The comparison's never take into account security, durability, or resale value.
1. It's ironic that the recent reports of "iOS Malware" have only served to show how rock solid iOS is if you don't jailbreak the phone. A moron could literally download malware from a sleazy Chinese app store and transfer to his iPhone and, yet, if the phone isn't jailbroken, the damage is fairly limited due to the sand boxing. The magazines love to bash Apple for being overly secure conscious and then they go out of their way to ignore the benefits. Try downloading malware on an Android phone and see what it can do. The iPhone doesn't get enough credit for it's security. Even the JLaw picture stories highlighted how iOS is so rock solid that the only way to hack it was through guessing passwords.
2. Durability - Car magazine's love to report on a car's repair history because it influences their recommendations. As picky as the Apple market is, I'd bet anything that Apple phones are more dependable than other phones due to the quality of the components. I know Consumer Reports used to report on defects for PC makers, I'd love to see defects or repair histories for phones. Apple haters always bring up this or that because any iPhone flaw goes supernova. Let's see Samsung repair issues quantified and stacked right up against Apple's and see who's laughing then. The fact that an iPhone defect even makes headline's is due to the fact that Apple takes pride in craftsmanship.
3. The total cost of ownership for vehicles is a metric that's now pretty mainstream. It basically says that besides the cost of purchase, you also need to take into account the cost of repairs and depreciation. A cheaper upfront purchase could be more expensive down the road when you take into account poor quality and the final resale value. A lot of iPhone buyers are already aware that you can get way more than half of what you paid for your iPhone a year later.
It seems like a lot of tech journalism is written on the fly with little real analysis. I'm waiting for something like Anandtech or Consumer Reports that will go another level down and really start keeping good statistics on defects, durability, or resale value. But I suppose that's probably never going to happen, it takes too much time. It's all about cost per click now and all you need is an outrageous headline.
1. It's ironic that the recent reports of "iOS Malware" have only served to show how rock solid iOS is if you don't jailbreak the phone. A moron could literally download malware from a sleazy Chinese app store and transfer to his iPhone and, yet, if the phone isn't jailbroken, the damage is fairly limited due to the sand boxing. The magazines love to bash Apple for being overly secure conscious and then they go out of their way to ignore the benefits. Try downloading malware on an Android phone and see what it can do. The iPhone doesn't get enough credit for it's security. Even the JLaw picture stories highlighted how iOS is so rock solid that the only way to hack it was through guessing passwords.
2. Durability - Car magazine's love to report on a car's repair history because it influences their recommendations. As picky as the Apple market is, I'd bet anything that Apple phones are more dependable than other phones due to the quality of the components. I know Consumer Reports used to report on defects for PC makers, I'd love to see defects or repair histories for phones. Apple haters always bring up this or that because any iPhone flaw goes supernova. Let's see Samsung repair issues quantified and stacked right up against Apple's and see who's laughing then. The fact that an iPhone defect even makes headline's is due to the fact that Apple takes pride in craftsmanship.
3. The total cost of ownership for vehicles is a metric that's now pretty mainstream. It basically says that besides the cost of purchase, you also need to take into account the cost of repairs and depreciation. A cheaper upfront purchase could be more expensive down the road when you take into account poor quality and the final resale value. A lot of iPhone buyers are already aware that you can get way more than half of what you paid for your iPhone a year later.
It seems like a lot of tech journalism is written on the fly with little real analysis. I'm waiting for something like Anandtech or Consumer Reports that will go another level down and really start keeping good statistics on defects, durability, or resale value. But I suppose that's probably never going to happen, it takes too much time. It's all about cost per click now and all you need is an outrageous headline.