Groups > comp.mobile.android > #54790 > unrolled thread

Is Apple acknowledging that many users want an active stylus on their phones?

Started by	sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
First post	2018-08-16 17:58 -0700
Last post	2018-08-17 12:01 -0500
Articles	20 on this page of 111 — 14 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →

#54837

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2018-08-18 13:41 -0400
Message-ID	<180820181341540339%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#54836

In article <pl9jsh$jvc$1@dont-email.me>, abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com>
wrote:

> 
> >> some NEW Apple devices still come with a headphone jack such as my 
> >> wife's iPad Pro purchased in January.
> 
> > ipads (and macs) have a different use case than phones
> 
> What (audio) difference? Watching a movie on the iPad, listening to
> music on the phone, it's all basically audio. Your Bluetooth arguments
> don't apply to tablets also?

i said different use case, not different audio.

in general, macs and often tablets are connected to a home theater
system or professional audio equipment (i.e., *not* headphones), if
they're connected to anything (most aren't).

a phone is often used with headphones for listening to music or
watching a video while out and about. while at home, speakers would
probably be used.

and yes, bluetooth works with tablets as well as macs. it's not just
phones.

one exceptionally cool thing about apple's airpods is you only need to
pair them with *one* device (usually the phone) and then they're
automatically paired with every other device you own, whether it's a
iphone, ipad or mac. what's even cooler is they play audio from
whatever device you're currently using (or you can switch it manually).

in other words the hassles of manually pairing, particularly pairing
and dealing with multiple devices, is a thing of the past.

also, since they are standard bluetooth, they work with android and
even older flip phones.

> > the analog headphone jack was removed on the iphone because space is
> >  *extremely* limited in a phone and that space could be better used 
> > for other purposes.
> 
> A nice theory but I doubt you have a clue as to what was added to the
> missing headphone jack space. I think your wired headphone = old
> technology argument held more water.

it's not a theory. apple explained what the extra room was for, which
is additional battery and the dual-lens camera with portrait
mode/lighting.

although the camera was at the top of the phone, the additional lens
meant other components had to move internally to accommodate
everything, particularly on the 7 (non-plus) model. 

on the iphone x, the display goes to the edge, which means there is no
room underneath for an analog headphone jack.

space is at an extreme premium. the original iphone used mini sims,
later micro sims and now nano sims, all due to needing the space for
more important things.

apple wants to move to e-sims to recover the space taken up by the nano
sim, however, the carriers are fighting that because it would mean the
user could easily switch to another carrier at any time with a couple
of taps, something the carriers do *not* want. 

the apple watch does have an e-sim because there is no alternative.
it's too small for a nano sim. 

> > not including it also makes it easier to seal the phone from
> > moisture and dirt incursion.
> 
> A past phone of mine (HTC) was WATERPROOF to 10'. It had a headphone jack.

i said easier, not impossible.  it's an additional hole to seal, and a
difficult one at that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54839

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-18 22:00 +0000
Message-ID	<pla4u5$dil$4@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54837

On 18 Aug 2018 10:41:54 GMT, nospam wrote:

> i said easier, not impossible.  it's an additional hole to seal, and a
> difficult one at that

And does Apple give the consumer a break on the money they saved?

Nope.

The real reason, almost certainly, that Apple removed basic functionality
from their devices is that Apple figured they'd make more money off their
customers by doing so.

It's no more complicated than that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54842

From	abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com>
Date	2018-08-18 15:22 -0700
Message-ID	<pla66g$9po$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#54837

On 8/18/2018 10:41 AM, nospam wrote:
> abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com> wrote:

> a phone is often used with headphones for listening to music or 
> watching a video while out and about. while at home, speakers would 
> probably be used.

Not in the modern age. Three grandkids over to the house, three tablets
playing different movies or games, and three sets of (wired) headphones
to keep the peace.

> one exceptionally cool thing about apple's airpods is you only need 
> to pair them with *one* device (usually the phone) and then they're 
> automatically paired with every other device you own, whether it's a
>  iphone, ipad or mac.

My wired headphones also automatically pair with all my Android devices
and... the Wife's iPad. Just have to plug them in. But some dummy
engineer left the pairing jack off her iPhone...

> apple explained what the extra [missing headphone jack] room was
> for, which is additional battery...

Must not be too much additional battery. The wife's iPhone 8+ and my
Motorola Droid Turbo 2 are about the same size. However the 8+ has a
2691 mAh battery while my Droid sports a 3760 mAh battery, AND room for
a headphone jack.

>>> not including it also makes it easier to seal the phone from 
>>> moisture and dirt incursion.
>> 
>> A past phone of mine (HTC) was WATERPROOF to 10'. It had a 
>> headphone jack.
> 
> i said easier, not impossible.  it's an additional hole to seal, and 
> a difficult one at that.

If making a waterproof headphone jack wasn't all that difficult for a
cheap phone company, you'd think a premium company could do it.

(Full disclosure: The Droid ain't waterproof either.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54855

From	sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
Date	2018-08-18 21:20 -0700
Message-ID	<plar6o$khj$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#54842

On 8/18/2018 3:22 PM, abcdef wrote:

<snip>

> My wired headphones also automatically pair with all my Android devices
> and... the Wife's iPad. Just have to plug them in. But some dummy
> engineer left the pairing jack off her iPhone...

The actual reasons for the removal of the headphone jack made perfect sense:
1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.
2. Make waterproofing easier.
3. Encourage sales of Airpods.
4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack does.
5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
on their computers.

OTOH, the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter that they include, for now, is not 
cheap. There's a DAC, and ADC, and an amplifier inside. Along with a 
3.5mm jack, Lightning plug, and cable, that must cost at least 75¢ to 
manufacture (aftermarket ones are about $1.40 retail), so all the cost 
removed from the phone moved into a separate device.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54858

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-19 05:14 +0000
Message-ID	<plaubi$or6$2@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54855

On 18 Aug 2018 21:20:36 GMT, sms wrote:

> The actual reasons for the removal of the headphone jack made perfect sense:
> 1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.
> 2. Make waterproofing easier.
> 3. Encourage sales of Airpods.
> 4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack does.
> 5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
> on their computers.
> 
> OTOH, the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter that they include, for now, is not 
> cheap. There's a DAC, and ADC, and an amplifier inside. Along with a 
> 3.5mm jack, Lightning plug, and cable, that must cost at least 75¢ to 
> manufacture (aftermarket ones are about $1.40 retail), so all the cost 
> removed from the phone moved into a separate device.

What I love about you, sms, is that you're educated, and hence, you speak
logical thought processes - where you comprehend the good and the bad
(unlike nospam who just childishly parrot's Apple MARKETING mantra).

I agree with you that eliminating the headphone jack functionality
- Makes iPhones more profitable to Apple
- Makes iPhones easier to waterproof (hence more profitable to Apple)
- Restricts users to Apple products (hence, more profitable to Apple)
- Generates licensing fees (hence, more profitable to Apple)
- Minimizes ports (which locks consumers into the Apple way - hence more
control and hence more profitable).

While you speak about a device which costs a buck to add to the box, you
have to remember that I bought a hardware equivalent (actually better in
almost all ways - but let's just say equivalent) 8-core LG Stylo 3 Plus for
one fifth the price of the 3-core iPhone 7 Plus, which you know has almost
nothing hardware wise better (other than RAM - but where the 3 cores will
be halved in CPU speeds in less than a year).

My point is that I agree with you that removing the headphone jack had one
positive outcome for Apple - which is it increased their profit.

But my point is that Apple doesn't pass on that to the consumer, who is
paying, in essence,over five times the cost for an essentially  hardware
equivalent phone (yes, I know the bands, and the memory and the cpu - but
note the caveats which on T-Mobile doesn't matter and note that it has a
courageous headphone jack - among other features that the iPhone lacks).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54877

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2018-08-19 06:26 -0400
Message-ID	<190820180626139339%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#54855

In article <plar6o$khj$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> The actual reasons for the removal of the headphone jack made perfect sense:

except that only one of what you listed is relevant.

the main reason is that the space is better used for other purposes.

> 1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.

negligible.

> 2. Make waterproofing easier.

yes

> 3. Encourage sales of Airpods.

no

> 4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack does.

no

> 5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
> on their computers.

no

> OTOH, the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter that they include, for now, is not 
> cheap. There's a DAC, and ADC, and an amplifier inside. Along with a 
> 3.5mm jack, Lightning plug, and cable, that must cost at least 75¢ to 
> manufacture (aftermarket ones are about $1.40 retail), so all the cost 
> removed from the phone moved into a separate device.

no.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54915

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-20 02:06 +0000
Message-ID	<pld7mq$tiq$9@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54877

On 19 Aug 2018 03:26:13 GMT, nospam wrote:

> the main reason is that the space is better used for other purposes.

Hehhehheh ... 

Yeah ... like using that lost functionality space to make the iPhone even
more profitable to Apple.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54917

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2018-08-19 22:18 -0400
Message-ID	<190820182218075857%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#54915

In article <pld7mq$tiq$9@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
<arlenholder@nospam.net> wrote:

> 
> > the main reason is that the space is better used for other purposes.
> 
> Hehhehheh ... 
> 
> Yeah ... like using that lost functionality space to make the iPhone even
> more profitable to Apple.

a whole couple of cents per unit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54919

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-20 02:32 +0000
Message-ID	<pld971$1gg$3@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54917

On 19 Aug 2018 19:18:07 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Yeah ... like using that lost functionality space to make the iPhone even
>> more profitable to Apple.
> 
> a whole couple of cents per unit.

To all who read this, notice that nospam, a canonical Apple Apologist,
*conveniently* ignores almost *everything* that _logical_ sentient adults
mention - about *why* Apple removed standard wired functionality.

Here's a list by sms, for example, which nospam ignores completely:
  The actual reasons for the removal of the headphone jack 
  made perfect sense:
 1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.
 2. Make waterproofing easier.
 3. Encourage sales of Airpods.
 4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack
does.
 5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
on their computers.

And, my profit-to-Apple assessment of those valid arguments:
 I agree with you that eliminating the headphone jack functionality
 - Makes iPhones more profitable to Apple
 - Makes iPhones easier to waterproof (hence more profitable to Apple)
 - Restricts users to Apple products (hence, more profitable to Apple)
 - Generates licensing fees (hence, more profitable to Apple)
 - Minimizes ports (which locks consumers into the Apple way 
 - hence more control and thus more profitable).

The fact that sentient well-educated intelligent adults like sms and I can
discuss complexities that are completely lost on the Apple Apologist
nospam.

The question that has always puzzled me about Apple Apologists like
nospam.. is...
a. Are they really _that_ dumb?
b. Or are they just playing their silly semantic games?

Why do adult comprehensive complexities such as those sms and I discussed,
completely whoosh by the canonical Apple Apologists like nospam,
Savageduck, Lewis, BK@OnRamp, Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Jolly Roger, etc.?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54920

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2018-08-19 22:51 -0400
Message-ID	<190820182251235635%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#54919

In article <pld971$1gg$3@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
<arlenholder@nospam.net> wrote:

> Here's a list by sms, for example, which nospam ignores completely

i didn't ignore it at all. i replied to it, as it's mostly wrong.

>   The actual reasons for the removal of the headphone jack 
>   made perfect sense:

the actual reasons are that it takes up space that can be better used
for more important things, it makes it easier to make it water
resistant and it's redundant because there is a digital headphone jack
already there, which is far more capable and more reliable.

>  1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.

by a few cents, if that much. it's certainly *not* a motivation to
eliminate it.

>  2. Make waterproofing easier.

yes, as noted above.

>  3. Encourage sales of Airpods.

nonsense. apple includes headphones *and* an adapter in the box so
nothing else needs to be bought.

iphones also have standard bluetooth, so any third party bluetooth
headset would work.

>  4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack
> does.

nonsense to that too. they include an adapter and any bluetooth headset
works fine. 

>  5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
> on their computers.

also wrong.

they *added* a smart connector to the ipad, for example.

keep in mind that numerous android phones, including the google pixel
and various motorola, htc and several others do not have an analog
headphone jack, along with the very first android phone from 10 years
ago.

specifically, google does *not* include headphones with the google
pixel, so if anyone is encouraging sales of bluetooth headsets, it
would be google and their pixel buds, their version of the airpods.

tl;dr the list is bullshit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54926

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-20 04:05 +0000
Message-ID	<pldelt$egt$1@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54920

On 19 Aug 2018 19:51:23 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Here's a list by sms, for example, which nospam ignores completely
> 
> i didn't ignore it at all. i replied to it, as it's mostly wrong.

Any logical adult would realize they didn't do it to save a few cents.
I don't know their profit margins, but I'm sure they're _huge_.

They wouldn't make such a faux pas, where they have to _defend_ the
decision with the idiotic take that it's a "courageous" decision to remove
basic functionality from a mobile device.

It's jut illogical what you present as their reasons.

> the actual reasons are that it takes up space that can be better used
> for more important things, it makes it easier to make it water
> resistant and it's redundant because there is a digital headphone jack
> already there, which is far more capable and more reliable.

While there's no doubt that it takes up space and that the fewer holes, the
more profitably Apple can waterproof, but I'm sure we can dig up similar
hardware phones that not only cost less, and which are the same size or
smaller for equivalent features, but which have headphone jacks and which
are just as water resistant.

>>  1. Reduce manufacturing cost of the phone.
> 
> by a few cents, if that much. it's certainly *not* a motivation to
> eliminate it.

Agreed. They didn't do it to eliminate the cost of the basic functionality.
They removed that basic functionality for reasons that they cleverly
planned out, and it wasn't to save a few cents in costs. 

>>  2. Make waterproofing easier.
> 
> yes, as noted above.

Except that plenty of phones, I'm sure (based on the myriad conversations
you've had with others on this topic in the past) are as waterproof, and
cost far less than the iPhone.

>>  3. Encourage sales of Airpods.
> 
> nonsense. apple includes headphones *and* an adapter in the box so
> nothing else needs to be bought.

That's utterly ridiculous, where, again, either you're:
a. Too stupid to realize what you said is preposterous, or, 
b. You're just playing your silly semantic games again.

As an example, how many people do you know who only have a single headphone
and have never needed to buy a second, third, fourth, fifth, etc., for use
in various situations.

The answer is almost none, almost certainly.
Hell, Even I have a dozen or more headphones, and I'm not even an
audiophile.

It's just preposterous for you to say that this one set of headphones that
Apple provides and adapter will suffice in all situations for years on end.

Apple stands to make money on all the lost equipment, damaged equipment,
worn equipment, and equipment for the various places you store stuff where
wired headphones are ubiquitous.

> iphones also have standard bluetooth, so any third party bluetooth
> headset would work.

True. But wired headphones are vastly cheaper and already prevalent.

While bluetooth is good, if bluetooth were so fantastic, nobody would have
wired speakers plugged into their desktop computers, for example. 

Bluetooth has its flaws too.

> 
>>  4. The headphone jack generates no licensing fees, the Lightning jack
>> does.
> 
> nonsense to that too. they include an adapter and any bluetooth headset
> works fine.

Except that only a fool would think that it will never be lost, and that it
will last forever, and that it will be conveniently in all places you'll be
just hanging off the trees for you to pluck out of the sky.

HINT: At my local library, they have baskets filled with wired headphones.

>>  5. Follows their philosophy of minimizing I/O ports, which is also seen 
>> on their computers.
> keep in mind that numerous android phones, including the google pixel
> and various motorola, htc and several others do not have an analog
> headphone jack, along with the very first android phone from 10 years
> ago.

You always blame Android for all the faults of Apple.
And you pick the worst examples of Android at the same time.

It's a basic trait of you Apple Apologists which we enshrined here...
 What are common psychological traits of the Apple Apologists?
 <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.ipad/2BJ0i7LtngQ>

> specifically, google does *not* include headphones with the google
> pixel, so if anyone is encouraging sales of bluetooth headsets, it
> would be google and their pixel buds, their version of the airpods.

Here are the basic traits of you Apple Apologists, where one of them is to
pick the *worst* examples and then blame Android for Apple's faults!

. You brazenly & repeatedly fabricate wholly imaginary app functionality
. You then exclaim that it's been told to us many times how to do it! 
...
. You almost never back up statements with actual referenced facts
. You incessantly play childish semantic games when faced with those facts
...
. You consistently fabricate quoted content that never happened 
. You then wittily respond to that imaginary quoted content as if it did!
...
. You're never purposefully helpful by helping the OP answer the question
. You post worthless retorts, all of which lack any added technical value
...
. You consistently blame Android for most of Apple's app & hardware faults 
. You consistently find the absolute worst price:performance comparisons
...
. You actually believe that a well-documented process is too complex!
. You literally believe elapsed time is proof of actual resolution time.
...
. You deny facts a priori - without even reading the referenced facts!
. And then you complain about quote snipping of your silly semantic games
===========================================================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54929

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2018-08-20 01:01 -0400
Message-ID	<200820180101052542%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#54926

In article <pldelt$egt$1@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
<arlenholder@nospam.net> wrote:

> Any logical adult would realize they didn't do it to save a few cents.

exactly.

you're contradicting what you wrote earlier.

> As an example, how many people do you know who only have a single headphone
> and have never needed to buy a second, third, fourth, fifth, etc., for use
> in various situations.

shitloads. like, pretty much everyone i know, most of whom don't use
any headphones at all, but those who do, they use only one set, the one
that came in the box.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54930

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-20 05:34 +0000
Message-ID	<pldjt2$rhh$1@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54929

On 19 Aug 2018 22:01:05 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Any logical adult would realize they didn't do it to save a few cents.
> 
> exactly.
> 
> you're contradicting what you wrote earlier.

Yet again, you're either
a. An idiot, or, 
b. Playing your silly semantic games.

They did it to make money. 
They didn't do it to save a few cents.

Both sms and I described in adult words how they can make money by
eliminating the basic functionality.

That your child's mind is consistently missing those obvious logical point,
repeatedly, simply means you're not a logical sentient adult. 

You're a canonical Apple Apologist. 
Hence, you repeatedly exhibit the thought process of a child, nospam.

As you did here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54840

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2018-08-19 10:01 +1200
Message-ID	<pla4vc$1ttd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#54834

On 2018-08-18 15:13:42 +0000, abcdef said:
> On 8/18/2018 12:00 AM, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2018-08-18 04:16:24 +0000, abcdef said:
>>> 
>>> At Target this afternoon I found two kinds of Apple EarPods for
>>> sale. One with a Lightning connector and one with a STANDARD connector.
>> 
>> The standard headphone jack versions still exist for those with older
>> devices,
> 
> If you mean OLDER APPLE devices I would point out that some NEW Apple
> devices still come with a headphone jack such as my wife's iPad Pro
> purchased in January.

Yes, there are also some current Apple devices that do still have a 
headphone jack ... so far. (One rumour is that the upcoming iPad update 
will drop that socket.)

> If you mean ALL OLDER devices I would point out that ALL the NON-APPLE
> tablets sold in my local big box stores HAVE headphone jacks.
> 
> So IMO the market for wired headphones has a little life left... ;)

Yes, there's no reason you cannot use Apple headphones with non-Aplpe 
devices ... but when Apple stops shipping devices with headphone jacks 
and relegates the older devices to "obsolete" (if not before that), 
then Apple will stopp selling headphone jack EarPods.

>> but they will be dropped when all the older devices with that socket
>> have been added to Apple's "obsolete" list.
> 
> I agree that Apple is likely drop the headphone jack soon if not already
> in its upcoming models. But perhaps for the lower classes the other
> manufacturers may hang in there awhile longer...

That's why there's an adapter to let you use headphone jack accessories 
with non-headphone jack Apple devices.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54843

From	abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com>
Date	2018-08-18 15:35 -0700
Message-ID	<pla6v3$dkt$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#54840

On 8/18/2018 3:01 PM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2018-08-18 15:13:42 +0000, abcdef said:

> Yes, there's no reason you cannot use Apple headphones with non-Aplpe
>  devices ...

Is price a reason? Target EarPods are US$29. The competition just down
the aisle with similar specs is around $19. And with the competition you
actually have a color choice...

> That's why there's an adapter to let you use headphone jack
> accessories with non-headphone jack Apple devices.

Ah yes. You must mean that damn dangling dongle. We discussed it earlier
in the thread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54849

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-19 00:16 +0000
Message-ID	<placsr$s88$1@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54843

On 18 Aug 2018 15:35:15 GMT, abcdef wrote:

> Is price a reason?

Given Apple has arguably the finest MARKETING organization on the planet,
you can rest assured that Apple figured out that they'd make more money by
locking their loyal consumer into their restrictive headphone use model.

Rest assured, any price savings are NEVER passed on to that loyal customer.

Otherwise an equivalent iPhone wouldn't cost five times that a far more
functional but let's just say equivalent hardware Android device costs.

Details on the 5X price to 0X performance comparison are here:
 iPhone 7 Plus v. LG Stylo 3 Plus price/performance hardware comparison
 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk/n0FaH2e_DQAJ>

The 5-times less expensive Android phone has more functionality than any
iPhone could ever have (it has been often proven that even a five-year old
Android device has far more functionality than any iPhone ever made, for
example). 

The five times more expensive 3-core (effectively) iPhone 7 Plus will have
its CPU speed (no longer secretly but still drastically and permanently)
cut to less than half in about a year, while the 8-core five times less
expensive equivalent phone will still maintain its CPU performance.

Meanwhile, the 8-core 5 times less expensive phone has a removable battery,
a 2TB sd card slot, a stylus, an FM radio, and, oh ... lest we forget, one
of those "courageous" headphone jacks!

Obviously it was long ago proven many times over that Apple iPhones provide
far less functionality to the users - but the price for Apple's loss of
functionality is five times more!

Those are all facts!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54853

From	abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com>
Date	2018-08-18 20:21 -0700
Message-ID	<plann7$cas$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#54849

On 8/18/2018 5:16 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2018 15:35:15 GMT, abcdef wrote:

>> Is price a reason?

> Given Apple has arguably the finest MARKETING organization on the 
> planet

Dunno about that. I think I'd give Amazon that prize. My Fire tablets
make me look at an ad before I can even access them. Course I realize
that the tablets are sold cheap with that in mind. And IMO the ads are
well done and often interesting so I've never considered paying the $30
bribe/fee to get rid of them.

> you can rest assured that Apple figured out that they'd make more 
> money by locking their loyal consumer into their restrictive 
> headphone use model.

Headphone use never entered into my wife's decision to get Apple
products. She's bought them for years (tablet, phone, and recently a
watch). Not sure she even used any of the headphones that came with
them. I suspect most people don't buy their phones based on headphone
type either.

> Rest assured, any price savings are NEVER passed on to that loyal 
> customer.

That's actually very good business sense if sales are good. Sure wish
I'd bought some Apple stock a few years back...

> The 5-times less expensive Android phone has more functionality than
>  any iPhone could ever have

The wife has always liked Apple products because they just work. She can
do everything SHE wants to do on them without any technical know how. I
suspect that's why many folks buy them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54857

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-19 05:14 +0000
Message-ID	<plaubh$or6$1@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54853

On 18 Aug 2018 20:21:13 GMT, abcdef wrote:

>> Given Apple has arguably the finest MARKETING organization on the 
>> planet
> 
> Dunno about that. I think I'd give Amazon that prize. 

I don't disagree where I'd still put Apple in the top ten for Marketing.
How else can you sell a phone for five times the price of a far more
functional phone as we noted in that thread I referenced.

Apple knows it's customers are filled with *fear*, so Apple plays to that
fear. 

Apple knows its customers want style - so colors are a big deal each year.

Apple knows its customers jsut play games - so emojis are also a big deal.

Yet, Apple knows its customers just use the device as a mere toy, so
functionality isn't even close to their list of important things. 

Nor is working in the real world, where the real world is "not supported",
nor even tested. 

> My Fire tablets
> make me look at an ad before I can even access them. Course I realize
> that the tablets are sold cheap with that in mind. And IMO the ads are
> well done and often interesting so I've never considered paying the $30
> bribe/fee to get rid of them.

I never see ads. 
For example, I watch all the YouTube videos I want for free, and I *never*
see a single ad. Never. 

On the iPad - it's filled to the brim with ads. 
But on Android - there are none.

That's what I mean about iOS being far less functional than Android.

> Headphone use never entered into my wife's decision to get Apple
> products. She's bought them for years (tablet, phone, and recently a
> watch). Not sure she even used any of the headphones that came with
> them. I suspect most people don't buy their phones based on headphone
> type either.

I agree. 
I buy plenty of iOS equipment - mostly as gifts.
Yes, the recipients complain about the lack of a headphone jack.

But they bought into the Orwellian iOS restrictions - so - that's what they
get. 

> That's actually very good business sense if sales are good. Sure wish
> I'd bought some Apple stock a few years back...
Understood. It's one of the most successful companies on the planet.

> The wife has always liked Apple products because they just work.

They don't actually work in the real world - and I can give you tons of
examples how.

What is *really* happening is that your wife uses iOS as a toy.
As a toy, it works fine.

Also, we proved long ago that the iOS user "just gives up" all day every
day. So your wife is like the people I give iOS devices to, mostly girls,
who aren't in the least technical.

They're so used to "just giving up" that they don't realize thye have to
just ive up all day every day. Basically iOS is crippled compared to
Android.  But your wife doesn't even notice.

Likely she is happy to be imprisoned inside the walled garden.
And very very very likely she "just gives up" constantly.
Even more likely, she just punches buttons - so as long as she can figure
out the buttons to punch (she'll give up most of the time) she's happy.

Many millions of iOS users are like your wife.
They use the device just as a toy.
And that's OK.

Except that it's a VERY EXPENSIVE toy.
It can't do even the _simplest_ of things that we do on Android all day
every tday without even thinking about it. 

If you challenge that, be prepared for a long list of things Android does
that iOS can't hope to do (starting with organizing your screen the way you
want, and then moving to debugging WiFI or setting defaults or recording
phone calls automatically or torrenting or just accessing your own files
over USB for heaven's sake! :()

Your wife likes the iOS toy because she isn't technical in the least almost
certainly. If she was, she'd hate iOS because it's basically crippled and
primitive (the launcher is stuck in a design of more than a decade old).

> She can
> do everything SHE wants to do on them without any technical know how. I
> suspect that's why many folks buy them.

I agree.
Toys have their place.
All iOS devices are toys.

If the user is OK with just giving up every day, and if they stay inside
the walled garden - and if they never do anything in the real world -
they're fine.

But it's still a toy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54865

From	abcdef <abcdef@abcdef.com>
Date	2018-08-18 23:20 -0700
Message-ID	<plb27t$hks$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#54857

On 8/18/2018 10:14 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:

> Apple knows its customers want style - so colors are a big deal each 
> year.

Same with many Android phones (and tablets).

> On the iPad - it's filled to the brim with ads.

Where?

> But on Android - there are none.

Lots of ads on my Fire tablets currently running a forked Android 5.2.

> I buy plenty of iOS equipment - mostly as gifts. Yes, the recipients 
> complain about the lack of a headphone jack.

Boy your gift recipients are really assholes. Give them a premium $$$
phone and all they can do is complain about a missing headphone jack??

> They [Apple products] don't actually work in the real world...

If Apple products didn't work to their customers satisfaction in the
real world then Apple certainly wouldn't be a rich company in the real
world.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54872

From	Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net>
Date	2018-08-19 08:31 +0000
Message-ID	<plb9se$gic$1@news.mixmin.net>
In reply to	#54865

On 18 Aug 2018 23:20:43 GMT, abcdef wrote:

>> Apple knows its customers want style - so colors are a big deal each 
>> year.
> 
> Same with many Android phones (and tablets).

Not really. There is a huge *range* of Android devices.
The Apple devices don't have the range.

Also, the Android customer isn't driven by intense fear.
Ask *any* iPhone owner why they buy their iPhone.

You'll hear their intense *fear* come out most of the time.
Also the Apple customer is driven by style.

That's why they care about silly colors.
And, they don't care about actual functionality - for example, they care
greatly about silly childish emojis.

Clearly these are three factors of the typical iPhone customer:
a. Driven by fear
b. Driven by style
c. Doesn't care about functionality

>> On the iPad - it's filled to the brim with ads.
> 
> Where?

We've had this discussion on the iPad/iPhone group so many times it's not
funny. On iOS, the YouTube app is filled to the brim with ads. So is the
Android YouTube app - but - get this - there's a free replacement for
YouTube which not only does MORE - but it never has ads.

We've discussed this so many times it's not funny.
(Where have you been?)

Here's just one...
 Why doesn't iOS have a single free app that completely replaces the
YouTube app entirely (with far more powerful functionality)? 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/5b-iz8Uj7xU/TOPREZNPBAAJ>

>> But on Android - there are none.
> 
> Lots of ads on my Fire tablets currently running a forked Android 5.2.

You haven't been paying attention.

Here's the hilarious attempt by the iOS Apologists to claim their wholly
imaginary functionality to combat the actual functionality of Android...
 Nospam posted just now that New Pipe YouTube "red" functionality exists on
iOS 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/3nmdadrrl3s/ZTsS-QR5AAAJ>

> 
>> I buy plenty of iOS equipment - mostly as gifts. Yes, the recipients 
>> complain about the lack of a headphone jack.
> 
> Boy your gift recipients are really assholes. Give them a premium $$$
> phone and all they can do is complain about a missing headphone jack??

They have every right to complain about lost functionality.

Almost everything about iOS is less functional than Android (which we've
proven time and again so many times that it's not funny).

Why would you ever state that expecting the most basic of functionality in
an iPhone is being an "asshole"? 

>> They [Apple products] don't actually work in the real world...
> 
> If Apple products didn't work to their customers satisfaction in the
> real world then Apple certainly wouldn't be a rich company in the real
> world.

Agreed. 

The iPhone is one of the best MARKETED consumer devices in history.

It's not functional - but Apple knows the customer doesn't care.
a. The Apple customer is driven by abject *fear*, and, 
b. The Apple customer is an ignorant slave to *style*, and, 
c. The Apple customer is childishly wowed by silly toys (e.g., emojis).

We've discussed this many times in the past.
(Where have you been?)
 iOS is really moving forward with this new announcement from Apple of "big
things" happening 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/m9aLeALeCWY/cICpfWs0BQAJ>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →

csiph-web

Is Apple acknowledging that many users want an active stylus on their phones?

Contents

#54837

#54839

#54842

#54855

#54858

#54877

#54915

#54917

#54919

#54920

#54926

#54929

#54930

#54840

#54843

#54849

#54853

#54857

#54865

#54872