iPhone 7 family gets the Product (RED) treatment

Apple's iPhone 7 family didn't step out in any colors flashier than rose gold at launch. This morning, however, the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus join the long line of Apple devices that have gotten the Product (RED) treatment. Aside from the florid finish, these special-edition iPhones are internally identical to their more subdued siblings.

A portion of the purchase price for each Product (RED) iPhone 7 will go to support The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. (RED) iPhones will be available in 128GB and 256GB versions on March 24. Prices will start at $749.

Along with its special-edition iPhone 7s, Apple quietly noted that it'll be doubling the base storage of the iPhone SE. The 16GB and 64GB versions of that device will be no more as of this Friday. Instead, Apple's tiniest iPhone will house 32GB and 128GB of storage. Prices will still start at $399. We're glad to see the 16GB scourge finally eliminated from iOS devices with this move.

Comments closed
    • Chrispy_
    • 3 years ago

    iPhone buyers don’t care about the health of the poor and exploited! They’re already buying products that are the pinnacle of exploiting the poor.

    They just want their shiny new toy in a cool new colour that makes them feel like the shining humanitarian examples they wish they were and somewhat justfies their:

    ridiculously profitable device (only 4% goes to materials and the employees who built it)
    environmentally disastrous both at production and difficulty in disposal/recycling
    fashion-statement phone that is no longer desirable the minute a new version appear
    purchase that will likely get discarded through damage [i<]on average[/i<] within 18 months. [url<]https://www.facebook.com/sanaltkolektifi/videos/1118612671531568/[/url<]

      • Wonders
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]the pinnacle[/quote<] Can't tell if your self-mocking sensationalism is unintentional, or a "that's the joke"-type situation. Rhetorical oddities aside, I completely and wholeheartedly agree with your underlying concern.

        • bwoodring
        • 3 years ago

        Yeah, the tone of his rhetoric is very off-putting, but basically, I think he is right. We get all these sweet electronics cheap because we don’t care about humans in China – they are basically robots to us.

          • Chrispy_
          • 3 years ago

          Yeah, it’s not just the humans in China that get treated like garbage, the environmental damage caused during the manufacture of smartphones is horrifying. Like, [i<]Chernobyl[/i<] horrifying. [url=https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kundulun,+Baotou,+Inner+Mongolia,+China/@40.6360705,109.70135,15z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x360fef8b633047a7:0x55a1893d2ed9a780<]Here's just one example[/url<] of the many man-made atrocities that are a direct side effect of our thirst for disposable electronics with rare-earth metals, heavy metals and built-in obsolescence. They destroy the environment to produce, and they destroy the environment if not fully recycled (a disappointingly low percentage of smartphones and tablets are ever recycled properly). Rather than explain the horrific impact of this one, 15 km^2 radioactive toxic sludge lake, just google Baotou lake and read the damning reports. I remember watching a TV programme last year that showed heavy-metal pollution and the same radiation levels affecting clay in areas 750km southwest of Baotou. That means the underground aquifers are polluted, potentially in a 750km radius or more. That's nearly two million square kilometers of damaged Mongolia with unknown duration of the damage or how serious it could be in the future, or whether the damage is containable [i<]at all[/i<]. I picked on the iPhone simply being the worst culprit because it's the most popular and the most frequently upgraded type of smartphone, but the concept of Apple trying to be ethical about their products is laughable at best. Raise awareness of AIDS to cover up the atrocities of where your products come from? Sure, that's responsible.

      • tipoo
      • 3 years ago

      What phone do you have? Because 99% likely it was built in the same one of two factories as the iPhone.
      Every single “You have a Mac? Sweatshop!” *clings to Dell* comment, groan.

        • Chrispy_
        • 3 years ago

        Motorola, and don’t worry I know every manufacturer uses the same sources, but I covered that in my earlier reply:

        [quote<]I picked on the iPhone simply being the worst culprit because it's the most popular and the most frequently upgraded type of smartphone[/quote<].

          • tipoo
          • 3 years ago

          Are there stats on it being the most frequently upgraded (most sold as a single model doesn’t necessarily mean that)? I haven’t seen anyone run anything other type of phone as long as the 4S got support, for instance.

            • Chrispy_
            • 3 years ago

            Not sure on any single model, but Apple has the highest sales to market share ratio in the usual Gartner/Forbes annual publications.

            I translate that as “Apple sells the most phones but doesn’t have the most phones still in use” meaning that Apple phones are taken out of use from disposal/recycling more than any other brand.

            When you think about it, Apple phones have typically been contract-only or more likely to be sold with a contract compared to other vendors which have had sold PAYG, sim-free phones for much longer. If you buy your phone with your own money up front, you’re more likely to look after it and use it till it breaks. For a lot of people, forced contracts mean you have a “free” phone given to you every two years, so of course they’re going to switch to the latest, most fashionable model (whether they actually need to or not).

      • NoOne ButMe
      • 3 years ago

      Apple claims a 3 year usage for first purchaser.

      Given the information they have compared to us, I’ll go with their number.

      And in t ram of length of lifespan after first user, they blow Android away. I see people with iPhone 5/5s regularly, and even someone at work still uses a 3GS(!).

      Still loads of problems with people manufacturing them and such. But 18 months is extremely likely an exaggeration/lie.

      Edit: I also know plenty of people with damaged phones both Android and iOS not replacing them…

        • Chrispy_
        • 3 years ago

        I pulled the 18 month figure out of the air based on some rough estimation:

        Apples are generally sold on 24-month contract.
        Some percentage of people break, lose or upgrade their phones within that 24-month period.

    • strikeleader
    • 3 years ago

    The only thing missing is being printed with #MAGA on the back. I think the internet would melt down.

    • thedosbox
    • 3 years ago

    I’d be seriously tempted by the red iphone if I could substitute a white maple leaf for the apple logo.

    • mkk
    • 3 years ago

    Yikes, that tint sure draws the mind to things like tuberculosis..

      • willmore
      • 3 years ago

      Because it looks like freshly coughed up blood? Ewww…

      • jihadjoe
      • 3 years ago

      Oh! The consumption!

    • tipoo
    • 3 years ago

    Imagine the blogosphere meltdown if the store went down and the Mac pro was only updated with a matte red coat 😛

      • nico1982
      • 3 years ago

      I’d buy that.

      Actually no – or yes? – but I guess it is only a matter of time before the Mac will get the color treatment.

        • tipoo
        • 3 years ago

        Bringing it back

        [url<]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/90/91/c8/9091c89726a163e29b012ba12cb65124.jpg[/url<]

          • nico1982
          • 3 years ago

          I would be on the fence between stealth black and frosted red.

          • Sargent Duck
          • 3 years ago

          Going back old school. I think those things had a 400Mhz processor?

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            The original five-flavors lineup had [url=http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_333.html<]333MHz G3 CPUs[/url<], but there were some later, more subdued colors that hit [url=http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_dv_plus_450.html<]450MHz[/url<] and [url=http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_dv_se_500.html<]500MHz[/url<]. And then Apple lost their collective minds and made things like [url=http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_500_fp_bd.html<]Dalmatian Blue[/url<] and [url=http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_se_600.html<]Flower Power[/url<]

            • tipoo
            • 3 years ago

            Started at 233MHz, then 266 for the familiar life savers colours, then up to 700MHz in the last ones

            [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_G3#Revision_history[/url<]

            • LoneWolf15
            • 3 years ago

            And as an Apple Certified Tech who had to take them apart: it sucked.

            Though not near as bad as the white IceBook G3 (Which I regard as the worst disassembly process in my history).

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            The eMac kinda sucked to take apart, too, but even that’s nothing compared to today’s glue-and-go MacBooks.

          • not@home
          • 3 years ago

          Every time I see one of those old Macs, I think of Zoolander. “The files are in the computer?”

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This