[The Masked Tulip]

Democorruptcy, on 17 April 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

If the market is so huge surely they can lower their price?

Chinese slave wages aren't that high yet.

Apple can't - won't - lower its price as its price is what gives it its kudos and exclusivity - people buy iphones and other Apple kit much in the same way that Brits buy houses.

(Did you see what I did there?)

There is this great belief in tech companies - I have witnessed it for 20 years now - that they see the entire 7 billion of us as purchasers of their kit. It has been said time and time before with all sorts of IT gadgets and IT services.

Those geeks in Silicon Valley - I was one - really do not understand the planet at all outside of California. They can't get it into their heads that billions of people are struggling each day for clean water and finding something to eat. Yet they include such people in their potential sales for iphones, window phones, android phones, etc.

Yes, some day in some Star Trek future every one will have a mobile device of some kind, but I think we need to think about hunger and thirst and poverty before we add those billions to future sales growth.

[Bloo Loo]

Paddles, on 17 April 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

The posters on this thread discussing the technical merits of the products are missing the point.

Look at AAPL on a two year timeline graph and tell me there's no speculative purchasing of stock.

bapple?

[The Masked Tulip]

Bloo Loo, on 17 April 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

bapple?

Put an 'i' in front of it and someone will buy it.

[Priced_Out_GenXer]

I certainly wouldn’t bet against Apple. Loads of people including many stock market analysts have predicted the demise of Apple for years and they’ve all got it spectacularly wrong every time.

I don’t think the rise of Andriod will make any difference whatsoever. Apple create premium products with a premium price tag that people are clearly prepared to pay. The profit margin on Apple hardware is enormous and there’s huge growth potential.

It’ll be interesting to see if\when Apple launch their rumoured Apple TV – the full screen TV not the little set top box they currently produce. This is the final piece of the jigsaw that Jobs allegedly said he had ‘cracked’ shortly before his death.

This post has been edited by monstermunch: 17 April 2012 - 02:46 PM

[MarkG]

The Masked Tulip, on 17 April 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

This is why people buy their laptops - they just work so you can concentrate on doing what you do and not trying to get drivers to work with it like on windows machines.

It's a laptop. You don't open it up and plug in random PCI cards, because there's no way to do so. Unless you're connecting some weird USB device you won't need any extra drivers, and you'd probably need those extra drivers on a Mac too.

When I bought my laptop the closest equivalent Mac was two and half times the price. Needless to say, I wasn't going to pay an extra $1500 just to have an Apple logo on the front.

[MarkG]

monstermunch, on 17 April 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

I certainly wouldn’t bet against Apple. Loads of people including many stock market analysts have predicted the demise of Apple for years and they’ve all got it spectacularly wrong every time.

A few years ago Apple was worth bugger all and even Microsoft was throwing money at them to keep them going. With Jobs dead I see no reason why they can't go back to being worth bugger all in a few years; when you sell primarily on fashion, you're always taking the risk that fashions will change.

This post has been edited by MarkG: 17 April 2012 - 02:55 PM

[Bobajobbob]

Google makes more money on each iPhone sold than they do on each android handset sold. Android will continue to grow and can almost compete with iOS now on the purely OS level however when it comes to the apple "universe" it is nowehere close. There is such a wealth of companies suporting idevices now from speaker systems, car integration, cases etc on top of the apple products/services (iTunes/airplay/apple tv/podcasts etc etc) that it is not simply about the device itself and whether samsung has 58 different models with a bigger screen.

[bmf]

MarkG, on 17 April 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

It's a laptop. You don't open it up and plug in random PCI cards, because there's no way to do so. Unless you're connecting some weird USB device you won't need any extra drivers, and you'd probably need those extra drivers on a Mac too.

When I bought my laptop the closest equivalent Mac was two and half times the price. Needless to say, I wasn't going to pay an extra $1500 just to have an Apple logo on the front.

The apple logo. The BBC is obsessed with apple. The other day on a sitcom someone was using a computer and of course it's apple product placement time. Would love to know where the kickbacks are going for this as it's not direct because the BBC doesn't do product placement AFAIK.

[Tin Foil Hat]

Being an owner of both android and iOS I now see the difference.

Both have lots of apps to do stuff. Both do the web etc.

The main difference is the speed at which you load pages/do stuff. It is noticeably quicker on the iOS devices. But you pay a hefty premium for this edge that Apple have. To many or most people the difference isn't worth it but if you're a regular long train journey commuter who spends most time surfing the web on a phone then yes it is worth it if you have the cash.

For the record, I hate the image and hype of Apple. I find it a real turn off as it has become the choice of the sheeple with too much money who think they're a bit special with their iPhones and iPads. The only reason I bought a 4s was to get TomTom on it for when I drive - I have been using the 2005 era TomTom navigator software on an old Windows Mobile phone and have patiently waited for TomTom to release it on Android but it never happened. Rumour has it that TomTom signed a deal not to release for android so anyone wanting it had to use an iPhone. And I have to say it's excellent on the iPhone and is as good as a standalone TomTom but I digress.

[The Masked Tulip]

Tin Foil Hat, on 17 April 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

Being an owner of both android and iOS I now see the difference.

Both have lots of apps to do stuff. Both do the web etc.

The main difference is the speed at which you load pages/do stuff. It is noticeably quicker on the iOS devices.

Interesting you say that - my friend who moved from iphone to samsung one running android this week thinks that the android loads much faster.

Of course, network connectivity, the mobo's back-end infrastruture, sites being contacted, etc, etc, etc, all play a significant part in the speed of how a mobo phone loads a web page.

Tin Foil Hat, on 17 April 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

The only reason I bought a 4s was to get TomTom on it for when I drive - I have been using the 2005 era TomTom navigator software on an old Windows Mobile phone and have patiently waited for TomTom to release it on Android but it never happened.

If your main purpose in your mobo phone - other than calls - is sat nav then you should look at the Nokia windows phones. The sat nav on the Nokia phones is probably the best on the market. So much so that it is said that the sat nav division at Nokia is worth 7 billion.

It is worth checking out - very impressive.

[Monkey]

The Masked Tulip, on 17 April 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

Interesting you say that - my friend who moved from iphone to samsung one running android this week thinks that the android loads much faster.

Of course, network connectivity, the mobo's back-end infrastruture, sites being contacted, etc, etc, etc, all play a significant part in the speed of how a mobo phone loads a web page.

as well as "apps" installed, what else is runnig in the background, what else is using your internet connection, battery level, redering engine used, etc.

to truely test this, you need a vanila version of the phones, (no bloatware) running the same browsers, on the same network etc.

As jeremy Clarkson proved, a Skoda Yeti is faster round donnington than a ferrari, driven by the Stig!!

in any condition you cna prove/disprove anything

This post has been edited by Monkey: 17 April 2012 - 03:26 PM

[Tin Foil Hat]

The Masked Tulip, on 17 April 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

Interesting you say that - my friend who moved from iphone to samsung one running android this week thinks that the android loads much faster.

If your main purpose in your mobo phone - other than calls - is sat nav then you should look at the Nokia windows phones. The sat nav on the Nokia phones is probably the best on the market. So much so that it is said that the sat nav division at Nokia is worth 7 billion.

It is worth checking out - very impressive.

I'm amazed at that. My androids are a Desire which is old now I grant you and a Sony S1 tablet. Both lovely bits of kit and no mistake guvnor. Samsung use flawed GPS chips which are a new generation and are basically too small. They don't lock properly and wander. Sammy screens are an absolute delight though and are very nice looking phones. So they were out of the race years ago for nav purposes.

My reason for TomTom is for the traffic and IQ routing. I haven't ever seen a phone that does accurate ETA/jam time, good look-ahead for a whole journey (not just part of it), genuinely takes the best routes most of the time and all the other things you take for granted as a TomTom user only to find out other products don't do something or other. The Nokia windows nav is excellent in reviews so far but doesn't have all the TomTom goodies. Not even comparable to my 2005 WinMo version.

I'm going to take a shufty at Sammy page load times next though when I'm passing CPW shop though. Very interesting.

Oh and another thing I noticed Apple have done is to add support for GLONASS and Galileo as well as GPS in the 4S. Not sure why!

[Tin Foil Hat]

Monkey, on 17 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

as well as "apps" installed, what else is runnig in the background, what else is using your internet connection, battery level, redering engine used, etc.

to truely test this, you need a vanila version of the phones, (no bloatware) running the same browsers, on the same network etc.

As jeremy Clarkson proved, a Skoda Yeti is faster round donnington than a ferrari, driven by the Stig!!

in any condition you cna prove/disprove anything

I do the comparisons every day at home - all 3 on wifi, all 3 vanilla with all crap not running etc. It's almost like the iPhone is running an Opera Mini proxy compression to make it quicker but it seems to be the genuine full pages. I still don't know how it works.

[The Masked Tulip]

Tin Foil Hat, on 17 April 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

I'm amazed at that. My androids are a Desire which is old now I grant you and a Sony S1 tablet. Both lovely bits of kit and no mistake guvnor. Samsung use flawed GPS chips which are a new generation and are basically too small. They don't lock properly and wander. Sammy screens are an absolute delight though and are very nice looking phones. So they were out of the race years ago for nav purposes.

My reason for TomTom is for the traffic and IQ routing. I haven't ever seen a phone that does accurate ETA/jam time, good look-ahead for a whole journey (not just part of it), genuinely takes the best routes most of the time and all the other things you take for granted as a TomTom user only to find out other products don't do something or other. The Nokia windows nav is excellent in reviews so far but doesn't have all the TomTom goodies. Not even comparable to my 2005 WinMo version.

I'm going to take a shufty at Sammy page load times next though when I'm passing CPW shop though. Very interesting.

Oh and another thing I noticed Apple have done is to add support for GLONASS and Galileo as well as GPS in the 4S. Not sure why!

To be frank, it is pointless comparing devices in some kind of race for internet connectivity on a purely random basis.

The only way you can truly compare 2 or more devices accurately is to subject them to very precise testing enironments - and even then it is hard to ensure that each device has an identical environment.

At the end of the day the results usually have a slight difference in miliseconds which is neither here nor there to human perception. In fact, in tests devices that people sometimes perceive to be faster sometimes are tested to be slower. The brain is also part of the equation.

To quote Sean Connery in 'The Rock' - "I am getting too old for this sh*t!"

[CrashConnoisseur]

Tin Foil Hat, on 17 April 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

Being an owner of both android and iOS I now see the difference.

Both have lots of apps to do stuff. Both do the web etc.

The main difference is the speed at which you load pages/do stuff. It is noticeably quicker on the iOS devices.

Do you notice the difference in User Interface lag?

'UI Lag Occurs More Often In Android Than iOS - The true story':
http://www.talk3g.co...-The-true-story

Quote

The truth is out. Something anyone who has used both iOS and Android, independently or together (as do I), will be well aware and very familiar with. Android UI lags, always has done, and seemingly always will do if Google do nothing about it. It seems, though, that the decision to actually do something is not as simple as it may seem.