> The problem is as a “normal user” you can’t go to your ‘tech friend’ and get a straight answer
Uh, it's 3 options.
Small size, best camera option, remaining option.
I didn't know this - I just went to Apple's website, clicked iPhone and it has a single page that presents all this very clearly.
So um, yeah. This is by the way how I do 'tech advice' to anyone who ever needs it - I open google, I type in the question and the first link has the answer 95% of the time.
Phones haven't been in 'gotta have it' category since iPhone 6 when they released a bigger size that a lot of people wanted. Since then, it has been 'better camera' yearly releases, oh and 'better chip', as if anyone needs a supercomputer to browse Instagram.
Cameras (and the associated computational photography power) have the advantage (for Apple and other manufacturers) of simultaneously still being on a fairly rapid improvement curve and being something a lot of people really care about. It's no coincidence that Apple really hits hard on the photography angle.
There is clearly a difference between my iPhone 6 and iPhone X but I've never been on a particularly frequent upgrade cadence. Under normal circumstances, I'd probably upgrade to this year's model but there's not a lot of point until I get out and about a lot again.
And then there are these two: iPhone 12, iPhone 12 Pro.
They are the exactly same phone in every regard that a "regular" user cares about. They are so identical that Gruber lumped them together in benchmarks in his review at Daring Fireball.
The only difference is the difference in cameras which is important to a very small number of people. And even then it doesn't make sense to make two different models instead of one, with the new camera setup.
I think you underestimate how many people care about cameras a lot--or at least think they do. Personally, I'm inclined to give Apple the benefit of the doubt that it knows what it's doing by having a cheaper mid-size model and a more expensive one with a better camera.
So the 'latest' options on Apple's website are presented as iPhone 12 Pro (best camera) and iPhone 12 (not best camera) - 2 options.
Then each option has 2 sizes, that makes it a total of 4.
I guess they could've named things better - it's still same old 'best camera = more expensive' formula from years prior, with an addition of 'smaller size' to the mix.
Think the issue is Jobs era Apple wouldn't do this, it would just be one great phone and one budget phone which would usually be last years good phone.
New Tim Cook Apple philosophy is doing what Apple fans used to criticise other tech companies of which is needlessly fragmenting their product line to try and milk more money out of it.
It's things like this that make the difference between ok and good and good and great.
Apple's revenue has gone from 65.2 billion dollars under the last year under Jobs to 275 billion dollars in 2019. It's easy to say that "Jobs would never!" but Jobs never ran a company almost 5x bigger. It's entirely possible that he would have. It's equally possible that Apple never grows to these heights with him at the helm. It's just an impossible comparison to be making.
Uh, it's 3 options.
Small size, best camera option, remaining option.
I didn't know this - I just went to Apple's website, clicked iPhone and it has a single page that presents all this very clearly.
So um, yeah. This is by the way how I do 'tech advice' to anyone who ever needs it - I open google, I type in the question and the first link has the answer 95% of the time.
Phones haven't been in 'gotta have it' category since iPhone 6 when they released a bigger size that a lot of people wanted. Since then, it has been 'better camera' yearly releases, oh and 'better chip', as if anyone needs a supercomputer to browse Instagram.