29
Apple users get hit harder w/dynamic pricing. Could this be another carrot to get ppl on Tor? (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/tor@infosec.pub
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Just heard a radio interview where a dynamic pricing expert said some online shops detect a Safari browser and assume Apple users have deeper pockets. The algo positions higher priced items to the top of the page and perhaps shows them higher prices as those on non-Apple platforms.

So of course I’m thinking: this is perhaps a good reason to get more folks using Tor. If you cannot sell the idea of privacy, maybe money savings would sway them.

Tor users are fucked by tor-hostility, but that marginalisation is only possible because we are a small demographic. We need to be a bigger demographic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Just want to quickly say that people do get cheap iphones often via carrier promotions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Whether you won it, bought it, or paid for it over time through a carrier promotion, it's still a premium device.

    Apple has, to date, made five non-premium phones. One, when the iPhone 5s released, they recalled the iPhone 5 and replaced it with the iPhone 5c, which was an iPhone 5 with a plastic back to indicate you were too poor to buy the latest model. But otherwise, internally, it was still last year's flagship. Two, when the iPhone 6s was out, before the 7, they re-released the iPhone 5s with the guts of the iPhone 6s and called it the iPhone SE. So it was still the iPhone 6s, just with the two-year-old flagship's screen, and (slower) fingerprint reader. Three, the second SE was an iPhone 8 with the guts of an 11. Four, the third SE was the second SE but with 5G. I think this was the "oldest flagship" that Apple put out, and it was still competitive (at least, in performance) with modern Android flagships. And five, the iPhone 16e. The iPhone 16 with only one camera and Apple's "experimental" modem, the C1. (The second-generation, C2, is in the iPhone Air.)

    None of those phones were less powerful than the Android flagships released the same year, though they all had less features, like fewer cameras, and the latter four lacked headphone jacks, none of them had memory card slots, etc. And they started at $400, IIRC.

    Android phones go a lot cheaper. And that's the point the article makes as well. The cost of ownership is much lower in Android, especially if you buy secondhand and last year's flagship, or especially last year's mid-range.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I understand the retail price of the phones. But I’m not talking about installment plans. Carriers have insane deals on phones (both android and iphone).

    The iphone I’m using right now was old when I got it for free ($0). I just took a look at my carrier’s website and I can get another old one for free ($0) right at this very moment lol. It’s extremely common to see deals in the $50-300 range, too. Typically the only concession you make is you agree to stay on the same contract for a period of time, usually 2-3 years. But people don’t typically change carriers that much.

    Dunno if other places have the same deals pop up, looking just at US offerings. To be fair we do get fleeced on our monthly phone bill anyway, so maybe that’s why they’re willing to ‘bait’ people in with the free phones. But generally speaking there isn’t really an income bracket beneath which people switch to android. Iphone has about 70% market share here, it’s extremely common even for people with food assistance to have iphones.

    Again I know the phones in general are premium, just pointing out that access to the phones here is a relatively low bar. Androids have the same deals pop up too fwiw

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent