Thursday, September 13, 2007

iPhone-y

Obviously, I am not anti-technology. I am typing this post on a computer on an internet blog. But, we sometimes fail to ask whether new technology is good or necessary, and to evaluate its impact on our communities and relationships.

I tend to view most technological advancement much like I do cars. How efficient is this thing? How long before it becomes obsolete? How much energy will it use? How will this impact the environment? How much does it cost? Does it replace vital human interaction or impact communities in a negative way? How much time will this thing save/cost?

Which brings us to the iPhone. I do not have one and likely will not until there is some other gadget which is way more advanced that makes the iPhone an "old model" in three or four years (months?). As serious as I am about running, I almost always buy "last year's model" runing shoes for 25% less than the new model. Why? Because year to year, the changes are mostly cosmetic. Maybe when the iPhone uses up its "Geek Cred" (I totally stole that from another blogger), I'll have one in five years. Maybe not. Therefore, I will not pretend that I know a lot about the iPhone or why it is the greatest item ever fashioned.

That said, it seems to me that Apple pulled one over on their fanboys and fangirls with this $200 price cut.

Steven Levitt, University of Chicago economist and author of Freakonomics (a must read if you have not already read it), had this to say earlier in the week:

If you ask an economist how to price a new product that is just being introduced, the response you will get is that you should charge a very high price at first and then steadily reduce that price over time.

There are two reasons for doing this. First, it generally gets cheaper to produce things over time, so it makes sense to lower prices in response. Second, people vary widely in their willingness to pay for a new gadget. By starting high, you get as much money as you can from those who really want the product, then expand the market at the lower price point.

Hmm … that sounds exactly like what Apple just did with the iPhone. They brought it out at $599, sold one million iPhones, and then dropped the price to $399 after two months, in the hopes of selling nine million more this year...

What economists (and Apple too, I guess) ignore is that consumers hate it when companies follow practices that look like they are designed to maximize profits. You won’t find it in economic models, but consumers care about the reason a firm chooses the price it chooses...

Apple’s price cut looks like one driven purely by a desire to maximize profit, which is why everyone is so mad.

Of course, there is an economic argument that Apple made a good financial decision for their company...in the short run. But part of Apple's gig is that people believe they are getting a better, more innovative product from Apple than they get from other companies. Cutting the price of the greatest invention since the wheel by 33% after two months on the market severely undermines that credibility. It could potentially hurt the Apple mystique for future purchases.

Wendell Berry, Kentucky farmer and writer, set forth this rubric for evaluating technology in his essay "Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer":
1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces.
2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces.
3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces.
4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces.
5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body.
6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools.
7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible.
8. It should come from a small, privately owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair.
9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships.
Again, someone who knows a lot more about the iPhone than I do will have to perform this evaluation. And, while I will likely never live an agrarian life quite like Mr. Berry, he does raise some important points that might help us resist the urge to fall into the iHerd of iPeople buying iGadgets for the sake of I.

5 comments:

Derek said...

good! we anti-technologists have to stick together! If you never read it I posted on this subject right when the iPhone was released to the masses (in very sense of the word). here's a link: http://oceanorchestra.vox.com/library/post/freedom-and-cell-phones.html

No one but an agrarian like Berry could come up with his list, for no industrialized society could ever abide by most of those points.

Cort said...

Yes, Berry's list is kind of pie-in-the-sky. But, it's such a departure from the norm that it can help balance the scales a bit when evaluating tech.

Brandon Andrew Miles said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brandon Andrew Miles said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brandon Andrew Miles said...

1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces...
For me it replaces the need for a laptop. Surely, it is not a laptop, but it fulfills all the wants and needs that I would have wanted a laptop for. In this light it is much cheaper. But in other terms, the iPhone (even before the price drop) was cheaper than most non-contract dicounted smart phones and definately cheaper than one of those phones plus any iPod, even the shuffle.


2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces...
It's no contest in this catagory. Smaller than the iPod, as slim as the nano, though taller than the shuffle (of course).

3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces...
There is a 20 minute walkthrough at Apple.com. It is baffling. And for the first time in my life, the initial holding an using of a product was exactly what was shown to me on TV. Everything is so very easy. Jennifer Chiles played with it the entire trip to Central City and she was in total awe of how easy she figured everything out not being a Mac user, or even a proficient PC user.

4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces...
I really don't know how to measure this. It is one gadget instead of 2 or 3, so surely it is better in the usage, but I really don't what kind of energy is used in the production or transportation, etc... Apple has been improving its green practices (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple).

5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body...
It doesn't, but what device like this does yet? Are we that far along?

6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools...
That's probably a big no if the wrong damage is done, although there are a ton of walk throughs on screen repair, battery replacement, etc... Anyone techy enough to want an iPhone will be able to tweak th software all day and night. It at least is no worse than any product it is replacing (other phones, iPods, laptops or tablet PCs).

7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible...
Mark down at The Place downtown on the square. Go show some support! He is a genius. Can fix anything, and he knows everything about everything (not exactly, but he is awesome, and really cares about his customers). Apple does really well with having local stores of either their brand or allowing private shop owners to have training to be authorized Apple centers for warranty repair, etc...

8. It should come from a small, privately owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair...
Ditto to number 7. He is authorized by Apple to do the warranty work, etc... He also can do any repair even if the warranty is out for a reasonable price.

9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships...
For me it doesn't. But I know lots of people that let all kinds of things, like their work (or even reading books) do this. The product itself it meant to help in productivity (possibly allowing more time for family and friends) while having some added entertainment value. That in and of itself is fine, but people will abuse anything.

So there you have it. The best I can do, being a current iPone user. I am in the middle of my review of the iPhone which will post with a decent review of the Treo we bought originally. When the prices dropped, we just had to sell the Treos and switch out. In the end it cost us $50 per iPhone. We just had to do it.

All of that aside, I understand the need to step aside from the norm in extremes at time in order to balance the scales, to borrow your phrase. But let's be careful not to alienate those who are tech enthusiasts by career or hobby, yet have healthy views of faith, community, etc...

I love the both of you dearly.