Re:Apple Unveils a More Powerful Apple TV
by lobster_johnson on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:49PM
(#10193990)
I get where you're going, but I would argue that Apple's brand image isn't luxury at all. Apple sits squarely in the mid-to-high end bracket — anyone who's essentially "middle class" can afford Apple products, and their pricing indicates this. Examples of luxury brands that few people can afford: Hermes bags, Lambourghini cars, Cartier watches.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Apple Unveils a More Powerful Apple TV
by t0mbstone on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @05:03PM
(#10194583)
You can buy a 50 inch 4K TV right now for only $750.
http://www.amazon.com/VIZIO-M50-C1-50-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B0...
That puts 4K squarely in the "middle class" market, if you ask me, and if Apple TV doesn't support it, that means they aren't even targeting middle class. They are basically targeting poor people with an expensive luxury item that can run apps (half of which, like Netflix and Hulu, already run on most users' smart TVs). Their marketing strategy is borderline nonsensical.
Re:Apple Unveils a More Powerful Apple TV
by rsynnott on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @05:11PM
(#10194647)
I think it fits squarely into the 'affordable luxury' armed; it's kind of the equivalent of, say, Bosch or Neff for kitchen appliances. A little bit more expensive than the entry level brands, and not really that different, but it looks good, and the oven door feels a bit more solid. Apple's certainly not in the true luxury segment, except arguably with the gold watch.