[chain13]

Blackberry is better for music. Ok, I'm not apple guy. But excuse me, what universe is this?

[TCB on Z10]

Blackberry is better for music. Ok, I'm not apple guy. But excuse me, what universe is this?

The one where the Force is with BlackBerry, giving them the best sound. Any padawan knows this.

BB, Still the One

[willowbeast]

its free

Why does everyone say it's free? It's not your paying for it in the price of the phone. Nothing is free these days.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[howarmat]

Why does everyone say it's free? It's not your paying for it in the price of the phone. Nothing is free these days.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

it didnt increase the cost of the phone, its included for "free"

[spantch101]

Well you could plug the headphones into the laptop assuming your music is sync'd between it and the phone

Yea my thoughts too. If you're using an iPhone you probably use iTunes. Why not just used that on the computer?

Posted via G5 with hub+

[willowbeast]

it didnt increase the cost of the phone, its included for "free"

My vehicle came with a free engine! Imagine that

Swiped via Priv

[anon(4243545)]

A true audiophile would never reproduce his music through a smartphone, he would just buy a McIntosh amplifier and processor, first of all. But, Denver said everything.

My vehicle came with a free engine! Imagine that

Swiped via Priv

Indeed it's free. If an year ago you would pay 799€ (actually a little less) for an iPhone, now you're going to pay the same amount, with the bluetooth airpods, which are worth about 120€. If they weren't free, either you wouldn't be paying the same for an iPhone, or Apple wouldn't include them.
It's as if the car you bought an year ago now ships with built-in navigator and Led lights for free (read: at the same price).

[crackbrry fan]

^^^^^^It's NOT FREE ALL accessories are factored into the pricing, do ya think apple is running a charity???

Posted via CB10

[LazyEvul]

My vehicle came with a free engine! Imagine that

Swiped via Priv

That's a false analogy. If your car came with a second engine for the same price as last year's model, without making any impactful cost reductions, then sure, that engine would be effectively free. The manufacturer certainly accounted for it somehow - maybe by cutting corners elsewhere, maybe by taking a margin hit in hopes of increased volume, or maybe by banking on selling extra accessories, extended warranties, etc.

But so long as the corner-cutting doesn't make a significant impact on the end user, what do they care? Apple didn't seem to make any notable cost reductions to make it happen (the internal jack was hardly an expensive component), so it's free, for all intents and purposes. Considering how cheap they're selling the adapter for, they likely decided to take a very small hit on margins to minimize the impact on sales that removing the jack would have.

[DenverRalphy]

My vehicle came with a free engine! Imagine that

Swiped via Priv

If your vehicle would have cost the same with or without the engine, then yep it sure is. His point is that with or without the included free accessories, the phone costs the same.

[RUU_CB]

If your vehicle would have cost the same with or without the engine, then yep it sure is. His point is that with or without the included free accessories, the phone costs the same.

That would imply all the previous versions have been overpriced by $10.

Posted via CB10

[LazyEvul]

That would imply all the previous versions have been overpriced by $10.

Posted via CB10

Wouldn't that logic also imply that any product which is sold for more than it takes to break even is overpriced? Because that's hardly a problem unique to Apple - for better or for worse, maximizing profits is generally considered a primary goal of capitalism.

[DenverRalphy]

That would imply all the previous versions have been overpriced by $10.

Posted via CB10

Nah, the Airpods retail for $159. If they weren't free, and did indeed increase the price of the phone, you'd see a HUUUGE increase in the price of the iPhone 7.

[DenverRalphy]

^^^^^^It's NOT FREE ALL accessories are factored into the pricing, do ya think apple is running a charity???

Posted via CB10

Except that those AirPods retail for $159. If that were the case, the iPhone 7 would be selling for $930. The other direction (minus the AirPod price) would be $610, which is about $100 less than what every other flagship device is selling for. So no, they're not including the price of the AirPods into the purchase price of the iPhone 7.

[Prem WatsApp]

I'm no Apple guy, and I hate iTunes, but a large percentage of the iTunes library is available in lossless format - even stuff you bought years ago can be re-downloaded (or streamed) in lossless today. You gotta give credit card details where credit is due...

Fixed it for you... :-)

�   "Chenterprise. We are the future. Resistance is futile. Prepare to BBe... "   �

[TCB on Z10]

Fixed it for you... :-)

Good one! Lol


BB, Still the One

[TCB on Z10]

Dup

[crackbrry fan]

Except that those AirPods retail for $159. If that were the case, the iPhone 7 would be selling for $930. The other direction (minus the AirPod price) would be $610, which is about $100 less than what every other flagship device is selling for. So no, they're not including the price of the AirPods into the purchase price of the iPhone 7.

Because they sell at x pricing, retail , individually, does not mean that the cost isn't factored into the " free" argument going on here. It DOESN'T cost $ 159. 00 to manufacture. Apple like many manufacturers margins on accessories are huge. They make a lot more on the replacement of accessories than devices. Do you also think that the iPhone costs anywhere near their retail price? If you do, you need to rethink that.

Posted via CB10

[Ginacn]

Making people pay for all the extras in order to get a "better" experience with their device it's apple's way of telling people shup up and give me your money.

I've never even considered any of their previous devices to be used as a mobile and at the same time as my music player.

I don't understand why people like to make their lives more complicated by dealing with those devices! :/

Posted from my BlackBerry Passport 

[Ursus Rufus]

Good one! Lol


BB, Still the One

[TCB on Z10]

Great song! BlackBerry could use it in commercials, maybe along with BTOs "Takin' Care of Business".

BB, Still the One

[to boldly go]

An amateur audiophile would plug their phone into their analog stereo system and enjoy FLAC music.

[svelt]

Hyperbolic title aside, this move was pretty audacious even for Apple. This isn't like changing from one proprietary type of charging mechanism to another - this is changing an international standard used by billions around the world cross-platform on every device that can play music.

[Bishkin]

I like my portable music at 24bit/96kHz or 192kHz on my DX80 ($350). My Z10/30 or any mobile phones for that matter is just a toy compared to the DX80. Having said that, my iPhone 5S/6S sound better on their speakers then my Z10/30 which are rather lame. My BB and iPhones all play FLAC downsampled and dithered to 16bit/44.1kHz.

[stlabrat]

"I like my portable music at 24bit/96kHz or 192kHz on my DX80 ($350). My Z10/30 or any mobile phones for that matter is just a toy compared to the DX80. Having said that, my iPhone 5S/6S sound better on their speakers then my Z10/30 which are rather lame. My BB and iPhones all play FLAC downsampled and dithered to 16bit/44.1kHz."
just out of curiosity, what kind of music you listen? (try to see what is the ultra high and low frequency coverage of the DX80 and its balance overall). thanks.