Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller on NFC, Wireless Charging and the Lightning Connector

[cliveren13]

Wow

Wow Apple didnt invent NFC so they dont use it wireless charging no go but Apple gives you all what it thinks u need and u so-called fanboys suck it up thank god for Nokia And Samsung

 

[Zunjine]

So you can already do that with your bank card. You can also navigate with your printed map instead of your smart phone, right?

You can already share your oyster card. As long as you both don't overlap you can share your card with as many people as you want. Plus I am pretty sure that if they enable NFC (again for purchasing not for the oystercard) they will have figured out how to thwart that. Or they wouldn't do it. Shocker!

If you want to say - for you - you wouldn't use NFC or find it of little value - that's fine. And acceptable. Just as long as you don't try to imply that your use case = the entire worlds use case as well.

Some people want options. I was SLAMMED (sincerely) for stating that there's a lot of reasons people would want a front facing camera on the iPad. I was in a very small minority that saw the potential. Hundreds of reasons why it wouldn't work - isn't practical - wouldn't be useful, you name it. Then it appeared on the iPad 2 and became one of the major selling points.

My point isn't that I'm some genius or fortune teller. My point is - there's nothing wrong with providing the option. If you don't want it or find it useful - don't use it. It's not like all of these places are going NFC "only" and won't allow other methods of payments.

Advocating (not that you are) against NFC payments is like someone "advocating" that no one should take AMEX because you don't like or want to use that card. So - don't.

1) Printed maps do not offer nearly the functionality that electronic maps offer. It's a false analogy as I have clearly already explained.

2) You can't share Oyster cards - that's what I said. That's illegal and not possible without a fairly complex hack - you can only have your travel card and credit associated with one card at a time so, if they decided to allow you to use your phone as a travel card they would likely require that your Oyster card be disabled/returned in order to prevent people sharing travel cards. That would be their way to thwart fraud - and it would mean that, if my phone ran out of battery, I wouldn't be able to travel home! Not a good design when a cheap little plastic card can do the same job without the need for a battery.

3) If they enable NFC for purchasing I would use my bank card for that purpose. There is little or no value in having that function duplicated on my phone and there are risks added in doing so.

4) I didn't at all try to imply that my use case = the entire world. I pointed out what I think and backed up my position with examples. I believe that, on balance, Apple made the right choice to not include NFC.

5) The front facing camera on the iPad is of little value to me. I rarely if ever use it and I don't think many do. I'm sorry people attacked you for saying it would be useful - that was wrong of them.

6) You say there is nothing wrong with providing the option to use NFC but that's not entirely true. Whenever you add ANYTHING to a design you add complexity and cost - even if it's a small amount. You have to make choices when designing a product and those choices include whether or not to add certain features that are of marginal value. So adding something purely as an option without already seeing a compelling use case for it is actually a bad thing - it adds complexity and cost and forces certain design compromises - the back probably couldn't be aluminium for a start since metal interferes with NFC signals. So, no, I don't think adding something that's of marginal value is always the right way to go - even if options are nice to have.

7) I am perfectly happy to say that NFC payments could be useful but there is little added value in being able to make these payments with a phone. For instance, since the payments system is networked there is no reason why my phone can't track the balances of my accounts via 3G/LTE without needing to be linked directly to the payment mechanism. Same goes for tickets and passes - you can already use barcode scanners to read them from a screen so adding NFC provides little additional value.

I am not yet convinced that the cost of including NFC in a handset - in terms of complexity and design compromises more than anything else - is worth paying. I have seen little to convince me otherwise.

 

[NAG]

Wow Apple didnt invent NFC so they dont use it wireless charging no go but Apple gives you all what it thinks u need and u so-called fanboys suck it up thank god for Nokia And Samsung

I take it that since you didn't invent understandable statements you decided not to use one.

 

[samcraig]

7) I am perfectly happy to say that NFC payments could be useful but there is little added value in being able to make these payments with a phone. For instance, since the payments system is networked there is no reason why my phone can't track the balances of my accounts via 3G/LTE without needing to be linked directly to the payment mechanism. Same goes for tickets and passes - you can already use barcode scanners to read them from a screen so adding NFC provides little additional value.

I am not yet convinced that the cost of including NFC in a handset - in terms of complexity and design compromises more than anything else - is worth paying. I have seen little to convince me otherwise.

You keep referring to NFC as if it's only good for payments.

There are so many use cases for NFC.

How about touching your phone to a movie poster on the wall to find out where the closest theater is playing the movie.

How about touching your phone to the hotel registration desk so you don't have to fill out their paperwork

How about touching your phone to a box of cereal to instantly get a coupon when you check out

How about an NFC tag in your wallet so you immediately know it was pick-pocketed

How about the ability to turn on lights or adjust other devices based on proximity.

NFC is not just about payments. And these are just a few of millions of ways NFC or NFC tagging could be utilized.

 

[cmwade77]

What I don't understand is why not MicroUSB? It does everything that this connector does (including video out) and would be compatible with most of the other phone chargers out there.

 

[Zunjine]

You keep referring to NFC as if it's only good for payments.

There are so many use cases for NFC.

How about touching your phone to a movie poster on the wall to find out where the closest theater is playing the movie.

How about touching your phone to the hotel registration desk so you don't have to fill out their paperwork

How about touching your phone to a box of cereal to instantly get a coupon when you check out

How about an NFC tag in your wallet so you immediately know it was pick-pocketed

How about the ability to turn on lights or adjust other devices based on proximity.

NFC is not just about payments. And these are just a few of millions of ways NFC or NFC tagging could be utilized.

I have referred to these other uses and I do agree that, at some point in time, this may be a useful function. But how many of those things currently exist?

On the other hand:

1) Movie posters often carry QR codes that can be read with your camera - this doesn't require that I am close enough to the poster to touch it and does not require any added technology on the poster itself - a better solution that already exists.

2) Hotel registration can be done electronically already via wifi and bluetooth or using an app, or via email registration which requires no additional infrastructure. Adding NFC brings little additional value.

3) You can get special offers by scanning QR codes which are already widely in use.

4) You can already do security tags using bluetooth - the new low powered 4.0 is already in wide use and more appropriate in many ways than NFC. NFC works over VERY short distances - there's a chance the alarm would go off if I took my phone out to use it!

5) Lights and other electronic devices can already be controlled by bluetooth and wifi. If you need to be close enough to use NFC (inches away) there is little advantage over just using the switch! You'd need a switch built in anyway since people won't always have a smartphone to do the job.

I'm not saying there are no good uses for NFC, only that very few that I have seen are really problems that need solving, problems which aren't already covered by bluetooth, Wifi, QR codes and other forms of communication, some of which are superior to NFC.

 

[kdarling]

In iOS 7, they'll release a software update enabling the GOBI feature of the LTE radio enabling the same types of communications as the typical "NFC" chips that are out now.

The forsaking of NFC is a strong indication Apple is on the GOBI (Qualcomm, integrated cell modems, and wireless generally) bandwagon.

As hchung pointed out last night:

• Gobi is just the marketing name for Qualcomm's world comm chipsets, and
• their ads with ATMs etc are only about replacing landline connections with cellular modems.

That's all. It has nothing to do with replacing NFC. It's about using their cell chips in gas/electric meters and billboards and rural ATMs and other such locations where remote control/reading would be handy.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Flux, but that's the difference in my posts and some of those arguing against. They are taking the stance of "I'm not interested in it for me" (so you shouldn't be interested either).

Suppose I- or you- live in a place where LTE is not available yet. Why not argue against LTE in this iPhone? It might be adding weight, battery burn, thickness, phone size tradeoffs, etc too? No such arguments made. Lots of people in the world (I can probably even use the word "MOST" of the people in the world) that can buy this iPhone won't have LTE where they are, but apparently that's a technology that makes great sense to build in anyway?

I have no use whatsoever for select features built into the iPhone. You might have great use for them. I find no fault with those features being in there. But- always in this scenario- there's always this crowd that will find fault for those wishing for features that Apple didn't include. Why? Because they don't see use for it for them (so naturally it make no sense for anyone else either).

iPhone does a bunch of stuff that you probably never use. But it's there if you do decide you want to use it. And when something like NFC or wireless charging is built into something that will sell as well as iPhone, all kinds of applications for those features will pop up... just like the demand for LTE will increase because this iPhone has LTE.

Can't find wireless charging stations now, so why build it in? Build it in and wireless charging stations will follow... just like wifi keeps showing up in more and more places. It wasn't that long ago that wired charging stations at airports were non-existant. Now it's hard to walk through an airport and not see all kinds of them. It wasn't that much further back that wifi was pretty uncommon and free wifi even more so. Now it's ever more likely that just about any airport, hotel, etc will have it. The demand must precede the supply to motivate the suppliers to feed the demand. Supply preceding demand never works as well.

 

[dv8r]

Apple releases features when they're ready. Why would they hold up an annual clockwork phone release because NFC needed more work to be compelling?

Need more work? NFC is from 1983 and the first phone with NFC is from 2006... Schiller trying to spin it like an emerging technology doesn’t make it so - this is Apple late at the gate, by choice... a bad one in my opinion.

And let’s get this out of the way - there are NO DIFFERENCE in swinging your phone before you to make a NFC payment and holding it in front of you to pay for coffee at Starbucks.

Don't be too quick to knock on Apple. Quite a number of their features can be sleeper hits, they lie dormant for some time because rearing their heads and then, we realise their full potential. Itunes was one, I foresee siri and passbook possibly being others.

I also think this is Apples weakness - they are relatively slow in making their services complete. Siri being the prime example of a function marketed as a killer feature, being pretty useless and only slowly getting enhancements as we go along (use Siri in Europe is frustrating at best). You see Apple trying to compensate for this weakness when their marketing apparatus downplay functions and technologies based on various arguments (this time Schiller being lame).

recall reading that these companies can readily have apps designed to enable payment via passbook. [EDIT/CUT] Imagine eating at a restaurant which allows you to pay via your iphone but not any other android phone. It's sneaky, it's clever, it borders on dirty-handedness, it's uniquely Apple.

I agree - this is exactly the reason, Apple is trying to distance themselves from Google and it does not make sense to implement something where Google Wallet has a head start. What annoys me is that their rather childish obsession with each other holds useful technology back and that Schiller doesn’t just say so instead of NFC not being “ready” - my a**. I think this will be a blow to Passbook and (because of Apples limited resources) send it the same way as Ping.

I'm not sure you'r 100% right about the tube in London - the Oyster Card system uses RFID, not NFC.

I’m pretty sure I saw these PayTag terminals everywhere - i will try it next time, I prefer the Oyster Card myself because I think Chromaroma is fun.

A lot of shops do use NFC but they can be used fairly easily with most credit and debit cards these days. For me that's a far better solution than using my expensive smartphone to make payments - what if I'm making a call at the time? Even if I'm not I still have to tap a big and bulky (in comparison to my credit card) device against the reader.

Sure - but that doesn’t change with Passbook. They need to scan the screen so you have to wave it in front of somebody anyway for them to read the barcode/QR code - this time with the part of the phone I don’t always want people to see.

If all shops and services accepted payments from an NFC enabled phone there would be an advantage in that I wouldn't have to take my credit or debit card out with me - I'd have a couple of items fewer to lose or have stolen. But since most places don't I'd still have to take them.

I know that NFC can be used for more than just transactions but it does seem that 95% of the arguments in favour of it are about using it to replace credit and debit cards - and the problem is that doing so isn't possible right now and likely isn't going to be for a good couple of years yet.

It depends on where you are - but yes, if you need to have your card with you also then it’s only for show. But then again, so is Passbook, and at least NFC won’t bother me with pop-ups each time I pass Staples or Starbucks...

 

[samcraig]

I have referred to these other uses and I do agree that, at some point in time, this may be a useful function. But how many of those things currently exist?

On the other hand: (bold are my replies)

1) Movie posters often carry QR codes that can be read with your camera - this doesn't require that I am close enough to the poster to touch it and does not require any added technology on the poster itself - a better solution that already exists. It's faster to go looking for an app then scan it? Ok

2) Hotel registration can be done electronically already via wifi and bluetooth or using an app, or via email registration which requires no additional infrastructure. Adding NFC brings little additional value. It's faster to connect to wifi or BT and then transmit? Ok

3) You can get special offers by scanning QR codes which are already widely in use. I'm seeing a pattern here - are you?


I'm not saying there are no good uses for NFC, only that very few that I have seen are really problems that need solving, problems which aren't already covered by bluetooth, Wifi, QR codes and other forms of communication, some of which are superior to NFC.

There is more than one way to skin a cat. And bluetooth and wifi are GREAT - but they aren't always the most efficient. Nor are they the most power efficient. Both Bluetooth and Wifi are battery drainers much more than NFC. Both BT and Wifi require pairing. NFC does not.

I think if you actually had NFC and there were many NFC enabled "things" you would enjoy it - or not use it that much - just like any other feature.

In fact if ever there was an argument to make NFC more ubiquitous and useful - it would be that Apple adopt it because Apple users tend to exploit technology a lot (in a good way).

Look - I'm not saying NFC is the end all be all. I'm just saying that I think you missing the boat on this one. It's cool. You don't have a need for it.

 

[topper24hours]

So, why not USB 3?

If you think a thunderbolt & lightning cable isn't a certainty at this point, I don't know what could convince you!! =)


10gb/s vs 4.8 on USB3.. not that anybody sends big data over their charging cable. The bigger spec differentiator is 10w for power vs 4.5 on USB3.

 

[Zunjine]

Need more work? NFC is from 1983 and the first phone with NFC is from 2006... Schiller trying to spin it like an emerging technology doesn’t make it so - this is Apple late at the gate, by choice... a bad one in my opinion.
And let’s get this out of the way - there are NO DIFFERENCE in swinging your phone before you to make a NFC payment and holding it in front of you to pay for coffee at Starbucks.

I also think this is Apples weakness - they are relatively slow in making their services complete. Siri being the prime example of a function marketed as a killer feature, being pretty useless and only slowly getting enhancements as we go along (use Siri in Europe is frustrating at best). You see Apple trying to compensate for this weakness when their marketing apparatus downplay functions and technologies based on various arguments (this time Schiller being lame).



I agree - this is exactly the reason, Apple is trying to distance themselves from Google and it does not make sense to implement something where Google Wallet has a head start. What annoys me is that their rather childish obsession with each other holds useful technology back and that Schiller doesn’t just say so instead of NFC not being “ready” - my a**. I think this will be a blow to Passbook and (because of Apples limited resources) send it the same way as Ping.



I’m pretty sure I saw these PayTag terminals everywhere - i will try it next time, I prefer the Oyster Card myself because I think Chromaroma is fun.



Sure - but that doesn’t change with Passbook. They need to scan the screen so you have to wave it in front of somebody anyway for them to read the barcode/QR code - this time with the part of the phone I don’t always want people to see.



It depends on where you are - but yes, if you need to have your card with you also then it’s only for show. But then again, so is Passbook, and at least NFC won’t bother me with pop-ups each time I pass Staples or Starbucks...

All of the things I noted are far, far faster my way than by NFC. Why? Because you don't have to wait months or years for the NFC readers to be installed in all those places.

Sure, when NFC is broadly adopted it might be a cool if somewhat redundant but slightly faster way to do certain things. For now, all those "problems" already have been solved in fairly well adopted and standard ways. NFC may be the solution one day, but for now it's largely a nice to have bit of tech. A fancy toy. Not much else.

 

[Flux.Capacitor]

You keep referring to NFC as if it's only good for payments.

There are so many use cases for NFC.

How about touching your phone to a movie poster on the wall to find out where the closest theater is playing the movie.

How about touching your phone to the hotel registration desk so you don't have to fill out their paperwork

How about touching your phone to a box of cereal to instantly get a coupon when you check out

How about an NFC tag in your wallet so you immediately know it was pick-pocketed

How about the ability to turn on lights or adjust other devices based on proximity.

NFC is not just about payments. And these are just a few of millions of ways NFC or NFC tagging could be utilized.

These are all great, but how many can be done now? As I've mentioned, i have a few friends with Android + NFC and NONE of them use it for anything, other than one guy uses it at McDonalds.

All those things you mentioned will be of great value when they become available, and I'm sure it will be available on Apple and MOST other devices as well IF and when it becomes available. That's if NFC is the route it goes. Might be Bluetooth Low Energy, might be a GOBI/LTE mix. But right now NFC is not a game changer.

 

[Cougarcat]

If you think a thunderbolt & lightning cable isn't a certainty at this point, I don't know what could convince you!! =)


10gb/s vs 4.8 on USB3.. not that anybody sends big data over their charging cable. The bigger spec differentiator is 10w for power vs 4.5 on USB3.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The reason Lightning uses USB 2 and not 3 or thunderbolt is that the iPhone's slower flash memory maxes out at 20 mb/sec, so there's no point.

These are all great, but how many can be done now? As I've mentioned, i have a few friends with Android + NFC and NONE of them use it for anything, other than one guy uses it at McDonalds.

You can use NFC tags now. "Mac columnist" Andy Ihnatko tested an S3 for a few months, and he discussed on his podcast recently how he would use a tag in his car to automatically configure it for car use. It sounded pretty slick, but it's definitely a feature for geeks.

 

[TopB]

Yeh cus Apple know whats best for their customers?

They must, they have $100 Billion in ca$h from customers that think Apple knows best

 

[Flux.Capacitor]

Flux, but that's the difference in my posts and some of those arguing against. They are taking the stance of "I'm not interested in it for me" (so you shouldn't be interested either).

Suppose I- or you- live in a place where LTE is not available yet. Why not argue against LTE in this iPhone? It might be adding weight, battery burn, thickness, phone size tradeoffs, etc too? No such arguments made. Lots of people in the world (I can probably even use the word "MOST" of the people in the world) that can buy this iPhone won't have LTE where they are, but apparently that's a technology that makes great sense to build in anyway?

That's an Excellent point, and I agree with you. I hadn't looked at it that way. I could see where if many NFC payment options are available to you, you would want the feature. Probably be a big disappointment. But all the ones harping for NFC, is there really a big void by not including it? Or do you just want that feature to know you have it? I'm not in anyway trying to steer anyone away from Android. The true beauty of this all is that we have choice. If you NEED NFC, then go with one of the NFC equipped phones.

I also agree with what you are saying; "Build it and they will come". Possibly true, but there may be a viable, or better alternative they are looking into. or they simply felt that even by the time the next iPhone comes out, NFC or wireless charging still wouldn't have caught up so it's best to keep costs to a minimum, and improve design at this time. They apparently didn't think the lack of any of these features would hurt sales.

 

[69650]

What I don't understand is why not MicroUSB? It does everything that this connector does (including video out) and would be compatible with most of the other phone chargers out there.

It all comes down to money. By designing a proprietary dock they can charge the companies who make iPhone/iPod accessories a licensing charge for access to it. They also get to have exclusive rights to sell the leads and the adapter which adds up to another nice little revenue stream. As with most things Apple does these days it's not about what is best for the consumer, it's about what makes most money for Apple.

 

[TopB]

Lol just because they know how to milk their customers doesnt mean they have their best intentions at heart.

That new connector being a nice way to milk you some more.

All business is run to make a profit, so they all "milk" their customers but any business that did not consider their customers best intentions would not be profitable for long unless they were a monopoly, like a government

 

[Flux.Capacitor]

You can use NFC tags now. "Mac columnist" Andy Ihnatko tested an S3 for a few months, and he discussed on his podcast recently how he would use a tag in his car to automatically configure it for car use. It sounded pretty slick, but it's definitely a feature for geeks.

There's an App for that... Kidding. That's definitely cool, but lets be honest... the iPhone is not really a phone for techies anyway. If that's the kind of stuff you are going to be doing, you are definitely better off with an Android phone anyway... with or without NFC.

 

[69650]

Wireless charging is a pointless gimmick.

It takes something as simple as plugging in a $19 cable, and makes it expensive and complicated in the sense that you can't charge your device and use it...unless you plug in the cable.

What's the point? Dump the middle man.

I don't see the value in NFC yet. I say it's another 4 to 5 years away from being a major part of our daily lives. Maybe sooner if Apple pushes the tech.

As of right now, I don't care. Not opposed to it, I just don't see the value at this time.

I would totally disagree with you. Wireless charging is long overdue. At the moment I have to plug in each device every night with cables everywhere. It's a pain. It would be so much easier if we have a mat that you can put on the sideboard plugged in (ONE cable) then simply place your iPhone on the mat, place you iPad on the mat, etc. One cable instead of several cables. So much easier.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

They must, they have $100 Billion in ca$h from customers that think Apple knows best

This implication is really old. Drug cartels roll in cash too but it doesn't mean they know best. Big Tobacco has made tons of cash but it doesn't mean they know best. Wall Street Banks make tons of cash too but it doesn't mean they know best. Big Oil. And on and on.

All that the cash hoard shows is that Apple makes products that lots of people buy... just like drug cartels, big tobacco, big oil, Wall Street banks, and on and on. Certainly we think they make fantastic products but the amount of money on hand is not proof that they know best.

If revenue flows do mean that, the U.S. Government rakes in far more revenues than Apple. But I bet few here would argue that the GOV knows best (or that much better than Apple based on their revenues).

 

[rpenzinger]

This post makes no sense.

Yes it does.

I have to agree...no it doesn't.

 

[69650]

Flux, but that's the difference in my posts and some of those arguing against. They are taking the stance of "I'm not interested in it for me" (so you shouldn't be interested either).

Suppose I- or you- live in a place where LTE is not available yet. Why not argue against LTE in this iPhone? It might be adding weight, battery burn, thickness, phone size tradeoffs, etc too? No such arguments made. Lots of people in the world (I can probably even use the word "MOST" of the people in the world) that can buy this iPhone won't have LTE where they are, but apparently that's a technology that makes great sense to build in anyway?

I have no use whatsoever for select features built into the iPhone. You might have great use for them. I find no fault with those features being in there. But- always in this scenario- there's always this crowd that will find fault for those wishing for features that Apple didn't include. Why? Because they don't see use for it for them (so naturally it make no sense for anyone else either).

iPhone does a bunch of stuff that you probably never use. But it's there if you do decide you want to use it. And when something like NFC or wireless charging is built into something that will sell as well as iPhone, all kinds of applications for those features will pop up... just like the demand for LTE will increase because this iPhone has LTE.

Can't find wireless charging stations now, so why build it in? Build it in and wireless charging stations will follow... just like wifi keeps showing up in more and more places. It wasn't that long ago that wired charging stations at airports were non-existant. Now it's hard to walk through an airport and not see all kinds of them. It wasn't that much further back that wifi was pretty uncommon and free wifi even more so. Now it's ever more likely that just about any airport, hotel, etc will have it. The demand must precede the supply to motivate the suppliers to feed the demand. Supply preceding demand never works as well.

Excellent post.

 

[dv8r]

That's an Excellent point, and I agree with you. I hadn't looked at it that way. I could see where if many NFC payment options are available to you, you would want the feature. Probably be a big disappointment. But all the ones harping for NFC, is there really a big void by not including it? Or do you just want that feature to know you have it? I'm not in anyway trying to steer anyone away from Android. The true beauty of this all is that we have choice. If you NEED NFC, then go with one of the NFC equipped phones.

There is no void - and it isn't the point. NFC has some real uses and it is out there, my point is that Schiller is plain wrong about it. It's not enough to make it a deal-breaker but I would like to have seen it in the iPhone because I want to get rid of my credit cards, tokens and subway passes. And I would have liked it in the iPhone because i despise Windows Phone and Android build quality and user experience.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

But all the ones harping for NFC, is there really a big void by not including it? Or do you just want that feature to know you have it?

Personally, I could care less about it myself. I just chimed in when I saw the tired old "I don't want it" (so "its stupid" for anyone else to want it) posts- a long list of logical & illogical arguments always supporting Apple's decision to leave out something that some would have liked to see.

The "big void" question could apply to every single person who wanted LTE in this iPhone too. Was there a big void by not including LTE in iPhone 4S? If we base it on sales, apparently not. OR, maybe just those that really wanted that feature in 4s just lived without it (which is exactly what will happen here for these features).

I'm not in anyway trying to steer anyone away from Android. The true beauty of this all is that we have choice. If you NEED NFC, then go with one of the NFC equipped phones.

The argument for NFC is not an argument for Android, much like the desire for Flash was not an argument for Android either. It's just individual utility desire (wanting a handy device like iPhone to do things that have value to individuals).

I doubt that anyone would choose a multi-functional device like an iPhone for a single, narrow feature like NFC. So the lack of it doesn't steer someone to Android unless they are otherwise completely indifferent about every other feature of iOS & iPhone vs. Android and some Android phone.

The utility desire is NFC in iPhone. That way we get one more thing it can do in the phone and ecosystem that we desire. "Don't like it, don't buy it" is a similarly poor argument when it's never a black & white question. It's not a matter of "no ______ is a deal breaker"; it's the gray of "I wish it had _______ too".