Away with You, Logic: Write the facts that fit your assumptions

by Uluroo — September 26, 2017

Did you know that the word "expensive" literally means "overpriced"? Read on to find out more.

Ladies and gentlemen, the English language has been altered at the whims of Mashable. Two words that once had separate meanings have now been fused into one, and Jack Morse is here to tell us about it: "Tim Cook thinks you should stop whining about the iPhone X's $1,000 price tag."

You might think that this article is completely normal and logical. After all, that is what Tim Cook thinks. But as we travel farther on, we realize that we were only standing at the mouth of the cave. Everything looked bright until we went in. And now we are stuck and have to read this because for some reason the Mashable website likes to freeze Uluroo's web browser.

Chill everyone. Just chill. No, the $999 iPhone X is not too expensive. Nor is it out of the reach of the average American.

It's not every day Uluroo comes across an article like this one. This one is truly unique. When writing this, Jack probably thought his sarcasm was funny. In reality, his sense of humor completely goes over the edge to the point where he is literally fabricating facts. Well, they aren't actually facts. But it all starts in the first paragraph.

Jack is talking about Tim Cook's appearance on Good Morning America. But you'll see that nowhere in this article does Jack cite when Tim Cook said the iPhone X is within reach of the average American. Wanna know why Jack didn't cite that? Because it never happened. But because that fits his sarcastic sense of humor, he decided to lie to his readers and imply that Tim Cook said so. Professional tip: When in conflict, humor comes before truth.

Speaking on Good Morning America [sic], the man who brought us the Apple Pencil case went to great lengths to techsplain to all us backward-thinking Luddites the Helvetica Neue writing on the wall.

He also brought us the iPad Pro. And the Apple Watch. And Apple Pay. These are just a few of the products that were introduced when Tim Cook was CEO of Apple, but again, to fit what he thinks is funny, Jack cites a not-so-awesome product Apple released during Cook's tenure. This seems to be a recurring theme: Write the facts to fit your piece, not the other way around. It's nice that we have our priorities straight.

"Well it's a value price, actually, for the technology that you're getting," noted Cook while fighting back a smirk. "And as it turns out you know most people are now paying for phones over long periods of time, and so very few people will pay the price tag of the phone initially."

Ah yes, the old "24 easy payments" argument. So empowering.

There's a link in there to Apple's "Buy iPhone X" page. Uluroo can't make sense of what this is trying to prove other than that your monthly payments are going to be higher than with previous phones. This is a big shocker! If one number is larger than another, that number divided by 24 will also be larger! Ya know what they say: You learn something new every day.

So yes, you will pay more for the iPhone X monthly than with other iPhones. But that doesn't disprove Cook's point, which is that most consumers won't pay for the full up-front price. Jack didn't disprove that point. He just excellently misunderstood Cook and then inserted a random link.

Tim Cook isn't saying that the iPhone X is less expensive than other iPhones. But what he is saying, and what Jack still hasn't refuted, is that people won't have to pay the $999 all at once.

But he didn't stop there. No, Cook went further, emphasizing that giving Apple an expensive piece of tech that you presumably own and have paid for makes the X an even better deal. Or something.

"Also, most people actually trade in their current phone, and so that reduces the price further," opined the Great And Wise One. "And some carriers even through in, ya know, subsidies and discounts."

Uluroo thinks that Jack shouldn't insult the CEO of the richest company on the planet in order to get a point across. This entire piece is filled with feeble arguments backed up by insults and bad jokes.

But you see, Jack just skipped over the trade-in part as though his "Great and Wise One" joke were enough to disprove it. There is literally no denying that a new iPhone is a better deal if you trade in your old one. Why is this so hard to grasp? Because Jack Morse is so bent on saying the iPhone X is overpriced that he'll do whatever it takes to shove his point down our throats. How this article got past the editors is another question altogether, because there has been no substantial argumentation whatsoever so far.

But we're not done yet, folks. Because we're about to make the jump another dimension where words, facts, and meaning itself have no meaning.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot about all the sweet subsidies and discounts that certainly come with zero contractual strings attached! Thanks Tim!

If you don't want to pay up front from the phone and the alternatives are also not good enough for you, maybe you aren't the type of person who wants to buy a phone at all. Seriously, people are capable of deciding for themselves whether the benefits and drawbacks of a contract are worth it for them. Your sarcastic ranting is not enough to change the fact that some things work for some people.

maybe the iPhone X is a great deal. After all, it will totally scan your face. That's pretty neat and no cause for concern.

Uluroo has responded to a couple of articles Jack has written about Face ID. The main reason Jack thinks Face ID is a cause for concern is only if corporations, advertisement companies, and malicious parties get ahold of the scans. So there's nothing inherently wrong with Face ID.

Basically, Face ID is a privacy concern for the same reason a passcode is a privacy concern: It can be used for bad purposes if the wrong parties get access to it.

And so what if fast charging costs extra?

Fast charging is not a necessity. Also, if it were bundled with the phone, the whole package would cost more. Uluroo thinks that Apple made the right call because people have the choice of whether to stick with the already-pretty-good charging or upgrade to fast charging.

OK, Tim, you've sold me. Let me just rustle up my $999 and... oh, what's that you say? AppleCare+ is going to set me back another $199.

So Apple should bundle AppleCare+ with its new iPhones. Totally makes sense.

Actually, this added cost is pretty obvious. The iPhone X is worth more money. Therefore, it costs more money to fix. This is hard to understand because... we have no idea why.

Also, you can get AppleCare+ at no extra cost if you take part in the iPhone Upgrade Program. Pretty generous. So this added cost is not necessary, and it's obvious why Apple has to charge more for it in the first place.

And it's not like I live in the United Kingdom, where the 256GB model will actually cost $1,529 even without AppleCare (+ or otherwise).

Things are priced differently in different countries and it makes Jack so mad!

Seriously, this is nothing new. Don't blame Apple for something that's been going on for a long time. If the extra cost of buying the iPhone X overseas pushes it over your budget, that's understandable, but it's not Apple's problem or Apple's fault.

This, actually, is starting to make more and more sense for me financially. Let me just toss my iPhone 6S in the trash and start my new, value price-driven life.

Jack links to another Mashable piece in there, which Uluroo isn't going to include, but here's a link to Uluroo's response to that article.

Jack also has this tweet embedded in the article:

I understand inflation, etc but don't you find the price tag for the iPhone X out of reach for the average American?

Jack didn't write this tweet, but he is basically saying the same thing. And now he's just making stuff up. Tim Cook never said the price of the iPhone X was within reach of the average American. He literally just said that people can leverage that cost with subsidies and carrier deals so they don't pay the full price up-front. He never said the phone isn't expensive. So why did Jack even write this article? These and many other questions will never get answered.

Tim, I'm totally happy to wait until 2018 to personally benefit from your unbiased take on how the iPhone X isn't that expensive after all.

Thank you for sharing this Truth with us — it's one I will cherish well into 2019 as I continue to make monthly payments on my totally affordable smartphone.

Even the point about the bias is wrong. Tim Cook isn't biased toward you buying an iPhone X. Strictly from a money standpoint, he would actually rather you buy an iPhone 8. That's because Apple reportedly has lower profit margins on the iPhone X than on the iPhone 8. So Apple makes, yes, more money if you buy the less expensive model. This is also what Tim Cook means by a "value price." It's not cheap, it's just not overpriced.

Jack has been trying to prove that expensive means overpriced. We sensible people know that he is profoundly incorrect. Just the fact that a Ferrari cost more doesn't mean that it's overpriced or not worth the cost. Sure, you maybe can't afford it and shouldn't buy it. But don't try to say that it's overpriced. Especially when the company makes less money on it despite the price tag.

Ironically, the only right thing about this article was the title. And even then it was a sarcastic one. Jack, there's nothing wrong with making a few jokes in your article. The problem is when you happily trade accuracy for humor. That's not helpful to anyone but Mashable's click traffic.

But then again, that is the whole point, isn't it?

Jack, here's a thought. If you have to jump through this many flaming hoops of inaccuracy just to keep the audience's attention, maybe you shouldn't be performing in the circus in the first place.