The Galaxy S9 Just Slapped Down Apple's Ridiculous iPhone X Pricing

This morning, Samsung revealed pricing details for its Galaxy S9 smartphone series. Despite rumours of a hefty markup, the 64GB model will cost $1199 in Australia. That's the same exact price as last year's Galaxy S8. As a result, the iPhone X's $1500+ price tag is looking more absurd than ever.

When Apple released the iPhone X in 2017, its exorbitant pricing raised more than a few eyebrows. The 256GB model had an RRP of $1829. That's over eighteen-hundred dollars. For a phone.

Even after accounting for the so-called 'Apple Tax', this price point was unprecedented. A raft of highly critical opinion columns soon followed (including a few on this website that you can read here , here and here.)

The general consensus was that while the iPhone X was a very impressive handset, $1829 was taking the piss.

Samsung Galaxy S9 And S9+: Australian Pricing, Specs And Availability

It feels like it was only a few months ago that Samsung unveiled the Galaxy Note8 smartphone. That's because it was only a few months ago. Nevertheless, a new flagship from Samsung is always cause for excitement, and the S9 and S9+ are looking pretty damn fine indeed. Here are the specifications for both phones, along with Australian pricing and specifications.

Read more

Fast-forward six months and Samsung has released its answer to the iPhone X. The Galaxy S9 and S9+ are very impressive handsets that can comfortably go toe-to-toe with Apple's current flagship. And yet, depending on the model you plump for, they cost up to $630 less.

Even if you buy the top-of-the-range 256GB Galaxy S9+ for $1499, you're still looking at a saving of $330 compared to the 256GB iPhone X. You'll also be getting a newer phone with a larger 6.3-inch display.

The verdict is still out on which phone has better photography chops - but we're pretty sure there won't be much in it. Certainly not enough to justify an eye-watering premium of $330. (Hell, if you're really concerned about photography you could put that extra $330 towards a dedicated point-and-shoot camera.)

Now we realise Android and iOS are two very different operating systems that have their own strengths and weaknesses. Anyone who is staunchly entrenched in the Apple camp isn't going to jump ship for the sake of their wallet. If you think Android is a buggy and unstable mess, we won't try to dissuade you.

Nevertheless, it can't be denied that the iPhone X is far too expensive for the average consumer; a fact that Apple itself has belatedly realised. According to a report on Apple Insider, the Cupertino juggernaut may discontinue or suspend the X line in the wake of weaker-than-expected demand. We wouldn't be surprised if Samsung was paying close attention to these reports and priced the S9 accordingly.

In any event, it seems the $1800+ pricing experiment is over for now, which is obviously good news for consumers. For the foreseeable future, the most you'll pay for a top-tier smartphone is likely to be somewhere in the region of $1500.

That's still way too expensive, but one battle at a time, eh?

Why You Don't Need An iPhone X, Or Any Other Expensive New Phone

Hold on just a moment before you drop $1579 (or more!) on an iPhone X - or another expensive phone from Samsung, Google, or anyone else. Do you really need that flagship handset? The list of reasons not to buy one of the latest and most expensive phones gets longer every year.

Read more


    Oh please - the S9 and S9+ are competitors to the iPhone 8 and 8 plus not the X. The prices between those models are roughly equivalent.

    This is from a person who is an Android user and has never owned an Apple device.

    Also A10 and A11 SOCs are faster than either the Snapdragon 845 or Exynos 8910.

      Oh please - the S9 and S9+ are competitors to the iPhone 8 and 8 plus not the X.

      That's debatable - they're both top-of-the-range flagships that are considered best in class. You could argue that the Note8 is the iPhone X's equivalent, but then my argument still stands. (Note8 was $1499 at the time of launch - $330 less than the iPhone X.)

      The X and S9 have virtually identical specs, the Samsung S4 had higher resolution than the current iphone 8.

      It's pretty obvious that the S9 is a perfect competitor to the X, same size screen, small bezels, QHD.

    Given what’s in the X, they should charge less for this phone.

    Hell, Samsung can’t even figure out facial recognition. They don’t deserve to charge more.

      But does facial recognition really matter when you finally put the fingerprint scanner in right spot? I'd much rather have my phone unlocked and on as I pull it out of my pocket than to worry about whether I'm holding it at the right angle or that my sunglasses/hat/*Insert other obstruction here* is going to stop me from unlocking it when I hold it up to my face awkwardly.

        Samsung kept that tech because they are hopeless at facial recognition, not because they believe it is the correct solution.

        The X has shown that done correctly, you don’t even notice it.

          So you're trying to say that fingerprint readers are inferior to facial recognition? Hate to burst your bubble, but fingerprint readers are here to stay. I agree Samsung’s facial recognition is average, but it's always just been a gimmick anyway.
          And I'd be willing to bet that the only reason Apple didn't put a fingerprint reader on the back of the X is because they're stubborn and didn't want to appear to copy every other manufacturer that's been doing it for years already.
          FaceID is cool, but it's too conditional in real world use cases when on the move. You can't unlock it at odd angles and certain sunglasses block the infra-red beam. You need something that works super quickly, every time. Which even an iPhone 8 can do.

            Watch the sheep drop that line of thinking the instant that Apple works out how to put the fingerprint sensor in the screen. Then, fingerprint reading will be magical.

        **Disclaimer: I own S7 and iPhone X and use both of them closely enough to actually make the below comment**

        You're correct saying fingerprint scanner is superior than facial recognition (comparing iPhone X vs iPhone 6s I had before). However, S7's fingerprint scanner sucks more than iPhone X's facial recognition imho. Too many a times I had to put my pin-code because it couldn't recognize my fingerprint! More than iPhone X failed to recognize my face for a)mascaraed party (duh!)
        b)direct sunlight on the 3D sensing cameras
        c) half of my face in my pillow etc.

        So my believe is if and when Apple bring back fingerprint scanner I'll have best of both worlds with an iPhone but not with a Samsung given my current experience with both of them.

          Fair play if you have already done this, but I've registered my thumb print 3 times on my phone and it's completely solved the problem of not reading. Never misses a beat now. When I only had it registered once it was hit and miss. Now it's rock solid.

            Thanks for the tip. I'll definitely try this!

    The iPhone x is the first apple phone in years to come close to Samsung specs, and it cost $380 more than the equivalent sized (5.8") S9.

    They've been making a killing off the standard iphone and its ancient HD ready screen by selling it at the same price as Samsung's flagship.

    Right now the Note 8 is $79 a month with 25GB on Optus, you'd have to be nuts to get an apple phone instead.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now