$2,000 for a phone? Holy price point, Batman. No thanks.
I assume the people who would buy something like this have enough money not to care, and also would not care about the second part of my comment, because they want New Thing or use their phones enough for it to be useful.
I guess it might be the case that the only way to make the folding screen thing even remotely work is a very, very expensive manufacturing process. But as is often the case, I don't see how it's worth it?
I want my phones smaller and with Touch ID, not enormous and wrinkly.
> $2,000 for a phone? Holy price point, Batman. No thanks.
Isn't that basically in line with the competition? Cheaper, even, than some of the competition?
$2800 here. What kinda of problem does that solve that's worth that kind of money? I'm seriously asking, because I can't figure it out. I can completely see buying an iPhone 18 Pro because you use it for work as an influencer or media creator, but this is close to twice the price and much less of a tool.
I don't think luxury phones necessarily need to solve problems. They're just luxury phones, people who can afford them will buy them because they like them, not because they're solving problems.
>What kinda of problem does that solve that's worth that kind of money?
If it means I don't have to put reading glasses on to use my phone, I'd pay a lot more...
Have you checked the accessibility features of your phone?
Incredibly useless. It is obvious that Apple doesn't have UI/UX designers over 40. Increasing the font size doesn't effect everything and breaks too many things. For example, you can't change the size of the time in the top left. Style > usability all over the place. Don't get me started on the stupid watch...
That does sound annoying :(
Apart from fire and shelter, a person really does not _require_ that much. These are luxury items, to which the basic rationale does not apply.
I can't really answer that because I'm not the target for this particular model. I'd rather have a new Mini.
But I think this could be really appealing for a large number of normies who have a phone as their sole computing device.
That is a valid use case, but it's a $2800 device, you can get another iPhone and a Neo (or an iPad) for the same price and have money to spare.
It does make sense as a one and only device, but the price makes it a little unrealistic, in my mind.
An influencer needing the latest iphone is also ridiculous when you think about it. They are running instagram and tiktok after all, not waiting for software to compile. They don't even need the latest and greatest camera because all their content is only going to be viewed on a palm sized screen.
Influencers want a device like that for status and branding. Technical specs are not a huge factor.
Doesn't it hide in a giant pink jelly case with a pop socket anyhow?
It's basically for people who want an iPhone and iPad, but in a device that's worse than both, while being more expensive than just buying one of each.
Good god, is it? My current phone is an iPhone SE 3rd Gen and I paid $250 for it on eBay.
That’s not a brand new folding phone. Those start at $1900 MSRP from what I see. However, you can get them a few hundred cheaper. Some of them cost even more than Apple.
People have been saying “Oh my God, who would pay $600 for a phone“ for 20 years. Clearly there are such people.
Most people don't actually realize they're paying $$$$ for their phone, as they get a phone with their mobile plan and they pay some monthly small sum for 24 months that lets them forget they'd never be able to afford it otherwise.
New flagship product with lots of features is more expensive than old entry level product purchased used?!
Not sure what expressing the cost of your current phone has to do with the discussion here, but I’m guessing this phone certainly isn’t for you. Some people choose to spend more on their phones, and some less.
A price difference of 8x for what this offers seems crazy to me.
A $10,000 car and a $80,000 car are going to be markedly different. Same for a $100,000 house vs a $800,000 house.
This $2,000 phone does not seem 8 times better than my $250 phone.
Your phone does not offer more screen area on demand. That is genuinely useful for many people. Apparently, not you, but that's OK.
> This $2,000 phone does not seem 8 times better than my $250 phone.
Well lets adjust the comparison you just made, then.
> A $10,000 car and a $80,000 car are going to be markedly different.
I can buy a Maserati Ghibli for under $10K on eBay and it will be very similar to the $109K Ghibli that Maserati would sell me today.
Well, other than being 10 years old, having 100,000 miles on it, most likely needing a new timing chain, suspension, and generally needing a new cooling system, sure.
That's why they're $10K.
Meanwhile for about the same price differential, $10K on eBay will get you an Audi RS 5 ... engine ... with 60K on it.
I don't know that the Ghibli makes the point you want to make.
> I don't know that the Ghibli makes the point you want to make.
What point do you think I was trying to make? ivraatiems compared what he paid for a used iPhone on eBay to a new iPhone four years newer, and then said this was an absurd price difference because 8x price gets you way more car.
All I did is point out that this is a bullshit comparison because of course you can buy an older, used product way cheaper than a brand new one. I chose the Ghibli because it is one of the more entertaining (and repeatable every year, there are lots of gluttons for punishment out there it seems) examples of fast depreciating cars. To varying degrees this example could use any product, but ivraatiems chose cars so I ran with it.
It's not really fair to compare a used phone price to a brand new one. The SE 3 sold for almost 500 when it was released.
Is this foldable 4x better than your SE 3? Almost definitely, by every metric, except size if you're into small things.
Your opinion is duly noted.
have you considered that you might just not be the target market ? :)
Who exactly is the target market? Millionaires?
As an engineer in a high cost of living location, you can buy this phone and still save some money in the same month.
However, maybe you can't buy a house there. For that you'd have to be a millionaire.
But people like me cannot be the target market of Apple because that would be a very limited number of customers. Also even if I could afford it, I don’t see any use case for it so why would I even buy it?
Pretty sure Apple and other manufacturers do market research before pouring tons of resources into it.
I guess the time would tell. I’m pretty sure they did market research before the Apple Vision Pro and we all saw how it turned out
256GB galaxy z fold8 is ~$1900
I might get one. I've been using a mini for years and am pretty much giving up on Apple ever making one again. The AI features finally seem worth an upgrade, and I don't love the size of the Air, standard iPhone, or Pro/Max models.
If I'm going to have to two-hand it, this is perhaps not the worst. Also, it might be more one-handable when closed than regular iPhones.
Is it very expensive? Yes, especially if you don't opt for the base storage (256 is not enough in the age of LLMs). But I've not upgraded in 5 years, so I've got budget to spare.
> $2,000 for a phone?
> I assume the people who would buy something like this have enough money not to care, and also would not care about the second part of my comment, because they want New Thing or use their phones enough for it to be useful.
But what's the monthly price with Apple's upgrade program? I'd bet that's how most people will be buying it (me included, if I decide to get one).
they're definitely hoping the people who can't afford it simply lease it like an expensive car.
Lots of people can afford it. If you keep the phone two years, that works out to less than $3 / day. The lease option is even less. They're going to sell or lease a lot of these.
I think it's going to be very interesting to see how well the sales for the Duo do in year two and three. I suspect sales will go up, but wouldn't be shocked if they drop.
The number of people who buy junk food on credit they can't pay off is pretty much unfathomable at least in the USA. There are plenty of people for whom "$3 / day" is something they very realistically can't afford.
Yup. I mean I don’t have any need for this one, but in general, the cost it’s pretty low when you look at it from a monthly cost or a daily cost
You remind me of the (in)famous comment by Steve Ballmer when the iPhone was first introduced .
The functionality and user experience provided by first iPhone compared to its peers at time completely justified its price.
In comparison iPhone Duo only offers a bigger screen and even limited functionality when it comes to camera if you compare it with iPhone 18 Pro.
The first iPhone did not have 3G when it came out, no GPS either, and no App Store - you were stuck with all the stock apps. It was definitely far behind its peers in several key aspects
Here’s a flashback: https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/original-iphone-review/
I’ve said it before, but Ballmer was exactly right WHEN he said that. I know because I was one of the very few people in my area, notable for being a tech hub, who had an iPhone at release… only because my employer at the time paid for it.
I had a large, relatively well-paid, tech-savvy circle of friends (and many random strangers) who openly envied me but could not justify the price point.
The numbers back this up because iPhone sales didn’t start hockeysticking up until the next version was released, which allowed carriers to further subsidize smartphones with data plans that brought the upfront costs down to $200.
The iPhone was as much a technology revolution as it was a consumer financing one, but it is never discussed as such.
also another thing people forget is that merely 10 weeks after the first iphone launched, Apple cut the price by $200 in sept 2007. it then launched the 2nd gen iphone (iphone 3g) at an even lower price the next year due to carrier subsidies.
In Canada they range from $3000-$4800. Absolutely bonkers prices.
Most people don't buy their phones, they just finance it through the phone carrier as an "upgrade".
The phone carriers then upsells their more expensive plans.
Just Klarna (or shall we say, "Apple Upgrade" [1] now) it. You need to consume. Not want, need.
1: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/07/apple-upgrade-launche...
5 different people messaged me today saying they are pre ordering a duo
None of those people have ever messaged me about any other phone event ever
Is this such a big news that it'd warrant texting people over?
I don’t see the problem with the pricing. It’s the most used gadget and its an iphone and ipad in one.
Few pay it directly. It's paid in installments, subsidized by the carrier, traded-in for for an old but still okay phone, etc.
And those who want to boast, can of course buy for the full price. This is a non-zero share of the target market.
> subsidized by the carrier
You misspelled “you’re overcharged for your mobile subscription and get a phone”.
I am with you on this one, probably sales charts are up for foldable phones but I am not sure those people are reading the room correct. We want smaller devices more tactile if we wanted ipads we would get ipads.
I try and usually succeed at using my phones for around 3 years, so it's not out of the question. Still have another year on my current one, I'll check out the next duo next year.
Depending on the age, people are spending between 4-6.5 hours a day on their phone. How much are people spending on computers? Their mattress? 2,000 for the cutting edge version is frankly reasonable for what a phone provides in this day and age, especially considering the last 3 years of inflation in the US...
to sell a phone for such a ridiculous price you need to make it as obvious as possible - a folded phone is pretty obvious - now people can buy it as a status symbol. what's the point of a status symbol if not everybody around you immediately recognizes the item as very expensive. there you go.
$700 premium for Duo compared to iPhone Pro Max 18. Exactly the price of iPad mini 256GB.
It's not a phone, it's a status symbol fashion object.
Ok maybe it's that but it's definitely also a phone
I'd imagine its targeted in particular at producers - e.g. content producers.
There's enough buyers in the market.
First mention of this in the whole thread. Its the first demographic that came to mind as well, for example filming yourself (maybe even with auto prompter?), any, center stage, etc. Not sure how practical it really is, for example you would still need some sort of way to put the phone ‘at eye level’, if you put it on a table the camera angle would be awkward unless you sit on the floor or small stool, or have they implemented some optic tricks that can compensate for this?
It has Touch ID
Yes, I think this is an artifact of the new under-display camera (at least on the inside). The official copy states:
> iPhone Duo uses Touch ID, which is integrated into the side button. This gives you an easy, secure, and consistent way to authenticate iPhone Duo, whether it’s closed or open.
Probably no way to do FaceID from under a display yet.
And thank goodness for that. I loathe, hate, despite, reject Face ID. The Duo is too pricey for me, but Touch ID makes me reconsider.
It is also enormous and costs $2,000.
Shutup and take my money!
/s
Why do you like that over Face ID?
Not the person you're replying to, but Face ID just works much less reliably for me. I usually wear glasses, and when I get up in the morning and am not wearing them yet, it usually takes a number of tries before my phone will unlock. Sometimes it will also randomly not work in the middle of the day, maybe because of glares or something. Touch ID always just worked.
After jumping from an iPhone to a Pixel and back, the only thing I miss is fingerprint unlock which is way faster and more convenient than Face ID. You don’t need to adjust the phones position or anything if it’s too close to your face or in a position where it can’t scan your face.
I prefer TouchID because FaceID doesn't work when my phone is flat on the table and away from me. That's is how I use my phone most of the time, I don't really hold it up to my face.
I echo what lutoma said. I hateHateHATE the endless having to tilt and/or move around the phone all the time (especially, but not only, after awaking) to get Face ID to "work". Give me Touch ID any day.
according to the blurb you can lease it $60/month
Renting. It's $57 per month for 24 months and then you have to hand it in.
So you pay $1368 for the privilege of using the Duo for 2 years.
You get the choice to pay the remaining value of the phone and keep it, or enter a new "lease" agreement for a brand new phone at the end of the term. The formula is simple:
purchase fee = device list price – lease payments made – remaining discounts or trade-in credits.
If you're paying $1368 over 24 months, you could pay the remaining $632 after those 24 months and keep it with 0% interest.
So let's say you go to Hertz or Avis at the airport, you get a car for a month at $1700. The car has an MSRP of $40,000 and Hertz/Avis gives you the option to buy the car for $38,300 after you return it.
Is that leasing or renting in your country?
Let's say you go to BMW or Lexus or Ford. You pay them $3000 and agree to pay them $500 a month for the next 3 years to use the car according to some conditions. The car is worth $60,000. You pay $21,000 over those three years. When you bring it back, they offer to let you buy it outright or to just hand it over to the dealer.
Is that leasing or renting in your country?
Is the difference between renting and leasing even meaningful? You chose a car rental agency for your example because it costs more per month to rent from a short-term rental agency. What is a lease but a long term loan? What difference does it make that I rent my apartment by signing a document called a "lease agreement"? Am I a renter? Or a leaser?
Renting/leasing is not automatically bad. The terms are what make one a good or a bad deal.
Is that $3000 a deposit that you get if you return it in good condition? In that case we would definitely call that renting.
> Is the difference between renting and leasing even meaningful?
Where I live, yes. If you lease you are the owner, with the financing company having the ability to seize it when you don't pay. If you rent you are not the owner, but are allowed to use it. Renting is a bit plebeian.
"Plebian" is a value judgement informed by class politics, which means it is laughable to take it seriously.
Lease. You can buy it out at the predefined price at the end.
English is not my first language, sorry. If you have a device that you pay a monthly fee for, but you can't keep it at the end of the contract, where I am from we call that renting.
Leasing is a financial construction where you actually own the product / property, with the bank having the option to claim it if you fail to pay.
This is not true, with leasing you don't own the product or property at all. Leasing is basically long-time rent. For example, when you lease a car, you don't own it - the leasing company does. In some cases, you can buy out the object at the end of the lease (like cars), in some cases you can't (like apartments).
> a financial construction where you actually own the product / property, with the bank having the option to claim it if you fail to pay.
This is called financing - basically, buying a thing with bank's money which they give you as a loan. For high-value purchases, there are often limitations on what you can do with the object, or requirements (like a requirement to have homeowner insurance for mortgages), but there are usually less restrictions compared to lease since you are the owner.
Ah.
Renting is you pay $X a month and when the contact ends everyone walks away. You don’t get the thing back, the other party does.
Leasing is close but slightly different. You still pay $X, you still don’t own it and can walk away at the end.
But with a lease you are given a choice to buy the thing at a pre-arranged price when the lease is over. So when you sign the contract you know that at the end you can pay $700 and it’s yours. Or you can still walk away.
It’s far, far more common with cars. The dealership guesses how much the car will be worth and offers you at lease based on that. If the car is worth more at the end of the lease than your buyout price, you can buy the car cheaper then you could, on the open market. If it’s worth less, you can walk away. You didn’t lose as much as you would have if you had gotten a loan, and you could go buy the same car used if you wanted for less.
For something like a phone, I’m not sure it really matters that much. So I don’t know why they decided to do leases.
It’s a lease, not rent. I don’t know the exact numbers on this but you can pay “rent” for two years and then pay like $300 (I don’t know what the right number is here) at the end to own it outright at that point. So at the end of the day you pay like $200 more than someone that buys it outright from the get go.
The upgrade program cost including the buyout is the exact same price as if you paid it all upfront.
Interesting. So everyone should be doing the lease.
No, because then you pay full price. If you buy your iPhone at a third party retailer the price is much lower.
The iPhone Air is €1329 at Apple and €849 at retailers.
That's almost three of the phone I use daily per year.
$2800 in most of Europe
yeah, insane.
Yeah, these days hard to justify anything more than a $500-800 Android unless it's heavily subsidized.
For $2800 I'd rather have a laptop + phone.
It’s $2250+tax for europoors
Europoors is gonna be my favourite word from now on
Have you never heard of this derogative term?
Plenty of arrogant Americans use that term
Frankly this is the first time I’ve seen this term. At first I thought it was a typo
Honestly, that doesn’t seem all that crazy. I was actually expecting it to be closer to $3k
Then it would most probably have had the fate of Apple Vision Pro
i love that we get these comments, even 20 years later. the phone costs what many (most? even?) folks on HN make in a day, after taxes.
You think most folks on HN are making $500,000 after taxes (being charitable and assuming "in a day" means a working day)? Moreover, does one commenter have to represent most folks? If someone makes less than $500,000, are they not allowed to voice their lack of desire for a phone that is affordable for the alleged majority who do make $500,000?
something around 20% of the site is from the bay area, where that is a somewhat middling salary, so yes.
and of course they can voice it, it's just boring; the point being there are more than plentiful amounts of folks that can trivially afford it.
> something around 20% of the site is from the bay area, where that is a somewhat middling salary, so yes.
What the hell, 500k after tax in california is likely close to a million before taxes. This isn't middling, even in the bay area.
agree to disagree
Come on, most people are not making 700k a year even on HN. Probably closer to $300k at the high end and there are a lot of Europeans on here so probably closer to $100k.
you would be surprised; i would bet on the plurality being > $300k. hard to survive on much less in the bay area, in any case.