Surely_ it 's satire! _looks around in amazement_
| inshard wrote:
| Whenever in doubt about your product's acceptance, just jack
| up the price and keep a straight face.
| birdman3131 wrote:
| Its showing as $149 for me.
|
| Which still feels outrageous for what is basically a knitted
| scarf.
| ryanchants wrote:
| There are 2 different sizes.
| beAbU wrote:
| There's a long and a short one. The long one costs $80 more
| than the short one. Jesus.
| craftkiller wrote:
| > The design drew inspiration from the concept of "a piece of
| cloth"
|
| I'm not convinced this wasn't an April Fools joke accidentally
| released early.
| kenjackson wrote:
| And they say you can "create your own personalized color
| combination". This is just literally just the pairing of the
| phone color and whatever color you pick for the bag. Who
| calls this a customized color combination?!
| rtkwe wrote:
| Some poor marketing drone trying to find anything to put on
| the page for this product.
| lacoolj wrote:
| I'm still not convinced it isn't.
|
| Let's wait until black friday and re-assess
| jader201 wrote:
| When I clicked the link, seeing it so high on the FP, I was
| 100% convinced they were finally re-releasing + rebranding the
| Mini.
|
| Then I saw what it was, and was like "ah it's an April Fools
| joke -- but wait, it's not April 1st".
|
| So now I can only assume people are upvoting it because it's so
| ridiculous?
|
| Are there people (on HN) that seriously think this is a good
| idea/are considering getting one of these hideous things?
| earlyriser wrote:
| You're literally describing my thought process, but I thought
| it was an older April 1st joke resurfacing.
| dpflan wrote:
| At this point, you may as well get a powerpack for a mini and
| put it in one of these slings, you could have a crazy
| powerful machine in your "sock-et" sling thing here...
|
| When the iPhone Air was just another huge phone...but
| thinner...smh. Apple should put up some page to check
| interest level in a smaller phone, and with enough interest,
| go manufacture it. If it is more expensive because economies
| of scale don't work out, but they create one that is small
| yet powerful, that's what I would buy at premium, because
| apparently compactness is a luxury.
| brovonov wrote:
| It's an out of season April fools joke.
| alex_c wrote:
| Do you guys not have phones?
| dustinsterk wrote:
| I did the same. Nope, not a joke.
| jama211 wrote:
| lol, people on HN learning that fashion is a thing is always
| hilarious to watch.
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| this isn't fashion; this is status signaling.
|
| i would hate to be you.
| christophilus wrote:
| > this isn't fashion; this is status signaling
|
| TIL these aren't the same things.
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| You're right. Fashion is about trends. Being in love with
| Apple products, especially without considering the need,
| usefulness or cost, does seem to be a trend.
| ale42 wrote:
| Did anyone else think/hope it was a new actually tiny iPhone?
| BugsJustFindMe wrote:
| The long strap version is too short on that model. Purse straps
| hang to hip level for a reason. Hanging at the hip makes reaching
| in substantially more ergonomic.
|
| Also lmao at the photo of the little bag strapped to the other
| larger bag. Yo dawg, I heard you like bags.
|
| Also they're super ugly. But I guess that's "subjective".
| fnord77 wrote:
| "Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth,""
|
| I had to check that if wasn't April 1st
|
| edit: holy shit, $150 for an iphone sock
| brandall10 wrote:
| FWIW, the designer behind these also created Job's turtlenecks.
| rchaud wrote:
| Were those also made mostly out of polyester?
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| I never thought this will be a reality but here we are
| https://scoopertino.com/apple-blasts-into-supermarkets-with-...
| noir_lord wrote:
| It gets really difficult to parody apple (and some of their
| customers) when they do things like this.
| lloda wrote:
| They themselves are the best at doing it, really.
| elboru wrote:
| I sincerely believe one day we'll get an official release of
| one of those Airpod straps:
| https://www.yahoo.com/news/hilarious-accessory-reminds-us-at...
| mobiledev2014 wrote:
| Wow, that article is wild! Talk about "aged like milk." I'm
| not saying iPhone Pocket will be a hit as big as AirPods, but
| it goes to show how unimaginative early reactions can be.
| GaryNumanVevo wrote:
| A phone brand that rich people buy selling overpriced designer
| items?
| seydor wrote:
| Does it fit an android phone or is it immediately ejected from
| the pocket with gusto?
| EPWN3D wrote:
| Ejecting with gusto would be gouache. The Android phone is
| simply shamed into dropping out of the sleeve.
| mauvehaus wrote:
| Do you perhaps mean gauche, as in socially awkward verging on
| unacceptable or is there a connection to art supplies I'm
| missing here?
|
| EDIT: or perhaps your phone "helpfully" autocorrected
| something wrong, as mine did.
| tacker2000 wrote:
| The bag will turn blue
| spogbiper wrote:
| this voids the warranty
| hrimfaxi wrote:
| This feels like a step backwards and if it were released on April
| 1st would be indistinguishable from a prank.
| stavros wrote:
| This just screams that Apple has jumped the shark to me. First of
| all, they're selling a knitted scarf for putting your phone in,
| which... what?
|
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth"
|
| Groundbreaking.
|
| > iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95
| (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
|
| Just... good luck, guys.
| stetrain wrote:
| It's a high-end fashion partnership, like the Hermes watches.
|
| You could probably argue that high-end fashion is in a constant
| state of jumping the shark.
| stavros wrote:
| But the Hermes watch was at least an Apple watch with some
| Hermes branding and accessories. This is just... a sock.
| stetrain wrote:
| I'm not sure how an Hermes branded watch accessory is
| different than an ISSEY MIYAKE branded iPhone accessory.
| ehzb2827 wrote:
| Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication -- Leonardo da
| Vinci
| alwillis wrote:
| I'm not concerned; we've been here before with iPod Socks [1].
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
| stavros wrote:
| Well, I stand corrected.
| biophysboy wrote:
| "A piece of cloth" is referring to Miyake's preexisting fashion
| line of clothes without seams, Yi Mei noBu .
| xenator wrote:
| Pffff... No AI? Who need it? Even my shower gel is AI already.
| brk wrote:
| It might be dumb, but at least it's expensive.
|
| This looks like it would make basic interaction with your phone
| highly cumbersome. It also looks like an easier target for
| thieves.
| astrolx wrote:
| > It might be dumb, but at least it's expensive.
|
| Just realizing that the reverse could be a selling point for a
| phone here: It might be expensive, but at least it's dumb.
| socalgal2 wrote:
| There will be tons of cheap clones in 3...2...1....
| brk wrote:
| This was one of my first thoughts. Could have knock-offs made
| for probably $10 landed cost, and put them on Amazon for $99.
| poilcn wrote:
| My mom knitted a bag for my niece's iphone in 2024, so there
| already was a trend.
| duxup wrote:
| I'm sure there will be, will be interested in how many people
| who want cheap clones want ... that.
|
| I'm not sure there's a sure crossover of big numbers.
| Cockbrand wrote:
| Haha, before looking at the price, I joked "I'm not going to
| buy this if it's only $99 or less."
|
| I sure didn't get disappointed.
| Syzygies wrote:
| The classic is two guys on a moped in Marseilles. The passenger
| cuts a pedestrian purse strap (or iPhone strap) and they
| vanish.
|
| One could embed an invisible security cable, but then...
| pndy wrote:
| This makes me wonder how strong this thing is because on first
| sight it just asks for being cut by a random thug. Same goes
| for this strap thing they introduced.
|
| I thought I won't be seeing anything else more ridiculous this
| decade regarding phones than people talking on speaker and
| holding them like piece of pie and here we are. There's no
| practicality whatsoever - I'd rather buy a strong case,
| probably that would cover both screen and cameras and a good
| urban backpack where I can put other stuff like physical wallet
| and a bottle of water, some charging cable.
|
| It's more a gadget sold as a status symbol - bit like some
| cases had that small rounded window for apple logo.
| tamimio wrote:
| Give it a week and you will get all colors from aliexpress or
| shien for $5.
| lufasz wrote:
| https://www.apple.com/shop/product/hs8p2zm/a/iphone-pocket-b...
|
| https://media.gq-magazine.co.uk/photos/5f8efdba9b357099d70a9...
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Damn you! Can't unsee it now. ;)
| bertili wrote:
| I saw it too before clicking the second link!
| amelius wrote:
| https://images.macrumors.com/t/h94LDq8hcQZUYyGkE_wGSaDm1bE=/...
|
| https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/9mQnP0/s3/fiat-multipla-19...
| lopis wrote:
| Suspiciously missing if the color shown in the press release,
| the one closely resembling the one Borat is using.
| jtokoph wrote:
| If you change the "Size" on the store page from "Long" to
| "Short", the yellow is there.
| https://www.apple.com/shop/product/hs8r2zm/a/iphone-
| pocket-b...
| notatoad wrote:
| yeah, but i can't wear the short one.
| bn-l wrote:
| I like!
| alejoar wrote:
| You can, it's just a bit of a tight fit.
| paulsmith wrote:
| lol I came here to post this too - perfect
| crazygringo wrote:
| It's kind of hilarious to me when the tech world collides with
| the high-end fashion world. On the one hand, I get how absurd
| this seems from a tech perspective. On the other hand, dropping a
| couple hundred dollars on a fashion item that will be trendy for
| a season among a certain group... it's no different from any
| other high-end fashion accessory. It's just that the two worlds
| so rarely overlap.
| acedTrex wrote:
| You can see just from this thread how the tech world reacts to
| the fashion world.
| qazxcvbnmlp wrote:
| HN commenter logic: 'if I don't understand it, this is
| clearly wrong'
|
| 'If someone doesn't spend money irrationally like I spend
| money irrationally its bad'
|
| There is indeed a blind spot.
| jama211 wrote:
| Well said
| rchaud wrote:
| The fashion world's biggest sellers are handbags and shoes,
| which are practical purchases and tend to feature pretty
| intricate design details. This is a Speedo for a phone, and
| it makes Apple's already over-the-top descriptions of its
| products sound even more absurd.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| Nothing about the fashion world's $5000 bags is practical.
| It's 99% status signaling
| bigyabai wrote:
| > It's 99% status signaling
|
| So is buying a $5,000 laptop. Much like shoes and bags, a
| kernel of practical demand quickly grows into an
| unlimited demand for vain materialism.
| Razengan wrote:
| > _So is buying a $5,000 laptop._
|
| No they actually do shit
| bigyabai wrote:
| So does a $5,000 bag. 99% of owning a $5,000 laptop is
| virtue signalling.
| chaostheory wrote:
| Apple is a fashion company when you think about it
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| The Google Glass/DVF collaboration was a notable example of
| cringe in this area.
|
| https://archive.nytimes.com/runway.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09...
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Compare with this Prada smartphone bag for 1470USD I don't know
| how many they sell every year but there's an audience.
|
| https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/prada-speedrock-re-nylon-and-l...
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| Apple has been a fashion brand for a few decades now.
| tokioyoyo wrote:
| I still firmly believe that it's made for Chinese market, where
| it will sell really well.
| gnarlouse wrote:
| As _silly_ a product as this is, the fact that it made it to the
| front page of Hacker News makes it a bigger deal than it actually
| is.
|
| It's not like it's sitting on Apple's frontpage. It's not some
| major product announcement. To get to the `/newsroom` page where
| the product was listed, you have to literally scroll to the
| bottom of https://apple.com and click a tiny link.
|
| I will however comment on the price and utter lack of
| functionality. This product is utter garbage--a total niche for
| art goblins (said lovingly).
| Noaidi wrote:
| Correct. The fact this made it o the front page is because the
| economy in the US is horribly K shaped.
| gnarlouse wrote:
| I don't follow
| bertili wrote:
| "Wear an iPhone"... It's increasingly difficult to love this
| company.
| Noaidi wrote:
| "The design of iPhone Pocket speaks to the bond between iPhone
| and its user"
|
| I have so much to say about that sentence that I cannot seem to
| say anything.
| weirdindiankid wrote:
| I'm not trying to be glib here, but this genuinely looks like
| something a satirical blog might post.
|
| I'm not a product or UI/UX designer but when you have to design a
| new, ridiculous way to carry a phone your company's manufacturing
| and selling, I'd have thought that's your sign to focus on making
| it _less_ awkward to carry. "Think different", indeed.
| wvbdmp wrote:
| > Material: Nylon (14%), Polyester (85%), Polyurethane (1%)
| tacker2000 wrote:
| Its crazy they didnt even use any expensive materials to maybe
| somewhat justify the price.
|
| Just the cheapest stuff you can get away with.
| Noaidi wrote:
| This is yet another sign of the K Shaped economy. While I am
| homeless through no fault of my own, people can buy a $200
| sweater pocket for their iphone.
|
| This is an old story, and it does not end well.
| lenerdenator wrote:
| ``` Apple Canton Road, Hong Kong
|
| Apple Ginza, Tokyo
|
| Apple Jing'an, Shanghai
|
| Apple Marche Saint-Germain, Paris
|
| Apple Myeongdong, Seoul
|
| Apple Orchard Road, Singapore
|
| Apple Piazza Liberty, Milan
|
| Apple Regent Street, London
|
| Apple SoHo, New York City
|
| Apple Xinyi A13, Taipei ```
|
| Couldn't hack it in Apple Plaza, Kansas City, huh?
| ta12653421 wrote:
| haha who came here because expecting a mini/small iPhone like the
| SE? :-D
| azmenak wrote:
| Seeing all the nerd brains of HN implode trying to understand
| this. This is what happens when the tech and fashion worlds
| overlap for a moment.
| akersten wrote:
| No one can convince me a $229 sock to hold your phone is
| comprehensible to the average person, nerd brain be damned
| jitl wrote:
| my conclusion is that designer fashion is not for average
| people
|
| see also apple watch hermes $500 watch straps
| (https://www.apple.com/shop/watch/bands/apple-watch-
| herm%C3%A...)
|
| or (non-apple) LV purses, $5000+
| https://us.louisvuitton.com/eng-us/women/handbags/all-
| handba...
|
| or LV phone strap, "Contact Us"
| https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/products/monogram-
| phone-s...
| andoando wrote:
| These are normal items, just expensive
| hu3 wrote:
| it's just status symbol
|
| some rich people like it
|
| some rich people think it's dumb and targeted at those with
| ego issues
| ggregoire wrote:
| A $10 fanny pack from Uniqlo or H&M looks better than this
| thing and is also more practical (can carry other stuff, keys,
| wallet, etc)
|
| https://static.standard.co.uk/2023/01/19/10/uniqlo%20header....
| CrimsonCape wrote:
| I found the reddit ManyBaggers recently and there is a
| cottage industry of high-end bags that seem incredibly made
| for the price that are in no way luxury products.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| You mean 99% of the world who scoffs at wasting money on this?
| Maybe it's the fashion world at odds with literally anyone else
| diego_moita wrote:
| No, I am not trying to "understand this". I don't give Apple
| enough credit to try to understand it.
|
| This thing is just a "Balenciaga": trash disguised as luxury.
| yellow_lead wrote:
| This is gonna launch first in Taipei (among other stores) and
| looks a lot like the bags people use to carry their boba tea in
| here. It's a bit expensive for a drink bag though.
| etchalon wrote:
| Products like these wouldn't need to exist if we just let women
| have pockets.
| travoc wrote:
| Who is "we?" Why are you preventing women from having pockets?
| I'm certainly not.
| etchalon wrote:
| And yet, they lack pockets.
|
| Mysteries abound.
| spogbiper wrote:
| if women actually bought clothes with pockets, vendors would
| sell them. there is no secret conspiracy against pockets for
| women
| etchalon wrote:
| I invite you to talk to literally any woman.
| zoklet-enjoyer wrote:
| Early April Fools joke?
| BobAliceInATree wrote:
| For those surprised by the cost, this is an Issey Miyake product,
| and the price is in-line with that. It's no different than the
| $800+ Hermes leather Apple Watch straps.
| shmatt wrote:
| Also made in Japan
| linkage wrote:
| I'm as big a weeb as anyone but this is a textbook example
| of:
|
| >thing >:(
|
| >thing, Japan :O
| bilekas wrote:
| > the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.
|
| Their level of innovation is inspiring. I knew my grandmother was
| ahead of her time. Apple just proves it.
| pertinhower wrote:
| Quote: " Inspired by the concept of 'a piece of cloth.'" Is this
| some kind of joke? If it were April 1st I'd assume the whole
| article is meant for comedic effect.
| CalRobert wrote:
| Pairs well with pieces from the Apple collection
| https://archive.org/details/apple-collection-1986-1987/page/...
| perihelions wrote:
| > _" Greater China"_
|
| Irredentist pro-war language, Tim Cook? I am so done with Apple.
| They knew what they did when they chose the words; they certainly
| spent thousands of hours deliberating them.
|
| This is Lebensraum with Chinese Characteristics.
|
| > _" The term is often used to avoid invoking sensitivities over
| the political status of Taiwan.[16] Contrastingly, it has been
| used in reference to Chinese irredentism in nationalist contexts,
| such as the notion that China should reclaim its "lost
| territories" to create a Greater China.[17][18]"_
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_China
| testfrequency wrote:
| Just like how they removed all the gay dating apps in China
| yesterday (by request of the government of course).
|
| So sad to watch a gay CEO just sit comfortably and allow his
| company quietly destroy his own "community". Don't get me
| started on SA either...
| ronsor wrote:
| > Just like how they removed all the gay dating apps in China
| yesterday (by request of the government of course).
|
| Those apps have always been illegal in China. Of course, one
| could say Apple should not operate in China (and this is
| perhaps true), but they cannot both operate there and break
| the law.
| voidmain wrote:
| Apple could choose to give the users of their devices
| freedom to run whatever operating systems and programs they
| choose. Then they could truthfully say that there is no way
| for them to control what people do with their devices once
| they leave the Apple store. If you put yourself in control
| of such things because it is profitable, you ought to take
| responsibility for the consequences.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| China could also make that illegal, and probably has.
|
| You're never going to outsmart the Chinese government
| with clever little tricks. They don't play like that.
| sabatonfan wrote:
| Can china make linux illegal?
| raincole wrote:
| They can make iPhone illegal.
|
| Would they? Unlikely, given iPhone creates a lot of jobs
| there. But if iPhone becomes the de facto devices for
| Chinese citizens to access illegal content then the
| chance is none-zero.
|
| (And of course they can make Linux illegal too. It's just
| harder to enforce than making iPhone illegal.)
| dhosek wrote:
| What makes you think they wouldn't if they felt it would
| be useful? Or more likely, require a particular
| government-endorsed Linux.
| bitwize wrote:
| If Brazil can, China can.
| sabatonfan wrote:
| Can you give me the source of where brazil made linux
| illegal? I am sorry but I tried to search and the only
| references I could find were of brazil banning twitter/X
| for some reason.
|
| I am genuinely curious how someone can decide linux to be
| illegal. How would the ban even work out?
| bitwize wrote:
| Brazil has what is known as the Felca law, which requires
| providers of app stores and "terminal operating systems"
| to do age verification and to provide secure auditable
| APIs that meet government standards for doing the same.
| Presumably, specific distros like Red Hat can go through
| a government approval process in order to be legal to
| distribute in Brazil, but without such certification and
| without providing such system-level APIs, a random distro
| like Debian will be illegal to distribute in Brazil.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Not only that, they can ignore their laws and
| disappear/kill you whenever they feel like it.
|
| They're not killing their own people by the millions like
| in Mao's days, but it's still a brutal dictatorship when
| it wants to be.
| underlipton wrote:
| Oh, we do that, too. And we also don't protect our own in
| other countries.
| skinnymuch wrote:
| Chinese people lives are getting better and they largely
| are on the same page. Meanwhile the US has DEI in the
| govt while the govt says DEI is bad. Minority
| authoritarian rule in the US with the Senate.
|
| The US is a brutal dictatorship all the time.
|
| China thankfully has a govt that is on the same page as
| the people.
| wiseowise wrote:
| Obvious troll or just mentally sick.
|
| Country with social credit, LLMs that have a seizure at
| "Tiananment square", Winnie the Pooh and Taiwan, Great
| firewall, cultural genocide of Uyghurs is a country where
| "lives are getting better" while US is a brutal
| dictatorship, my fucking sides.
| tgma wrote:
| Is that so? I have not surveyed the Chinese, but will not
| be surprised if the approval was higher than you'd
| imagine. If anything, the core ideas of communism have
| clear demand in the west and people are voting for them
| when they are shown with a lipstick on top.
| wiseowise wrote:
| > I have not surveyed the Chinese but will not be
| surprised if the approval was higher than you'd imagine.
| If anything, the core ideas have clear demand in the west
| and people are voting for them when they are shown with a
| lipstick on top.
|
| Ask other dictatorships while you're at it. Systems so
| great one wonders why stupid democracies haven't adopted
| the model still.
| tgma wrote:
| You're weasling your way out of the core point. I'm in no
| way advocating for such ideas. Quite the opposite. I'm
| just saying unless you have data about this you shouldn't
| rely on your instincts. There are many nuances around
| this and economic prosperity can mask huge other issues.
|
| > Ask other dictatorships while you're at it.
|
| In fact, I have observed immigrants from certain failed
| states that you refer to as "dictatorships." In many
| cases they say they hate their government yet they vote
| for mostly the same policies when they are given the
| chance to do so in the West, so again, even surveying
| them directly with a lazy question "do you like the
| government in country X" won't get you to the spirit of
| the answer.
|
| To wit, you also just fell for the common fallacy of
| assuming dictatorship is the opposite of democracy. They
| are much more alike than you'd think. Democracy isn't
| liberty.
| rpdillon wrote:
| It's not really about outsmarting them. Authoritarian
| systems of control rely on centralization. If you create
| an ecosystem where end users have lots of agency, of
| course most of them will go the path of least resistance,
| but the few who are willing to put in the effort to
| resist still can. Google and Apple tightening their grip
| over their respective mobile ecosystems is a very potent
| lever for authoritarian governments to pull.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| They don't rely on them. They successfully use them. In
| the Soviet Union every one horse village with unpaved
| roads had a commissar. No internet, no telegraph, no
| newspaper, no electricity but they held control just the
| same. Central control makes it convenient for them, but
| it isn't the difference between them existing and not
| existing.
| rpdillon wrote:
| I admit ignorance of a lot of this but just going off of
| your comment wouldn't the commissar be the system of
| centralized control in this case?
| KronisLV wrote:
| Surely there's a difference between hardware being a
| locked down appliance and... well, a more generic
| computation device.
|
| I think the argument is that Apple or even any company
| that makes Android phones could choose to have an open
| bootloader (and maybe some driver stuff) and normally
| that wouldn't really offend any government, while also
| giving the users more freedoms.
|
| Otherwise, what's next, PCs that only run Windows and
| only allow Edge as the browser and force the telemetry
| on?
| sneak wrote:
| Then China asks Apple to blacklist prohibited apps via
| notarization revocation. This isn't the gotcha you think
| it is.
| eptcyka wrote:
| If only you could run your own software on the computer
| you bought and paid for.
| zassy wrote:
| People on HN thinking Apple should get into some kind of
| dick waving contest with an authoritarian government that
| rules over 1/6th of the global population and that
| supplies the labor to build their products and the
| materials in those products by implementing your guy's
| pet issues is the height of fucking delusion.
|
| At least try to pretend like you guys are thinking about
| situations in the real world.
| eptcyka wrote:
| Allowing me to run my own code doesn't involve the dick
| waving contest.
| tgma wrote:
| It's delusional to think the default OS would be replaced
| by anyone more than a few percent of niche users.
|
| It's your desire to have open OS just say so. Doesn't
| really tie into avoiding oppression by communism. The
| Chinese need to solve that problem at its root.
| behnamoh wrote:
| Or you know, allow third party app stores?
| Aeolun wrote:
| > they cannot both operate there and break the law.
|
| Clearly they were doing exactly that until yesterday?
| cactusplant7374 wrote:
| He did give a tour of Apple HQ to MBS. But maybe they think
| they can do more good than harm by selling products in Saudi.
| fennecfoxy wrote:
| This is why, as a gay man, I give people a look when they ask
| why I still rant about gay rights "even though you guys have
| marriage and stuff now".
|
| It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I
| don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are
| icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing for
| it. People are entitled to be who they are.
| testfrequency wrote:
| Most hetero people will never (thankfully) know that pitted
| feeling of having to check your surroundings and
| environment every single day when you simply want to hold
| your partners hand, chat to a coworker, book a hotel
| reservation, or book a night out to celebrate.
|
| Every single macro outcome like this only demoralizes gay
| people just wanting to wake up and not think about anything
| other than the stresses and excitement of the day ahead.
|
| If anyone reads this and you think it sounds dramatic, it's
| not. It's a reality, and Tim Cook knows that..he should do
| better.
| NickC25 wrote:
| >It's a reality, and Tim Cook knows that..he should do
| better.
|
| You say that, but he's made billions by explicitly _not_
| doing better. And he 's Wall Street's darling for it.
| jimbokun wrote:
| Tim Cook has no ability to change the Chinese
| government's policies.
| bigyabai wrote:
| Untrue and defeatist. Tim Cook does influence Chinese
| policy, you can't pretend he's the victim here:
| EU: Tim Cook will *leave your economic zone* if you
| fraudulently label him as a monopolist, okay? If your
| government doesn't change, Apple won't bless your
| economy. China: There's just nothing we could
| do. When they asked to backdoor iCloud we couldn't make
| any demands from them. They constantly demand
| authoritarian control and *never* let us say a single
| word. We're being abused, someone help us!
| jimbokun wrote:
| OK, honest question: did Tim Cook and Apple successfully
| get the EU to change a policy they didn't like?
| sabatonfan wrote:
| I am a straight man and I feel like some communities just
| become scape-goats
|
| We have this us vs them mentality which some people use to
| collect power and influence at the costs of them
|
| Ultimately I think that it is a very foolish thing because
| I think that as long as nobody bothers on my freedom etc.,
| I should be in literally nobody's business bothering their
| freedom
|
| > It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I
| don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are
| icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing
| for it. People are entitled to be who they are.
|
| I agree 100% with this message.
|
| But one thing I have problem with (on the straight side of
| things) is that I have seen occasionally some extremely
| feminist comments which do try to impeach or try to have
| this very fundamental skewed problem that man are ALL the
| problem and its all man's fault etc. and I have seen the
| same in masculinity cultures as well and I feel like both
| of them are just radicalizing people to seize power and
| influence or sell courses or feel better about themselves.
|
| I think that we sometimes forget that people are people and
| we should treat others with the same courtesy and kindness
| that we expect to be treated with, I guess. maybe we
| sometimes don't treat them that way or didn't treat them
| that way and I guess we should just apologize or try not to
| do that ever again. Mistakes happen but as long as we still
| have a mindset similar to doing good, I feel like things
| would be hopeful.
| sabatonfan wrote:
| I didn't know that tim cook was gay and here is one message
| from wikipedia I want to quote
|
| > In June 2014, Cook attended San Francisco's gay pride
| parade along with a delegation of Apple staff.[85] On October
| 30, Cook publicly came out as gay in an editorial for
| Bloomberg Business, saying, "I'm proud to be gay, and I
| consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given
| me."[86] While it had been reported in early 2011 that Cook
| was gay,[87][88] at the time, Cook tried to keep his personal
| life private
|
| I feel like Tim Cook should be a man of his words and try to
| actually help the community he is proud to be in but I am
| sure that investors might not be happy but that just goes on
| to show that maybe even some CEO's could be puppets of
| shareholders and can be forced to do things solely for profit
| where their heart might not lie.
|
| I think that another point is that shareholders can also be
| puppets of CEO's in the case of Elon musk 1 Trillion $ deal
| shows that imo
|
| I feel like we live in the times where morality can be side-
| lined for profit and be celebrated. The whole idea why even
| people can be puppets of each other could be because they get
| profits and power and influence because of it (basically
| money most of the times)
|
| But what power do those CEO's have if they can't stand for
| what they think is right or educate themselves on these
| matters.
|
| Food for thought.
|
| > virtue was not convenient at the time
|
| Maybe we live just in such times.
| jimbokun wrote:
| Tim Cook has no ability to change the Chinese government's
| policies.
| underlipton wrote:
| "No" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. The things he could
| do would be very painful, maybe a Pyrrhic victory. Maybe
| they're worth it if the alternative is aiding an abetting
| authoritarian regime. I'm not casting judgment, just
| presenting the options. Which do actually exist.
| jimbokun wrote:
| The things he could do would not change the policies
| implemented by the Chinese government.
| sneak wrote:
| You can't fight City Hall.
|
| The iPhone is a Chinese product. China ultimately controls
| whether or not the iPhone exists. No place else on earth can
| manufacture 20,000 iPhones an hour, 24/7/365.
|
| Making two hundred million devices of the iPhone's complexity
| and quality is not a trivial matter, and takes tens of
| thousands of skilled (and experienced) workers. Almost all of
| those people are Chinese, in China, subject to Chinese law.
| Apple cannot meaningfully fight Chinese law.
|
| "sit comfortably" is a big stretch here. I imagine it must
| upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you and I. We,
| after all, can speak publicly about how upsetting it is. He
| cannot.
| xp84 wrote:
| > must upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you
| and I. We, after all, can speak publicly about how
| upsetting it is. He cannot.
|
| Yes, he will just have to comfort himself by crying into
| his pillow made of solid gold bars on his California King-
| size bed made of a solid block of hundred dollar bills.
| Poor Tim Apple -- the real victim here.
|
| In seriousness, even if he feels (and is right!) that there
| was nothing Apple could do better, nothing stops him from
| resigning, and then publicly stating that he didn't want to
| be a part of a company that had to collaborate with a
| brutal and inhumane government. He just would rather
| acquire more billions for some reason.
| wiseowise wrote:
| > So sad to watch a gay CEO just sit comfortably and allow
| his company quietly destroy his own "community"
|
| His community are elites and money.
| blahgeek wrote:
| I think it's a common term used to loosely describe the
| geographical region. It's used by many other companies like
| Microsoft [1] and Google [2]
|
| [1]
| https://careers.microsoft.com/v2/global/en/locations/gcr.htm...
|
| [2] https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/intl/en-
| apac/collections/gre...
| perihelions wrote:
| It's a large step up from "it's used for job postings in (or
| closely working with) mainland China", to "it's featured in
| Apple product announcements targeting a global audience of
| millions".
|
| _Has_ it been used in an Apple product announcement before?
| My search is imperfect, but I actually can 't find an example
| (on their /newsroom subdomain).
|
| As recently as two months ago, with the Airphone
| announcement, they weren't doing this:
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/09/introducing-iphone-
| ai... ( _" Introducing iPhone Air, a powerful new iPhone with
| a breakthrough design"_)
|
| > _" The 40W Dynamic Power Adapter with 60W Max will be
| available in Canada,_ China mainland, _Japan, Mexico,_
| Taiwan, _the Philippines, and the U.S. "_
| saaaaaam wrote:
| Apple seems to have been using "Greater China" for a number
| of years, going by the newsroom section of their site.
|
| 2016 - "Users in Greater China will see these new features
| by default on iOS and OS X(r) after updating."
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2016/05/17Apple-Celebrates-
| Ch...
|
| 2019 - "The New Artist of the Week program provides new
| talent with a prominent platform across greater China for
| their work to be discovered."
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/01/HomePod-available-
| in-...
|
| 2020 - "First, I want to recognize Apple's family in
| Greater China. Though the rate of infections has
| dramatically declined, we know COVID-19's effects are still
| being strongly felt. I want to express my deep gratitude to
| our team in China for their determination and spirit. As of
| today, all of our stores in Greater China have reopened."
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/03/apples-
| covid-19-respo...
|
| 2024 - "Today, Apple has 57 stores in Greater China, with
| thousands of team members delivering exceptional service
| and creating magical experiences for customers."
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-jingan-to-
| welco...
| FabHK wrote:
| That might be because that product was only available in
| China mainland, unlike this product which is available in
| Greater China.
| 7moritz7 wrote:
| Greater China is never used to describe a region. It means
| China, Tibet, Macao, Hong Kong and Taiwan according to Apple.
| FabHK wrote:
| It's not a "loose geographical region". It's usually denotes
| precisely the PRC (People's Republic of China, including
| mainland China and the special administrative regions of Hong
| Kong and Macao) together with the ROC (Republic of China,
| usually known as Taiwan).
| groundzeros2015 wrote:
| Not engaging in political fights outside your circle of
| influence is actually good for business and responsible
| leadership.
| reaperducer wrote:
| "Good for business" is not the highest goal a human can
| achieve. Not even close.
|
| Start with "do the right thing" and progress from there.
| groundzeros2015 wrote:
| - What do you desire from professionals you hire?
|
| - is performative naming of countries that hurt your
| relationships "the right thing"
|
| - is business where we achieve our highest goals as humans?
| 1121redblackgo wrote:
| I'd rather we drop the pretense or expectations that
| corporations have anything but one goal. That will help us
| direct our energy to where it can actually be productive.
|
| If the marketplace demands better corporate stewardship,
| and people vote with their wallet, and companies decides to
| change then great, but the corporate ship is only ever
| getting steered in one direction and it's not for noble
| reasons.
| epolanski wrote:
| I really dislike this narrative.
|
| Because if you really want to stick with it, most companies
| should do business in a handful of countries in the world.
|
| I think businesses should mind their own businesses and
| comply with local laws, end of story.
|
| I ain't got no patience for companies quitting country X,
| but not Y.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _if you really want to stick with it, most companies
| should do business in a handful of countries in the
| world._
|
| Why is that a bad thing?
|
| Difficulty: Don't use the trope "maximize shareholder
| value."
| groundzeros2015 wrote:
| Because what you consider moral issues are actually just
| issue prominent in media.
|
| And yes, I want my business to be prudent in earning
| money. Doing harm to people is not effective or prudent.
| Getting in political name callings is also not prudent.
| reaperducer wrote:
| How's that Gulf of America map working out in Mexico?
| epolanski wrote:
| The world changes very fast.
|
| This leads to uncertainty.
|
| Can you imagine McDonald's starting to open/close non-
| stop in countries depending on their status in some
| imaginary ethical ranking?
|
| And who gets to decide that imaginary ranking anyway?
| dist-epoch wrote:
| Apple is the third most valuable company in the world. Not a
| mom and pop grocery store.
|
| Apple CEO meets with the US president.
| jimbokun wrote:
| And the US President does the talking and makes demands.
| Not the other way around.
| vdupras wrote:
| There is no middle ground. Mentioning "Greater China" isn't
| neutral. It's precisely the idea of considering "Greater
| China" as neutral that is _de facto_ siding with the PRC.
|
| No, this is Apple being confident that the USA will drop
| Taiwan and that this and that siding with China is the
| "responsible" thing to do.
| MangoToupe wrote:
| The ROC also believes in one china, including one day
| resuming sovereignty of the mainland, no? I don't see any
| obvious indicator of the concept as siding with the PRC.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > The ROC also believes in one china, including one day
| resuming sovereignty of the mainland, no?
|
| The ROC isn't a one-party state like the PRC and
| different parties in Taiwan have different positions on
| that. The KMT and other parties generally aligned with it
| mostly favor unification under the ROC (or a one-country,
| two-systems end state), the DPP and parties aligned with
| it tend to favor both Taiwanese nationalism and
| independent statehood. The DPP currently holds the
| Presidency and the KMT has the larges legislative bloc,
| so...?
| themgt wrote:
| _Last October, 17 Office Management Specialists (OMSs) from
| posts across broader China convened at U.S. Consulate
| General Shanghai for the third annual Greater China Office
| Management Specialist Workshop. Participants included OMSs
| from Embassy Beijing and consulates across mainland China,
| as well as colleagues from Consulate General Hong Kong and
| the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Taipei. The
| workshop's theme, Reenergizing Your Why, provided
| participants with a forum to discuss common goals,
| motivations, challenges and benefits of their career
| paths._
|
| https://statemag.state.gov/2019/03/mission-china-
| strengthens...
|
| _There are approximately 50 Protestant denominations,
| including Anglican, Baptist, Christian and Missionary
| Alliance, the Church of Christ in China, Lutheran,
| Methodist, Pentecostal, and Seventh-day Adventists. The
| Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong recognizes the pope and
| maintains links to the Vatican; the Bishop of Hong Kong and
| his retired predecessor are the only Catholic cardinals in
| greater China._
|
| https://2021-2025.state.gov/reports/2016-report-on-
| internati...
| wagwang wrote:
| The us dropped taiwan 50 years ago when they removed them
| from the UN
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| History shows without exception that authoritarianism and
| commerce are bedfellows.
|
| I'm unaware of any for profit business interest over all of
| known history that hasn't bent the knee to the desires of an
| authoritarian government
| sneak wrote:
| The CCP has Apple hostage. Their products are (effectively) all
| made there.
|
| China has more control over Apple than the US does, at present.
| They are, of course, in crash override priority mode trying to
| change that, but nowhere else on earth can manufacture (on
| average) 20,000 iPhones per hour, 24/7/365. (TBH it's probably
| closer to 50k per hour in the months up to release day.)
|
| The iPhone is a Chinese product, made by tens of thousands of
| Chinese people, on machines in China, subject to Chinese
| jurisdiction and law. That's an uncomfortable fact for the US
| economy.
|
| If Apple doesn't do exactly what China wants them to do, the
| iPhone does not exist, and Apple as we know it today does not
| exist.
| jajuuka wrote:
| US government has FAR more control over Apple as a company.
| China only has control of the Chinese operations. The
| president is personally beefing with companies and buying
| stakes in them. The tariffs alone could have severely hurt
| Apple, but Apple bent over backwards to appease the
| president. The US government can simply request an app be
| removed and Apple and Google will do it worldwide.
|
| China does not have that power over Apple. China can threaten
| Apple but they have already diversified their manufacturing
| to other countries so China does not have a strangle hold on
| the supply line.
| thenthenthen wrote:
| Apple has to comply by Mainland rules. In addition to the
| supplychain that is slowly getting diversified, all
| Mainland customer data is handled by a co-owned (not sure
| %, or if it is 100% outsourced) datacenter in Guizhou.
| wat10000 wrote:
| They've been using this term for years. It's nothing new and
| nothing unique to Apple.
|
| Don't forget that the "we are the only legitimate Chinese
| government and we own it all" attitude is shared by _both_
| Chinese governments. The PRC claims Taiwan, but Taiwan claims
| all of China as well.
| 1-more wrote:
| Taiwan claimed Mongolia until 2002!
| kossTKR wrote:
| Your comment is the actual prowar propaganda though in my
| europeean eyes.
|
| The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever wars
| to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for an
| ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred thousand
| civilians, - where is China geonociding hundreds a week right
| now? Yeah nowhere, but the US is doing that every decade.
|
| Incredible to see this angle that 'the good guys' are bowing
| down to bad China in this context when you have so much
| poverty, political repression and lack of gay rights, abortion
| etc in many right wing states to straight up hyper right wing
| terrorism targeting vulnerable populations every year.
| NickC25 wrote:
| >The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever
| wars to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for
| an ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred
| thousand civilians.
|
| My man, the US and China are more or less the exact same here
| with the exception of forever wars.
|
| Climate? China pollutes like crazy, and so does the US.
| Colonialism? Maybe not in the same vein but China does engage
| in actions to other nations, such as Macau, Hong Kong, and
| Taiwan that could be classified as colonialism. Fascism? Well
| yeah both countries are pretty much openly fascist right now.
| Support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide of over a
| hundred thousand people? Yeah the US and China are both
| complicit there. In fact, in China, you're speaking about the
| regime itself, with context to the ongoing genocide of Uyghur
| people.
| kossTKR wrote:
| Yes its imperial logic so why arent you saying that to OP's
| bizzare US = peace and gay rights comment?
|
| And the Uyghur repression is no genocide compared to
| Palestine thats complete US misinformation and frankly a
| sinister comparison - the US is much much more violent,
| again look at Palestine, before that literally 30+ wars for
| resources and markets with millions of civilians dead.
|
| Im not naive about China but this US = beacon of human
| rights angle is frankly gross to me.
|
| China has many problems but americans are literally worse
| and you wanting to boycut due to human rights, is this a
| joke?
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| No the chinese people, most of whom do not have a ICE car,
| do not produce those carbon numbers
|
| China is where the west exported pollution to by the fact
| that we pushed most of the deadly and dangerous production
| and manufacturing there.
|
| So all the west does is launder pollution through east and
| southeastern asia.
| rafabulsing wrote:
| How does that excuse China's pollution? They still chose
| to do that, no one forced them to. I do agree that other
| countries are guilty of China's pollution as well, but
| that certainly does not excuse China choice to do that
| pollution laundering for them.
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| It doesn't. The right answer is that both China and the
| West suck and should have worked together to reduce
| consumption rather than accept the waste-surveillance
| capitalism system they both accelerated from 1970-present
|
| It's like trying to reduce prostitution, when society is
| demanding more sex, do you jail the prostitutes or the
| tricks?
|
| If there's no demand for sex workers then there's no sex
| worker market. However if nobody is struggling to
| survive, then theres no supply.
|
| You need to end the desire for consumption in order to
| eliminate authoritarianism
| rafabulsing wrote:
| Right. So what was your point when you replied to a
| commenter saying the US and China are equally bad,
| pollution wise, with
|
| > No the chinese people, most of whom do not have a ICE
| car, do not produce those carbon numbers
|
| That sounds to me like you're saying that China is not as
| bad as the US, because the pollution in China comes in
| some part from laundered pollution from the US. If that's
| not the case, could you explain what you meant?
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| You can't do carbon production attribution the same
| between a consumption and a production nation at the per
| capita level
|
| Someone paying to fly a private jet and a slave putting
| coal into a furnace aren't the same
| rafabulsing wrote:
| I really don't see that as a fair comparison. OP wasn't
| equating individual citizens, they were equating the
| nations as a whole. And China, as a state, definitely
| isn't akin to a slave being forced to do this dirty work.
| sabatonfan wrote:
| I feel like in geo-politics. No country can be good.
|
| Personally, I feel like america still has (had) hope with
| zohran mamdani but after the recent american shutdown, I
| would consider democratic party to be an extension of
| republican party or not doing anything radical except
| bernie,aoc, zohran and some other people.
|
| I feel like America could have a hope to swing whereas china
| doesn't imo.
|
| although, I feel like what is happening is that people made
| (short term?) decisions earlier generations earlier which
| lead us to where we are today where any country over-all
| needs a radical change as both europe and america and a lot
| of other countries need to radicalize what they are doing to
| give hope to the youngsters
|
| Personally I feel like we shouldn't care much about US or
| chinese products but rather the ideologies of the product
| creators if we are worried about things and I think this is
| one of the reasons I love open source so much.
| kossTKR wrote:
| Hope to swing? The US has killed many more people in wars
| of conquest than China in the last 50 years. So i really
| see both as problematic but the US is still much more
| violent geopolitically. Ie worse in my eyes, Israels latest
| genocide being a creszendo on an already horrible track
| record.
| graeme wrote:
| >where is China geonociding hundreds a week right now?
|
| Xinjiang. They put people in camps and take extensive efforts
| to prevent births, to eliminate the Uighur population over
| time.
| kossTKR wrote:
| Yeah i've looked into it and its bad still much much less
| violent than the over 100.000 civilians, kids and mothers
| killed in Palestine so whats up with this weird focus when
| you guys are littersally killing muslims by the thousands
| every other year with no remorse?
|
| Do you condemn Israel? And if not - then what even is this
| concern of yours? Both are bad but Israel is much worse
| according to litterally all major NGOs.
|
| Seriously do you condemn US imperialism and the genocide in
| Gaza too?
| graeme wrote:
| I didn't condemn or approve of anyone, I just answered
| your question. You're making a lot of assumptions.
|
| You're focussing exclusively on violence. If Israel
| adopted China's Xinjiang methods they would:
|
| 1. Take direct administrative control over Gaza
|
| 2. Place any man even remotely linked to violence or
| Islam in a prison camp and use them as prison labour to
| produce products
|
| 3. Monitor all women and prevent them from having births
|
| But, violence would go down. In Xinjiang the Muslim
| population is shrinking as the authorities prevent
| reproduction.
|
| Following your logic you are saying you would find this
| less objectionable. Is that actually the case? I suspect
| not.
|
| I write this to hopefully expand your view that more than
| one situation can be objectionable, that not everyone is
| American or Israeli and it is possible to analyze a
| situation on its own merits and say "huh that's bad".
|
| China goes to great lengths to minimize actual violence,
| which minimizes attention, which lets them focus on
| shrinking the population of Uighurs. I doubt Israel could
| actually do this in Gaza, but I think it would be worse
| if they did.
| kossTKR wrote:
| So you don't condemn israels ethnic cleansing but are
| very worried about muslim minorities in China that are
| repressed?
|
| I am totally on board condemning China, but you aren't
| with Israel and that says it all - and i don't believe
| you actually are concerned about this muslim minority if
| you aren't at least as horrified by Israeli actual
| warcrimes and an ongoing genocide.
|
| They already monitor everyone, they already control all
| markets they dont just prevent births they kill kids in
| an ethnic cleansing according to experts at the ICC,
| Amnesty International, Doctors without Borders and many
| others.
|
| Again, unfathomable to me that you can list "they prevent
| births" as worse than murdering over 40.000 kids in a few
| years in Gaza and 100.000 civilians according to the
| newest numbers - that's by all measures worse than what
| China's doing and why every respectable NGO and expert
| groups are talking about Israel and not the Uyghurs at
| the moment.
|
| Why are you not condemning Israels/US ethnic cleansing
| when i'm condemning chinas actions on multiple fronts?
| DustinEchoes wrote:
| I sometimes wonder what the comments will look like here when
| China invades/blockades Taiwan, and I suspect they will look
| a lot like this. Lots of US whataboutism. Note that the OP
| doesn't mention the US at all.
| yeahforsureman wrote:
| Looks like you almost have this habit of explaining/talking
| about things 'as a European', particularly when bringing up
| USA in the context of international relations like now...
|
| I guess it's OK -- I'm European too, for example -- but it
| does seem like you're doing it to imply that your views are
| somehow (at least relatively more) popular among, or
| representative of, well, Europeans. But now that we're making
| such massive generalisations, I'd claim that well-educated
| English-speaking Europeans are often likelier to be more
| familiar with the views and internal debates among
| _Americans_ than those of many of their fellow Europeans, and
| that you 're probably no exception.
|
| As for your comment, had you not addressed it to 'you
| Americans', I'd be hard-pressed to tell it apart from a
| pretty standard-issue American Left (or 'Progressive') rant,
| perhaps somewhere from the younger and more identitarian part
| of that crowd, for example (despite some of the quasi-tankie
| undertones). While I'll admit that scoffing at things like
| pro-life policies and/or American poverty is certainly easier
| and more common throughout the political spectra in (Western)
| Europe, I'd say your cringe-inducing bothsidesism with USA
| and China falls closer to the crackpot left camp in Europe as
| well.
|
| Europe contains multitudes, and undoubtedly for some but not
| all, up until now at least, it has been a bit too easy to
| comfortably observe and judge things for so long as a world-
| political bystander from under the US nuclear umbrella,
| typically further from the Russian border too -- whether you
| were an insular French with casual contempt for all things
| 'Yankee', a German atomic-phobic pacifist (or worse, a far-
| right, Pro-Putin knuckle dragger) from that 'European
| powerhouse' heated with Russian non-renewables, or even a
| Swede from the world's leading moral superpower, or something
| like that, anyway... ;)
| nimbius wrote:
| of the 193 members of the UN, only 12 (6%) recognize Taiwan as
| a country.
|
| the Kuomintang lost the war. its effectively the same as if the
| confederacy retreated to the Florida keys and China maintained
| a policy of deliberate ambiguity.
| sunnyps wrote:
| The population of Taiwan is 23 million. The population of
| Florida Keys is 82000. Not the same.
| 45764986 wrote:
| Why is UN recognition the metric here and not, like, idk the
| fact that Taiwan is a liberal democracy with the rule of law
| and freedom of speech and not a hypercapitalist dictatorship
| that disappears dissidents?
| signatoremo wrote:
| Nothing pro war about it. Read history books instead of making
| assumptions. It is referring to the mainland, Taiwan, Hong
| Kong, Macau as a whole. It became popular with the rise of
| China. Try any business newspaper in the 90s. It is less
| relevant now as Hong Kong and Macau are now part of China.
|
| It isn't unlike Benelux, or Scandinavia, or Iberian, or Balkan,
| or Gulf countries.
| GaggiX wrote:
| >It isn't unlike Benelux, or Scandinavia, or Iberian, or
| Balkan, or Gulf countries.
|
| Greater Israel, Greater Italy, Greater Germanic Reich oh wait
| I lost the point, I guess any connections to irredentism are
| purely coincidental.
| signatoremo wrote:
| When was the last time Greater Italy being used? Right.
|
| From the book "The Concept of "Greater China": Themes,
| Variations and Reservation":
|
| _The world is suddenly talking about the emergence of
| "Greater China." The term has appeared in the headlines of
| major newspapers and magazines, has been the topic of
| conferences sponsored by prominent think-tanks, and is now
| the theme of a special issue of the world 's leading
| journal of Chinese affairs. It thus joins other phrases -
| "the new world order," "the end of history," "the Pacific
| Century" and the "clash of civilizations" - as part of the
| trendiest vocabulary used in discussions of contemporary
| global affairs._
|
| https://doi.org/10.1017/S030574100003229X
|
| "Pro war" you say?
| GaggiX wrote:
| Yeah I think you may have understood my point. If you
| don't like Greater Italy, replace it with Greater
| Netherlands, it's much more relevant today.
|
| EDIT: it would be cool if you add "EDIT" when editing a
| comment or maybe think for moment before posting so that
| I don't reply to a different comment. Every time I reload
| the page I see a different comment, it's pretty funny
| honestly.
| signatoremo wrote:
| My edit didn't change what I wanted to say.
|
| And I don't understand your point. Greater China
| continues to be used today, like it's been in the last 30
| years. Who get to decide it's relevant or not? UN?
| GaggiX wrote:
| My point is very simple: "Greater _Nation_ " has been
| used countless times throughout history to describe
| irredentist movements. Given the political status between
| the PCR and the ROC, it's very reasonable to think that
| the term has negative connotations.
| signatoremo wrote:
| GP called the term "pro war". That's what I object. I
| thought it was very clear?
|
| As for "negative connotations", you are entitled to your
| opinion, but that isn't commonly shared, judging from how
| often it's being used. I'm sure there are people in
| Finland who don't like being called Scandinavian, given
| their distinct culture and language compared to other
| Scandinavian countries. That doesn't mean it is
| unreasonable for someone to call them that.
| GaggiX wrote:
| If you're referring to Pan-Scandinavism, there was never
| a serious proposal to conquer Finland. In fact, the
| opposite is true: Sweden sent soldiers to help Finland
| during World Wars I and II, making no attempt to annex
| the country. I have no idea how "Scandinavia" could
| possibly be compared to the many "Greater _Nation_ " out
| there. Maybe you should take your own advice and read
| some history books as your example is fundamentally
| different.
| signatoremo wrote:
| You are right that was a bad example. I was thinking
| Nordic, not Scandinavia, but no one in Finland would
| object to that label.
| thenthenthen wrote:
| It is common to use it for urban areas, cities, like
| Greater London.
| perihelions wrote:
| Wikipedia tracks a very long list of "Greater $wherevers"
| in irredentist or pan-nationalist movements:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Pan-
| nationalist_conce... ( _" Template:Pan-
| nationalist_concepts"_)
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| Taiwan still claims the rest of mainland China so maybe it's a
| reference to that.
| kwar13 wrote:
| Thanks for pointing this out.
| mvkel wrote:
| Since 2021, Tim Cook has repeatedly quoted the old IBM CEO's
| line "world peace through world trade."
|
| This was the same line IBM used to protect their huge business
| with... wait for it... Nazi Germany
| mvkel wrote:
| It is unfortunate that iPhones cannot be made anywhere else in
| the world. No other country has the right tooling, workforce,
| or skill set, at that volume.
|
| China made a strategic decision to go deep there, and the rest
| of the world decided it was post-industrial
| theturtle32 wrote:
| Today I heard the word "Irredentist" for the first time as I'm
| about to turn 42.
| hmry wrote:
| Me too. I've always just heard that kind of thing called
| "imperialist". But "irredentist" seems more precise.
| 45764986 wrote:
| Friend, this criticism has been relevant since 1998.
|
| https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-criticised-for-dumping-t...
| ufmace wrote:
| "Pro-war" seems like an odd assertion here. They're recognizing
| the status quo in a reasonably neutral way, which seems anti-
| war to me.
|
| It seems like you're advocating for Western powers to take a
| position, using either soft or hard power, on a war that
| already ended many decades ago. Sounds quite a bit like
| imperialism to me, and pretty far from being anti-war.
|
| An anti-war position, at least from the perspective of a
| Westerner and Western companies, is more like, you guys lost,
| suck it up and stop asking us to intervene on your behalf.
| hmry wrote:
| I don't really see how "Greater China" is more neutral than
| "Mainland China and Taiwan" which is the phrasing they
| previously used.
| colejhudson wrote:
| The recognition of any "status quo" is political.
|
| Push back, as in this thread, can change which hierarchies
| are accepted and which aren't.
|
| In particular, the use of "Greater China" normalizes
| corporate acquiescence to Beijing's explicitly revisionist
| policy preferences.
|
| Taiwan is an independent nation. It isn't lost. And all free
| nations should intervene whenever the right to self-
| determination of another is threatened.
|
| Say hi to the chairman for me.
| skinnymuch wrote:
| Cool. Good to see more correct language used in a western and
| white supremacist world.
|
| It's not Lebensraum at all. Any Nazi-esque stuff is NATO, the
| west, etc.
|
| If the Confederates were in Hawaii or Puerto Rico, it would be
| the status quo to want it to be a part of the US again.
|
| The other funny thing about bringing Nazis up is that the Nazis
| were heavily influenced by American expansion and depravity.
|
| Meanwhile China's militarily has done almost nothing in the
| past century while western military and troops have been
| everywhere in the world.
| dang wrote:
| " _Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents._ "
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| perihelions wrote:
| With respect, this topic is of immense interest and
| significance to a large number of us on HN. The many engaged
| and enthusiastic responses attest to that.
|
| Is it off-topic to talk about the adversarial role of tech
| companies in a potential war, one that would be devastating
| to many of us? About the entanglements of their supply
| chains? Have I truly, in your judgement, derailed this thread
| away from curious discussion? Because, this subthread looks
| to me comparatively thoughtful (if mildly heated), while the
| more narrowly-construed topic of discussion is a polyester
| fashion accessory.
|
| To paraphrase Anakin Skywalker: "from my point of view, it's
| the iPhone Pocket that's generic and uncurious".
| dang wrote:
| It's obviously off topic and obviously nationalistic
| flamebait. Those are the high-order bits here. Adding
| provocations like "lebensraum" makes this even more of an
| obvious call.
|
| > Have I truly, in your judgement, derailed this thread
| away from curious discussion?
|
| For sure. A subthread like this usually has a lot of
| activation energy because the (off) topic is sensational
| and divisive, but that's not the same thing as curious
| conversation. Replacing less sensational/divisive topics
| with more sensational/divisive ones is the essence of the
| "generic tangent", which HN's guidelines ask users to avoid
| for good reason.
|
| If the OP isn't so interesting, the solution is to find
| other threads that are interesting, not turn this one into
| a flamewar (or potential flamewar) about something else.
| a_ba wrote:
| Wasn't Borat wearing one of those like 20years ago?
| karel-3d wrote:
| welcome back, iPod socks.
| parsimo2010 wrote:
| I'm so glad there are some people willing to pay over $200 for "a
| piece of cloth" which I assume is a translation issue but it
| sounds uninspired- who knew your inspiration for a bag could be
| the material that most bags are made of?
|
| I especially like how it's sized to fit almost any iPhone ever
| made. So not only are you getting a bag made of cloth, for over
| $200 it's not even custom fitted!
|
| Anyway, this product isn't for me. I suppose enough other people
| will buy it.
|
| Edit: I suppose the short version is under $200 but my sentiment
| hasn't changed. Perhaps I'm even more cranky now that increasing
| the length of the strap costs $80. That's the same level of rip-
| off that Apple charges for increased SSD storage on their Macs.
| craftkiller wrote:
| I bought my current phone for $94 brand new. It can communicate
| with other devices over the air through literal magic. It has
| 2.5 million tiny lights, each independently controlled to be
| any color I want. It knows where I am anywhere on the planet.
| Through it, I can access an essentially infinite pool of
| entertainment, hail life-saving emergency services, perform
| monetary transactions, acquire food, etc.
|
| This piece of cloth is twice the price and it can't even make
| phone calls.
| kulahan wrote:
| Surely you understand things like economies of scale, surplus
| inventories, etc.?
|
| Not to mention, "number of lights" or "ability to communicate
| through the air" has no real bearing on its value, _clearly_.
| downrightmike wrote:
| Literally not magic, but millions of patents and innovations
| that we understand down to the quantum level.
|
| That's why the Romans could never make huge advances, they
| didn't understand the fundamentals. They knew using coal to
| make swords gave them better, harder edges, but they found it
| by raw accident, not knowing that the iron and carbon were
| combining atomically.
| GaryNumanVevo wrote:
| This is like complaining about the $400 Hermes band. The
| "iPhone Pocket" is obviously a luxury item from a high end
| designer, of course it's going to be expensive.
| parsimo2010 wrote:
| Oh, I think those are ridiculous too, but they aren't quite
| the same thing. All of Apple's Hermes bands have "Hermes" in
| the name: https://www.apple.com/shop/watch/bands/apple-watch-
| herm%C3%A...
|
| With this you don't even get the designer in the name.
|
| Plus, I can see spending money for things that are nicer or
| specially designed. There is a huge quality difference
| between a Loungefly bag made out of synthetic material and a
| Coach bag of leather (or even Louis Vuitton, although that is
| a big step up in price). But this iPhone bag isn't that- 3D
| knitting isn't even that special, you could just as easily
| put a cheap Android phone in this bag, and I don't think it's
| going to be any more durable than a moderately priced
| crossbody or small purse.
| jeremya wrote:
| It's a thneed!
| low_tech_punk wrote:
| A slingshot, A blind fold, A pocket -- Steve Jobs never said
| that.
| HardwareLust wrote:
| Apple's been heading down the toilet since Cook took over, now
| they've morphed into a parody of themselves.
| yapyap wrote:
| April fools came early for 2026
| rsynnott wrote:
| Finally, Apple have invented the bag.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| No, Apple has never had to be the first to invent. They wait,
| and they don't release until they get it right. /s
| booleanbetrayal wrote:
| The next product Apple will unveil will be an iPhone case made of
| human fingernails from those who have tried to climb this
| K-shaped economic ladder and failed. It'll be a steal at only
| $500 a pop.
| sd9 wrote:
| I do not mean to be crass, but some of the ones that are carrying
| an iPhone bear more than a passing resemblance to a human vagina.
| butz wrote:
| How about making phone that fits into a normal pocket?
| ungreased0675 wrote:
| I was hoping this would be the announcement of a mini iPhone.
|
| Instead they're selling larger pockets because normal pockets
| aren't big enough for large phones.
| mohsen1 wrote:
| "3D-knitted"
|
| Do others knit in the 2-dimensional space?
| xdennis wrote:
| Should have said 4D, because it exists in the space-time
| continuum.
| fennecfoxy wrote:
| Ha, I bet the muggers/phone thieves will have a field day.
|
| I find it interesting that anybody is that surprised. Remember,
| this is the company that overcharges for SSDs (no they're not
| magical super SSDs that only Apple can make)/extra ram.
|
| They charged $1000 for a monitor stand that's pretty much just a
| thin block of aluminium.
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| I guess it works as a really expensive lasso/strangulation
| device.
|
| I assume the sort of person who buys this walks from the
| chauffeured car door to the door, not down a regular high
| street.
| mikestew wrote:
| I was kinda hoping for new HomePods today, if rumors are to be
| believed, but instead I get this.
| haunter wrote:
| $5 on Aliexpress next week
| jtc-hn wrote:
| Back when Steve Jobs was at Next, Apple released the Duo Dock.
| Instead of plugging your laptop into a docking station, you put
| it in a slot like a giant 3.5" floppy. It was different, sure,
| but I still don't know what design problem it solved.
|
| This is today's Duo Dock, isn't it?
| bamboozled wrote:
| I'd love to out my laptop into a slit and take it out later ?
| This "bag" though seems like an insult considered I still liked
| the smaller iPhones.
| munificent wrote:
| > I still don't know what design problem it solved.
|
| It supported a CRT so you could have your laptop under your
| display without needing to spend desktop space for a laptop off
| to the side.
| Havoc wrote:
| Is this intended as a serious product? Can't quite tell
| bamboozled wrote:
| dear god, this is stupid...
| bunderbunder wrote:
| Every knitter on the planet is simultaneously thinking, "$150 for
| a rib stitch tube with a slit that I could make a clone of in one
| sitting? Dang."
| nusl wrote:
| This pattern repeats itself in "high" fashion quite a lot.
| Simple, ridiculous things that are relatively trivial to make,
| yet massively expensive due to hype/brand/fomo. I guess it
| wouldn't exist if people didn't pay for it, but it also shows
| how people don't value craftsmanship so much as status symbols.
|
| Show them two identical products, one from Apple, one from
| Auntie down the street, and they'll pick Apple and tell you the
| other is inferior.
| bunderbunder wrote:
| I'm sure theirs is better than anything I could make myself
| in all sorts of little ways. I'm just not sure it would be
| $140 better.
|
| On the other hand, if I did make one for myself (which I
| won't - one purse is enough) it would probably have a 2-color
| brioche stitch or something like that for more visual
| interest.
| EGreg wrote:
| I clicked hoping they're making a small iPhone again like the SE
| was.
|
| I look around at people with the smaller phone and wish we had a
| newer model. Whatever happened to this?
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0gtsjfy7E
|
| The small iPhone is like the Cadillac Ciel. So many would buy it
| if they could, but they can't so they won't.
| maxfurman wrote:
| The iPhone Pocket is a pocket for your iPhone and not a pocket-
| sized iPhone??? Unbelievable. So disappointing.
| balls187 wrote:
| Not for me.
|
| But my partner is a fashion designer and was just this morning
| working through studying 3D knitting technique.
|
| So I wonder if this will lead to more 3D knitted products.
| bz_bz_bz wrote:
| An Apple Thneed
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| Formerly known as a "purse".
| Lu2025 wrote:
| They could just make a device that fits in a regular pocket. Most
| phones are too big now.
| pcdoodle wrote:
| Wow, that's a little tone deaf. I was hoping for a small iPhone,
| They're so big now we make dedicated bags... F
| atlex2 wrote:
| I built some of the first apps on the App Store. Top twenty
| navigation app. Won an ADA.
|
| Still, my pocket is my iPhone pocket.
|
| Until they release something the size of the X or smaller, I'm
| sticking with my iPhone 13 Mini or eventually going for a Razr
| style Android.
|
| Every year they release something, I go check it out. My love for
| Apple dies a bit more.
| jtrn wrote:
| Makes me think og Borat.
| foofoo12 wrote:
| > beautiful way to wear and carry
|
| I strongly disagree with that statement.
| titusjohnson wrote:
| I take the pants that have insufficient pockets to a tailor, and
| ask them to extend the depth of the phone pocket. You can even
| ask them to do the extension in phone size if you want to
| restrict its movement in your pocket. On average I've needed
| about a 3" extension which both restricts lateral phone movement,
| and also carries it low enough on my thigh that the phone doesn't
| pinch into my hip when I sit down.
|
| $30 or so later you'll have an integrated Pholster and don't have
| to carry another thing around with you. For $200 you should be
| able to update all the pants you have that lack a proper pocket.
| This is also an incredibly easy thing to sew yourself, by hand,
| while you watch TV. $30 for a tailor to do the first pair to give
| you a template to follow, $50 at a craft store will get you some
| decent scissors, needle, thread, and a yard of whatever material
| you like. You'll butcher the first pair of pants, but the second,
| will be better and the third will be perfect.
| davidhunter wrote:
| Top of the market
| jordemort wrote:
| I clicked hoping for a smaller iPhone and I'm very disappointed
| that it's just a sock to stuff my current oversized one into
| Aeolun wrote:
| Bwuh, I thought they had a new name for a smaller iPhone, but
| it's just a bag.
| dysoco wrote:
| Did a pickpocket design this?
| midtake wrote:
| Worst of all is that it's polyester, basically a piece of
| plastic. I hope this product fails just because of that.
| drewchew wrote:
| Y'all remember iPod Socks?
| raffael_de wrote:
| _The CookSleeve(tm)_
| mlmonkey wrote:
| I thought this satire at first.
|
| Steve would have fired everyone involved in this stupidity.
| longtimelistnr wrote:
| Steve was a noted fan of Issey Miyake
| NickC25 wrote:
| Wait this thing is like $150? It's got all of like $2 worth of
| yarn and plastic.
|
| A sucker is born every minute, clearly.
| thebruce87m wrote:
| And an iPhone is just made out of stuff dug up from the ground.
| bigyabai wrote:
| I've seen the leaked BOMs, it might as well be with the
| margins they command.
| epolanski wrote:
| I thought this was an april fools.
| varjag wrote:
| Phone tote bag that goes hard with world's thinnest phone.
| mvkel wrote:
| Apple should experience the same surge of collective excitement
| everyone felt when they first saw the headline "iPhone Pocket,"
| followed by the crushing disappointment of discovering it's just
| a grocery bag for your iPhone.
| ayaros wrote:
| Like many, I was disappointed this wasn't a new iPhone mini.
|
| $30 for a pack of six iPod socks always seemed like a horrible
| value to me in the mid-2000s. I'm not denying they were fun and
| whimsical, but as cases, they didn't protect your iPod or allow
| you to use it while inside them. It felt like a rip-off two
| decades ago, and these are _30-46_ times more expensive _per-
| sock._
|
| I know Apple does things like this to position themselves as a
| luxury brand and as a shareholder I still do not buy the idea
| stunts like these are what's best for the company. At best, a
| small segment of the target demographic will see this as a
| curiosity at the cost of further damage to Apple's reputation.
| People will see this as further proof Apple is more concerned
| with products and services which rip off their customers and
| developers, as opposed to providing real value.
|
| I will be the first to welcome Apple bringing back some semblance
| of fun and whimsy into their product line-up, and this is not the
| way to do it.
| pandemic_region wrote:
| A smaller phone just means you'll spend less time on it. That's
| not a desirable outcome for anyone except the customer.
| otikik wrote:
| $229.95
| ryanolsonx wrote:
| OMG
| jl6 wrote:
| That's a nice piece of cloth. I would worry about it getting
| damaged. I wonder if they will sell a case for it.
| niek_pas wrote:
| I wonder if it supports the $19 Polishing Cloth
| (https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mw693am/a/polishing-cloth).
| gloosx wrote:
| Wow did they really make it so you can't just pick-up and use the
| screen?
|
| There are thousands of sub 10$ case strap-attachments which make
| it easy to both use and not drop your phone while wearing it
| around your neck.
|
| Imagine milking your phone out of _this_ every time there is a
| notification... What a joke
| blfr wrote:
| Unironically utterly brilliant.
|
| I don't have an iPhone and will not get one at least until Google
| kills ReVanced, nor would I ever get a sock for my phone but wow,
| I fully expect this to be hit. Not only in this collaboration, it
| will spawn a thousand copies as well.
|
| Everything about this is perfect. The Japanese origin, the idea,
| high tech manufacturing (single cloth, 3d knitted, whatever), the
| cheap material, the timing... I am in awe. The kind of shock and
| awe that militaries aim to deliver.
|
| Apple has ingested a million tiny current trends of
| craftsmanship, story telling, accessorizing, ground them into
| this magnificent triumph of corporate capitalism. This is why
| commies never even stood a chance.
| api wrote:
| Aww. I was hoping for a super mini flip or foldable low-power
| minimalist iPhone, but it's another weird Apple hipster fashion
| accessory. Very disappointing.
| diddid wrote:
| I had to check the calendar to see if it was April 1. If Apple
| can sell a sock to put your iPhone in for 150 bucks... I wish I
| had the skills for that.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| They're hardly the only retailer that successfully markets
| overpriced accessories.
| 999900000999 wrote:
| I just can't.
|
| This is 150$ and probably cost 5 to 10$ to make.
|
| You can ask a traditional crafts person in most the world to
| make you a custom one with traditional patterns and it would be
| significantly better. Then they can feed their family for a
| least a week.
|
| Apple isn't the only one who can make a giant sock!
| getpokedagain wrote:
| But its like 3D! Totally worth it when other objects are
| totally not!
| intrasight wrote:
| I think the discussion is missing the real purpose of this
| (and which can't be achieved by other vendors) which is to
| normalize carrying your phone in a way that it's recording
| without your holding it in your hand to make it obvious that
| you're recording.
| jitl wrote:
| phone strap is not a newly invented product category
| https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Cell-Phone-Lanyards-
| Wris...
| intrasight wrote:
| This Apple product is not a phone strap and those Amazon
| products are not Apple products
| estimator7292 wrote:
| Cats are not dogs.
|
| Checkmate.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Wait until you see what a bag from Coach costs.
| jama211 wrote:
| I feel like you've missed the forest for the trees here
| criddell wrote:
| Apple selling this validates the idea. Those traditional
| crafts people now have a bigger market to sell their unique
| variations into.
| bn-l wrote:
| It's a very long sock though. And it's, ahhh... "3D woven"
| hopelite wrote:
| Am I the only one who feels that Mt. BS is getting way too
| high?
| ebbi wrote:
| Rarely do items (and their prices) make sense in fashion - but
| people still buy it by the droves.
|
| All it will take is some celebrity placements with the iPhone
| Pocket and people will lap it up.
| twobitshifter wrote:
| Hey, I don't know about you, but that seems like a screaming
| deal for a design that drew inspiration from the concept of "a
| piece of cloth"
| jama211 wrote:
| It's just a small collab, who cares
| exsss wrote:
| Who is the target group for this?
| duxup wrote:
| Stylistically it looks like something that goes with a very
| specific style of clothing and only that.
| jedberg wrote:
| When I saw this I thought it was April 1st for a moment.
| icar wrote:
| I would prefer if we flipped it, "Pocket iPhone", and got an
| iPhone that fit in a normal pocket.
| drusepth wrote:
| Saw this earlier today and legitimately thought it was satire,
| especially when I heard the price. Turns out it's real?
| CIPHERSTONE wrote:
| And the ghost of Steve Jobs Wept...
| coolThingsFirst wrote:
| Cringe.
|
| "Crafted in Japan, iPhone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted
| construction that is the result of research and development
| carried out at ISSEY MIYAKE."
|
| How would a 2d knitted construction look like? Lmfao.
| alex_zhezherov wrote:
| lol 230$ for a sock ..
| rglover wrote:
| If you listen closely, you can hear Taps playing.
| radicality wrote:
| > iPhone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted construction
|
| What does that mean? What would be an example of 2D knitted
| construction ?
| RyanOD wrote:
| Imagine being the copywriters tasked with making this sound
| cool.
| ramshanker wrote:
| This will make theft so much easier as compared to normal trouser
| pocket. It's more of a style thing I guess.
| choult wrote:
| Shark jumped.
| leoh wrote:
| Reminds me of the thong Borat wears.
| heratyian wrote:
| hoping for game boy pocket...
| non_obsolete wrote:
| Apple Mankini by Borat.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Hacker news is probably not Apple's core audience for this
| product.
|
| I recently saw in Southeast Asia everybody had their phone with a
| strap going around their neck. Which is why Apple made a first
| party case recently that does this. Apple's making products to
| cater towards international trends. People paying a lot of money
| for a fabric product is not unheard of, simply take a walk around
| the nicer mall in your area with multi-thousand dollar handbags
| as a demonstration.
| solatic wrote:
| Precisely.
|
| People don't need to carry wallets anymore. No cash, no
| physical plastic credit card. It's little surprise that the
| purse will trend smaller as people need to carry less and less
| inside it.
|
| Apple is hitting a revenue growth plateau, which means the time
| has come to expand into adjacent categories. In a world where
| people put their phones into purses, why not the purse? And at
| a Apple-brand price point to match?
| bigyabai wrote:
| Apple is a tech company. Their last two tech products (Vision
| Pro and iPhone Air) were colossal and unexpected failures. The
| industry is holding it's breath.
|
| We already know Apple can manufacture lifestyle products and
| market fashion to fashionable people - that's not the issue.
| We're starting to turn the corner on Apple's _true_ desire to
| stop competing. They can 't innovate like they used to with the
| iPad and the Apple Watch; the "new" Apple products today are
| expensive alternatives to superior products. Apple's most-
| lucrative investments are turning out to be the App Store and
| iCloud, software investments that have nothing to do with their
| hardware quality. So we're now in the awkward position of
| getting precisely zero innovative hardware and tons of useless
| and expensive bric-a-brak like iPhone Pockets and iPad laptop-
| cases to convince people the ecosystem doesn't need to compete
| to be fun.
|
| On the one hand, yes, I am not the target audience for this in
| the same way I would ignore the Apple CPAP machine. On the
| other hand, this is setting a new low for Apple that hadn't
| been challenged since the polishing cloth debacle. Nothing here
| is innovative and it seems to confirm the industry's broader
| suspicion that Apple's business model is bankrupt.
| Razengan wrote:
| Ah this year's "Apple is dOoMeD"~ get yours in while November
| lasts!
| bigyabai wrote:
| Apple is doomed. Tim Cook cannot lead; he succumbed to
| advertisements, subscriptions and surveillance.
|
| Sour grapes, but hardly unpredictable.
| pram wrote:
| Someone wasn't around for iPod socks!
| bigyabai wrote:
| The iPod sock was a $30 joke. The iPhone Pocket _starts_ at
| $149.99.
|
| If there's any punch-line here, you're going to have to
| help me see it. Even for Apple, it's pathetic.
| jhatemyjob wrote:
| Yeah, most Americans don't understand how ubiquitous this is in
| Asia. I doubt this will catch on in America because of how
| unsafe the cities are. I would never wear this in New York but
| I definitely would in Tokyo
| diffeomorphism wrote:
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth,"
|
| This is satire, right?
| iJohnDoe wrote:
| April fools? $150 and $230?
| reubenswartz wrote:
| </NotTheOnion>!
| Isamu wrote:
| Issey Miyake was the most interesting high end clothing designer,
| many of his high fashion designs didn't sync with any trends from
| other fashion designers, they were instead highly sculptural and
| informed by art rather than design.
|
| He was interested in fashion enabled by technology, and there is
| the long standing connection between him and Steve Jobs.
|
| It is okay to dismiss high fashion brands that don't suit your
| needs, this is a niche thing that doesn't appeal to everyone. It
| makes sense as a part of the Apple product portfolio that is
| fashion conscious.
| AbraKdabra wrote:
| Please tell me this is an out of season April fools joke...
| daemonologist wrote:
| The is the ultimate Rincewind accessory - you can put a half-
| brick in it and wallop people, without having to take off one of
| your socks. In a pinch you can even just wallop people with your
| phone, if no bricks are to hand.
| Alir3z4 wrote:
| I thought it's a joke and someone made a satire website or
| something.
|
| The ridiculous part is, people will buy this.
| martini333 wrote:
| Hey guys, you could like just not buy it.
| jsheard wrote:
| Apple releases a baffling knitted thing every 20 years. What
| wonders will 2045 bring?
| tantalor wrote:
| The iPhone Pocket is not even the first baffling knitted thing
| (BKT) they released this year.
|
| That award would go to the "Dual Knit Band"
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/10/apple-vision-pro-upgr...
| jsheard wrote:
| Nah I'll give them credit for that one, the dual knit band is
| what the Vision Pro should have shipped with in the first
| place. The original designs were the baffling ones, you had
| to choose between a fancy knitted band without any top
| support, or a cheap band with top support, but now you get
| the best of both in one. Which you really want for such a
| heavy headset.
| derefr wrote:
| I don't think it's baffling; the original band was just
| Apple making the same kind of fumble that Coke made with
| New Coke: they assumed that because something is well-
| received in quick one-time demos, that means that people
| will also like it over longer exposures.
|
| If you don't know the backstory: New Coke had a sweeter
| formula than Coke Classic. And, as the original "Pepsi
| challenge" [1975] demonstrated a decade prior to New Coke
| [1985], people tend to prefer a sweeter drink when they're
| only being given a 15ml sip of it. New Coke's initial user
| testing was essentially a "New Coke challenge" -- giving
| people 15ml sips of Coke Classic vs New Coke -- and this
| led them to believe that this sweeter formula would be
| popular. But as demonstrated by later attempted
| replications of the "Pepsi challenge", the preference for
| sweeter drinks goes away when people get a full mouthful of
| the beverage; let alone when they're handed a full glass to
| drink as they please. It never seemingly occurred to Coke
| to do another round of "full-scale" testing, with testers
| being given full glasses of New Coke to drink (perhaps with
| ice; perhaps with food; perhaps chilled, perhaps warm...
| etc), before green-lighting the formula for production.
|
| Same thing seemed to happen to Apple with the Vision Pro's
| original band. You don't tend to notice the strain of
| headset's weight pressing down onto your face _at first_ ;
| it only becomes apparent after ~10-15 minutes of use. It
| was likely that both their user-testing sessions, and their
| shareholder demo sessions, were short. (The final retail
| demo they walk you through is certainly short!)
|
| You wouldn't think that this could be true of the Vision
| Pro, because it was a very-clearly dogfooded product: Apple
| made this thing first-and-foremost _for Apple engineers_ ,
| to allow their hardware design teams to work remotely
| during COVID. (That's why they shipped a "Pro" SKU first;
| the "Pro" SKU was what they _needed_.) Many of those same
| engineers were likely wearing prototypes of the Vision Pro
| _to design later revisions of the Vision Pro_.
|
| My guess, though, is that early revisions didn't have all
| of visionOS (especially the computer-interaction parts)
| finished yet; and therefore, the Vision Pro was, at the
| time, really just serving as a peripheral for viewing of
| spatially-AR-embedded 3D objects (i.e. their hardware
| prototypes). The workflow likely looked like: edit and
| collaborate in a CAD program, with the headset off; save
| their changes; push the 3D model to the headset; pop the
| headset on; check out their changes ("do a walk around" of
| the object); take the headset back off; and go back to
| editing/collaborating on their computer.
|
| Obviously, the original band would have worked just fine
| for that workflow!
| ginko wrote:
| Are you saying they released a knitted thing in 1984?
| 9rx wrote:
| Yes, Apple released knitted shirts in 1984 with the launch of
| the Macintosh.
| wat10000 wrote:
| But not, I think, shirts _for_ the Macintosh. Although I 'm
| sure we can all agree that they should have.
| xg15 wrote:
| The Genius Cap - the world's first knitted cap with built-in
| EEG electrodes and Neuralink inductors?
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Neuralink _injectors_.
| xg15 wrote:
| Ah, or like that. I was thinking about some kind of
| hypothetical wireless power or communication.
| mceachen wrote:
| They _could_ make a small iphone if they wanted to:
|
| https://www.phonearena.com/phones/size/Apple-iPhone-Air,Appl...
| ge96 wrote:
| My prediction this will fail, it's like a target for people to
| steal
| matthewtovbin wrote:
| Sweet! Pocket and sling - two in one!
| opengrass wrote:
| Worth $5
| aio2 wrote:
| its literally a pussy to stick your phone in lmao
| null3cksor wrote:
| Is this a joke?
| BuckRogers wrote:
| My iPhone 12 mini is my iPhone Pocket. Still using it and holding
| onto it as long as I can.
| paxys wrote:
| "Who is going to buy this?"
|
| I assume the same people who bought the $700 wheels for their
| computer case.
| jschveibinz wrote:
| Officially jumped the shark?
| daneel_w wrote:
| From the designers of the $20 deo stick.
| 6thbit wrote:
| Could this be apple's attempt at testing out the waters on
| whether their customer base would be interested on a new wearable
| piece of hardware?
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I always have a little chuckle when I see people holding a tiny
| delicate smartphone in a massive fat case to protect it from the
| damage it will inevitably take in normal use. I always think that
| it would have been better if they had just made the phone itself
| a little tougher!
| Retric wrote:
| Cases are an ablative layer of protection, you can't get the
| same thing by making larger phone of some uniform material.
|
| Young kids can go through multiple cases each of which look
| like they have been run over, but it's relatively common for
| adults to replace a case.
| sysashi wrote:
| I'm not a native speaker, I tried googling and translating
| and still did not get what "ablative" means. Do you mind
| explaining like I'm 5 what does it mean please..
| isjamesalive wrote:
| I think they meant in the sense of it being worn away and
| destroyed as an intended use.
|
| Adjective definition 3 from
| https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ablative
| sysashi wrote:
| Thank you, this page is much more informative than
| default google's definition of this word!
| EdgeExplorer wrote:
| > Ablation (Latin: ablatio - removal) is the removal or
| destruction of something from an object by vaporization,
| chipping, erosive processes, or by other means. Examples of
| ablative materials[clarification needed] are described
| below, including spacecraft material for ascent and
| atmospheric reentry, ice and snow in glaciology, biological
| tissues in medicine and passive fire protection materials.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablation
|
| The poster is saying that a case can wear out and be
| replaced without damage to the phone. You can let the case
| take all the damage, then get a new one. But if you let a
| phone take all the damage (even if it's a tougher phone),
| you can't remove that damage.
| sysashi wrote:
| Thank you! I just searched for "ablative" and ended up on
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablative_case which
| confused me even more hehe
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| And then worry about what colour they are going to buy while
| not a single picometre of that colour is visible in many cases.
| wat10000 wrote:
| It's good to have a choice. I know I'm going to drop my phone
| from time to time, and sometimes it will be onto a hard
| surface, so I always get a case. I once managed to shatter the
| back glass while it was in a case, not sure how I managed that.
| Other people may be less clumsy, or more tolerant of living
| with damage, or more willing to pay for insurance or
| replacements.
|
| It's also nice to be able to choose a texture. In my latest
| iteration, I got Apple's techwoven case, and I really like the
| feel compared to the usual silicone stuff, or bare metal. The
| texture also makes it easier to grip so maybe I'll drop it
| less. I can hope.
| hastamelo wrote:
| funny thing - every 2 years gorilla glass creates a tougher
| one. and the phone makers then make the glass thinner, thus
| erasing the durability gain
| whatsupdog wrote:
| I haven't had a screen break in almost a decade now. I do buy
| flagship phones. So I don't think we need to make glass
| anymore thicker. But I also use screen protectors, and I had
| maybe 1 break in the last 10 years.
| marknutter wrote:
| The phones are incredibly tough, I have never used a case and
| I've only cracked my screen once and that was like 8 years ago.
| firefax wrote:
| this reminds me of the little man bags poker players use (a lot
| of casinos ban full sized backpacks) and not in a good way
| hhh wrote:
| It sucks that most people don't see the pocket as the perfect
| overlap between fashion and tech. It's the ideal Issey Miyake
| bag, it's just something tech people won't get.
| walletdrainer wrote:
| I'm sure a lot of people get it, but "this is kinda neat" makes
| for less of a HN comment than [insert an elaborate rant on how
| ridiculous it is to charge markups for fashion stuff]
| femiagbabiaka wrote:
| Correct. It's acceptable to not like it, but 200 or whatever
| for an Issey Miyake piece is pretty par for course.
| ls-a wrote:
| It sucks that most people don't see that Apple totally stole
| this (iPhone Pocket) after it became trendy. I bought it as a
| gift last year. It was very trendy then. I forgot the store's
| name. Just like apps, Apple steals fashion ideas.
| SllX wrote:
| That and the design misattributions. Even going in blind, if
| you actually read the Newsroom post and find the Store page,
| you can figure out that this isn't even an Apple product. It's
| an ISSEY MIYAKE product. If you end up finding any of the Vogue
| articles, it says right in the article that this was a design
| project initiated by and done within ISSEY MIYAKE by an ISSEY
| MIYAKE team, with some input from Apple employees they
| (proactively) approached and talked to.
| jama211 wrote:
| I genuinely find it hilarious that everyone has such a strong
| opinion about a random accessory. Seriously, who cares? Why is it
| that any company could make any random thing an everyone shrugs
| their shoulders and either likes it or ignores it but when apple
| makes something everyone's knickers get in a twist?
|
| Why do y'all care so much about something you'd just walk past
| and ignore in literally any other scenario?
| kingkongjaffa wrote:
| Hope. For better or worse tech nerds (me included) maintain a
| hopeful optimism that Apple will make good products.
|
| For the longest time they were the only tech company that
| really cared about design, and most people don't encounter good
| or thoughtful design or ever really see behind the scenes or
| think about design and designers.
|
| Jony Ive and Steve Jobs really glorified design I think rightly
| in many ways, and elevated what industrial design could be in
| technology and engineering companies that historically had
| treated design as something you paid an external agency to do.
|
| Most people don't know Dieter Rams or Donald Norman, tech
| people maybe know Edward Tufte. Loads of people know Jony Ive.
|
| Unfortunately the only good ideas Apple have had this decade
| are the M-series processors, which are fantastic. Their
| software and hardware are otherwise lacking, across all
| categories.
|
| So, when Apple releases _anything_ people hope it's (a return
| to) good, of all the consumer product makers I think Apple has
| the highest level of goodwill, people are excited and hopeful
| that the next thing they release will be great, and are
| disappointed when it isn't.
| bigyabai wrote:
| > Why do y'all care so much
|
| My pension. When "jokes" like this hit the frontpage of HN, I
| am reminded that every dollar I put into my 401k will never see
| the light of day. The FTC should be mauling Apple for resting
| on anticompetitive laurels, but instead they're letting them
| grow fat and become a high-risk business. If you're not filing
| for retirement tomorrow, you should be considering the
| consequences this will have when you turn 65. Letting Apple
| fuck off and manufacture high-margin designer is terrible for
| America in the long-term.
|
| The economy is not as simple as "don't buy the product then" at
| Apple's scale. Look at how John Deere transitioned from a blue-
| chip brand to an Oracle-level scourge on humanity. I don't want
| Apple to head down that same road, but we might be too late to
| save them at this point.
| RyanOD wrote:
| Mental note...be sure to see the final design _before_ I sign the
| contract.
| vagab0nd wrote:
| I don't think selling a useless product for ridiculous amount is
| a problem for Apple. I do think that selling an ugly product is a
| problem for Apple.
| alfiedotwtf wrote:
| Checks date... nope, not April
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| The people shocked by this are the same people who still believe
| Apple can sell a normal sized phone but isn't doing so possibly
| just to piss us off. The thing is there are millions and millions
| of suckers out there who will suck these Sock(tm)s and
| Pocket(tm)s up in possibly dozens - some for the colours and some
| for the mere satisfaction of getting to pay Apple. If you venture
| across iForums and iSubs you will slowly start seeing comments
| about these fabric things are already curing haemorrhoids and
| insomnia, in anticipation (even before shipping starts).
| vswaroop04 wrote:
| XD Who even buy these things
| stainablesteel wrote:
| wow, that's seriously hilarious
|
| it's so ugly that it shows their desperation, who would ever need
| this?
| tempestn wrote:
| Had to double check the date here. This really is
| indistinguishable from an April 1 post.
| kwanbix wrote:
| $149.95 (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.)
| plus tax. What a joke.
| RandomBacon wrote:
| It's a joke even before looking at the price. "3D-knitted"
| WTF is that? Isn't all knitting in "3D"?
|
| It's a crappy handbag, and it's just for a phone.
|
| It looks like they had to use models to advertise it because
| they couldn't use "everyday people" in "everyday situations"
| to advertise because it looks like it would be garbage in
| that scenario.
|
| Is Apple expanding to the "luxury" fashion market?
| tempestn wrote:
| My favorite bit is right before that,
|
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth"
| chamomeal wrote:
| Lmao yeah I checked the domain after that. Cannot believe
| a person seriously wrote that. Inspired by the _concept_
| of a piece of cloth is one of the funniest things I've
| ever seen.
|
| Sometimes I think they're messing with us. This is more
| ridiculous than that monitor stand from a few years ago
| astrange wrote:
| It's translated from Japanese. It makes more sense there.
| Especially if you don't leave out the load-bearing quote
| marks.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| It's not translated from Japanese, it's originally in
| English. "A-POC" for "A Piece of Cloth". It refers to
| garments sewn from a single cut of a ream of cloth. It
| was translated into Japanese as Yi Mei noBu which isn't
| any more meaningful, but the original trademark is in
| English.
|
| edit: What are you disagreeing with? That's what I'm
| referring to. The Issey Miyake trademark, which the label
| uses as "A-POC" as an English acronym, and translates
| into Japanese only to explain it to the domestic market
| rather than as the trademark itself. I linked that MoMa
| article elsewhere in this thread
| 0x457 wrote:
| Well, no? This is A-POC it was inspired by:
| https://www.moma.org/collection/works/100361 and I'm
| pretty sure this is where that meaning you are referring
| to originated from.
| astrange wrote:
| The sentence structure 'inspired by the concept of "thing
| in quotation marks"' is what's translated.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| > [Yi Mei noBu ] nokonseputokarainsupireshiyon
|
| ... isn't any more meaningful than the English, it is
| exactly "inspired by the concept of "thing in quotation
| marks"
|
| I think this article was originally written in English
| anyway (only the English one credits an author, who is
| not Japanese)
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| No, you just aren't familiar with the term. It has a
| specific meaning in the context. It's this:
| https://www.moma.org/collection/works/100361 and it's
| well known to customers familiar with the popular Issey
| Miyake label (which does something like $85 million in
| sales)
|
| In tech we also use common words or phrases to trademark
| new ideas. It's not ridiculous or unusual. But it may be
| unfamiliar to you if you are not interested in fashion
| (common in these parts, as apparent in this thread) and
| fashion topics are easy targets for technical brothers.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| A-POC (A Piece of Clothing) and a piece of cloth
| communicate different ideas to most people. The MoMA
| article showed how the press release could have been
| written to be clear to anyone interested. And tech people
| should consider this in their writing.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| "Cloth" is the correct one, sorry for not reading the
| link closely. I chose to share that one because of the
| illustrative photo, but they are incorrect in calling it
| "piece of clothing"
|
| See:
| https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/185792
| and https://us.isseymiyake.com/pages/apocable?srsltid=Afm
| BOopZJL...
|
| (You can also see an archival garment in the Met article
| that closely resembles the iPhone Pocket btw)
| pseudalopex wrote:
| A-POC (A Piece of Cloth) and a piece of cloth communicate
| different ideas to most people. The Met article showed
| how the press release could have been written to be clear
| to anyone interested.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| > concept of "a piece of cloth"
|
| and
|
| > a piece of cloth
|
| communicate different ideas to most people
|
| but this product isn't for most people, it's for Issey
| Miyake's customer base. That's why this is buried as a
| newsroom update and the marketing is elsewhere rather
| than the apple.com front page
| TOMDM wrote:
| It honestly reads like low effort engagement bait I'd
| expect to see on Twitter
| RHSeeger wrote:
| I dunno, this was pretty good too
|
| > The design of iPhone Pocket speaks to the bond between
| iPhone and its user
|
| Like it's a pet or something
| steve1977 wrote:
| Apple must be trolling us at this point.
|
| Also I cannot help but read this in the voice of Jony
| Ive.
| t-writescode wrote:
| They didn't buy Beats by Dre for the sound quality.
| rinze wrote:
| Could be AI-knitted. They lost an opportunity right there.
| jsheard wrote:
| > Is Apple expanding to the "luxury" fashion market?
|
| They've been flirting with it for a while, remember they
| made a $17,000 solid gold variant of the first gen Apple
| Watch (which is no longer supported lol), and today they
| sell luxury Hermes edition watches at a 2-3x premium over
| the regular titanium models.
| RandomBacon wrote:
| I think that's different. That's just premium flair for
| their product, whereas this is just a stupid fashion
| product.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Both products could be viewed both ways.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _they made a $17,000 solid gold variant of the first
| gen Apple Watch (which is no longer supported lol)_
|
| I don't think the kind of people to spend $17K on a
| digital watch care that it's no longer supported - it's
| pocket change for them
| smugma wrote:
| I got an Hermes (plastic?) strap as a gift and it's way
| better than any other strap I've ever had. Plastic and
| steel still look brand new.
|
| Is it worth 10-20X the price of a normal strap? No, but
| it's called disposable income for a reason.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| >Is Apple expanding to the "luxury" fashion market?
|
| Apple has been dealing in luxury fashion goods since at
| least the early 2000s.
|
| You think they made computers look like that, with a
| circular mouse, because it was _better_? You think putting
| the charging port on the bottom of yet another mouse was
| about sharp product focus?
|
| Apple sells what it does because it's a Lifestyle Brand.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| It has a meaning as technical jargon in textiles
| https://www.uniqlo.com/eu/en/news/sp/topics/2022011301/
| which was chosen as being similar to Issey Miyake's piece
| of cloth construction:
| https://www.moma.org/collection/works/100361
|
| You seem more eager to shit on this aspect of it than to
| understand something you're unfamiliar with. Not that you
| need to become familiar with something you're uninterested
| in, especially with luxury market products, but since
| you're here talking about it and this isn't "Hater News"...
|
| It does have higher production cost but the price of this
| item is priced for it being designed by Issey Miyake (not
| Apple) and sold as a luxury fashion item. If you want a
| cheaper strap they sell that too.
| rvba wrote:
| I imagine that a lot of poor people will pay this, in order
| to try to show off as rich
| cpuguy83 wrote:
| Most expensive sock ever.
| caycep wrote:
| Have you seen what the Olsen twins are charging for a
| sweater?!
| pryce wrote:
| They've invented the 'thneed' from "The Lorax"...
| cpuguy83 wrote:
| Excellent, I'll be repeating this.
| jghn wrote:
| I've been seeing the headline going around today and have been
| assuming all day that it's some trending joke post. Nope!
| ssharp wrote:
| I get the sentiment but was this actually some big launch
| announcement? When I look at the store online, you have to dig
| a bit just to even find the product.
| coldtea wrote:
| It's embarassing enough that it exists as a product,
| regardless of the size of the announcement.
| bartvk wrote:
| Really? Why? I think it fits right in. Apple products are
| heavily designed, and this is a fashion item that adds
| something.
| tempestn wrote:
| Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth", we give you
| this "3d-knitted" piece of cloth to put your phone in. It's
| kind of difficult to actually get a phone into and out of,
| and it looks a bit ridiculous, but don't worry, it's only
| $160 (unless you want the long strap).
|
| Like, if you were doing this as an April Fools joke post,
| what would you even change?
| bartvk wrote:
| I get what you're saying, to you it feels ridiculous. But
| the thing is, these are professional designers that have
| put out a product. The product page shows their
| professional language and it doesn't work for all people.
|
| But I guarantee you that they thought long and hard on
| this, and have very good reasons for each and every aspect
| of the product. It is not half assed work. I don't see a
| reason to take it as a joke.
| steve1977 wrote:
| Homeopaths think long and hard about homeopathy, but that
| doesn't make it a proper science.
| 63stack wrote:
| It is entirely possible that professional designers with
| their professional language put out a garbage product
| after thinking long and hard about every aspect.
| bovermyer wrote:
| Kind of like those fashions where the model wears some kind
| of artistic interpretation of a yellow flower when really
| they look like they're wearing more of an art installation
| than functional clothing?
| MBCook wrote:
| Not GP, but it's probably a personal thing.
|
| I remember the iPod socks. Now make them bigger. Now stretch
| them out a bunch. Now make it look a little more like Borat's
| speedo.
|
| Now charge like 7x-10x what the iPod socks cost.
|
| If the first place I had seen this was not a direct link to
| apple.com I too would've thought this was a complete joke.
| other_herbert wrote:
| I checked the url a couple of times to make sure it really was
| legit... I was certain there'd be like 3 p's or a non visible
| character in there...
| subzero06 wrote:
| Wow Apple is innovative! lmao
| nblgbg wrote:
| I thought it was a parody! Is this really what Apple can do?
| znpy wrote:
| Btw Issey Miyake (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issey_Miyake)
| died in 2022.
|
| This piece of trash likely has nothing to do with the guy,
| somebody's likely just milking the brand/name as long as it still
| has some relevance.
|
| Really poor taste from Apple.
| antipaul wrote:
| Notably: <Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth">
| josh-sematic wrote:
| Clicked the link hoping it would be a new attempt at something
| like the iPhone mini. Sadly disappointed!
| stmw wrote:
| Wish they would make a modern iPhone that still fit into a
| pocket, as well.
| tmikaeld wrote:
| They expect me to walk around with my phone in a long sock? A
| fannypack even looks more appealing.. also, isn't this a sign
| that phones are getting too big?
| joelthelion wrote:
| And yet apple is still priced like a growth company.
| b8 wrote:
| Literally just looks like a cut sock.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| It's a sock.
| zoba wrote:
| iPhones are now so big we need a special carrying device for it.
|
| Please bring back the mini :'(
| brudgers wrote:
| Dammit, Ali Express doesn't have any yet.
| mariodiana wrote:
| They're telling us that iPhones are going to be getting so big,
| we're going to have to buy it its own custom pocket.
| illwrks wrote:
| Phone thefts where I live (London, UK) are at an all time high.
| If ever a product was needed to self identify as a target this
| has to be it. "See this expensive iPod Sock? It's holding my
| expensive iPhone"...
| wkirby wrote:
| Make. A. Smaller. Phone.
| recursive wrote:
| For a second, I believed they were launching an iPhone small
| enough to _reasonably_ fit into a pocket. That might make me
| switch to iPhone.
|
| Nope
| virtualritz wrote:
| For everyone who is upset about the price tag: this is a wealth-
| signaling product. Like a Hermes handbag.
|
| Apple is not a luxury brand but it's close enough with some of
| its products that it can get away with a price like this on a
| product like that.
| lvl155 wrote:
| I do wish they sold a double-side magsafe that you can put on
| your shirt/jacket so I can just clip my iPhone on my chest. Pro
| Max is too big for my pockets.
| ttkari wrote:
| Oh my... I'm just left wondering if Apple releasing a giant sock
| for your phone equals to the proverbial moment of your taxi
| driver giving you advice on stocks to buy.
| simianparrot wrote:
| I got excited for a moment, thought it was a new line of iPhone
| Mini -- you know, the actual handheld iPhones. I still use my 13
| Mini.
|
| This was the biggest letdown of clicking a link since my last
| Rickroll in the early 2000's
| taylodl wrote:
| Me too! I thought it was an announcement for an iPhone that
| actually fit in your pocket! The phones are too damned big!
| avhception wrote:
| Exactly what I thought!
|
| And instead of making a practical phone that would fit my
| pocket, we get this stupid, overpriced sock. What a joke.
| xeonmc wrote:
| It's also only compatible with iPhone 8 and above,
| according to the product page.
| whateveracct wrote:
| I'm replying to this on a 16 Pro (not Max) and it's a
| perfectly portable size imo
|
| The Maxes are really huge tho
| andrepd wrote:
| Has there even been a decently-sized phone since the Sony
| Compacts? And the iPhone minis of course.
| PeaceTed wrote:
| Not just you with this. Was hoping they brought back the mini
| instead we got iPod sock version 2.
| jlaternman wrote:
| It does initially look like a stupid and Insanely Facile
| fashion statement, I agree, but I think the iPod sock v2
| could be one of the most practical and cleverly designed
| products Apple has ever released.
|
| It's clearly intended to be used as bait for phone snatchers.
| That iPhone dangling loose a foot below your arm in free air
| is just too tempting... no thief can resist. But, then! You
| start swinging that motherf*cker, and your iPhone becomes a
| deadly weapon before any potential thief has time to think.
|
| Third parties are sure to fill the market with the most
| obvious additions, e.g. metal spikes, studs, mildly poison-
| laced hooks. I assume there will also be training courses
| scheduled in Apple Stores around the world to clarify this
| accessory's purpose -- not to mention, to teach proper
| technique and the ethical considerations of when to stop
| striking with the iPhone Pocket to avoid manslaughter charges
| in your region.
|
| This is a move by Apple to subtly promote armed, deceptive
| martial arts as self-defence. To promote the Bushido spirit
| as a practical coping mechanism in these stressful times, and
| to empower its users in everyday situations. I for one think
| it's Insanely Great, and right on that bold frontier of
| innovation and Thinking Different that Apple built its
| reputation on.
| walterbell wrote:
| Let the memes begin!
| wolfgang000 wrote:
| Me too, I still have my iPhone SE, I was hoping they would
| bring back some smaller version of the iPhone + Touch ID, I
| refuse to upgrade just because of the lack of Touch ID
| rkomorn wrote:
| Out of curiosity, what makes you attached to Touch ID? Face
| ID is one of my favorite things about my SE to mini upgrade.
| wolfgang000 wrote:
| I don't want to look at my iPhone every time I need to
| unlock it, for example, when I am riding my motorbike, the
| helmet would block my face. This isn't a problem when I use
| Touch ID because I can use fingerless gloves. Another case
| is when I need to discreetly check my phone for a moment,
| like when I am in a meeting or a dinner.
|
| I don't have anything against Face Id, BUT I just don't see
| why they eliminate the sensor and remove the option.
| rkomorn wrote:
| Makes sense. Thanks. :)
| BuckRogers wrote:
| I used to think the same thing. And ya TouchID is handy
| sometimes over FaceID. But FaceID overall between the two
| if one has to choose is superior. If you haven't lived
| with it daily yet, I wouldn't let that stop you from
| getting a 13 mini. It helps a lot too with longevity,
| less to break. You are obviously one of us, those that
| keep their phones for a very long time. It never needs
| wiped off, it's incredibly consistent. The durability
| feature starts to matter when you're using something this
| many years. Not trying to change your mind, just share a
| perspective as I do understand where you're coming from
| for sure. You're not exactly wrong.
| walterbell wrote:
| Speed of unlock and minimal distraction via one motor
| memory gesture.
| quamserena wrote:
| I like having a tactile home button.
| oakesm9 wrote:
| The iPhone hasn't had a "real" home button since the
| iPhone 7 in 2016. It's a static touch pad with haptic
| feedback.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| Haptic feedback is tactile.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| Yeah, I'm on a 3rd gen SE and hoping when it finally dies
| there will be some sort of similar option.
|
| Not hating on people who do, but I just do not use my phone
| enough to justify the hassle of having a freakin' cinder
| block in my pocket.
| quamserena wrote:
| I'm still on the 1st gen SE from 2016. Imagine my
| disappointment when I found out that the iPhone Pocket was,
| in fact, not an iPhone that fits in your pocket.
|
| Looking at replacing my SE with a keitai supplemented with
| an Android emulator
| hedora wrote:
| Since it's clearly April 1st inside the reality distortion
| field, I'm disappointed there are no throwback designs sized
| for the mini and se at the bottom of the page.
| Tade0 wrote:
| Same.
|
| Meanwhile this looks like this sort of man-purse that in my
| corner of the world is referred to as something that loosely
| translates to "quiver of righteousness".
| shwaj wrote:
| lol! What corner is that?
| Tade0 wrote:
| Poland and the original wording is "kolczan prawilnosci".
|
| The "righteousness" in question is a calque from the
| Russian adjective "pravil'nyi", meaning "correct, right,
| proper" and originates from prison slang. I believe the
| equivalent English term is "Original Gangster".
|
| The term is of course used in jest in reference to how man-
| purses, out of all things, are normalized among people
| associating themselves with street culture, especially that
| my understanding is that those items were initially just
| fanny packs worn differently.
| mr_toad wrote:
| It's about 4x the price of a man purse, even a brand-name
| like Nike.
| closewith wrote:
| Rather than a standalone phone, I'd love a small companion
| iPhone that uses the same number liked the Apple watch. Just a
| pocket-sized phone with a camera and the ability to use iPhone
| apps that I could take places where I don't want or need the
| full slab-sized behemoth.
| philip1209 wrote:
| My iPhone 13 mini broke last week and I was pleasantly
| surprised that AppleCare replaced it. "4 more years!"
| NegativeLatency wrote:
| Yeah I was imagining it being more like the "Game Boy Pocket"
| levocardia wrote:
| I got rickrolled by Claude last year if it makes you feel any
| better.
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| Well at least it's multithreaded. :D
| rappatic wrote:
| Nothing like a $150 or $230 phone bag.
| amelius wrote:
| Reminder to self: don't buy fashion items from an IT company.
| kjellsbells wrote:
| Nerd question: what are the in-wear physics of this item?
|
| It looks like a mass on a spring: the phone is a relatively heavy
| weight, and the wool pocket and strap are naturally springy.
|
| So during everyday wear, does this thing bounce around? It seems
| like it would be impractical.
| LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
| Is it usable as a sling? To throw the iPhone in self-defense?
| namegulf wrote:
| First thought this was a parody, joke or something.
|
| Then saw the domain apple.com, can't believe it!
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| I do not use Apple products so I do not have an opinion about
| them.
|
| One thing I know is that they are z making beast. The fact that
| they could sell a monitor stand for ~1000 EUR and wheels for
| something I do not remember for I think 200 EUR, and now this,
| means that they are genuises.
| durakot wrote:
| Short AAPL
| coldtea wrote:
| From the company that gave us the iPod socks
| zach_moore wrote:
| It's inspired by a piece of cloth!
| 45764986 wrote:
| If this seems like an odd accessory to you, consider that women's
| clothing often does not have pockets.
| abujazar wrote:
| Wow, it's not even a parody. The iPhones are so huge and heavy
| now it needs its own purse.
| bborud wrote:
| Objects have to earn the right to exist. We make so much stuff.
| Most of it unnecessary. Stuff that will soon be cluttering your
| home and then end up in a landfill.
|
| This is not a product that deserves to exist. It is not made from
| quality materials ( Nylon (14%), Polyester (85%), Polyurethane
| (1%)). It is not innovative. It is questionable whether it solves
| its primary use case particularly well.
|
| What makes this particularly objectionable is that it is from a
| design house that usually makes quality garments. And then they
| stoop to making this crap, slapping their designer label on it
| and then exploit ghastly people who don't know any better to
| waste tons of money on it.
|
| This is pissing on Issey Miyake's grave.
| artyom wrote:
| > We _BUY_ so much stuff. Most of it unnecessary.
|
| Fixed it.
| nyx wrote:
| You're right, of course, but I don't think blame rests solely
| on the individual consumer here... I guess it's a bit of a
| chicken-and-egg problem, wherein Apple makes $200 knitted
| iPhone scrotes because they know people will line up to buy
| it, and people will line up to buy $200 knitted iPhone
| scrotes because Apple made them.
|
| And people have brand loyalty to Apple stuff because quality,
| or design, or something... but for a product like this, which
| to me is prima facie a ridiculous, impractical, high-priced,
| fast-fashion item, you know that the marketers are cashing in
| on that brand loyalty almost exclusively (in the absence of
| any intrinsic value).
|
| Half-baked thoughts, I'm sure people have written properly
| about this. But the conclusion I leap to is that marketing
| people are the great Satan here. Fuck those guys.
| xeonmc wrote:
| There are at least two graves I can think of that this is
| pissing on.
| __alexs wrote:
| Synthetic fabrics are perfectly capable of being high quality.
| Buzz Rickson aren't making their MA-1s out of junk.
| lucideer wrote:
| MA-1s are inner lined with a 100% cotton/wool mix. The outer
| is nylon because synthetic fabrics are generally good for
| waterproofing (waterproofing is _always_ a trade-off of
| quality over function) & also just because bombers are
| generally nylon, but a big part of their construction is
| using quality non-synthetic fabrics _wherever they can_ to
| ensure overall quality.
| l5870uoo9y wrote:
| Except microplastics rub off and penetrate the skin barrier.
| bborud wrote:
| The MA-1 "works" under a relatively narrow set of conditions
| that I don't see most days. I tried. It is a miserable
| garment for how and where I live.
|
| I'm not saying synthetic materials are always bad. I own a
| few jackets in synthetic materials that are good, but I have
| gone through a lot that are rubbish. For jackets it is more
| about the technical design than the exact material. I have
| had lots of expensive jackets that just don't work for my use
| cases. And a few that do. It is trial and error since I have
| no idea why some jackets just don't work.
|
| I live in a place where it rains heavily, and in the winter
| it is often cold, and I spend a lot of time outside being
| physically active. This means that the challenge is to find
| jackets that can deal with heavy rain, cold, physical
| abrasion, and perhaps most important of all: moisture
| management.
|
| If you spend a lot of time being physically active outside in
| all kinds of bad weather, you tend to start caring a lot
| about what materials you wear. Best case for sub-par
| garments: they start to smell. Worst case: you freeze because
| your clothes can't manage moisture.
|
| But for what is more or less a glorified sock, at that price
| I am not buying a piece of plastic. I'd expect more pleasant
| natural materials.
| fvrghl wrote:
| Are you familiar with Miyake's work? He did a lot of innovative
| design with synthetics, including the entire Pleats Please
| line.
| bborud wrote:
| To some degree, but junk is junk even if it says Issey Miyake
| on it. But at the price they are asking I'd insist on higher
| quality materials. Not this junk.
|
| It is like those horrible Louis Vuitton plastic bags. Yes
| they are expensive and probably better made than most plastic
| bags, but they are mass produced plastic bags. You can get
| nice, custom, handmade bags for a fraction of what this
| pointless junk goes for.
|
| (The only reason I know about Issey Miyake is because years
| ago I happened to buy a couple of handmade linen suits while
| visiting Japan. And only later discovered that these suits
| were "a big deal" when some fashion people I shared an office
| with saw me wear them as "casual office clothes". To me they
| were comfortable linen suits that were obviously hand dyed.
| And they weren't even that expensive)
| futuraperdita wrote:
| > You can get nice, custom, handmade bags for a fraction of
| what this pointless junk goes for.
|
| You're making the subjective value judgement that a
| synthetic material is "junk", without qualifying it as
| such. A textile that is less expensive to manufacture, or
| is synthetic, does not automatically qualify as "junk".
| Look at technical fabrics such as GoreTex as a highly
| functional example, or any avant-garde techwear from brands
| like ACRONYM which usually last quite a long time and have
| some artistic merit within the fashion world.
|
| It's OK to not like synthetic materials. It's also OK to
| not care about fashion-as-art, but fashion is oft ephemeral
| by nature and design.
| jowday wrote:
| GoreTex is a bad example - it's gonna delaminate after a
| year or so of heavy use and is pretty much impossible to
| repair after that. Which also undercuts ACRONYM's
| messaging about their GoreTex products being some kind of
| like, buy-it-for-life rainjacket.
| lucideer wrote:
| GoreTex is highly functional but it doesn't last long &
| it isn't repairable. These are trade-offs that may be
| worthwhile for certain innovative, highly-functional use-
| cases (like water proofing) but are very rarely
| worthwhile for average use-cases.
|
| With very few exceptions, the majority of synthetic
| materials commonly used in clothing come with these
| trade-offs. "Junk" being a slang term for things that get
| thrown away seems appropriate in this case (short-lived,
| non-repairable material).
|
| > _have some artistic merit within the fashion world_
|
| > _It 's also OK to not care about fashion-as-art, but
| fashion is oft ephemeral by nature and design_
|
| While I do feel strongly that art for its own sake is oft
| undervalued & has enormous merit, this is ultimately off-
| topic in a thread that kicked off on the topic of
| quality, function & the (undeniable) fact that we produce
| too many things. These are separate qualifiers to
| "artistic merit".
|
| Fashion being ephemeral is in fact the point here (it
| should be less ephemeral, independent of what your views
| on art are).
| ivirshup wrote:
| Issey Miyake's "Pleats Please" line has always been made
| out of synthetics. It was an intentional choice due to the
| character of polyester as a fabric, like it's ability to
| hold the pleats while still being machine washable.
|
| https://asufidmmuseum.asu.edu/learn/articles/issey-miyake-
| pl...
| stevage wrote:
| I've never seen a bag similar to this so from that perspective
| it's a bit innovative.
|
| I am so very very far from the target market here though.
| vitorsr wrote:
| Reminds me of waterproof phone pouches.
| 98codes wrote:
| It's November, but I still had to make sure the date on the
| page wasn't April 1st.
| Animats wrote:
| Hadn't heard Issey Miyake mentioned in over a decade. He was an
| important designer in the 1980s, and died in 2022. Known for
| running completed garments through a pleating machine.
|
| Looking at that thing, the overall impression is "a phone so
| big and heavy it needs its own shoulder bag?"
| steve1977 wrote:
| But... but... it's a 3D-knitted construction!
| thrw045 wrote:
| You hate on Louis Vuitton but have you ever tried one? Have you
| looked at all the designs they have? I think LV is better than
| Hermes bags with that horrendous closure they have on the
| Birkin and other bags. LV has cool colorful designs also in
| their ready to wear. You might object to the branding but the
| bags work very well and are designed well in terms of how easy
| it is to get stuff in and out and if you don't throw it around
| the canvas can last a long time. Hermes might have nice Pogo
| leather and so on but that doesn't mean that closure is worth
| the hassle IMO.
|
| Also IDK what to think about the iPhone Pocket. It LOOKS like a
| hassle to get stuff in and out of it but if they have somehow
| managed to make it easy, maybe it's well designed. If not then
| I agree with you the product is probably garbage.
| lallysingh wrote:
| This is an iPhone Thneed.
| user3939382 wrote:
| I can make a better phone
| marknutter wrote:
| I bought iPod socks back in the day and loved them. I used them
| for more than just my iPod, like my Palm pilot and my digital
| camera :)
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| Saw the link and was looking forward to an iPhone that could
| actually fit in one hand again, welp.
| d--b wrote:
| I think this should be called the iPhone Borat.
| yalogin wrote:
| Is this a better thing to announce instead of the iPhone Air? I
| personally think so :) the Air should never have been green lit
| lurking_swe wrote:
| here i am replying from my iphone air. My favorite iphone to
| date, by far. I "downgraded" from a 16 pro. Phone feels like a
| feather. Fits so nicely into my cross body bag as well!
|
| Battery life has been better than expected.
| SequoiaHope wrote:
| Amazing that Apple would prominently highlight a product made
| with 3D knitting, as I've just gotten in to machine knitting as a
| hobby after buying an old Brother KH-910 on eBay and modding with
| with an AYAB (all yarns are beautiful)[1] open hardware/software
| knitting machine board from the AYAB discord. I just got a second
| needle bed for my knitting machine (KR-850 ribber) so I can do
| double bed jacquard knitting and other more advanced stuff.
|
| But this has also led me down the rabbit hole learning about
| industrial machine knitting and 3d "wholegarment" knitting,
| invented by Masahiro Shima first in the 1960's for autonomous
| glove knitting and later for entire full size garments in the
| 1990's. [2,3,4] That's what Apple is using in this product (now
| two companies offer 3D knitting machines according to Wikipedia).
| In traditional machine knitting you still have to make multiple
| flat sections and stitch them together, but in 3D Wholegarment
| knitting the machine is capable of knitting an entire complex
| garment, bag, utility item, whatever all in one go fully
| autonomously. Shima Seiki invented a new kind of knitting needle
| and expanded the system from two needle beds to four to enable
| the most advanced form of Wholegarment knitting. What I find
| fascinating about this technology is that it makes it possible to
| run a garment manufacturing business which is almost fully
| autonomous, eliminating the need for often poorly treated
| overseas labor [5], and potentially simplifying business
| operations dramatically.
|
| The piece linked in [2] talks to an Italian knitting company that
| was able to keep manufacturing domestic thanks to these machines,
| and this helps explain how Apple can offer these bags as made in
| Japan in these volumes. I daydream about getting a used Mach2x
| and parking it somewhere to make it run 24/7 to make warm
| garments for the homeless around the Bay Area, perhaps with a low
| volume boutique fashion brand which helps pay for it. Anyway
| they're really neat machines and this has been my little autistic
| hyperfocus lately, I thought I would share!
|
| [1] https://www.ayab-knitting.com/
|
| [2] https://youtu.be/kZE8rvPYbII
|
| [3] https://www.shimaseiki.com/ire/about/history.html
|
| [4] https://youtu.be/y6wHl0Xtxfw
|
| [5] https://youtu.be/PxFwA-jw3X4
| erickhill wrote:
| My god, for that price...
|
| Imagine the cost if it was a pair of pants! Apple pants(tm)
| tamimio wrote:
| I think apple is short on some cash and they are trying to get
| some quick money. The issue is now you will see this ugly looking
| "case" all over the streets and especially among women, it might
| be the next Stanley cup all over again.
| ZhiqiangWang wrote:
| Wait, Tim is not excited?
| taco_emoji wrote:
| Two hundred and thirty American dollars for this?
| doawoo wrote:
| Lol it feels like this is their solution to the "phone too big"
| problem. Anyways, when's the next iPhone Mini???
| lucideer wrote:
| It shouldn't be legal to sell products under the name of a dead
| person (at the very least in cases where there's a strong chance
| buyers are given the impression that the person had something to
| do with production of the product).
|
| > _a collaboration between ISSEY MIYAKE and Apple_
|
| Issey Miyake died 3 years ago. He has not participated in this
| "collaboration".
| zippergz wrote:
| Can we also not have Levi's? Ford cars? Jack Daniel's? All of
| their namesakes died a very long time ago.
| soapdog wrote:
| You can achieve similar results by throwing your iPhone inside a
| PS1 trail sock...
| gigatexal wrote:
| Well this is a head scratcher for sure.
| diego_moita wrote:
| I'll propose a name for products that are like this, visibly,
| trash disguised as luxury.
|
| We should call them "balenciaga".
| sfc32 wrote:
| Is it April 1st today?
| andrepd wrote:
| > Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth,"
|
| Had to triple-check that this wasn't a parody website.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-11 23:00 UTC)