Its official: Apple just bought Beats for $3 Billion

Status
Not open for further replies.
So instead of Apple products being overpriced, but of decent to good quality. This is the headphone equivalent of taking a Packard Bell Desktop and slapping an Apple sticker on it?

Well at least they didn't buy Skull Candy....
 
Ninja Scooter said:
Of course people are sheep. That's the point of marketing. It's the reason people will buy Kleenex or Heinz Kerchup instead of the cheaper store brand. It's the reason huge pharmaceutical companies stay in business despite the fact that you can buy generics with the exact same ingredients. Hell we are on a message board where people are willing to pay more for a game to get the original box art instead of that "icky" greatest hits art, or where people buy and rebuy consoles because they get rereleased in a new color or with a yoshi sticker on them. People buy into brands for whatever reason, whether it's because that's what they are used to, or because their friends are doing it, or because they just get a little bit of personal satisfaction out of it. Not sure why people like to pick on Apple and especially Beats consumers about it so much. Who fucking cares. Do you go around telling your friends they could have gotten a better quality t-shirt or sneakers for cheaper too?
Click to expand...

I like you
 
So detox never came out because Apple can't have people on their board dropping the n bomb and rapping about batches and hoes right?

Dre sold out brehs.
 
Majine said:
I haven't tried Beats In-ear headphones but they HAVE to be better than Apples, so potential net-win right there?
Click to expand...

apple’s earpods that came out with the iphone 5 are actually good. Definitely better bang for your buck at 30 bucks than beats in ears for 100.
 
Ninja Scooter said:
Do you go around telling your friends they could have gotten a better quality t-shirt or sneakers for cheaper too?
Click to expand...
Many people do think that it's crazy to spend £50 on a t-shirt when you can buy one for £8 that's basically the same, but without a particular brand name on it. What you said doesn't negate the argument that people are vain and easily led - it just extends it to other categories.

The reason people do it less with sneakers is because they are also more likely to be victims of advertising, marketing and fashion trends. If I posted up 2 pairs of sneakers, one Nike and one unbranded, but the unbranded pair were better quality, more comfortable, lasted longer, and were cheaper, I would expect the majority to choose the Nikes still, but that's not a defence of why people by Beats. It's just saying that most of us are vain, shallow characters who piss away money unnecessarily based on what other people think of us.
 
thefunkyman said:
Many people do think that it's crazy to spend £50 on a t-shirt when you can buy one for £8 that's basically the same, but without a particular brand name on it. What you said doesn't negate the argument that people are vain and easily led - it just extends it to other categories.

The reason people do it less with sneakers is because they are also more likely to be victims of advertising, marketing and fashion trends. If I posted up 2 pairs of sneakers, one Nike and one unbranded, but the unbranded pair were better quality, more comfortable, lasted longer, and were cheaper, I would expect the majority to choose the Nikes still, but that's not a defence of why people by Beats. It's just saying that most of us are vain, shallow characters who piss away money unnecessarily based on what other people think of us.
Click to expand...
People choose brands because they don't want to do the research. Do you actually research every single product you purchase? How do you know the unbranded pair lasted longer and was better quality? If I gave you the choice between a Nike and a Chinese Qiaodan right now, which would you buy?
 
Majine said:
They are not in-ear tho.
Click to expand...

true.

Apple’s in ears are pretty decent but are thin in the bass (exact opposite issue with Beats, really). good detail retrieval and mids, though. Compared with some of the more hifi IEM competition out there at $100-150 (like hifiman RE-400, Vsonic GR07) Apple’s IEM’s are probably worth around their price at 80 bucks. I’d say they’re a deal if found for 50-60.

either way, both offerings are better than Apple’s older buds or IEMs and better than any beats IEM that I’ve heard. I would not expect beats to be included in the box (they make ore money selling them separate) and I would not assume that a beats IEM is an upgrade in SQ, either.

completely unrelated to this. If there’s one thing that I consider positive about beats making hi end headphones popular is that it got the other players off their asses to make fashionable - and good sounding - phones and put a marketing pouch behind them. The Kef M500, Sennheiser Momentum (over ear model), and the B&W P7. these are all fairly new attempts to make fashionable headphones in the 300 dollar range to compete with beats. I may not like beats and their sound, but I like those other headphones and the market for those opened up due to beats popularity.
 
numble said:
People choose brands because they don't want to do the research. Do you actually research every single product you purchase? How do you know the unbranded pair lasted longer and was better quality? If I gave you the choice between a Nike and a Chinese Qiaodan right now, which would you buy?
Click to expand...
I'm not making some "holier than thou" argument where I claim to be completely unaffected by advertising, marketing, brand image and how other people perceive me.

What I am claiming though, is that even if there was conclusive proof that "unbranded sneaker X" was better quality, cheaper, lasted longer etc. than "Nike sneaker Y", that the majority of people would still choose the Nikes. You know they would, let's face it. People want to have that Nike swoosh on their trainers. You could even have the same pair of Nikes, except one has all of the branding removed and is $20 cheaper, but people would still pay $20 more for the branded ones.
 
thefunkyman said:
I'm not making some "holier than thou" argument where I claim to be completely unaffected by advertising, marketing, brand image and how other people perceive me.

What I am claiming though, is that even if there was conclusive proof that "unbranded sneaker X" was better quality, cheaper, lasted longer etc. than "Nike sneaker Y", that the majority of people would still choose the Nikes. You know they would, let's face it. People want to have that Nike swoosh on their trainers. You could even have the same pair of Nikes, except one has all of the branding removed and is $20 cheaper, but people would still pay $20 more for the branded ones.
Click to expand...
Do you actually have testing reports on all the shoes when you walk in to a shoe store? Your hypothetical is actually showing exactly why people are influenced by reputation and perception (and brands can build up negative perceptions and reputations too--"I won't buy another Compaq, another pair of X shoes, because I had a bad experience with them"). In the absence of complete information, we tend to go to the brands we personally trust and others recommend. This does not make you shallow. This means you are smart enough to not waste your time researching and becoming an expert on every little thing.
 
This is interesting.

For me beats are premium priced headphones that are just ok in quality.

Compare that to say bose or sennheiser, which says more to me about sound quality than beats does.

Apple and Bose could have made a good partnership. They still probably could if they rip out the internals of the beats headphones and put in Bose parts.

Obviously beats kills it in terms of sales and brand power, but apple always to me has never compromised on quality... Also is this really good partnership? I can't see anyone over 35 wearing a pair of them and apple has always suited all age groups.
 
numble said:
In the absence of complete information, we tend to go to the brands we personally trust and others recommend.
Click to expand...
Or in the case of Beats, people ignore all of the info online and recommendations that they should buy something else, simply because they want that "oh, look he has some Beats!" headphones on their head. Young folks are the Beats demographic. They all have access to the web. They can easily research this stuff. They can easily find videos from some of the top tech folks on YouTube saying "buy something else!".....

TldLxOu.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et_PWifUd1w

And that's a $160 pair of headphones up against some $400 Beats.

But still, they want their peers to be impressed by their brand choice, not by their wise choice.
 
thefunkyman said:
Or in the case of Beats, people ignore all of the info online and recommendations that they should buy something else, simply because they want that "oh, look he has some Beats!" headphones on their head. Young folks are the Beats demographic. They all have access to the web. They can easily research this stuff. They can easily find videos from some of the top tech folks on YouTube saying "buy something else!".....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et_PWifUd1w

But still, they want their peers to be impressed by their brand choice, not by their wise choice.
Click to expand...
There are a ton of sneaker reviews online, too. I don't think I've read a single one. I just go into a store and choose something that looks and feels good, from a trustworthy brand. Some things we just don't care to research. The biggest indicator is how we usually trust big brands for medicine and doctor recommendations--it's something you put in your body, for your health! But I doubt you are reading all the clinical test results, reviews, and reports on those pharmaceuticals. You can easily research everything, even the reviews for random restaurants or coffee shops in a strange town, but if you don't want to, it is easy to gravitate to the branded restaurants and Starbucks.
 
numble said:
There are a ton of sneaker reviews online, too. I don't think I've read a single one. I just go into a store and choose something that looks and feels good, from a trustworthy brand. Some things we just don't care to research.
Click to expand...
But you don't have tons of people online saying "Nikes are over-priced crap", do you, including some of the biggest tech folks on the web? And when did Monster/Beats become a "trustworthy brand"?
 
thefunkyman said:
But you don't have tons of people online saying "Nikes are over-priced crap", do you, including some of the biggest tech folks on the web? And when did Monster/Beats become a "trustworthy brand"?
Click to expand...

To be fair, outside these circlejerks you don't really have big banners over the web saying that Beats are crap/overpriced either.
 
thefunkyman said:
But you don't have tons of people online saying "Nikes are over-priced crap", do you, including some of the biggest tech folks on the web? And when did Monster/Beats become a "trustworthy brand"?
Click to expand...
There definitely are tons of people saying Nike is overpriced crap. We even get counter-brands like Starburys focused on this very idea. I still don't research sneakers as intently as you, which reviewers do you find most trustworthy?

Different people have different valuations of trustworthiness. It may just not crap out after a bit of use, like with shoes. People may find a brand trustworthy if many people use it or it is endorsed by someone they trust. You can't simply have a brand success without some sort of quality. Otherwise we'd still have New Coke or Crystal Pepsi, which were rejected by the public despite strong branding. People still rejected Ping and the ROKR, despite the strong Apple brand.
 
I just read that 62% of headphones over 100 dollars are beats. Fucking hell man those things are dog quality. This just reenforces the theory that people really are stupid.

Would jobs have done this? Would he? 3 billion dollars for this? I see that it will make them money if they have 500m revenue every year but what happens if beats falls down the stairs? At any rate what a load of it. Reason number 877484 why I don't use apple anymore and have no plans to ever again.

You can say all you want about Microsoft but at least Win7 is openish and a decent OS where you can do what you want.

Apple simply isn't in the business of professional audio hardware design and neither is BEATS lol. Sennheiser and Beyer will crap all over this but the masses will be like OH MY apple gadgets here is my money!
 
DemurOnion said:
I just read that 62% of headphones over 100 dollars are beats. Fucking hell man those things are dog quality. This just reenforces the theory that people really are stupid.

Would jobs have done this? Would he? 3 billion dollars for this? I see that it will make them money if they have 500m revenue every year but what happens if beats falls down the stairs? At any rate what a load of it. Reason number 877484 why I don't use apple anymore and have no plans to ever again.

You can say all you want about Microsoft but at least Win7 is openish and a decent OS where you can do what you want.
Click to expand...

lol What. What does this have to do with Beats?
 
Smart. Beats will improve the audio across the spectrum I assume. Better speakers for MacBooks, iMac, iPhone. And better headphones bundled with every new iPhones. All powered by Beats Audio.

arbok26 said:
This is interesting.

For me beats are premium priced headphones that are just ok in quality.

Compare that to say bose or sennheiser, which says more to me about sound quality than beats does.

Apple and Bose could have made a good partnership. They still probably could if they rip out the internals of the beats headphones and put in Bose parts.

Obviously beats kills it in terms of sales and brand power, but apple always to me has never compromised on quality... Also is this really good partnership? I can't see anyone over 35 wearing a pair of them and apple has always suited all age groups.
Click to expand...

Bose isn't even on the same level as Sennheiser. Beats and Bose are much closer but Sennheiser belongs in a group among Denon, AKG, Beyerdynamics, etc..
 
thefunkyman said:
But you don't have tons of people online saying "Nikes are over-priced crap", do you, including some of the biggest tech folks on the web? And when did Monster/Beats become a "trustworthy brand"?
Click to expand...

i think u would fit right in on the headfi forums, although you might be too poor for their tastes.
 
The 'What Would Jobs Do?' thing is absurd. No, he wouldn't have, but he's dead. It's Cook's ship to steer now. He can't direct a company based on what he guesses Jobs would have done with every eventuality.
 
numble said:
You can't simply have a brand success without some sort of quality. Otherwise we'd still have New Coke or Crystal Pepsi, which were rejected by the public despite strong branding.
Click to expand...
That's not a good example, because the reason why they were rejected is largely because of the strong brand image of the original products and their association with a particular taste. In blind taste tests, the new products were favoured more than the old ones. If anything, that just backs up what I'm saying. When the brand name wasn't made clear, people favoured the new taste.
 
arbok26 said:
This is interesting.

For me beats are premium priced headphones that are just ok in quality.

Compare that to say bose or sennheiser, which says more to me about sound quality than beats does.

Apple and Bose could have made a good partnership. They still probably could if they rip out the internals of the beats headphones and put in Bose parts.

Obviously beats kills it in terms of sales and brand power, but apple always to me has never compromised on quality... Also is this really good partnership? I can't see anyone over 35 wearing a pair of them and apple has always suited all age groups.
Click to expand...

Bose is nowhere near Sennheiser. They aren't even on the same planet. Bose is more or less BEATS type stuff with better clarity possibly. Meanwhile, the HD800s need a suitable replacement at some point I hope Senn is working on it.
 
effingvic said:
lol What. What does this have to do with Beats?
Click to expand...

Ohh, I just put that in there as my idea that Apple doesn't do it for me anymore. They are a brand for yuppies and cakeheads and people that like the ease of their products I guess. Once I stopped using Apple I never went back nor had any feelings of doubt. Their quality versus price is absurd.

And Beats just drives that point home. Apple is faux quality hardware with inspirational design.
 
speculawyer said:
Because it is NOT subjective. It is OBJECTIVE. We can measure things like frequency response, decibels, roll-off, etc.
Click to expand...

thefunkyman said:
Or in the case of Beats, people ignore all of the info online and recommendations that they should buy something else, simply because they want that "oh, look he has some Beats!" headphones on their head. Young folks are the Beats demographic. They all have access to the web. They can easily research this stuff. They can easily find videos from some of the top tech folks on YouTube saying "buy something else!".....

http://i.imgur.com/TldLxOu.jpg[IMG]

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et_PWifUd1w[url]

And that's a $160 pair of headphones up against some $400 Beats.

But still, they want their peers to be impressed by their brand choice, not by their wise choice.[/QUOTE]

There are people in this world, who for the same reasons think that people who by Apple products ignore all the info and online recommendations that they should buy something else. This can be said for any product, and doubly so for a product that has a large following.

It's as Numble says, people don't want to take the time to become an expert on everything (nor could they). People weigh experiential evidence and trusted friend recommendations higher than that of research that they haven't done or are even unaware of. It's not a big deal, we all do it hundreds of times a day in any manner of decision making. Companies, including Apple and Beats make use of this, if Beats were the first to have stumbled on to this, then 3 billion would a major undervaluation.
Click to expand...
 
thefunkyman said:
That's not a good example, because the reason why they were rejected is largely because of the strong brand image of the original products and their association with a particular taste. In blind taste tests, the new products were favoured more than the old ones. If anything, that just backs up what I'm saying. When the brand name wasn't made clear, people favoured the new taste.
Click to expand...
The problem with the New Coke taste tests were based on single sips and not total servings or continual servings. It was a strong brand and there was a deluge of advertising. I don't know about Crystal Pepsi as much as you seem to know about, though.
 
ivedoneyourmom said:
There are people in this world, who for the same reasons think that people who by Apple products ignore all the info and online recommendations that they should buy something else. This can be said for any product, and doubly so for a product that has a large following.

It's as Numble says, people don't want to take the time to become an expert on everything (nor could they). People weigh experiential evidence and trusted friend recommendations higher than that of research that they haven't done or are even unaware of. It's not a big deal, we all do it hundreds of times a day in any manner of decision making. Companies, including Apple and Beats make use of this, if Beats were the first to have stumbled on to this, then 3 billion would a major undervaluation.
Click to expand...

You can't really compare this method to Apple. In many ways their tablets and computers in particular are superior in a lot of tangible objective ways than similarly priced competition.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Personal judgment no valid than any other.



But what if someone doesn't like the way they look?



Ok? I don't understand how what you just said related to what we're discussing.



Compare based on what? How are you not understanding this very simple concept?

I don't own beats headphones because I don't want them. I don't value looks or brand recognition, but have somehow found it within myself not to trip over myself trying to justify talking down to those people that do. Maybe the rest of my life affords me the luxury of not having to feel superior to others because of their choice of headphones.



If they are successful the market and those that want them have judged them to be valuable.
Click to expand...

People with taste don't really agree or like people without taste. Maybe your luxuriously equal and fair lifestyle is not for everyone. I wouldn't be caught dead in a pair of Beats. For so many reasons chief among them they sound like crap.

But I can understand people not wanting this or not agreeing with it in anyway. I'm not going to go popping tires of Beats customers or anything. But I do know I won't be befriending many such people either based on their knowledge and taste in audio. I can understand also why some people like them I guess. It makes them fit in. Like a pair of nice jeans or something. But again there is a divide between people and their tastes here and it is a definite schism imo.

And the first quote in many ways is not a personal judgement. Objectively, Beats audio is terrible. Objectively, they are worse sounding than other headphones. If said person is wearing headphones not to listen to them is the only way this is a personal value judgement. Otherwise no. It is stupid, in that stupid is equated with paying more money than you need to for MUCH MUCH lesser quality. That is stupid in my book too.
 
Don't understand this at all. Apple hardware is typically more expensive but it is good hardware.

Beats are really not good at all versus even my MDR-10RBT's.
 
DemurOnion said:
But I do know I won't be befriending many such people either based on their knowledge and taste in audio.
Click to expand...

You may not become friends with someone because they buy Beats? That's crazy. Beats is the biggest seller in this market. You are refusing to friend quite a lot of people potentially.
 
Cheebo said:
You can't really compare this method to Apple. In many ways their tablets and computers in particular are superior in a lot of tangible objective ways than similarly priced competition.
Click to expand...

It really comes down to what you value more. I enjoyed my iPad (sold it when I moved, will likely buy the next model when it comes out and have the money), but I am well aware of the arguments against it, iTunes, too little ram, not enough storage, no expandable storage, Apple, not as fast as X, not as flexible as Android, harder to side-load software, etc. This list could be near infinite in length, and all of these points are viewed as inferior to some people when comparing iPad to the competition. Maybe Beats headphones are a bit heavily weighted on the side of popularity, appearance, group association, etc. But I'd be willing to guess they are better at sound than some of their competitors and worse than some. Trade offs and values.

I love my Apple products, I can't see myself buying anything but the next iPhone, however I think some of the distress in this announcement (aside from the racial element on Macrumors, et al.) is it hits a bit too close to home. A lot of the comments people make about Beats are comments they have heard about Apple and they tirelessly defended, now they joined forces - that's got to leave many of these people confused.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Long Way Home — Official Trailer | Apple TV+
2
339
AJUMP23 replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
71
3K
Yerd replied
Tim Apple announces Season 3 of Severance
36
3K
kapshin replied
The Gorge - Official Trailer | Apple TV+
46
3K
sono replied
Xbox + Apple TV+ 3 months free deal
News 
8
2K
reinking replied
Top Bottom