Official PC vs. The World


Recommended Posts

The latest hardware, providing cutting-edge graphics/physics at high resolutions.

KB+mouse.

Unfortunately, that comes at a price. A high-end gaming computer can cost as much as $3000 US. Of course, you don't need that to play most games but you definitely need a decent rig to play the latest titles with maxed out graphics at 60+ FPS.

Game mods.

Today's modding is nowhere near as good as it was in the old days. I'd say things started going bad after 2005. For some reason, developers created games that were modder-unfriendly. They didn't release the necessary tools to help modders and in some cases, made their games so "closed" that you couldn't even play custom maps or use custom weapons (e.g. Call of Duty 4 -> Modern Warfare 2).

Personally, I think the main weapon PC gaming has over console gaming is the keyboard and mouse. The amount of control and precision it provides is astounding.

Unfortunately, that comes at a price. A high-end gaming computer can cost as much as $3000 US. Of course, you don't need that to play most games but you definitely need a decent rig to play the latest titles with maxed out graphics at 60+ FPS.

Today's modding is nowhere near as good as it was in the old days. I'd say things started going bad after 2005. For some reason, developers created games that were modder-unfriendly. They didn't release the necessary tools to help modders and in some cases, made their games so "closed" that you couldn't even play custom maps or use custom weapons (e.g. Call of Duty 4 -> Modern Warfare 2).

Personally, I think the main weapon PC gaming has over console gaming is the keyboard and mouse. The amount of control and precision it provides is astounding.

While it's true it doesn't change the fact that some games still have huge modding communities like the Fallout series and Elder Scrolls series. And it's just the simple fact that we can get mods for a lot of the games that don't on the consoles. Console gamers don't know what they are missing as far as that is concerned.

And here's another one.. Blizzard makes games for the PC only. At least so far.

I prefer PC Gaming because I'm willing to spend the money for quality. No mater how much money I am willing to give Microsoft or Sony for a 360 or a PS3 I will never get a better graphical experience than what they offer at their lowest price point.

I can game in 3D on _every_ title. Not just ones that Sony/Microsoft developers support.

I can game across 3-6+ Displays at once with 3D

I can game at 2560x1600 not 1080p or in most cases 720p

I can game while doing something else on another monitor

I get a much larger amount of Indie games (Minecraft!)

I get to play MMORPG's

I get a huge back catalog of all those great PC Games from the past 2 decades

I get cheaper games! - Amazon usually lists games for £17-£25 while PS3/360 versions always £39.99-£44.99

And I know that some will make the argument that PC Gaming is very expensive, but so? I want quality and I'm willing to pay for it. At-least I have that option, I can start off with a cheap cheap £40 graphics card or get a super expensive £400 one. I have options and on a console you just don't. And besides.. everyone has a PC. Everyone here has one, everyone commenting in the Console threads have one. If you already have a PC it is cheaper to drop a new graphics card in that than buying a whole new console and that is just a fact.

While it's true it doesn't change the fact that some games still have huge modding communities like the Fallout series and Elder Scrolls series. And it's just the simple fact that we can get mods for a lot of the games that don't on the consoles. Console gamers don't know what they are missing as far as that is concerned.

And here's another one.. Blizzard makes games for the PC only. At least so far.

True.

I prefer PC Gaming because I'm willing to spend the money for quality. No mater how much money I am willing to give Microsoft or Sony for a 360 or a PS3 I will never get a better graphical experience than what they offer at their lowest price point.

I can game in 3D on _every_ title. Not just ones that Sony/Microsoft developers support.

I can game across 3-6+ Displays at once with 3D

I can game at 2560x1600 not 1080p or in most cases 720p

I can game while doing something else on another monitor

I get a much larger amount of Indie games (Minecraft!)

I get to play MMORPG's

I get a huge back catalog of all those great PC Games from the past 2 decades

I get cheaper games! - Amazon usually lists games for £17-£25 while PS3/360 versions always £39.99-£44.99

And I know that some will make the argument that PC Gaming is very expensive, but so? I want quality and I'm willing to pay for it. At-least I have that option, I can start off with a cheap cheap £40 graphics card or get a super expensive £400 one. I have options and on a console you just don't. And besides.. everyone has a PC. Everyone here has one, everyone commenting in the Console threads have one. If you already have a PC it is cheaper to drop a new graphics card in that than buying a whole new console and that is just a fact.

It's true that the majority of people have a computer in one way or another. Whether that computer is capable of playing games isn't a question at all. The real question is, "Which games can it play?" Anything from playing Solitaire or Minesweeper to Crysis is considering PC gaming.

You raise some good points, Vice. PC gamers have so many options. I'd go as far to say that only PC gaming can offer true customization. You can change the files of your favourite game, input console commands to give you infinite health, ammo, etc. You can mod your case with fancy cathode lights or water-cooling. The possibilities are almost limitless.

I must admit though, true enjoyment of PC gaming requires a bit of money and technical know-how. It isn't for everyone. One thing console gaming has over PC gaming is simplicity. Everything from finding someone to play with to setting up a network is simple with console gaming. It removes the complexities of having to install a game, find the right patch to download, and getting the game up and running. Of course, that varies from game-to-game on the PC but the general "complexity" is still there. I think that's what turns away most people from PC gaming.

steam (steam sales ftw)

mods

free multiplayer (unless you count specific games like WOW, but the amount of paid MP to the FREE MP is tiny)

Keyboard & Mouse

it has more uses than just gaming. surely those people in ps3/xbox360/wii section didn't buy pc's just to tell us how much better are consoles are :D

cheaper games.

i can play a 15 year old games, use dosbox and emulators for even moar games.

we had "HD" for years now :D

Today's modding is nowhere near as good as it was in the old days. I'd say things started going bad after 2005. For some reason, developers created games that were modder-unfriendly. They didn't release the necessary tools to help modders and in some cases, made their games so "closed" that you couldn't even play custom maps or use custom weapons (e.g. Call of Duty 4 -> Modern Warfare 2).

Personally, I think the main weapon PC gaming has over console gaming is the keyboard and mouse. The amount of control and precision it provides is astounding.

I miss the days when I was big into the TA moddign scene. part of the SWTA team, did a lot of models for it, think they're all replaced in the spring version though. and pat of another big mod group doing a TC. That was an awesome game for modding. awesoem game for RTS too.

KB + Mouse..

Nothing else really matters when talking about PC gaming. I mean PC gaming sucks because of the hardware requirements, and the fact that you have to keep updating every 6 months or so just to keep up with the latest and greatest games. You are limited to a monitor size. 99% of the people out there do not use a monitor bigger than 22" but have at least a 32" television. The higher res you get in a game on PC the more latest hardware is needed to keep up. Install size sucks. Most PC games are 8 gigs or more now. Some are as large as 20gigs now. The only other plus side to PC gaming that I can think of is the ability to release patches much faster. Since you do not have to go through the console companies to release your patches, they can directly host them on their site and in turn you can get a fix for a game almost immediately after it is found/fixed.

I'm with the KB and Mouse crew, nothing beats the precision you can get especially when playing shooters. I struggle with console shooters. The other big advantage of PC gaming is that most platforms for online gaming are free, and not subscription based.

True.

It's true that the majority of people have a computer in one way or another. Whether that computer is capable of playing games isn't a question at all. The real question is, "Which games can it play?" Anything from playing Solitaire or Minesweeper to Crysis is considering PC gaming.

You raise some good points, Vice. PC gamers have so many options. I'd go as far to say that only PC gaming can offer true customization. You can change the files of your favourite game, input console commands to give you infinite health, ammo, etc. You can mod your case with fancy cathode lights or water-cooling. The possibilities are almost limitless.

I must admit though, true enjoyment of PC gaming requires a bit of money and technical know-how. It isn't for everyone. One thing console gaming has over PC gaming is simplicity. Everything from finding someone to play with to setting up a network is simple with console gaming. It removes the complexities of having to install a game, find the right patch to download, and getting the game up and running. Of course, that varies from game-to-game on the PC but the general "complexity" is still there. I think that's what turns away most people from PC gaming.

pc gaming has always been pretty easy, but easier than ever now a days. my mom plays games on fb on her netbook, if she can do it, anyone can. while consoles have only gotten far more compicated than they once were. the last time i tried to set up streaming to an xbox for example it was a nightmare. maybe that's improved, but it's still no where how easy it was for me to set up streaming to my netbook.

games are easy to keep up to date with patchers that check for updates everytime you launch the game or steam.

PC has options for every gamer and every budget. you can spend $2-300 on an emachines and play a fair number of great games on it at higher IQ and resolution than consoles, or you can spend $2000+ and play at the highest IQ and resolutions that console gamers can't even dream of. some say the screen is smaller than your tv, but i sit alot closer to my monitor than my tv, and when i do get close i don't see pixels on my monitor due to low pixel density.

some say consoles are cheaper while talking about having the best tv, the best furniture, and all 3 consoles at least one of them they'd had to replace due to failure out of warranty at least once.

then there's hte kb+mouse control combo. for most games it's unbeatable in precision accuracy and ease of use. and you have th eoption to supplment your KB with something like an n52 or a gaming keyboard. or upgrade your mouse from the basic 3 button optical to a 5600dpi 20 button mmo mouse. and for flight and racing sims PCs have the best 3rd party controller suites for their respective type of sim that just don't exist for consoles.

the mod scene isn't what it used to be, but there's still plenty of games with included SDKs or tools at launch or soon after. and even when there isn't, if the mod community wants to mod a game, nothing really stops them. some of the best games in the past decade started out as mods, and themselves have become legendary.

the PC also has a wider variety of games. not just pure numbers, but actual variety in type s of games and variation of gameplay between them. sequels are often more than a level pack or a new skin.

and pc has multiple uses even more than consoles. sur eyou can use your ps3 as a bluray player and basic htpc, but i can do all that with my gaming pc plus browse the internet IM on any service, find new friends record and edit video of my games and post it to any service i like, graphic design, music playback and editing, and so on. my pc isn't just my gaming platform, it's my workstation and home theatre and online social conduit all in one.

there was one more point i am forgetting here, maybe i'll remember later and come back to it.

EDIT: i forgot mmo's HOW COULD I? lolz. well PCs have mmo's where console's don't. well ok there is ff11 and dc universe, but those are pretty awful and or lolzy ones imho and who outside of japan keeps their old ps2 plugged in for ff11? even bad mmo's give more hours of play than most console sp games these days, and are excelent entertainment values wether you play for a few weeks or play for years.

KB + Mouse..

Nothing else really matters when talking about PC gaming. I mean PC gaming sucks because of the hardware requirements, and the fact that you have to keep updating every 6 months or so just to keep up with the latest and greatest games. You are limited to a monitor size. 99% of the people out there do not use a monitor bigger than 22" but have at least a 32" television. The higher res you get in a game on PC the more latest hardware is needed to keep up. Install size sucks. Most PC games are 8 gigs or more now. Some are as large as 20gigs now. The only other plus side to PC gaming that I can think of is the ability to release patches much faster. Since you do not have to go through the console companies to release your patches, they can directly host them on their site and in turn you can get a fix for a game almost immediately after it is found/fixed.

Most gamers don't upgrade every 6 months, i mean who does? I honestly don't have that sort of money to splash every six months, sure i'll do minor upgrades like RAM or something amongst those lines, but no one I know, throws crossfire cards away and goes on a spending spree. Most sane PC gamers do builds that will be somewhat future proof atleast for a 1-2 year period, otherwise you're just running after all the new hardware all the time, which is plain stupid. For example, i bought a 5870 a while back, that will last me a while, before I even consider dropping a bucket load of money again.

-Backwards compatibility with most games platforms ever done.

-Prices of the games.

-Modding, it may not be as active as it has been, but it's still a very positive thing to do.

-Controllers, keyboard, mouse, joysticks, gamepads, wheels, wiimote, kinect, if you name a controller PC probably supports it.

Also, a "decent rig" doesn't cost $3000 nor $1000, prices have gone down a lot.

PC for me. :devil:

best platform to enjoy GTA series. why? moddddsssss!!!!!!!!!! :laugh:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

for the cost of 10 Xbox or PS3 games, you can buy a mid-high end gfx. card & still have cash to spend on atleast 3-5 games :p

in india, major PC games retail at INR 500 to INR 1000, exceptions are some EA games, which retail at 2k+

example -

GTA Episodes From Liberty City

PC - MRP: R 499.00 ; ~ USD 10

XBOX 360 - MRP: R 1999.00 ~ USD 45

PS3 - MRP: R 1799.00

prices from here - http://intencity.in/

gfx. cards like Nvidia GTX460 can easily play games maxed out for 2-3 years atleast at 720p.

& you dont need to go for ultra top end CPU like Intel's i7 extreme series, for gaming, a AMD X3 is more than enough & it retails for as low as INR 3600 (under $100)

must read atricle for gamers - Gamers: Do You Need More Than An Athlon II X3? [Tom's Hardware]

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm definately a PC gamer, but I'm getting a little sick of being treated like an afterthought. "Oh we'll support PC, but you want the DLC? Screw you."

Some companies support the PC wonderfully. Some not so much. But it irks me that we're still getting DirectX 9 games and not getting DLC and things like that.

It's better than it was, but it's getting old.

I'm definately a PC gamer, but I'm getting a little sick of being treated like an afterthought. "Oh we'll support PC, but you want the DLC? Screw you."

Some companies support the PC wonderfully. Some not so much. But it irks me that we're still getting DirectX 9 games and not getting DLC and things like that.

It's better than it was, but it's getting old.

I don't mind DX9 games as long as they run well. Still, I'd prefer the bells and whistles of DX10/DX11. As for DLC, it seems as though the PC platform is an after-thought for some developers. I'm glad we have companies like Valve, BioWare, and Blizzard that support their games long after they're released. On the whole though, I think we're coming out of the PC gaming depression. More and more developers are releasing (or planning to release) quality games on the PC.

Here are some that I'm looking forward to:

  • Mass Effect 3
  • Bulletstorm
  • The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings
  • Diablo 3

The exact same thing is going to happen when the next batch of consoles come in I'd bet. The PC platform will get a slow burn as the consoles get traction, then as the consoles get older devs will start picking up the PC again.

Hopefully MS won't let things go quite so badly with future versions of DirectX, anyway.

the thing about dx9 is though, is it has lots of eyecandy and runs very well on even older hardware. where as dx10 doesn't really add much eyecandy at all, and the eye candy in dx11 adds quite the performance hit on even current high end hardware, for the most part.

i think devs are more interested in dx11 than dx10 for a few reasons even if they don't play to use it for eyecandy first and foremost, as i understand it has some optimizations that make dx9 eyecandy run better on lower end hardware.

another thing in favour of dx11 is that windows 7 is being adopted faster by consumers than vista, and dx11 works in vista as well, giving a good amount of market share for dx11 capable PCs. devs seem to be interested in using other improvements of win7 as well, and leaving xp behind if possible(or at least in some ways).

as far as a pc gaming drought goes, i think it's more a myth. while 5 or 6 years ago it seemed liek there were tonnes of totally awesome games on the pc, it's just kind of shifted in that pc games tend to be either overshadowed by their console counterpart sin terms of how much advertising publishers spend on them, or they're non console genres such as mmo's or strategy games like civ and total war. most pc gaming titles seem to advertise more by word of mouth between gamers over the net on forums and in chat rooms, where as console games get alot more paid advertising and other hype to bring awareness about them.

as far as i've seen there have been a steady stream of new pc game betas to try out(in lieu of demos), new f2p games to play, thanks to steam a huge resurgence in indie games being made, huge successes in casual online gaming in the form of fb games that core pc gamers often forget about but opens our world to millions of people who might get bored of mafia wars pvp and want to try out something a little different and visceral like wow pvp for example. as well as the ability to buy those old classics retail shops haven't carried for years through other online vendors(i'm thinking GoG here?)

PC gaming seems to be the best kept secret in teh games industry. it's very successful especially when devs and publishers set modest goals and stay within budget, and communicate to the community honestly(especially when it comes to mmo's).

another thing going back to how pc games are marketted, in terms of players networking with each other, is closed betas and NDAs. devs seem to be handing out CB keys en masse coupled with NDAs these days, and i think it really hurts them more than helps them. part of this is going to large CBs too early and people breaking NDAs and uploading videos to youtube slowing slow combat and jerky bad animations and bad lag and otehr things, while plaeyrs that are willing to share about the CBs at all, will complain about the lag but refuse to break the NDA further and give us some good opinions on these games with details. i think most pc gamers realize that Cb is far from final and that changes are going to happen to almost everything int eh game. the problem is when there are old NDA breaking videos for a game which show bad combat or something, and no new videos and everyone playing the beta just says NDA NDA NDA.

the other problem with betas is when devs go to CB or even open beta too late before release, when they obviously have no time to digest feedback and act on it, and fix glaring problems with their games. for the last several years in mmo's in particular there has been this paradigm where devs andpubs feel ok with going from cb to ob to launch within a month or two and the game is just not ready for launch, either lacking enough contentn to keep players in teh game for more than the first month or polish and having game breaking bugs that should've never gotten past CB and internal hardware QA. these games sell a million boxes at launch which pays back dev costs it seems, but the gravy train never comes to town due to something like a 30% or lower retention rate after the first month and bad press and negative opinions in word of mouth advertsiing. so that even when these games improve to a great extent since very way you can think of, peopel still remember aoc and getting out of tortage and not being sure where to go and getting ganked every 5 seconds by a healer class who ones shots them or a stealthy barb who stun locks them or a tank that they just cannot kill, not to mention the constant crashes ever half hour and so on, no matter how much fun the game is.

six months of instability and other issues might've been ok for wow or older games(not so much older games- wow really has been the exception on all levels) but wow was also alot funner in basic terms than alot of older mmo's with a built in network of brand and studio fans that was already quite big to begin with. even ff14 with it's legions of loyal japanese players and ff11 players an ff brand fans shows that you have to be ready at launch or you're gonna be hammered and no you are not blizzard with wow.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!