Price does not equal quality.
There is plenty of overpriced garbage out there in any product category.
$300 can get you a mighty fine pair of cans or in-ear buds. But that is squarely in the mid-range.
When I think "high-end" prices generally start above $500 and go into the thousands.
3:43 am — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
No one gives a shit.
5:56 am — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
Hey Grubs, why don't you just post a comment on whatever blog that is, and keep your opinion for yourself
7:51 am — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
given apple's sort of terrible performace in audio, they'd really have to step it up to justify high end prices. i mean, beats are already shit, so maybe it's a low bar, but if they want to start charging $500 they'd better improve some.
11:37 am — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
My Optional Name:
>given apple's sort of terrible performace in audio, they'd really have to step it up to justify high end prices.
Ironically, most reviews of the Beats Solo 2, which was released some time AFTER Apple bought them out, say that the sound quality is very much improved.
1:49 pm — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
then they're making steps in the right direction.
2:42 pm — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
Apple's great at audio quality value. EG: your free earbuds are great quality, esp. compared to the headphones out at the time.
Beats is midrange.
If Apple does high end ear buds I expect they will be at appropriate quality for the price.
After all, nobody is going to buy them if there's a better deal out there.
4:01 pm — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
No posts today... must be a slow Apple news day I guess.
9:24 pm — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
To Be Fair:
> EG: your free earbuds are great quality, esp. compared to the headphones out at the time.
Wait, you're serious?
10:17 pm — Wednesday, 7 September 2016
A lot of things "make no sense" to poor uninformed Gruber these days, including Apple's decision to speed up the older Apple Watch. Poor baby.
1:48 am — Thursday, 8 September 2016
> including Apple's decision to speed up the older Apple Watch.
that doesn't really make sense to me either... why would people buy the new one if the old one is just as fast? the only difference appears to be GPS and better water resistance, although i wear mine in the shower all the time with no problem.
2:25 am — Thursday, 8 September 2016
Also a better screen, and FWIW I'd imagine GPS is a big want for some folks. (I am not in the smartwatch market myself.)
8:46 am — Thursday, 8 September 2016
Vanilla Dry Ice:
Wow, Gruber's day-after iPhone event commentary is spot-on. While his other friends, who actually cover shit and work, are busy pounding out material, he's probably holed up in a SF dive bar waiting to taste the perfect martini while watching old Bond films on his iWatch.
3:41 pm — Thursday, 8 September 2016
Gruber is busy gathering links and coming up with snappy headlines for them.
He's also busy digging up claim chowder and shit he posted that shows how he is always correct.
So yeah, it's going to be a while.
3:58 pm — Thursday, 8 September 2016
Without a doubt Gruber links to The Verge just for this headline alone:
4:02 pm — Thursday, 8 September 2016
>Price does not equal quality.
Ain't that the truth. My $15 Xiaomi wired IMEs are 10x better than any Earbuds/EarPods that Apple has ever put out. All Apple earbuds sound mediocre and they keep falling out.
9:01 pm — Thursday, 8 September 2016
I can't wait for my Xiaomi earbuds to get here. Was gifted a pair of Beats earbuds a couple years ago and while they've been pretty good, one just stopped working. They cost about 4x as much as the Xiaomi too.
9:11 pm — Thursday, 8 September 2016
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment,
install the Safari extension!