Technology Android

[dilla]

Apple leaving out Starbucks? I highly doubt it. While what you said about the tech may be true, watch Starbucks amend their charging tech to suit iPhone users. I seriously doubt you'll ever hear something along the lines of "oh, you have iPhone? Yeah we don't support that here" when it comes to places like Starbucks. Restaurants and stores that attract the same crowd as the Starbucks crowd will ditch whatever tech isn't supported by the iPhone before they say the don't support the iPhone.

I didn't know Apple's tech was exactly the same as the one used in the Surface. Can't even say I knew the Surface had that feature. I think the memes that came out after yesterday's keynote about face recognition and women not being able to unlock their phones because of makeup still get the point across that people won't pay attention to a feature unless Apple does it. I get that it pisses some people off but a big part of Apple's success is its marketing and ability to grab headlines. Prior to yesterday if you walked up to someone on the street and asked what device had face recognition, most wouldn't be able to tell you. So when I said Apple "improved on it" I chose my words incorrectly. Whatever it is that makes tech sites make "faceID" a part of the headline, whatever generates buzz in the form of memes and discussion on forums or social media, that's what Apple "improved" on. Not making it accessible to the layman, but an attractive option and something worth getting excited about. If I'm wrong, I still bring up the point I made above that Android had it, then took it out. And now apparently the Surface had it, but not many people not interesting in tech news knew about it. That has to be worth something.

I do notice a difference in battery drain between my iPad and my phone. My iPad I always on WiFi but can go weeks before being used because I use it for very specific studying stuff. But when I do use it, including a question bank that uses the internet 100% of the time in order to work, I can get a week's usage on it. I know phones are very different in that they have a smaller battery, always have a cell signal, etc. But no way could I get 10+ hours of usage on my phone even if it was on airplane mode and just WiFi. That's not even a fraction of what I get on my iPad Air. My sister's iPhone 7+ can easily go 36 hours without needing a charge and my sister is always on LTE and she is very much into Instagram and Snapchat as well as Facebook. I've had to disable the latter because it is a known battery hog, even though I'm not logged in to Facebook. Android doesn't know what the fuck to do with it unless its disabled. Same for many other Samsung bloat apps I've had to disable because they go rogue and start using data in the background. Samsung Plus app once used a few hundred MBs of data in the background and drained the battery in the process. This was early on in to owning the phone and before I began disabling apps. Plenty of other users on the S7 forums have reported the same thing, except they weren't on unlimited data like I was.

Apple has its own issues of being overbearing on devs and even screwing them over. But the pros of that are devs are scared of their apps causing problems for the users because Apple will give them the boot out the App Store if they're suspected of being malignant apps. If you use an iOS app next an Android app, it's obvious iOS devs take more care with their apps than they do Android. iOS gets the preference and priority over Android. And that in turn affects the user experience.

Your experiences are anecdotal as are mine. But in all honestly, aside from a nice screen and camera, my S7 is not all that much better than my S3 was, and they both suffer from the same problems in regards to battery life. I've used BetterBatteryStats and GSam to track wake locks and tried to plug holes but still don't see big enough improvements. I don't think someone should have to go through all this work to figure it out. I'm sure having the battery degraded to a capacity that's 66% of original less than a year in to ownership is a big culprit of it.

We'll see the reviews of the iPhone X and what the drawbacks are. Also what real life usage is like. But with a macOS and iOS device that I use daily and heavily, it might be time to close the circle and go the iPhone route. Even with Apple's dragging of its feet to implement new tech that others have had for a while, I find Apple makes it much easier to set up and use a device and have them all connected between each other. They're not perfect, but whatever they suck at, Google picks up the slack with their iOS offerings. And funny thing is, Google usually prioritizes iOS over Android too in their app development. Hangouts is much cleaner and wasn't All/Duo iOS first, too? Maybe it was another app or feature but I remember the outrage at Google bee-lining straight to iOS before Android. I know Nintendo prioritized iOS before Android with that Mario game, too. Those aren't two small companies that don't mean much; they mean a lot in terms of what apps/games people want and they clearly cater to someone else before Android.

I don't have a personal issue with Samsung but it could be the OEM that's driving me away from Android. I will still consider the Pixel 2 because I see a phone from Google being the appropriate rival phone to a phone from Apple, but I'm not holding my breath. The Android subreddit has various complaints too about the same battery drain and other issues and that just sheds the light on the fact that all Android devices suffer from it, not just Samsung. And it's frustrating enough that I'd leave Android for iOS after 8 years, as many others have done in recent years as well. I'll give up "customizability" of Android in the name of Big Brother Apple not only having my devices well-connected to each other but also seemingly taking a harder stance on privacy and security as well.

 

[S O F I]

yeah i'll get the 8, who cares what masta say

 

[masta247]

Apple leaving out Starbucks? I highly doubt it. While what you said about the tech may be true, watch Starbucks amend their charging tech to suit iPhone users. I seriously doubt you'll ever hear something along the lines of "oh, you have iPhone? Yeah we don't support that here" when it comes to places like Starbucks. Restaurants and stores that attract the same crowd as the Starbucks crowd will ditch whatever tech isn't supported by the iPhone before they say the don't support the iPhone.

Do you think Starbucks will spend dozens of millions of dollars to replace furniture that has PMA chargers with QI chargers because Apple didn't care to include PMA charging? I don't think so. Apple uses a Broadcom chip for wireless charging that is capable of both, Qi and PMA, which makes it seem like advertising as having only Qi charging means they deliberately disabled PMA support. The world does not revolve around Apple. PMA will not suddenly cease to exists and companies will not suddenly make only Qi devices because Apple did.

I didn't know Apple's tech was exactly the same as the one used in the Surface. Can't even say I knew the Surface had that feature. I think the memes that came out after yesterday's keynote about face recognition and women not being able to unlock their phones because of makeup still get the point across that people won't pay attention to a feature unless Apple does it.

I think this has more to do with the fact that Apple brings enthusiast features to the mainstream, less in-the-know crowds, albeit later.Sort of like DYI PC makers using certain things for years and then shaking their head when the average joe "discovers" them in a mainstream computer or laptop thinking they're cutting edge tech. I don't understand the concept of going for a given choice rather than a different one until it's understood by the average Joes. The fun of using the tech is the tech itself, not when it has a following of people who don't usually understand it at first. I believe that a cool tech is a cool tech. Millions of Galaxy S8 users have been unlocking the phone with their face OR iris every single day, for over 6 months now. Does the fact that the average Joe in the US does not know about it until Apple does the same thing make the S8 a worse phone? Because that wouldn't be logical. The fact that I've been using wireless charging and unlocking my laptop with my face for years make me just facepalm when the Apple crowd now "discovers" that it's a thing, and certainly doesn't make me think that they know what they're doing by following that thought.

Apple has its own issues of being overbearing on devs and even screwing them over. But the pros of that are devs are scared of their apps causing problems for the users because Apple will give them the boot out the App Store if they're suspected of being malignant apps. If you use an iOS app next an Android app, it's obvious iOS devs take more care with their apps than they do Android. iOS gets the preference and priority over Android. And that in turn affects the user experience.

Apple makes it more difficult to develop for them. They have yearly developer fees and require a Mac to make apps on. Apart from very arrogant approach aimed at making their pockets fatter compared to Google (where the total fee is 25$ for life) there are not many differences. Sure, Apple controls every single app submitted to its store, while Google has automated tests, but they're not testing for technical quality apart from malicious code.

Nintendo and Mario was a deal that Apple made to Nintendo for timed exclusivity. It's a poor example as Apple paid Nintendo for it, and it's an everyday occurrence in the gaming world. There are more apps that are actually made Android first these days, especially by non-US developers. It is a common practice (and a very big business) to code apps normally and then lease a Mac virtual machine and pay per hour just to test, build and submit an iOS app to the App Store (as Apple requires that those things are done on a Mac). Google Play is a much, much bigger market for developers, and most of all it's the easiest way to reach the whole world, as the App Store is mostly local to a few, although high-revenue countries.

I don't have a personal issue with Samsung but it could be the OEM that's driving me away from Android. I will still consider the Pixel 2 because I see a phone from Google being the appropriate rival phone to a phone from Apple, but I'm not holding my breath. The Android subreddit has various complaints too about the same battery drain and other issues and that just sheds the light on the fact that all Android devices suffer from it, not just Samsung.

How is Apple taking a harder stance on privacy and security? iOS is probably the single, most back-doored OS in the world. Apple assists governments in encrypting their devices for "national security". Samsung is actually leading in that with their Knox solutions. It's unbreakable, and certified for use by the Chinese government, as none of the US authorities have access to its encryption keys. At the same time, the Iris scanner of the S8 is the most secure and unique access key, much safer than face recognition or a fingerprint.

And regarding the Pixel, I don't think the Pixel is a good iPhone rival. I know there are many low-hanging fruits to hate on Samsung from the TouchWiz days, but the Samsung skin is probably the most trouble free and convenient to use.
The Pixel doesn't do anything better than a Galaxy S7 would. If you don't like the S7, then I'm not sure you'll find happiness in the Android world. You're trading a polished, cutting edge tech experience for a more 'rough around the edges' skin on top of the same software, and a device with bigger bezels made by an inferior hardware maker.

And it's frustrating enough that I'd leave Android for iOS after 8 years, as many others have done in recent years as well. I'll give up "customizability" of Android in the name of Big Brother Apple not only having my devices well-connected to each other but also seemingly taking a harder stance on privacy and security as well.

There is more people switching from iOS to Android than the other way around. That said, the OSes became more alike than ever. If I actually liked using Macs and liked their interconnectivity and Mac-ish logic of operation, and didn't actually need what Android has that iOS doesn't, I would totally consider getting an iPhone. While I'm pointing out a lot of things how Android phones are technically superior and better products for the money from a pure technology enthusiast perspective, maybe that's not what you're looking for and you care about a familiar experience with Mac OS vibes all around it, except in a phone. Then only the iPhones can deliver that, no matter how much you want to enjoy your Android phone. With the addition of wireless charging, quick charging and an OLED screen, no iPhone has ever been as technically close to a flagship Android offering as the X is. You are just paying a huge premium for being on the iOS camp for it, but if you think you will like it, then read the first reviews of the X and go for it by any means, if they're good. I never said it's a bad phone, no need to find excuses for liking it too. The nerd in me gets a little triggered when someone on the Apple camps claims superiority in a field where iPhones are clearly not superior, which casual iPhone owners frequently do, as well as Apple's propaganda-style marketing materials themselves, but I'm not hating on the choice itself, as there are legitimate reasons for going with an iPhone too.

Apple puts me off as a company in a similar fashion as Intel does - even though I would rather not put money in their pockets knowing I'm voting with my wallet for the bad guys in the tech world, I have products made by both companies.
That said I have an iPad because it happened to be technically the best tablet, as Android tablets suck big time. However to me it became mainly a media consumption device and it does its job really, really well. I am still amused when Apple advertises it as a PC replacement, because I can't imagine the kind of simpleton that an iPad can replace a computer for, but I can totally find many use cases or needs that an iPad or an iPhone can satisfy well. I would totally get an iPad for my grandpa, or an iPhone for a Mac user. With full understanding that it's a more limited choice. Question is whether those technical limitations and capability limitations are even of any concern to you. Maybe not, and you're going to be happier on camp iOS.

yeah i'll get the 8, who cares what masta say

I can close my ears and scream that I can't hear you also, because I'm happy believing that mine is the best, the dude selling it told me. Is that how ALL Apple fans are? That explains a lot ;-)
Well, enjoy the stone age! Why would you get the 8? I'd understand the X.

 

[dilla]

Do you think Starbucks will spend dozens of millions of dollars to replace furniture that has PMA chargers with QI chargers because Apple didn't care to include PMA charging? I don't think so. Apple uses a Broadcom chip for wireless charging that is capable of both, Qi and PMA, which makes it seem like advertising as having only Qi charging means they deliberately disabled PMA support. The world does not revolve around Apple. PMA will not suddenly cease to exists and companies will not suddenly make only Qi devices because Apple did.

I don't think it will be their first choice to go about things and I said I believed Starbucks would cater to Apple before they decide to scrap old tech. That means they'll include hardware that supports Apple devices and wireless charging. They won't leave them hanging. Remember, we're not talking about just phones. We're talking about AirPods and Apple Watches that can also be charged in this manner and in Starbucks you will see a more affluent crowd going in an out. And most of those people will have at least two of those devices on them at any given time, namely an iPhone and an Apple Watch. They also come in with iPads to do work, and soon I'm sure iPads will support wireless charging. Again, why would Starbucks leave those people out?

It's not that Apple will kill existing wireless charging tech, although they have shown they have power to change the direction of the industry by killing an already dying Flash platform and more recently killing the headphone jack. I'm saying businesses will happily set current tech to the side and cater to whatever Apple needs to be accommodated for their new tech. Like my example in another post of Android apps usually being inferior to their iOS counterparts, Starbucks and other companies wouldn't prioritize them enough to officially kill the support for non-Apple tech and software. They'll instead do what Google does with their own offerings and ignore them until they become obsolete or unusable and drag the dead body away quietly when everyone has left. So again, not killing current wireless charging, just setting the table for whatever Apple brings that is different so as not to alienate the majority of their user base which would be Apple product users.

Millions of Galaxy S8 users have been unlocking the phone with their face OR iris every single day, for over 6 months now. Does the fact that the average Joe in the US does not know about it until Apple does the same thing make the S8 a worse phone?

No, it doesn't make it a worse phone. But you'd understand the power any company has to make something that has been out for years and unable to gain mainstream acceptance and all of a sudden makes it mainstream. If face ID was so poor in the past that Android scrapped it, then MS makes it better and puts it in to Surface and people still don't know about it, and then Apple does it and now everyone is excited for the feature, doesn't that make you wonder what's going on? The tech will never be perfect but Apple is known to delay features in the name of making it work properly. Many times, people scoff at the stuff Apple brings out. When the 5S came out with a fingerprint scanner (and not the first one to do so), people on this very form laughed at it and said they didn't see the point. Now it's on every phone. Other members on this forum laughed 7 years ago when Apple announced the iPad and it was described by many as a "steamrolled iPhone." But that rocketed the tablet market out of this world and Android and others jumped in. And now, they've all jumped back out completely. Ask an Android fanboy and they'll say it's because PC makers now make great 2 in 1s. Ask an Apple fanboy and they'll simply tell you Android's tablet OS sucked ass and Android gave up. The truth is somewhere in between but Apple is still leading the tablet category in sales (easy when you're really the only one left) and now the iPad Pro is seen by many as a notebook replacement, or close to it. It may not completely replace one but depending on your needs, it can be a choice between an iPad Pro and a Surface. And plenty of people had faults with the Surface ranging from the keyboard to an inferior stylus. There's personal preference ("I don't like the stylus") and then there's straight up failure ("My Surface keyboard creaks or doesn't work, my hinge is loose, M$'s latest update ruined my Surface usability"). I'm not sure Apple has had those complaints or as many of them as any other OEM, be it with phones, computers, tablets, or their smart watches.

I can't tell you what that means to you but I'd be shocked if you told me that meant nothing because "others have done it first." That's true. When people, such as myself, say that Apple has done this or that thing first, we're wrong. A more accurate thing to say would be Apple has mastered it first. Made it mainstream first. It's not Apple's fault that others pay attention their offerings in a way they don't to others. You'd understand why the Average Joe would see TouchID and now FaceID as being Apple creations (incorrectly) because no one gives a shit about the Surface computers that did FaceID and the Moto Atrix or Droid Incredible that had fingerprint scanners before the 5S. You can't be mad at Apple for people thinking they did it first, so are you going to be mad at people for making that mistake? That's a lot of people to be mad at.

Apple puts me off as a company in a similar fashion as Intel does - even though I would rather not put money in their pockets knowing I'm voting with my wallet for the bad guys in the tech world, I have products made by both companies.

While I'm pointing out a lot of things how Android phones are technically superior and better products for the money from a pure technology enthusiast perspective, maybe that's not what you're looking for and you care about a familiar experience with Mac OS vibes all around it, except in a phone.

Final thing. Are we not at the point now with mobile devices that huge spec bumps don't mean much anymore? I see side-by-side comparos of all the flagship phones and all it is is opening and closing of apps and timing how long it takes to do 30+ operations like opening a game, loading it, closing it, going to home screen, open next app, rinse wash repeat. For a gamer, isn't the iPhone the one with the much superior GPU leading to a better, more fluid experience? Doesn't the iPhone do it with less RAM too because it runs the OS natively as opposed to the method Android phones run it? Which is why we're seeing 6GB phones coming out soon? The difference in experience between an iPhone X and a Note 8 might not be too different to the naked eye. But if we were to scrutinize the hardware differences, in what ways is Android's higher specs a barrier of entry for the iPhone's capabilities? What do Android phones do because of their hardware that iPhones can't?

 

[masta247]

It's not that Apple will kill existing wireless charging tech, although they have shown they have power to change the direction of the industry by killing an already dying Flash platform and more recently killing the headphone jack

As of now they are handicapping their devices by requiring a dongle to work with most of the headphones on the market and peripherals (no USB-A in Macs).
As far as wireless charging goes, maybe in the US some companies will adjust to Apple with their future products or decisions. Outside of it, nobody is going to ditch PMA because Apple did, and even if Apple made a business decision based on some knowledge about PMA having no future, there are already so many PMA chargers, including unlabeled ones (where you don't know whether it's QI or PMA) that would not work with the iPhones today and create major confusion. If Apple doesn't reverse the decision and add support for PMA, it's handicapping their own customers only.

No, it doesn't make it a worse phone. But you'd understand the power any company has to make something that has been out for years and unable to gain mainstream acceptance and all of a sudden makes it mainstream

That's called a lot of marketing dollars spent in the few local markets and a big following of 'fans' that Apple built there. It doesn't make the tech any better or worse. It just makes an existing tech enjoyed by the enthusiasts seen as "okay to use now" by the mainstream there. I fail to see how that's of any value to the buyer who's getting the same tech (or an inferior one if the enthusiasts already moved on to something better).

If face ID was so poor in the past that Android scrapped it, then MS makes it better and puts it in to Surface and people still don't know about it, and then Apple does it and now everyone is excited for the feature , doesn't that make you wonder what's going on?

I used to wonder what's going on when the fingerprint scanners weren't gaining traction on Android before the Galaxy S5 and iPhone implemented theirs.
But face recognition is not that old and it did gain traction. It was never scrapped on Android. MS has it, never scrapped it and people love it, you just haven't heard about it because you're more in the Apple camp than the MS camp, and it was retweeted less. While in the Android world the S8 has it where it works well. That said the S8 one-ups it with an Iris scanner, which is more secure.

The tech will never be perfect but Apple is known to delay features in the name of making it work properly.

There's a lot of press calling the new iPhones the "finally" series of iPhones, as they introduced a lot of Android phone features. finally. Here is a list : http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_8_iphone_x_event__a_few_finally_moments-news-27243.php
You will notice that Apple didn't make any techs better for the new iPhones. They added them and caught up in many regards, which is why I said the iPhones have never been so close technologically with Android flagships.

But.. the wireless charging is Qi only (and it's not quick wireless charging like Samsung's), the 'fast cable charging', while almost double the speed of the old school Apple 1A chargers is really slow in comparison to Androids, considering it's just 900mA for 30 minutes of 0-50% charging - that's actually just on par with regular speed charging in a modern Android phone (1.8A Apple quick charge vs 2A Android stock voltage charge), while the OLED screen is a first, it's lower resolution, and doesn't go all the way to 100% black by shutting down the pixels as it doesn't have unlimited contrast like the Samsung implementations. So they didn't make anything better, quite the contrary - they kind of caught up but their implementations aren't up there with the best Android flagships. It's nice that they're finally there at all though, but the S8 is still a step or two ahead of the iPhone X, technologically.

The truth is somewhere in between but Apple is still leading the tablet category in sales (easy when you're really the only one left) and now the iPad Pro is seen by many as a notebook replacement, or close to it.

The iPad is the best tablet, no doubt about it. It used to be the only good value product from Apple also, until they called it a Pro to hike the prices up, and now increased them up by additional 50$.
As far as a computer replacement.. that's one of the most annoying aspects of Apple marketing to me. As I said, I can't imagine the kind of simpleton that an iPad can replace a computer for. For my grandpa, sure, it replaces a computer for people who use a computer for cat videos and simple apps, but for them a "computer" is an abstract thought and they never needed one. They likely don't even need a "pro" iPad then too.

It's not Apple's fault that others pay attention their offerings in a way they don't to others. You'd understand why the Average Joe would see TouchID and now FaceID as being Apple creations (incorrectly) because no one gives a shit about the Surface computers

That depends on where you're coming from. Apple's marketing is catered to an average, less tech savvy person, which can be seen as annoying when they are showing the simplest things and coating them with "absolutely amazing omg!".
As far as people are concerned, maybe a less tech savvy person in the US learns about facial recognition from Apple and their marketing term - "Face ID", and to them, it's a new thing and they're all talking about it. Many enthusiasts see Apple as yet another implementation of facial recognition, just late to the party, and so they don't really care about it much. So do people outside the US and the other few main markets of Apple, that are completely not getting the Apple hype, and it does look ridiculous from the outside.

I don't get it why would you see the fact that there are more 9gag memes about facial recognition, or that more people are talking about it on twitter as a stimulant to get an Apple device, because to me it just screams that I'd be doing what a less tech savvy person does, who needed major, local marketing campaign to become aware of a tech and never understood that you could have had that tech years ago, and now there are better ones already.

 

[dilla]

That's called a lot of marketing dollars spent in the few local markets and a big following of 'fans' that Apple built there. It doesn't make the tech any better or worse. It just makes an existing tech enjoyed by the enthusiasts seen as "okay to use now" by the mainstream there. I fail to see how that's of any value to the buyer who's getting the same tech (or an inferior one if the enthusiasts already moved on to something better).

If we take the fingerprint scanner as an example, it was out well before Apple did it in their phones. Aside from locking/unlocking a laptop, did it serve a purpose? If it was on an Android phone like the Droid Incredible, did it serve a purpose beyond the lock screen? TouchID unlocked the phone but also authenticated plenty of other things like the App Store and in-app purchases. Lenovo didn't have an App Store (which feels silly to type out the obvious) and Android did but I don't think the phones prior to TouchID in the iPhone could authenticate Play Store purchases. Your analogy is like criticizing Henry Ford for the first mass-produced car when there were other people that had some working form of an automobile well before Ford's Model T.

"Some German already built the first gas car in in the 1800s, why the fuck did Ford have to go and make another one that was more accessible to people?"

To regular folks, who gets (incorrectly) credited to building the first car? Ford. Take him out the picture and we'd all accept Daimler as our automobile creator but we'd be in a very different place in the auto industry if we did that.

That depends on where you're coming from. Apple's marketing is catered to an average, less tech savvy person, which can be seen as annoying when they are showing the simplest things and coating them with "absolutely amazing omg!".
As far as people are concerned, maybe a less tech savvy person in the US learns about facial recognition from Apple and their marketing term - "Face ID", and to them, it's a new thing and they're all talking about it. Many enthusiasts see Apple as yet another implementation of facial recognition, just late to the party, and so they don't really care about it much. So do people outside the US and the other few main markets of Apple, that are completely not getting the Apple hype, and it does look ridiculous from the outside.

Again, this might be a US-only observation of mine, but the vast majority of the public falls into the "not tech savvy" camp. That's why device repair shops are littered around the States, no matter if you're in an affluent neighborhood or the inner city. It's why Geek Squad exists (to rip people off in the process) where they come to your house and fuck around for hours to set up a simple router. Or back up your hard drive or recovery data after a failed drive. It's why Apple has a store that's no longer called a "store" because it's a showroom plus a repair center plus a place to familiarize yourself with the product you just bought. It's why Microsoft followed suit years later and may or may not be successful in their execution. It's why Apple had its own section at tech stores like Best Buy for over a decade and only in the last few years has Samsung followed suit. Now MS has their own table with logos and booths for their Surface models only. The rest of the Windows machines lounge around as the buffer zone between the Apple section and the MS section.

If Apple is considered for dum dums, then it's the reason my dad has never asked for help with his MBP for 5.5 years and my sister for 6. Which is more than can be said for countless HP, ASUS, and Dell Insipiron models. He now has an XPS 15 for his office, which is doing fine, and he too got a 2017 15" like mine last week, swearing that Apple was for him for his home computing needs. That's just attacking the OEMs and not the OS, where despite the majority of this country being raised on Windows machines at home (Macs at school, in many cases) people still find Windows frustrating to use as compatibility issues pop up left and right with printers, scanners, and other hardware. It's why the medical field has embraced software for iOS over Android, as well. Which is a bit odd but I guess Apple's "closed garden" model works well for IT support in hospitals and other facilities. We can criticize Apple's marketing tactics, which are a huge part of its success, good or bad. But you have to draw the line somewhere and wonder why more and more fields, at least in the US, seem to cater more towards iOS than Android. The world is still a Windows world when it comes to computing, but mobile, I think, is a different ball game.


EDIT: Holy shit, this forum just deleted like 5 paragraphs I had typed up. lol probably a sign.

 

[masta247]

Which is a bit odd but I guess Apple's "closed garden" model works well for IT support in hospitals and other facilities. We can criticize Apple's marketing tactics, which are a huge part of its success, good or bad. But you have to draw the line somewhere and wonder why more and more fields, at least in the US, seem to cater more towards iOS than Android. The world is still a Windows world when it comes to computing, but mobile, I think, is a different ball game.





EDIT: Holy shit, this forum just deleted like 5 paragraphs I had typed up. lol probably a sign.

lol I think a quick observation and opinion about new iPhones being out again turned into a huge Android vs iOS discussion.

I think our differences in Mac vs Windows vs Android observations are largely related to our environments and experiences. I'm surprised when you mention iOS having more adoption than Android, as I still see it as a much more niche operating system compared to Android, which is used everywhere now. And if you look at global statistics, there are 7 Android devices active for each 1 iOS device.
I travel a lot, and I can't count the amount of times there was an Android app for something that had no iOS app. Android is in cars, micro-computers, home automation systems, servers, pretty much everywhere. Heck, Apple merely won hospitals and some local businesses in the US with the iPad and that's it, except I can see how for people in the US it might seem like it's 'everywhere'. In the EU, such things go through the tender system, which Apple would not be capable of winning, thus hospitals and ALL public services run on Windows / Linux / Android.

I spent enough time in Canada to notice the iOS hype in North America and I can recognize that iOS is big in Canada, but there iOS is pretty much equal to Android in terms of popularity and apps, and outside of North America, UK, Japan and Australia iOS is miniscule.
The point is, iOS does not have an app support advantage, apart from Apple handpicked ones that are critical to creating such appearance, such as was the case with their Nintendo deal and surely some chosen American app developers.

Likewise for Macs, the first one I even saw in my life, I was at university, and it was due to the fact there was a dude with a Mac and nothing he needed worked on it.
Then I lived in Hong Kong, and I got myself a Mac as I really liked the Haswell Macbook Air, and while I loved the hardware design at the time (as well as how MacOS dealt with battery life at the time) software-wise it was an incredibly frustrating experience for me.. when again, nothing would work. I almost failed a class because I couldn't find a program for very basic distributed software prototyping.. that I finally found a freaking Android version of and drew diagrams on my phone.
Not to mention gaming, as not a thing works on Macs. I understand that not everyone is a gamer but I can't imagine Mac users not even wanting to play something casually once in a while.

Since Windows XP or Vista, I've never heard of a person having issues with how Windows works with peripherals. On the contrary, there are devices with Windows drivers, that don't work on Macs. For printers and scanners you don't even need special drivers on Windows, you just press "print" and that's it if the printer is on the same network.
If there is a default, it is that any software works on Windows and a corresponding version might not work on other operating systems, and with Windows 7 or 10 I never had a single issue, or heard of issues apart from people being dummies about something (and downloading files like "catphoto.exe", for instance).

That's now discussing Mac vs Windows again and my belief is that while a Mac is absolutely not for me, if you're happy with it, just enjoy it - it's just an OS with somewhat different logic of operation that simply doesn't work with a lot of the software available on the market - if you're not using it and like how it works, then you might be a happier camper with a Mac.

As far as iOS and Android go, they are much closer in terms of software support. iOS has almost the same amount of critical apps as Android, at least in America. Heck, if you're a developer and your app is big enough on one platform, it's silly not to port it to iOS too considering it's not much extra work.

In terms of the way the OSes work, they are very, very similar. Sure there is a thing here or there that you can't do on iOS compared to Android, but for everyday, casual use and media consumption both are almost equal. My main problem with iOS is the devices that come with it - the iPhones are technologically behind Android flagships, and they are also more expensive, which again, for me, makes it an illogical purchase. That said, I'm not you or anyone else, especially as I don't live in the US, and an iPhone might satisfy all your use cases as well or maybe even better than an Android phone would, if you don't need the extra capabilities of Android. Heck, I'm a minimalist and I don't like having things I don't need. I just happen to need the extra operations I can do on files that Android offers, and I got into VR, but before this year's iPhones that caught up with many things my list had been much longer.

The thing with Ford is not a good analogy, as Apple really don't do anything better with their iPhones, technologically.
Ford was an icon for new, large scale manufacturing and management approach, which led to him selling the best value for money cars - they were some of the cheapest, while at the same time amongst the most capable - that's the opposite of what Apple does.
Apple does literally the same thing as other makers, just is a step or two behind in adopting newest technologies, spends more on marketing in the US and it's few biggest markets and charges a higher premium for their products.
And again it's a little annoying that it might sounds like Apple-hating, as it is just factually how Apple rolls. I'm not going to say that their products don't have a certain appeal, they actually do. They are just not technologically on par, that's it. I think your point about Apple stores and their customers being frequently less tech savvy was very accurate. They know how to sell something new to an Average Joe better. That is just not something that speaks to me or adds any value.

 

[Casey]

The vast majority of new computer science grads, programmers and developers are coming from India and China now.

And let me tell you something - they aren't developing for iOS.

 

[masta247]

The vast majority of new computer science grads, programmers and developers are coming from India and China now.

And let me tell you something - they aren't developing for iOS.

Partially because iOS is not enjoying too much of a thought share over there, and partially because Apple went money hungry out of proportion on developers and requires you to actually need a Mac to program for iOS, and pay a 99$ yearly "developer fee", which not only is quite outrageous if you're a young developer considering your options but also in my opinion Apple is shooting themselves in the foot due to what you mentioned. I mean, even if for some reason someone there wanted to code for iOS, good luck finding a developer with a Mac and a monthly salary to spend every year on a dev subscription fee over there.

I made 8 Android apps, contributing a couple bucks to my spare passive income. It isn't worth it to rent a Mac to port them to iOS and pay the yearly developer fee, and then support them on iOS over time, and having to deal with Apple asking me to make changes to it. I'd only do that if one of my apps was making big money, which I think is a sentiment that also speaks to many developers making niche apps. Then if you're a user looking for a niche app for a very specific need that you have, you realize it's only on Android.

 

[masta247]

The unthinkable has happened. According to European montly sales data (the only there is regarding this), in August, AMD finally sold more CPUs than Intel, and so far it seems like Coffee Lake will not be enough to reverse the trend:

https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ealing-significant-market-share-revenue-intel

 

[masta247]

The first iPhone 8 reviews are out, and they're not too good:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/iphone-8-review-not-the-upgrade-youre-looking-for-1505818800

even the Verge:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16323570/apple-new-iphone-8-review-plus-2017

while competitors like Samsung and LG have pushed phone hardware design far forward, the iPhone has basically stood still for four years. The iPhone 8 might be the most polished iteration of this basic design Apple’s ever made, but compared to the Galaxy S8 and other Android flagships like the LG V30, it’s just extremely dated. Apple’s true competitor to those devices is the iPhone X, but the company tells us that the 8 is also a flagship phone, and those huge bezels and surfboard dimensions just don’t cut it at the top end of the market anymore.

But of course, it just doesn’t matter if you have no intention of switching away from iOS, or you’re locked into iMessage. Android phones might as well not even exist for you. The thing to know is that spending money on an iPhone 8 doesn’t get you the cutting edge of phone design

And their summary:

After spending a week with the 8, I can’t think of a single compelling reason to upgrade from an iPhone 7
(...)
And yet, a lot of people are going to buy an iPhone 8 — it’s the phone to get if you’re on an upgrade plan, your older phone breaks or finally gets too slow, or you just need a new phone right now. It’s Apple’s new default phone, and it’s pretty great that a default phone is actually this good. But it’s not the future, and it’s not the cutting edge. It’s just the default.
It’s an iPhone.

It's a funny thing to me to see the iPhone not as a cutting edge phone, but still as the default.

 

[dilla]

Partially because iOS is not enjoying too much of a thought share over there, and partially because Apple went money hungry out of proportion on developers and requires you to actually need a Mac to program for iOS, and pay a 99$ yearly "developer fee", which not only is quite outrageous if you're a young developer considering your options but also in my opinion Apple is shooting themselves in the foot due to what you mentioned. I mean, even if for some reason someone there wanted to code for iOS, good luck finding a developer with a Mac and a monthly salary to spend every year on a dev subscription fee over there.

I made 8 Android apps, contributing a couple bucks to my spare passive income. It isn't worth it to rent a Mac to port them to iOS and pay the yearly developer fee, and then support them on iOS over time, and having to deal with Apple asking me to make changes to it. I'd only do that if one of my apps was making big money, which I think is a sentiment that also speaks to many developers making niche apps. Then if you're a user looking for a niche app for a very specific need that you have, you realize it's only on Android.

Apple's dev fee is ridiculous and I'm sure it's killed newer devs and their apps to run on iOS. I believe iOS still makes more money for devs than Android does but I'm also thinking of an article that said this a few years ago. So young devs are at a crossroads about taking a risk and paying $100 and bending to Apple's will or avoiding it altogether and sticking to Android.

At least Apple's consistent in their walled garden approach. They're restrictive or have high standards, depending how you look at it, for their hardware and software. Much higher than the average, at least.

But when it comes to all the big apps, especially social media, I feel like I see more links and ads to download from the App Store. It may or may not include a link for the Play Store, but what goes through my mind is that their targeting what their research says are the most active and profitable users, and that seems to be iOS. It may or may not mean there are more iOS users than Android users, but when they look at the stats of who is accessing their services and how often, it seems the younger crowd prefers iOS over Android and the younger crowd is more likely to use social media. Even for news apps, I'm betting the younger generation flocks to the CNN, NYT, WaPo, etc. apps instead of print. Or the website, which the older generation is still only starting to use over print. I bet they see higher traffic from iOS users than Android users, who tend to be older. Not saying Android users don't read the news. Or use social media. I just iOS status bars a lot more than Android when I see screenshots posted online. And not just for shit memes but on Twitter when bloggers and reporters screenshot something. That's what sways my guess that iOS users are more interactive with their apps because it's always an iOS screenshot.

 

[dilla]

The first iPhone 8 reviews are out, and they're not too good:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/iphone-8-review-not-the-upgrade-youre-looking-for-1505818800

even the Verge:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16323570/apple-new-iphone-8-review-plus-2017



And their summary:


It's a funny thing to me to see the iPhone not as a cutting edge phone, but still as the default.

People have been saying this for a few years now about the frequency with which people update their phones. I'm not sure the S7 is different from the S8, much like the iPhone 7 from the 8. If I were to get an iPhone, it would be the X; the 8, as reviewers have pointed out, is more of the same from the 7. Just an updated battery and better camera.

Reviewers and posters on forums alike always complain about a phone and point out its flaws but ultimately, each iteration of Samsung or Apple's phones manages to outsell the last one.

The 8 is a 7S with a different name. Many felt the same about the S7 v the S6 and I feel the same about the S7 and S8 in relation to each other. The S8 has Bixby, which seems to be a downgrade since until recently you couldn't disable it or delete it. Samsung wanted to ram it down your throat to love and accept it. The bumps in hardware are just as minor. Slightly bigger screen/smaller bezels/bezel-less, slightly better camera, slightly bigger battery, etc.

But the S8 is the default until the Note 8 comes out. I haven't kept up with its news but I'm sure it won't have S8 users scrambling to upgrade 6 months after buying an S8.

Also, some people are downright insane and change phones every few months to what they perceive to be the best ones. I think this is a trait of people that follow the news and have to keep up with the Jones's. The rest of the normal folks are either tied to their 2 year contracts or 18 month leases (which is the new thing for US carriers the past year or two). So they're not upgrading for at least 12 months, if not longer. If they do, they pay ETFs and other penalties for upgrading. So I imagine the 8 will have adopters that previously owned a 7/7+ but the majority will still be people coming from the 6S or earlier. One thing many iPhone users enjoy is that their phones are supported by Apple with updates for longer than 2 years, so they feel their phones are still secure enough to continue using even if it's the iPhone 5S from 2013.

 

[dilla]

OK, triple posting but I originally came here to share this with Masta

http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/can-pro-tablets-replace-your-laptop/

I'm not making a case for or against it but it was an interesting read of what many people are using tablets for (which I'm sure you know) but how some have managed to replace their desktops with them. I didn't know a lot of those uses and what people look for so it was an interesting read for me. Obviously, the conclusion is that it depends on how you use your Pro tablet but I think we're not too far off.

I don't know what the Andromeda project that was so hyped about some months back was, but if Google decides to get back in to the tablet market, it would be good for them to tackle the iPad Pro. I'm not sure if it would be a good idea since the iPad Pro isn't what the Surface is but it's gunning for it. Those two have had a head start of 5+ years since Google dropped out quietly from the tablet race. To get an Android Pro tablet noticed when there's already a heated race between Apple and MS is going to take a ton of advertising on Google's part. Tough to do when MS now gives the NFL Surface tablets (that don't work and players and coaches hate) and the Pro is targeting basically everyone else.

But it sucks Android doesn't have a Pro tablet from Google. I wonder how Samsung feels shouldering the weight for the tablet OS that even Google gave up on.

 

[dilla]

Pixel XL 2: http://www.droid-life.com/2017/09/19/google-pixel-2-xl-exclusive/

People are crying about the $849 price tag. That is a lot of money but with it being the XL model, it's comparable to the S8+ or maybe the Note 8 and the iPhone 7+/8+ in price, right? If not, it costs less.

The people complaining are rocking Pixels and Nexus 5x/6Ps. Rather recent phones. Why are they upgrading so soon, especially the Pixel users? Seems stupid to complain about upgrading a phone every year by choice instead of 2+ years by contract or 3+ out of necessity.

They're the ones that drove prices up! They were the schmucks that purchased a new phone every year, or sooner, and let OEMs think this was OK.

 

[masta247]

OK, triple posting but I originally came here to share this with Masta



http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/can-pro-tablets-replace-your-laptop/



I'm not making a case for or against it but it was an interesting read of what many people are using tablets for (which I'm sure you know) but how some have managed to replace their desktops with them. I didn't know a lot of those uses and what people look for so it was an interesting read for me. Obviously, the conclusion is that it depends on how you use your Pro tablet but I think we're not too far off.

While it was quite interesting where the editors came from, I always wonder what do those people do for work that for them a mobile OS-ed tablet could replace a full-fledged desktop operating system, even remotely. Those are two completely different worlds.
Apps are cool for content consumption, in some cases some last moment edits or, in absolutely best case scenario, simple data entry. I never understood the "can run all desktop programs" as a simple "pro" in a pros and cons column, as that is a pre-requisite of a computer in my book and anything not doing that does not belong in the same comparison, as it's a completely different product aimed at different people.

While I agree that there is a world of people who use the internet for Facebook, cat videos, an occasional word document, in which case they don't even need to be bothered by having a computer in the first place, I think a tech journalist who makes them the default market for computers is kind of insulting to that word and the tech industry, and applauding lack of personal growth in being locked up with a device preventing a person from becoming more tech savvy and maybe pursuing a better job.
Tablets turned out to be great and convenient, but if they don't run programs, they are designed for media consumption and thus should be presented as such by fair tech journalists. Especially in times where you can get almost equally tiny devices with full fledged operating systems.

I believe iOS still makes more money for devs than Android does

Per user. It is in large part because iOS devices are owned by people who are willing to spend more on apps, or click on ads more. Android is used worldwide, including millions of users in countries where virtual purchases are mostly frowned upon, and ad blocks are common. I think if an iOS user already "overspent" on their phone, he is more likely to spend some extra money on an app rather than looking for a free alternative too, which would be my interpretation of this:

If Android users are also more tech savvy, they are also more conditioned to avoid ads.
Additionally, iOS apps appear to be as active as Android apps because there is a smaller variety of apps to choose from, and iOS users are likely less inclined to look for alternatives (if less tech savvy) so the users are more concentrated around the biggest apps. It makes sense for Netlix, for instance, to promote the iOS app, due to all of the above plus Netflix being most popular in western countries where iOS is very common. Thus if I were Netflix, I would totally update the iOS app before I looked at the Android app. It's more of an exception than reality, yet I'm sure there are people who mostly care about the select few apps that are iOS first, and for them it's easy to think that iOS apps are better. Because as a whole, the App Store is about a third of Google Play in terms of downloads and users:

"According to App Annie, in 2016 the Play Market received over 75 billion downloads, while the App Store recorded just slightly over 25 billion downloads during the same year."
https://medium.com/master-of-code-global/app-store-vs-google-play-stores-in-numbers-fd5ba020c195

They're the ones that drove prices up! They were the schmucks that purchased a new phone every year, or sooner, and let OEMs think this was OK.

I completely agree. They also agreed to price gouging and voted with their wallets in favor of it. The Pixel was essentially a Nexus device at double the price of the previous generation. While I was a big fan of the Nexus line (despite never having owned one), I really didn't like what Google did with the Pixel, as to me it was a symbol of going from "we are the good guys making cutting edge tech available for reasonable prices" to making their first attempt at "we are fancy and luxurious now, and we will cost you".

On top of that, the current generation of phones is the one with so far the least improvements in a decade, yet the biggest price spikes in a decade. It's a thing that happened industry-wide - unjustified price hikes. I didn't upgrade just because I didn't find it fair to be charged more for the S8, despite, as you said, it having the least improvements of any S series devices so far apart from the reduced bezels.

 

[dilla]

While it was quite interesting where the editors came from, I always wonder what do those people do for work that for them a mobile OS-ed tablet could replace a full-fledged desktop operating system, even remotely. Those are two completely different worlds.

I believe the people on that site are writers by profession, they just might write about different things. The site is about tech but they have a sister site called The Sweethome that does the same thing with household appliances. The two sites together are somewhat of a more casually-written but more in-depth Consumer Reports site, at least in my opinion. I don't think they work in the tech world directly, though. They just write about it. And I imagine a huge portion of the world falls in to the category of "not a computer scientist/engineer." I can't even think of what word given to encompass that field and the people in it but people that know the ins and outs of computer hardware and software.

So maybe being written by them means it's very much applicable to majority of the readers.

Tablets turned out to be great and convenient, but if they don't run programs, they are designed for media consumption and thus should be presented as such by fair tech journalists. Especially in times where you can get almost equally tiny devices with full fledged operating systems.

I haven't looked at benchmarks nor read too much beyond some user experiences and blogs, but photo editing and creative software are available for iOS and I have read people praise the iPad Pro for running these programs smoothly. I imagine the capabilities of the program should be the same as their desktop counterparts but now with the added bonus of the Apple Pencil.

About your point about ad blockers, I don't think there are many ad blockers that work system wide on Android that don't require root. With root, yes, there are plenty of options, including changing the phone's DNS on cellular networks and not just for WiFi. But that still requires root and I'm not sure the percentage of Android users that root their devices, let alone have a system-wide ad blocker (not just their browser) goes beyond a few percent. I'm sure the majority of people we see on forums have their devices rooted and maybe with a custom ROM but that's still not the general population. The same thing applies to iOS users that jailbroke their devices. It can't be even close to half of all iOS users. I'm not sure where I'd even find that information and if it would be reliable if conducted **on a forum*
* where users are still usually more experienced than the average user.

One thing that got me thinking was the availability of apps off the Play Store that can be side loaded and are used as alternatives for other paid apps and how Android has many more of those than iOS. I'm not sure it's possible to side load an IPA on to a non-jailbroken device. So Android users have the ability to side load an app and by pass the Play Store and also those apps can be free alternatives to other paid apps. While that seems great and I do it a great deal, that could be enough for new developers to not even consider putting a quality, paid app (or free one, if they choose) because they know someone can make a free alternative and sink the paid app. I'm not complaining about free apps but it's something to think about that I don't iOS devs have to worry about. They just have to worry about someone making a better app for less, which is fair. But not when the alternative is free and may or may not be better than the paid one.

As for the price hikes, we still have the option to vote with our wallets and not buy the $1000+ phones. The thing is, my contract is due to expire next March. I still have time but not upgrading will still have me paying for my phone through Sprint because the contract price had the cost of the phone baked in to it. So I'd have to upgrade or at least change my plan, and possibly carrier. I'm fine with my S7, kind of, but if I upgrade I don't think I'd go the Samsung route again. I was considering a Pixel but not at that price. 6 months from now, it could be cheaper, possibly used, but not $849.

Regardless of what phone I choose, I will at the very least need to change my plan with Sprint or another carrier and get off the 2 year contract plan they no longer offer. They ended that offering earlier this year and were the last major carrier to do so. Now we have installment plans or lease options which still drive the price up by about $30 a month on our family plan in order to get the same benefits, like unlimited data, voice, etc.

So I'll have to contribute to the very same problem I pointed out because it would be time for an upgrade and I could either keep my phone on the same plan or a new plan to save money, or change phones and change plans and possibly carrier too. And both seem like a hassle. But we'll see.

 

[dilla]

Google might have just bought HTC.

So maybe the next Google Phone takes some design cues from HTC's current offerings.

 

[masta247]

I don't think I have ever seen a mobile app that works remotely as well to its desktop counterpart, and those that exist are just the very most popular few. They are like the demo versions of the real thing, stripped off most of the features, designed to work on ARM chips, which are much slower and less capable than AMD/Intel processors. As far as creativity goes, I think the Surface line-up hits the spot with the pens, program support and portability.

I was surprised that Google paid 1.1 billion for essentially using what's left of HTC's mobile division. That's a lot of money for people who were not good enough to be taken by other, more successful Taiwanese/Chinese when HTC was sinking, management that made all the worst decision that almost sunk the company (if it weren't for the Vive division that is staying with HTC) and non-exclusive access to the patents. It's a similar story as with Motorola, which was more hopeful, had much more patents that Google could access exclusively, and also use the brand on top of that. HTC is a sunken ship as an Android OEM, with most of the crew already gone.
They bought Moto for almost 13 billion though, and sold for a little over two. I'm surprised not many people talk about Google's bad decisions, which they have made a lot of, especially recently.

 

[dilla]

Google has bought up a lot of startups like Nest and Waze and really didn't do much with them. They're still successful but that seems to be a small few compared to what they did with established companies like Moto and now HTC. They sound kind of desperate.

As a sidenote, HTC has been circling the drain for a long time. Wasn't LG also struggling, at least the mobile division? I wonder what's next for them since the G series phones, and V series too, don't seem to be taking off too much.

Sort of building off of the Google news, I had been using the macOS High Sierra developer's beta for a few months on both my old Mac and more recently my new one. One of the features I both iOS 11 and High Sierra is auto play of videos and restricting access to cookies and other privacy data. Ad companies are up in arms over it but it doesn't seem like Apple will budge. People, regardless of what OS they use, are praising Apple for standing up to advertisers and are taking joy in having some control back over their privacy.

One user put it pretty well that Apple charges you a pretty penny up front and Google tends to rail you after you've joined their services, but you pay either way. Either with the Apple premium or with Google taking over your data.