Samsung's New Galaxy S10+ vs. Apple's iPhone XS Max

[PLondon]

Android? Nope. No thanks. I like software that works. Android is still a mess and a security risk. Less than no interest.

You clearly haven't used a recent phone running Android. I'm on my third year now using Pixel phones alongside my usual Apple devices and I can tell you that Android, at least on the Pixel phones, is buttery smooth with far less bugs and crashes than I've experienced in the same timeframe on my iOS devices... The fact that you also get a far superior more flexible OS with Android is an added bonus.

With regards to security Pixel users receive monthly updates and I've never experienced any issues whatsoever.

Having owned every single iPhone since day one I can honestly tell you that Android has surpassed Apple in recent years and if you spend some time on a new Pixel phone you might change your mind too.

There is an exciting world outside Apple's walled garden if you just give it a chance.

 

[44267547]

I know a heap of people who have purchased Apple products because they thought they were cool.

I’m not contesting that you didn’t know people who purchased Apple products, I’m contesting the fact that they don’t purchase it just because it’s ‘cool’. They have to see the value in a product that is as expensive that Apple charges, it has to add some type of functionality to their daily life (Isn’t that the purpose of tech in the first place?) . Again, your argument is rather poor, no one just buys a product because it has an Apple logo on it, not when the product itself likely has to offer them some type of convenience or functionality to connect them to the media world or something of that sort.

 

[mrochester]

oh common, you know perfectly fine what would happen if Apple would ban Facebook in their App Store due to the massive data breaches lately... okay, I'll bite: it would mean dropping iPhone sales.
Thats why at the moment Apple is perfectly fine with all the Facebook data breaches and so is privacy not really a big deal for Apple Inc.

I’m sure Apple aren’t happy about the Facebook situation. But what are they to do when so many people want to choose to freely give away their privacy to Facebook?

It’s not Apple’s job to regulate Facebook and nor do I think they should. Apple should simply regulate their own business, which they do very well. And it’s why so many people buy Apple products!

The answer is very strong government regulation to control Facebook.

 

[torana355]

I’m not contesting that you didn’t know people who purchased Apple products, I’m contesting the fact that they don’t purchase it just because it’s ‘cool’. They have to see the value in a product that is as expensive that Apple charges, it has to add some type of functionality to their daily life (Isn’t that the purpose of tech in the first place?) . Again, your argument is rather poor, no one just buys a product because it has an Apple logo on it, not when the product itself likely has to offer them some type of convenience or functionality to connect them to the media world or something of that sort.

No I wholeheartedly disagree. I see it all the time. And yes many people buy Apple products because it has an Apple logo. I'm not saying there are not people that buy it because they see value in the product because they certainly do, i have Apple products myself. But don't try to tell me Apples brand power doesn't play a massive part in thier sales.

 

[Geert76]

I’m sure Apple aren’t happy about the Facebook situation.

you are 100% correct.

So, cash is still king to privacy, for Apple. This Facebook app is a classic example of that.
I would really wish people would not fall for the double moral (standard) Apple is using with their Privacy tactics.

 

[44267547]

But don't try to tell me Apples brand power doesn't play a massive part in thier sales.

Again, you’re just not getting it, and that’s OK. It’s not about the branding, because the price of what Apple charges for a product, people see past what they’re able to spend and what they can afford, when they purchase a product with Apple, it has to benefit them in some form or fashion of another, rather that be for work related, personal use, or simply just for media consumption, but no one just purchases it because there’s an Apple logo on it, when someone can make the same argument about any other tech manufacturer brand.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[mrochester]

No I wholeheartedly disagree. I see it all the time. And yes many people buy Apple products because it has an Apple logo. I'm not saying there are not people that buy it because they see value in the product because they certainly do, i have Apple products myself. But don't try to tell me Apples brand power doesn't play a massive part in thier sales.

Apple’s brand power has come FROM making great products that people want to buy. Not the other way around.

 

[torana355]

Again, you’re just not getting it, and that’s OK. It’s not about the branding, because the price of what Apple charges for a product, people see past what they’re able to spend and what they can afford, when they purchase a product with Apple, it has to benefit them in some form or fashion of another, rather that be for work related, personal use, or simply just for media consumption, but no one just purchases it because there’s an Apple logo on it, when someone can make the same argument about any other tech manufacturer brand.

Thanks for the discussion.

Oh I get it. You are wrong, ive seen it happen with my own eyes. I've often had people ask me what phone to buy as I'm great with technology. They usually start by saying they want an iPhone as they are the best phones, when i ask them what do they think is great about them they usually reply with, umm I don't know because it an iPhone. At which point I need to explain the pros and cons of iPhones vs Android phones like the Pixel and Galaxy. You should google the power of branding and look more into how Apple managed to build thier brand initially, you might learn something.
[doublepost=1551612510][/doublepost]

Apple’s brand power has come FROM making great products that people want to buy. Not the other way around.

I'm not disputing that, in fact it my point exactly. Brand power is a powerful sales tool. Many people who do not know much about tech automatically go for a brand like Apple. Also brand power does not come from just great products, it's comes from smart advertising. Feel free to DuckDuckGo the power of branding

 

[pika2000]

Samsung's Galaxy S10 and S10+ are certainly some of the best Android devices available right now with innovative features and top of the line specs that aren't included in current iPhones.​

Okay, I think we have to stop this notion how "innovative" the S10 is. In a vacuum, maybe, but the Android world is not just Samsung. It's really pathetic for a tech-focused site to only look at the major brands.

Xiaomi Mi 9, SD855, Super AMOLED, triple camera with ultra wide angle and 48MP, under display fingerprint scanner, all for $500.
Want punch hole screen? Huawei has theirs for $480.

The only innovative thing Samsung did is charging Apple prices.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

It’s OS AND business model preference. I think Google’s business model of surveillance capitalism is damaging the world beyond all recognition. Apple has a much better business model of make product, sell for money.

I pray one day google and Facebook will go out of business so we can move away from surveillance capitalism. Sadly, too many people are completely clueless about the long term implications of these business models and there is very little government regulation to control them (luckily we have started in the EU with GDPR). People need to start understanding that their personal information is just as valuable, if not more so, than money, and that they shouldn’t be freely giving it away to companies like google and Facebook who use that data to manipulate what you think and what you do.

Sadly it’s likely going to be too late before the sheep realise what has happened to them. I’ll enjoy my ‘told you so’ though .

I’m not overly obsessed with that side of things to be honest. I use google for my searches and I use Facebook daily as it’s been a very valuable tool for me. I prefer iOS as an OS purely for the features it offers which tie in with the people I am in touch with. Others have different preferences and I think choice is a good thing as well as competition to keep these money grabbing companies delivering good products.

 

[Shanghaichica]

It’s like I know a heap of people who buy Android phones because they are cheap and haven’t the foggiest what they are getting themselves in for.

Those people probably don’t care why they are getting themselves into. It’s just a cheap phone to them.

In Europe, the US, Canada, New Zealand etc most people can buy whatever phone they want so it’s not the same as people buying android phones in developing because that’s what they can afford.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

I think it probably depends on user preference. If you’re used to round smart watches that will seem more traditional

with other Bluetooth devices I have to pair it to every single device I want to use it with. With the AirPods they pair to your iPhone and then they are automatically paired with all your other Apple devices such as iPads, Apple TV, Apple Watch, MacBook.

Another thing is that I have a pair of Bluetooth headphones. They automatically connect to the last device they were used with which is fine but in order to use them with another device I need to disconnect them from the last device they were connected to before I can connect to another device.

I don’t have this problem with my AirPods.

But that is the point I was wanting to get over. Pairing is a "one time" operation that is simple and only takes a matter of seconds for each master device. Is it a hardship to have to do that maybe 4 times when one purchases a new set of phones? Does that justify a £30 premium over Galaxy Buds (compared to Airpods) which also provide (according to reviews) superior sound quality and pretty much universal ear fit, due to the different adapters provided. And also better sound isolation for noisy environments (which can be electronically over-ridden if using them on cycles etc).

Also headphones automatically connecting to the last device used (when in Bluetooth range) is what probably most people would want. And if its not what they want, 2 or 3 taps on Bluetooth icons on devices changes connection. Are you a barrister earning £500 an hour for a few seconds to have such value?

 

[mrochester]

But that is the point I was wanting to get over. Pairing is a "one time" operation that is simple and only takes a matter of seconds for each master device. Is it a hardship to have to do that maybe 4 times when one purchases a new set of phones? Does that justify a £30 premium over Galaxy Buds (compared to Airpods) which also provide (according to reviews) superior sound quality and pretty much universal ear fit, due to the different adapters provided. And also better sound isolation for noisy environments (which can be electronically over-ridden if using them on cycles etc).

Also headphones automatically connecting to the last device used (when in Bluetooth range) is what probably most people would want. And if its not what they want, 2 or 3 taps on Bluetooth icons on devices changes connection. Are you a barrister earning £500 an hour for a few seconds to have such value?

Galaxy buds go in your ear, which automatically rules out a large portion of the population from using them. AirPods sit just outside your are canal and are a much more comfortable fit!

 

[The Game 161]

Galaxy buds go in your ear, which automatically rules out a large portion of the population from using them. AirPods sit just outside your are canal and are a much more comfortable fit!

According to early YouTube reviews that’s not been the case. They say the buds are better in the ear. Guess will see when mine arrive to judge for myself.

 

[mrochester]

According to early YouTube reviews that’s not been the case. They say the buds are better in the ear. Guess will see when mine arrive to judge for myself.

No, the point I am making is that there are many people who cannot wear in ear buds, me included. In ear buds cause a lot of people problems with ear wax build up, rashes etc. The Galaxy Buds can be as comfortable as they please but they are no good for those people.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

Galaxy buds go in your ear, which automatically rules out a large portion of the population from using them. AirPods sit just outside your are canal and are a much more comfortable fit!

In what way are the Buds ruled out for a "large portion" of the population? And how does this portion compare to the portion of the population that Airpods do not fit/stay in their ears? The majority of reviews I have seen have stated that Buds were more comfortable. But this is purely subjective.

 

[mrochester]

In what way are the Buds ruled out for a "large portion" of the population? And how does this portion compare to the portion of the population that Airpods do not fit/stay in their ears? The majority of reviews I have seen have stated that Buds were more comfortable. But this is purely subjective.

Read my post above.

No idea how that compares. I guess we'll see which sells better, AirPods or Galaxy Buds.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

Read my post above.

No idea how that compares. I guess we'll see which sells better, AirPods or Galaxy Buds.

Yes, I saw your explanation after I posted. Better to explain when one first posts a comment?
Sales of Buds v Airpods will not give an indication of the "portions" discussed. Sales of Airpods and wired Apple buds v sales of all in ear buds from all sources, wired or otherwise may help here

 

[mrochester]

Yes, I saw your explanation after I posted. Better to explain when one first posts a comment?
Sales of Buds v Airpods will not give an indication of the "portions" discussed. Sales of Airpods and wired Apple buds v sales of all in ear buds from all sources, wired or otherwise may help here

Well sales of all headphones that aren't in-ear vs sales of in-ear buds is the most appropriate comparison.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

Well sales of all headphones that aren't in-ear vs sales of in-ear buds is the most appropriate comparison.

I do not understand how that applies. I have no problem with the Bud style of fit, which as far as I know, is the industry standard for ear buds. Apple buds style do not stay in my right ear at all and are quickly sore in my left. I prefer over ear headphones for sound quality when spending under £300. One needs to compare sales of the hard plastic ear buds to the Bud style with flexible adapters.

 

[mrochester]

I do not understand how that applies. I have no problem with the Bud style of fit, which as far as I know, is the industry standard for ear buds. Apple buds style do not stay in my right ear at all and are quickly sore in my left. I prefer over ear headphones for sound quality when spending under £300. One needs to compare sales of the hard plastic ear buds to the Bud style with flexible adapters.

The comparison is in-ear headphones vs none in-ear headphones, i.e., the type with small rubber grommets that fit right into your ear-canal vs the type that don't do that (Galaxy Buds which fit into the ear canal via rubber grommets in comparison to AirPods which sit outside of your ear canal).

 

[Shanghaichica]

But that is the point I was wanting to get over. Pairing is a "one time" operation that is simple and only takes a matter of seconds for each master device. Is it a hardship to have to do that maybe 4 times when one purchases a new set of phones? Does that justify a £30 premium over Galaxy Buds (compared to Airpods) which also provide (according to reviews) superior sound quality and pretty much universal ear fit, due to the different adapters provided. And also better sound isolation for noisy environments (which can be electronically over-ridden if using them on cycles etc).

Also headphones automatically connecting to the last device used (when in Bluetooth range) is what probably most people would want. And if its not what they want, 2 or 3 taps on Bluetooth icons on devices changes connection. Are you a barrister earning £500 an hour for a few seconds to have such value?

The problem with these headphones is that I manually have to disconnect them from the last device I used before I can connect them to another device. This can be a pain if that device is upstairs and in downstairs.

However with the buds having all the same features as the AirPods, better sound quality and cheaper that is a great thing.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

The comparison is in-ear headphones vs none in-ear headphones, i.e., the type with small rubber grommets that fit right into your ear-canal vs the type that don't do that (Galaxy Buds which fit into the ear canal via rubber grommets in comparison to AirPods which sit outside of your ear canal).

OK. Go and get the data. I thought you were talking about headphones which have housings which sit on or over ones ears with a band that sits on top of ones head. Let's call those "headphones"
Let's call Airpods, Galaxy Buds etc"earbuds".

Plenty of people buy "earbuds" for portability etc. If there is a large portion of people that cannot wear the Galaxy Buds style of fit due to your reasons, I am sure a company like Sony will serve the market.

 

[mrochester]

OK. Go and get the data. I thought you were talking about headphones which have housings which sit on or over ones ears with a band that sits on top of ones head. Let's call those "headphones"
Let's call Airpods, Galaxy Buds etc"earbuds".

Plenty of people buy "earbuds" for portability etc. If there is a large portion of people that cannot wear the Galaxy Buds style of fit due to your reasons, I am sure a company like Sony will serve the market.

I have no data to get.

Yes for all the people who cannot wear in-ear headphones there are plenty of competitors on the market, Apple simply being one of them.

 

[aue123]

kinda jumping back to what some people were saying about privacy.. doesn’t google own almost all social media platforms? snapchat, youtube etc.. etc.. to keep your privacy you would literally be disconnected from the internet. or at least some of the best parts of it.