Do you think Apple is concerned about the rumours of the Galaxy S4?

[mrsir2009]

Android is for tinkerers.

iOS is for everyone else.

Do you honestly think that all of the people that use Android are customisation freaks who install custom ROMs and all the rest...? Android CAN be customised (as can iOS with a Jailbreak), but most people don't, and vanilla is actually a pretty nice OS for "everyone else".

 

[matttye]

Do you think Apple is concerned about the rumours of the Galaxy S4?

Maybe every video isn't 1gb, but plenty of them are in 200mb+. For example, this past Christmas, I shot a video of my son opening his gifts for the first time. My mother wanted a copy of the video also. With the video being HD, it was easily around 400mb or so. With Wifi Direct, it took no time for it to be sent to her phone. If I used something like Bump, it would have taken a significantly longer amount of time. The majority of the videos in my phone are no less than 50mb, due to them being high resolution, so Bump would come up short in a large way. It might be fine for tiny files, but then again, so is bluetooth... The bottom line is, it's nothing more than a workaround, which is why it isn't feasible for all situations. I shouldn't have to think about how large a file is or isn't. I should just send it. With Bump, a person has to be cognizant of how large a file they are trying to transmit, otherwise they may be stuck waiting for quite a while.


It appears you don't understand what Wifi Direct is. Wifi Direct has nothing to do with a Wifi Network being present or not. Wifi Direct creates a DIRECT ad hoc connection between two devices via Wifi. It has nothing to do with Wifi networks or anything of the sort. It is strictly an ad hoc peer to peer connection.


That is not even remotely similar, for the reasons I previously stated. It's really that simple. Having to take a picture of something is a workaround in an attempt to achieve the same functionality. What if I'm in the car at night? Now I have to turn on the light and to photograph the QR code? With NFC, I could have simply sat the phone down, and once it started charging and the light turns on, it will automatically read the tag and begin the automated tasks. Sorry, your workaround is just that...a workaround.


No...there are the real deal features like Wifi Direct, and then there are workarounds like Bump. They way Bump transmits data is no different than if you were to email a file to someone. The only difference is it allows you to "bump" the devices. In the end it's nothing more than a subpar workaround, same as with QR codes instead of NFC tags.

I thought wifi direct needed both phones to be on the same network. Even though that's not the case, you are still nitpicking IMO. In real life usage Bump has never fell short for me. I've never thought, "oh no this video is too big to send." You could have sent that video using wifi and it wouldn't have taken that long!

Like unobtanium said, there's rarely ever a need to send a video to someone right there and then while you're out and about. Most likely it would make more sense to put it on Facebook or Dropbox or something later so that everyone can download it, and you won't have to keep sending it to various people.

Qr codes were around before NFC tags so they can't possibly be a workaround. They are an alternative. I could say some "what ifs" too.. What if you have a metal case on when you need to scan the NFC tag? You'd have to take the case off.

Also my qr code reader has a button on the top left corner to turn the camera light on. Takes about a tenth of a second to turn on so it's no bother at all.

As I've said before too, you don't need to buy qr code tags, you can print about fifty of them on an a4 sheet of paper.

 

[Irishman]

Do you honestly think that all of the people that use Android are customisation freaks who install custom ROMs and all the rest...? Android CAN be customised (as can iOS with a Jailbreak), but most people don't, and vanilla is actually a pretty nice OS for "everyone else".

Nope, because my wife has an HTC One and couldn't care less. She just got a deal on it that she couldn't get on an iphone.

I'm not talking about the people that choose to buy the phone, in this case. I'm talking about the way it's designed. It's designed to be customized and to install custom UIs over the top of (the carriers do it all the time - Touchwiz, anyone?), manage and change every little aspect of the phone software.

Just like the people that choose to buy an iphone do it for their own reasons, too. But Apple is clear about the way they design it.

So, from a design standpoint, there is a clear difference in philosophy in the two mobile devices and OS's.

 

[0dev]

Of course Apple will take concern, Samsung is currently the biggest Android handset maker and Android is iOS's biggest competitor. Samsung is focusing on upping marketshare at the expense of profit and they're doing a good job of it. Apple didn't sue them because they didn't think they were a threat, after all.

 

[Irishman]

Of course Apple will take concern, Samsung is currently the biggest Android handset maker and Android is iOS's biggest competitor. Samsung is focusing on upping marketshare at the expense of profit and they're doing a good job of it. Apple didn't sue them because they didn't think they were a threat, after all.

I don't think Apple is so much concerned about retaking marketshare. They're just concerned about making what they think is the best phone.

 

[0dev]

I don't think Apple is so much concerned about retaking marketshare. They're just concerned about making what they think is the best phone.

Apple cares about making the biggest margin possible on their products and they can't do that if they lose sales.

 

[Irishman]

Apple cares about making the biggest margin possible on their products and they can't do that if they lose sales.

Sure they can. Margin is not the same as revenue from units sold. A company can make an extremely high margin per unit (Apple's Macs) while not controlling PC marketshare (which they never have, despite double digit growth percentage of that market over the past couple years). Apple has remained extremely profitable in the PC market sitting in 3rd place, and it's another example that shows that Dell, HP, Lenovo and Asus don't have to lose in order for Apple to win, but they certainly are making less profit as an industry compared to Apple.

Higher margin dollars are higher quality dollars from the standpoint of keeping your business running.

Amazon with the Kindles? Still selling the Fires and Fire HDs at a loss because they know they'll make it up on content sales. Console gaming had been the same for years. I think MS only recently started making money on XBox 360 units sold! Android handset makers are now in a race to the bottom to commoditize the smartphone. They're taking less and less margin dollars per unit because they're selling more and more of them.

Apple doesn't operate that way.

 

[TacticalDesire]

I'm not sure what you mean by efficient? I'm not fanboy-ing here but the Nexus 7 I owned for 4 months was nowhere near as smooth or stable as the ipad mini that has just replaced it. Even with its virgin Jelly Bean and quad core processor. Also, the battery life was nowhere near the ipad mini's. I may have just had a bad one but if it hadn't been for it slowing right down and the stock launcher crashing regularly, I would've kept it as I really liked the OS and found it very intuitive.

Android could definitely use some work in the optimization department. When I mentioned efficiency I was talking about navigation through the OS, multitasking and changing/toggling simple things like GPS, Wifi, screen brightness etc. I can't speak for the performance issues you're describing as I've never experienced them.

 

[0dev]

Sure they can. Margin is not the same as revenue from units sold. A company can make an extremely high margin per unit (Apple's Macs) while not controlling PC marketshare (which they never have, despite double digit growth percentage of that market over the past couple years). Apple has remained extremely profitable in the PC market sitting in 3rd place, and it's another example that shows that Dell, HP, Lenovo and Asus don't have to lose in order for Apple to win, but they certainly are making less profit as an industry compared to Apple.

Higher margin dollars are higher quality dollars from the standpoint of keeping your business running.

Amazon with the Kindles? Still selling the Fires and Fire HDs at a loss because they know they'll make it up on content sales. Console gaming had been the same for years. I think MS only recently started making money on XBox 360 units sold! Android handset makers are now in a race to the bottom to commoditize the smartphone. They're taking less and less margin dollars per unit because they're selling more and more of them.

Apple doesn't operate that way.

What you say is true, Apple aims at the high end market, but they can't make a good margin on high quality products without economies of scale. If sales fall and Apple is forced to reduce production, each product suddenly costs more to produce and they lose valuable profit margin. Therefore it's in their interests to keep sales high.

 

[Tinmania]

I'm not sure what you mean by efficient? I'm not fanboy-ing here but the Nexus 7 I owned for 4 months was nowhere near as smooth or stable as the ipad mini that has just replaced it. Even with its virgin Jelly Bean and quad core processor. Also, the battery life was nowhere near the ipad mini's. I may have just had a bad one but if it hadn't been for it slowing right down and the stock launcher crashing regularly, I would've kept it as I really liked the OS and found it very intuitive.

The way I see it there is a big difference between Android on a phone vs. a tablet.

When I got my Nexus 4 I loved it so much I thought it was a no-brainer to get a Nexus 7. But for some reason it didn't seem buttery smooth like my Nexus 4 did. And the sleek minimal bezel of my Nexus 4 was replaced by, what seemed to me like, a gigantic ugly bezel. So I returned it.

While I have an iPad 3 (and iPad 1/2 before that) I never had played around with an iPad mini. So I took time to really check it out and, compared to my Nexus 7, felt it had a minimal bezel and much brighter screen--and of course was smoother. I came away feeling it could easily replace my iPad 3 (and in fact might). So I returned the Nexus 7.

Maybe I didn't give it a fair workout but as for me, I a.) do not like that aspect ration of Android tablets (feel too skinny) and b.) do not like the large bezels. Beyond that they need to be smoother.

Edit: Ironically I now have a Note 2, which is often referred to as a "phablet," that I am really loving. But it is a large-screen smartphone and not a tablet.



Michael

 

[irDigital0l]

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13...s-samsung-warns-of-shrinking-hardware-profits

I think Apple is more focused on software growth.

 

[Irishman]

What you say is true, Apple aims at the high end market, but they can't make a good margin on high quality products without economies of scale. If sales fall and Apple is forced to reduce production, each product suddenly costs more to produce and they lose valuable profit margin. Therefore it's in their interests to keep sales high.

But not at the expense of the vast numbers of people they've convinced to buy idevices and Macs over the past 10 years!

Surely, you're not suggesting that Apple's success hinges on making flaky geeks happy?!?

Have they done that for hardcore gamers who have asked for a headless upgradeable iMac over the years? Nope. Is Apple dying because of it? Nope.

They didn't cater to users when they removed floppy drives, optical drives, making their consumer lines largely non-upgradeable-friendly computers. They didn't cater to users when they went from ADB connectors to USB, or Firewire, or the 30-pin connector, ditched the Motorola processor in favor of Intel, partnering with Intel on Thunderbolt, etc, etc. Very few of these were popular moves at the time, but proved to be largely the right moves.

I just don't see the urgency to have Apple mimic the geek attractiveness of Android, especially when it runs the very real risk of alienating its already-established user base.

 

[Tinmania]

But not at the expense of the vast numbers of people they've convinced to buy idevices and Macs over the past 10 years!

Surely, you're not suggesting that Apple's success hinges on making flaky geeks happy?!?

Have they done that for hardcore gamers who have asked for a headless upgradeable iMac over the years? Nope. Is Apple dying because of it? Nope.

I just don't see the urgency to have Apple mimic

the geek attractiveness of Android

, especially when it runs the very real risk of alienating its already-established user base.

That geek attractiveness thing is not why Android is doing so well.

Of the few dozen people I know who have an Android phone I am the only one who does anything remotely deep with it. Everyone else uses it as-is; usually for facebook, email, phone, text, and a few apps (banking, words with friends, angry birds, etc.).

Same with my iPhone-using friends.




Michael

 

[mrsir2009]

But not at the expense of the vast numbers of people they've convinced to buy idevices and Macs over the past 10 years!

Surely, you're not suggesting that Apple's success hinges on making flaky geeks happy?!?

Have they done that for hardcore gamers who have asked for a headless upgradeable iMac over the years? Nope. Is Apple dying because of it? Nope.

They didn't cater to users when they removed floppy drives, optical drives, making their consumer lines largely non-upgradeable-friendly computers. They didn't cater to users when they went from ADB connectors to USB, or Firewire, or the 30-pin connector, ditched the Motorola processor in favor of Intel, partnering with Intel on Thunderbolt, etc, etc. Very few of these were popular moves at the time, but proved to be largely the right moves.

I just don't see the urgency to have Apple mimic the geek attractiveness of Android, especially when it runs the very real risk of alienating its already-established user base.

Macrumors kinda gives you the illusion that the spec geeks are a large portion of the customer base, doesn’t it?

 

[0dev]

But not at the expense of the vast numbers of people they've convinced to buy idevices and Macs over the past 10 years!

Surely, you're not suggesting that Apple's success hinges on making flaky geeks happy?!?

Have they done that for hardcore gamers who have asked for a headless upgradeable iMac over the years? Nope. Is Apple dying because of it? Nope.

They didn't cater to users when they removed floppy drives, optical drives, making their consumer lines largely non-upgradeable-friendly computers. They didn't cater to users when they went from ADB connectors to USB, or Firewire, or the 30-pin connector, ditched the Motorola processor in favor of Intel, partnering with Intel on Thunderbolt, etc, etc. Very few of these were popular moves at the time, but proved to be largely the right moves.

I just don't see the urgency to have Apple mimic the geek attractiveness of Android, especially when it runs the very real risk of alienating its already-established user base.

Whoever said anything about keeping geeks happy? Of course that's not Apple's MO, but like every company in the smartphone market right now they want to keep their marketshare up. The only difference is in how each company tries to achieve that goal. Apple does it by making one high end, high margin smartphone a year, so they need that product to sell.

Android is attractive to general users because it's got a massive ecosystem of apps, it's on both high spec and cheap hardware, and with all the different variations of Android provided by various manufacturers it offers something for everyone. It's only a small number of people who choose Android because of custom ROMs etc.

Right now Apple doesn't have any major concerns. They need to make sure they're keeping up with competitors, but they don't exactly have to worry about losing a lot of customers. However, if they were to completely ignore the needs of customers, that would change very quickly. The smartphone market is very fickle. Just a year or two ago, HTC was the biggest Android device maker, and now they've started trailing behind while losing that title to Samsung. And just a few years before that, Nokia and RIM owned the market. Not anymore. History tells us that if you don't move with the times you get left behind in this market, simple as that.

 

[Irishman]

That geek attractiveness thing is not why Android is doing so well.

Of the few dozen people I know who have an Android phone I am the only one who does anything remotely deep with it. Everyone else uses it as-is; usually for facebook, email, phone, text, and a few apps (banking, words with friends, angry birds, etc.).

Same with my iPhone-using friends.




Michael

So, in your view, why is Android doing well?

----------

Whoever said anything about keeping geeks happy? Of course that's not Apple's MO, but like every company in the smartphone market right now they want to keep their marketshare up. The only difference is in how each company tries to achieve that goal. Apple does it by making one high end, high margin smartphone a year, so they need that product to sell.

Android is attractive to general users because it's got a massive ecosystem of apps, it's on both high spec and cheap hardware, and with all the different variations of Android provided by various manufacturers it offers something for everyone. It's only a small number of people who choose Android because of custom ROMs etc.

Right now Apple doesn't have any major concerns. They need to make sure they're keeping up with competitors, but they don't exactly have to worry about losing a lot of customers. However, if they were to completely ignore the needs of customers, that would change very quickly. The smartphone market is very fickle. Just a year or two ago, HTC was the biggest Android device maker, and now they've started trailing behind while losing that title to Samsung. And just a few years before that, Nokia and RIM owned the market. Not anymore. History tells us that if you don't move with the times you get left behind in this market, simple as that.

So, with that foundation laid, what do you think Apple must offer in order to continue to be a leader in the smartphone market?

 

[0dev]

So, with that foundation laid, what do you think Apple must offer in order to continue to be a leader in the smartphone market?

More choice. That's the main area Android leads in.

I want to see Apple sell a phone with a four inch screen or smaller and another with a 4.8 inch at least, instead of a compromise with the iPhone 5. I want to see a choice of themes for iOS too so users can make it look as they want it rather than sticking to the stale UI they've had since 2007 in which the only customisation you're allowed is a different wallpaper and moving around the icons.

And there are times when the locked down nature of the OS make it more complicated too. Like why can't I attach files to e-mails from the compose screen? Why can't I see the filesystem?

Also, as more of a personal complaint than anything else, I want to see them ease up the App Store restrictions. I want to see proper alternative browser options rather than Safari with a wrapper around it. I want to see apps like this on the App Store too, because Apple shouldn't act like a moral guardian to their customers and that's a site I use very often and not having an app for it on my iPhone is a PITA.

 

[Irishman]

More choice. That's the main area Android leads in.

I want to see Apple sell a phone with a four inch screen or smaller and another with a 4.8 inch at least, instead of a compromise with the iPhone 5.

Okay, so, having read that, I'm going to look at your proposal the way a business would. I think it's the smart way to analyze it while keeping focused.

If a company like Apple were going to investigate offering a second phone (I'll round it up to 5", just to keep the numbers easy to type), they'd have to analyze how many new phone sales they'd attract, versus how many sales they'd cannibalize from their primary (4") phone. How many potential phone customers would they attract FROM Android and Windows Phone 8 simply because they offered a larger screen?

I'm sure they did the same analysis when deciding to offer the iPad Mini, and in its case, the results were favorable, so there is a chance that they could find favorably for a larger iPhone. So, if we use iPad sales vs iPad Mini sales as an analogue, what do we see?

Per CBS News Moneywatch, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_162-57565508/apple-ipad-mini-hurts-revenue/ last quarter Apple made $54.5 billion in revenue (versus the analyst's prediction of $54.7 billion). They sold 47.8 million iPhones during that time (beating the analysts 46-47 million units sold predictions).

Here comes the relevant bit: They sold 22.9 million iPads (both full size and Mini), with an average price of $466 per unit sold, for a total of $10.67 billion. Contrast that to the prior quarter where the average price per unit was $536, for a total of $7.51 billion. So, the concern from a business standpoint is this - did the Mini cannibalize sales of the full-size iPad, instead of reaching out to new customers that otherwise wouldn't buy an Apple tablet? Reuters suggests the answer is likely yes, given Sharp backing off on full-size iPad screen manufacturing http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_162-57564708/is-ipad-mini-cannibalizing-its-bigger-sibling/

So, in the busiest quarter of the year, Apple had a flat margin comp quarter over quarter, despite a strong iPhone quarter. Where did the margin loss come from? They don't sell enough Macs to account for the loss (plus there were no major, less-expensive Macs offered to account for it). The culprit has to be the iPad Mini, which they sell more of, but at less profit. Remember, not all revenue dollars are created equal, so a business wants to focus on the higher profit dollars to prosper.

Part of me thinks the Mini might actually have been Apple's way of putting a toe in the water to see the effect of carrying two different sizes of the same class of product. I don't think they'd let the iPhone be the test case. Too much risk if things went wrong. Given that, this doesn't bode well for an iPhone Maxi (or whatever they'd call it).

I want to see a choice of themes for iOS too so users can make it look as they want it rather than sticking to the stale UI they've had since 2007 in which the only customisation you're allowed is a different wallpaper and moving around the icons.

This could happen. It's early enough in iOS's lifespan that they just haven't gotten around to changing the drapes yet. I think that - with Forrestal gone - the influence of skewmorphism in the OS will hopefully go the way of the dodo. At least OSX lets you change system fonts, sizes, highlight colors, etc. I'm not against it.

And there are times when the locked down nature of the OS make it more complicated too. Like why can't I attach files to e-mails from the compose screen? Why can't I see the filesystem?

This argument I've never quite understood. It seems like, in the cases of some users, they view mobile OSs as more of replacements to desktop/laptop OSs. Is that right? They expect the same level of functionality from a mobile OS, even if it could potentially make the experience more off-putting to 80% of mobile users. If not showing the file system to the end user is a conscious decision Apple has made, it's not adversely affecting the experiences of hundreds of millions of users. What is Apple's incentive to change it?

Also, as more of a personal complaint than anything else, I want to see them ease up the App Store restrictions. I want to see proper alternative browser options rather than Safari with a wrapper around it. I want to see apps like this on the App Store too, because Apple shouldn't act like a moral guardian to their customers and that's a site I use very often and not having an app for it on my iPhone is a PITA.

I think Google would take issue with your characterization of their Chrome browser on iOS as just Safari within a wrapper. As would the guys who make the Mercury Web Browser (those are just two mobile browsers I use from time to time, and in the case of Mercury, I paid money for it, and it's a fantastic product). The problem I have with them is that I can't make either of them my default browser. So, if I click on a link in an email or iMessage, Safari will always open. Apple will likely never allow an app that lets you get your kink on, because they'd stated from the outset of the app store, that they do not want iOS to be a place where people get porn. Admittedly, that is a holdover from Steve's sensibilities, but it is still strong.

 

[0dev]

Okay, so, having read that, I'm going to look at your proposal the way a business would. I think it's the smart way to analyze it while keeping focused.

If a company like Apple were going to investigate offering a second phone (I'll round it up to 5", just to keep the numbers easy to type), they'd have to analyze how many new phone sales they'd attract, versus how many sales they'd cannibalize from their primary (4") phone. How many potential phone customers would they attract FROM Android and Windows Phone 8 simply because they offered a larger screen?

I'm sure they did the same analysis when deciding to offer the iPad Mini, and in its case, the results were favorable, so there is a chance that they could find favorably for a larger iPhone. So, if we use iPad sales vs iPad Mini sales as an analogue, what do we see?

Apple don't care about self-cannibalisation. In fact when the iPad Mini came out they said if someone's going to release a product that eats up sales of the bigger more expensive iPad it might as well be them. The Verge quoted Jobs himself in saying "If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will." Obviously they wanted to get their foot in the door on the smaller tablet market before it was taken up by only Android devices. The same logic would go for large screen smartphones.

Also in this case the new 5 inch model would be the high end phone, the 4 inch would be the lower end.

Per CBS News Moneywatch, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_162-57565508/apple-ipad-mini-hurts-revenue/ last quarter Apple made $54.5 billion in revenue (versus the analyst's prediction of $54.7 billion). They sold 47.8 million iPhones during that time (beating the analysts 46-47 million units sold predictions).

Here comes the relevant bit: They sold 22.9 million iPads (both full size and Mini), with an average price of $466 per unit sold, for a total of $10.67 billion. Contrast that to the prior quarter where the average price per unit was $536, for a total of $7.51 billion. So, the concern from a business standpoint is this - did the Mini cannibalize sales of the full-size iPad, instead of reaching out to new customers that otherwise wouldn't buy an Apple tablet? Reuters suggests the answer is likely yes, given Sharp backing off on full-size iPad screen manufacturing http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_162-57564708/is-ipad-mini-cannibalizing-its-bigger-sibling/

So, in the busiest quarter of the year, Apple had a flat margin comp quarter over quarter, despite a strong iPhone quarter. Where did the margin loss come from? They don't sell enough Macs to account for the loss (plus there were no major, less-expensive Macs offered to account for it). The culprit has to be the iPad Mini, which they sell more of, but at less profit. Remember, not all revenue dollars are created equal, so a business wants to focus on the higher profit dollars to prosper.

Part of me thinks the Mini might actually have been Apple's way of putting a toe in the water to see the effect of carrying two different sizes of the same class of product. I don't think they'd let the iPhone be the test case. Too much risk if things went wrong. Given that, this doesn't bode well for an iPhone Maxi (or whatever they'd call it).

But like I said, and like Jobs believed, if they stayed out of the small tablet market and they kept getting popular with consumers, sales of the big iPad would be cannibalised by Asus and Samsung instead. If something is going to kill sales of Apple's products it might as well be Apple's other products.

This could happen. It's early enough in iOS's lifespan that they just haven't gotten around to changing the drapes yet. I think that - with Forrestal gone - the influence of skewmorphism in the OS will hopefully go the way of the dodo. At least OSX lets you change system fonts, sizes, highlight colors, etc. I'm not against it.

Exactly, let's hope they open it up to more user customisation, because even for regular users the availability of third party launchers and the like is a plus for Android.

This argument I've never quite understood. It seems like, in the cases of some users, they view mobile OSs as more of replacements to desktop/laptop OSs. Is that right? They expect the same level of functionality from a mobile OS, even if it could potentially make the experience more off-putting to 80% of mobile users. If not showing the file system to the end user is a conscious decision Apple has made, it's not adversely affecting the experiences of hundreds of millions of users. What is Apple's incentive to change it?

It's simple enough, I want to save a file into a folder and get into that folder from another app. So say I go into the Djay app and save a mix. I want to then go into Dropbox and upload that mix. Right now I can't do that in iOS. I can in Android, but not in iOS.

Because they put this stupid limit on the OS, it makes it more difficult and less convenient to use the system, it's as simple as that. It's not about making it emulate a full computer OS, it's about doing all you can to make the OS user friendly. That's why I find it ironic Apple doesn't do it, because user friendliness is meant to be their USP.

I think Google would take issue with your characterization of their Chrome browser on iOS as just Safari within a wrapper. As would the guys who make the Mercury Web Browser (those are just two mobile browsers I use from time to time, and in the case of Mercury, I paid money for it, and it's a fantastic product).

Underneath everything it's just bits tacked onto the Safari engine though. On Android I can download Firefox which uses the actual Mozilla engine. More important for the end user, I can download full add-ons for Firefox on Android such as AdBlock and NoScript, all without rooting. Apple do not allow third party add-ons for App Store apps.

The problem I have with them is that I can't make either of them my default browser. So, if I click on a link in an email or iMessage, Safari will always open.

Exactly, another symptom of Closed System Syndrome, like the hidden filesystem and lack of customisation, all of which does not affect Android.

Apple will likely never allow an app that lets you get your kink on, because they'd stated from the outset of the app store, that they do not want iOS to be a place where people get porn. Admittedly, that is a holdover from Steve's sensibilities, but it is still strong.

That's my point, Apple acts as a moral guardian. They're a tech company, not my parents, and I'm an adult, so why do they so strictly control the type of content I can access on the phone I purchased? Google has no such restrictions on Android, and even if an app isn't in the Play Store you can always sideload, again without even having to root.

Besides, it's the porn industry that pushes technology forward. Picking beef with it is just stupid. This is actually something Android had on their side from day one, in fact I remember that soon after the G1 came out I saw this comic which I think makes a nice point. And hey, as Jobs said, "If you want porn, get an Android phone." Well you know what? I'm following that advice

 

[Irishman]

Apple don't care about self-cannibalisation. In fact when the iPad Mini came out they said if someone's going to release a product that eats up sales of the bigger more expensive iPad it might as well be them. The Verge quoted Jobs himself in saying "If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will." Obviously they wanted to get their foot in the door on the smaller tablet market before it was taken up by only Android devices. The same logic would go for large screen smartphones.

Also in this case the new 5 inch model would be the high end phone, the 4 inch would be the lower end.



But like I said, and like Jobs believed, if they stayed out of the small tablet market and they kept getting popular with consumers, sales of the big iPad would be cannibalised by Asus and Samsung instead. If something is going to kill sales of Apple's products it might as well be Apple's other products.



Exactly, let's hope they open it up to more user customisation, because even for regular users the availability of third party launchers and the like is a plus for Android.



It's simple enough, I want to save a file into a folder and get into that folder from another app. So say I go into the Djay app and save a mix. I want to then go into Dropbox and upload that mix. Right now I can't do that in iOS. I can in Android, but not in iOS.

Because they put this stupid limit on the OS, it makes it more difficult and less convenient to use the system, it's as simple as that. It's not about making it emulate a full computer OS, it's about doing all you can to make the OS user friendly. That's why I find it ironic Apple doesn't do it, because user friendliness is meant to be their USP.



Underneath everything it's just bits tacked onto the Safari engine though. On Android I can download Firefox which uses the actual Mozilla engine. More important for the end user, I can download full add-ons for Firefox on Android such as AdBlock and NoScript, all without rooting. Apple do not allow third party add-ons for App Store apps.



Exactly, another symptom of Closed System Syndrome, like the hidden filesystem and lack of customisation, all of which does not affect Android.



That's my point, Apple acts as a moral guardian. They're a tech company, not my parents, and I'm an adult, so why do they so strictly control the type of content I can access on the phone I purchased? Google has no such restrictions on Android, and even if an app isn't in the Play Store you can always sideload, again without even having to root.

Besides, it's the porn industry that pushes technology forward. Picking beef with it is just stupid. This is actually something Android had on their side from day one, in fact I remember that soon after the G1 came out I saw this comic which I think makes a nice point. And hey, as Jobs said, "If you want porn, get an Android phone." Well you know what? I'm following that advice

It sounds like you've got your own reasons not to go with iPhone.

Have at it and enjoy.

 

[The Game 161]

Wonder if Samsung will be tempted to bring the S pen to the S4?

 

[0dev]

Wonder if Samsung will be tempted to bring the S pen to the S4?

I doubt it, that's the unique selling point of the Note, without that exclusive feature it's just a bigger Galaxy S [whatever].

 

[The iGentleman]

I thought wifi direct needed both phones to be on the same network. Even though that's not the case, you are still nitpicking IMO. In real life usage Bump has never fell short for me. I've never thought, "oh no this video is too big to send." You could have sent that video using wifi and it wouldn't have taken that long!

You haven't thought that, because it isn't feasible for you to do it due to the limitations you have. It's really that simple.

Like unobtanium said, there's rarely ever a need to send a video to someone right there and then while you're out and about. Most likely it would make more sense to put it on Facebook or Dropbox or something later so that everyone can download it, and you won't have to keep sending it to various people.

Me, a couple guys and a bunch of ladies all went out a couple nights ago. We got some great videos of the ladies doing some things on poles on the dance floor. We immediately shared those videos each other right there on the spot. Just because you may not share videos, doesn't mean nobody else does.

Qr codes were around before NFC tags so they can't possibly be a workaround. They are an alternative. I could say some "what ifs" too.. What if you have a metal case on when you need to scan the NFC tag? You'd have to take the case off.

So we're going to play that game? What if you have a metal case? Ok, what if your case covers the camera partially? You see how ridiculous that sounds? That's how ridiculous your "what if you have a metal case" sounds...

Also my qr code reader has a button on the top left corner to turn the camera light on. Takes about a tenth of a second to turn on so it's no bother at all.

As I've said before too, you don't need to buy qr code tags, you can print about fifty of them on an a4 sheet of paper.

Like I said, a workaround. So if you're in the dark, you've got to turn on the flash and then take a picture, when with NFC you could have simply just sat the phone down and been done with it. I can sit my phone down and as soon as the screen turns on because of the charger, it reads the NFC tag and does the predefined tasks. So while I'm driving and my phone is doing things on its own, you're employing workaround tactics...sitting there fumbling with the phone trying to take a picture of a qr code so you can IMITATE the same functionality.

 

[sneaky butcher]

I thought wifi direct needed both phones to be on the same network..

Hi, no wifi direct means the 2 devices connect directly to each other using just their own wifi antennas. No internet, or wireless network required.


I gave my sister 2 seasons of Homeland tv show in 720p around 4gb. Didnt take long about 15-20 mins to transfer. No data usage, no wifi network required. Just the 2 devices.

Bump needs the internet so your relying on that being available & fast and most of the world isnt on 4g. Then you have data usage and most people dont have unlimited data. wifi-direct is much better.

The question is why dont the newer apple devices support wi-fi direct?

 

[TBN27]

I think that Apple still has a smug attitude and will get steam rollered this year by the Galaxy S4. Apple corporate culture is that everything they design is "perfect" and they are slow to adapt to rapid changes. Witness the large number of defectors from this forum, there has been a cacophony of posts about dissatisfaction with Apple and people switching to Android or will be switching when the Galaxy S4 comes out.

as much as there are defectors leaving for android, there are a lot of those defectors leaving android for iOS. as a 4 year android user, i can see why apple is slow to adapt things. because as much as it looks like they are behind, they are actually waiting for the piece of technology to mature or gains widespread support i guess. this can be only said for NFC capabilities. it doesn't work well and comes off as gimmicky at the current moment. many of the features on android are cool though. however i left for iOS because of the poor reliability of the android OS that i have experienced over time. if complacency is going to be the downfall of iOS, instability will be the downfall of Android.