Hacker News Reader

Comment by emsy | Hacker News Reader

Same here. Whenever I get caught up in some religious phone OS war I say I chose the platform I hate the least. I wish I could love my iPhone, but there are so many things wrong with it which could easily be solved without compromising anything product wise.

View on HN

Can you give some examples? Things being broken in life is usually one or more of:

- lack of time to implement (this would be great but we have three people on a team, and five features to deliver...)

- lack of people who care enough and have the resources to fix it (this would be great, but manager has other priorities that are more important at the moment)

- conscious choice as expression of philosophy or style (like flat UI)

- conscious technical trade off (like on-device photo analysis)

What are some of the things you think are wrong and would be easy to solve? Openradar links would be useful too :)

So, my single biggest daily aggravation: I turn off bluetooth/wifi frequently.[1]

There is no way to make the &%*#ing thing stop whining about lack of wifi - it literally waits until I'm trying to do something else to throw up a shitty dialog trying to annoy me into turning it on.

I turn connectivity off for a reason, and no, Apple does not know better in this instance. It is incredibly user-hostile and irritating, and I hope the engineer that wrote that code gets pink eye[2].

[1] I know, I'm a weirdo. Trying to explain how I'm Doing It Wrong will lead me to ignore you.

[2] I kid. It is really annoying, though.

Presumably, you're trying to do something that requires a network connection when it prompts you? If that's not a case the behavior is likely a bug.

I don't think you are doing it wrong but in 90% of the cases that's on the app developer. The OS usually doesn't ask for wifi randomly but many apps do. They check for connectivity and if wifi isn't available they prompt the user. It's not hard code to write but it shouldn't be used often. I'm actually writing similar code right now but for a pretty good reason, I'm working a feature that might use the presence of a wifi network to indicate proximity to an IoT device.

Under Settings > Wi-Fi, turn off “Ask to join networks”

Above all else, I can't develop for my own device without rebuilding weekly.

I can't run real Firefox.

I can't route all calls through Google Voice.

I can't run CarPlay without a head unit.

I can't open all map links in my preferred maps app.

I can't create restricted accounts for my kids.

It's essentially unusable as a "smart" phone.

Any claims about privacy fall apart after investigation. Google will still get my location on iOS if I use Google Search, exactly as it does on Android.

You can deny Google Search location services and iOS blocks far more tracking cookies than Android, so I don't think you can support that claims about privacy falling apart.

You can also disable location in Google Search on Android, in addition to switching to entirely different search providers and assistants. On Android, you can block tracking cookies in all apps, not just the web browser — without having to "jailbreak" your phone (relying on a rootable security vulnerability) or even unlock the bootloader.

For somebody who is seriously privacy-conscience, Android is strictly better.

All claims about privacy appear to stem from using fewer Google apps by default. Those default apps (like Safari and Siri) are inferior to their Google equivalents for most users, and for the people who don't want to give Google information, Android users can choose to use non-Google apps as well (like Firefox and local assistants and maps).

That's not at all were all the claims come from. You can block all ads without jailbreaking on iOS and iOS collections an order of magnitude less tracking data[0] than Android. Apple has pioneered the differential privacy algorithm's on top of that. Apple has a ton of features pointed at user privacy especially in the latest version of Safari. Android is in no way strictly better for privacy and saying so is irresponsible IMO.

[0] https://digitalcontentnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DC...

How has apple pioneered differential privacy. MS started it and Google has used ot before Apple ,even open sourced some portion of it,iirc. Google is also doing research in federated learning(ian goodfellow)

> You can block all ads without jailbreaking on iOS

You can't block ads across all apps without running your own ad-blocking proxy, jailbreaking, or paying Apple for the privilege of building an ad-blocking app on your phone. You can on Android by just installing an app (one example: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.blokada.alarm/).

> and iOS collections an order of magnitude less tracking data[0] than Android.

iOS collects the same data that Android collects. The difference is how much data the default apps collect that go to Google as I stated earlier. The Google apps are strictly better than the equivalent Apple apps for most users (maps, assistant, photos, mail, etc.). For the relatively fewer users who care more about privacy than about their apps doing things for them by knowing about them, Android has more and better options as well (Firefox, local apps, system-wide ad blocking, etc.).

> You can also disable location in Google Search on Android, in addition to switching to entirely different search providers and assistants.

Nope. Google was caught collecting location data even when everything was turned off:

https://qz.com/1131515/google-collects-android-users-locatio...

They also made their settings very misleading: https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/13/17684660/google-turn-off-...

Your second link is about data collection that Google apps also do on iPhones. It doesn't happen if you use a different search provider or disable sending your location for Google searches, as I stated and you quoted.

Your first link is about accidental collection that no longer occurs according to the article.

> I can't develop for my own device without rebuilding weekly.

Well, unless you pay, or use Swift Playgrounds.

> I can't create restricted accounts for my kids.

Does the standard set of restrictions not do what you want?

> Google will still get my location on iOS if I use Google Search, exactly as it does on Android.

You don't have to use Google…

> Does the standard set of restrictions not do what you want?

Separate accounts have separate data, not just restrictions.

> You don't have to use Google…

That's the point.

>I can't route all calls through Google Voice.

This is on Google now. Apple provides ways for app developers to use the native phone UI now. If I set up my number with the Google Hangouts app, I can get calls from my Google Voice number via the Voice app or the native UI. You can't do this with the Google Voice app but I have a feeling that's because they haven't updated it to support this API.

I'm talking about calling out, not receiving calls, which doesn't require any support from the phone as Google Voice can forward to any phone number.

What do you mean you can’t call out on a Google Voice? You open the app and make the call.

If Google Voice has Siri integration which has been around for awhile, you can say “Call X using Google Voice” and it will call using GV and activate the phone Bluetooth protocol if you are connected to your car’s Bluetooth system.

I mean click on a phone number in my contacts app or on a web page and have the call go through Google Voice or dial in my default phone app and have the call go through Google Voice.

And it’s somehow harder to go to the Google Voice app and call especially when you can import your contacts?

What’s the fundamental difference between clicking on Contacts and making a call and clicking on the GV app?

If the GV app has been updated to take advantage of the latest APIs, calls to and from the GV app will show up in your call history along with the native dialer.

If you like GV, why use the native contacts app at all? Any app that adds to contacts will automaticallly be added to GV.

You entirely ignored the part about clicking on phone numbers in web pages. It's the same with any app. I should be able to use whichever contacts app I like, whether it is a unified contacts app, my LinkedIn contacts, my Facebook contacts, the maps application, etc. Any time I click a phone number to make a call, it should appear to come from my Google Voice number. Copying and pasting is horrible experience just to make a call.

Blame that on Google. If you use Chrome on iOS, they already give you a choice of which maps app to use and which mail client to use. There is no reason they couldn’t give you the choice of how to handle Tel links.

If Google wanted to since they already have all of the apps, you could completely stay in the Google ecosystem on iOS - Browser, mail client, google voice, etc.

I should be able to do it from any app as I stated earlier (not just Google's) just as I can on Android.

And have all of the security issues that go along with it....

https://gkbrk.com/2017/05/android-dialer-packets/

You're grasping for excuses. There are security issues with running any app on your phone. A maps app could do nefarious things with your location. A browser app could do nefarious things with your browse history. That doesn't mean Apple blocks all third party apps.

If I trust a phone app enough to use its dialer, I should be able to route all calls through it. If I trust a maps app enough to use it manually, I should be able to set it to open for all address links. It really is that simple.

All valid point and I would add ignorance to it. They simply don’t know or care.

I file radars when applicable, my gripes are more general:

- No universal 3D Touch puts it in a weird spot. I like 3D Touch! Why not say we equip all models with 3D Touch, similar to when they made ips display the standard even for entry level MacBooks.

-prohibiting self signed applications. You have all the right to keep Steam Link off your shop, but not off my device. And if I had the desire to install Alex Jones’ app I would like to do that. You’re not my mom Apple. I’m still hoping the EU will fix this at some point.

-iTunes. I use it. It’s awful. If they would at least kill it off I’d know not to use it anymore.

-Seriously lagging behind in standards like PWAs, wireless charging or NFC.

-iMessage and Airdrop are awesome. Too bad I can rarely use them because the majority around me use Android.

I'm asking this as a thought experiment, nothing personal.

What if, fixing things the way you like breaks these features for someone else?

What would having headphone jack break?

Two things:

1. There's really no space for it, if you look at teardowns. So something took its place.

2. It does give better water resistance. Google the water resistance tests between iPhones and others. The difference is night and day in real world performance.

1. No. Teardowns have shown nothing of that sort. It's a marketing decision to push people to buy $170 airpods. In fact, there's a very popular tech blogger's video where he successfully adds in a headphone jack[1] to his iPhone 8.

2. No. Samsung phones are far more water resistant than iPhones are with a jack on it. I would love to see your links to said research.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfbE3_uAMA

Re: water resistance – Sony is pretty good there too, but last time I plunged my phone, the headphone jack itself was acting up until it had dried out. I guess there's no way around that.

Edit: Oh, and when I broke my older model with saltwater, they replaced it. Twice.

> It's a marketing decision to push people to buy $170 airpods.

Earbuds that work with the iPhone come in the box (and prior to the just announced models even an adapter was included). I'm not sure how lack of a jack pushes someone to buy AirPods. Maybe it makes them think about buying bluetooth headphones over wired if they were already thinking about third party headphones? Maybe.

Also while you may disagree about the 'barometric vent', it was put in the space that the headphone jack would have taken.

As pictured above, you can see a piece of plastic sits behind the ingress protection (waterproofing!), right where the headphone jack would have been. And (update!) according to Apple it's a "barometric vent." Apparently adding all the waterproofing to the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus meant that it was more of a sealed box, and so to be able to have an accurate and working barometer, Apple used that space. The barometer is the thing that allows a phone to measure altitude, and Apple points out that on the iPhone 7 it can measure even minor changes like climbing a flight of stairs.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/16/12941040/iphone-7-teardow...

I would rather have a headphone jack than a barometer.

You may disagree how the space was used, but I wanted to point out that it was in fact used. The poster I responded to said tear downs showed it not used. Even the video given as evidence showed the guy taking out the vent as the first step.

Wires are so last century. Bluetooth headphones have been available for at least 20 years. (I had a pair for my SonyEricsson m600c, and I'm not an early adopter.)

Knowing my altitude is something I need on at least a weekly basis. I'm OK with losing a port I haven't used in a couple of decades.

I don't want to have to charge my headphones or have them run out of battery.

And that's fine, but if you do anything active while wearing headphones, wireless is so much better. Even my cheap bluetooth headphones last 10 hours on a short charge (and tell me when they need to be recharged). I couldn't imagine going back to wires at the gym or while doing yard work. I do use a wired pair at my desk, but then why would I plug into my phone?

And AirPods? If you keep them in the case between uses they should always be charged.

Nice, and I'm not OK with that :) I have no intention of having another thing that requires recharging, I've already got my phone. Glad to see different people needing different features from a phone, though.

Out of curiosity, why do you frequently need to know your altitude? I don't think I've ever known my altitude except when driving past those "Welcome to Springdalevale, pop. 781. alt. 2,003 ft" signs you see when driving through small towns in mountainous areas.

> It's a marketing decision to push people to buy $170 airpods

FWIW, my lack of headphone jack had nothing to do with me buying $170 airpods. The product sells itself. It literally felt like something out of the future when it launched. Opening and closing the lid makes me happy on a daily basis. I can't think of a better use for that $170. It's a product that is pure joy to use, and completely eliminates one of the biggest annoyance factor in my daily life: tangled headphones, and worse, that feeling on your ears when you accidentally tug earbuds that are in your ear. So frustrating!

They cost $160, but you can use the included headphones without buying anything.

No. Teardowns have shown nothing of that sort. It's a marketing decision to push people to buy $170 airpods. In fact, there's a very popular tech blogger's video where he successfully adds in a headphone jack[1] to his iPhone 8.

How are people being "pushed" to buy Airpods when they can use any Bluetooth headphone, the headphones that come bundled with the phone, or use their own headphones with a $9.99 adapter that they have included up until yesterday?

Simple. There are multiple codecs in Bluetooth headphones, the most used one is proprietary aptX from Qualcomm. Apple has no problems licensing it for Macbooks and iMacs, but for iPhones they chose to reject Qualcomm, do their thing, and use AAC codec, which is supported only by small fraction of wireless headphones. https://darko.audio/2017/12/how-to-enable-aptx-hd-bluetooth-...

So, if your headphones don't support AAC, they will (most likely) fallback to SBC encoding with a subpar sound quality. Don't want a subpar sound quality? Buy Airpods. Or Beats. Or some other overpriced thing that understands AAC. There was some 100 year-old industry standard regarding sound transmission, but apparently it's "obsolete" now, because Apple said so. And bundled headphones don't sound too good.

The removal of headphone jack was purely a political decision to spite Qualcomm and screwing over Apple's customers.

So now it’s a bad thing that Apple chose to support an industry standard (AAC) instead of a proprietary Qualcomm only protocol?

But if you aren’t satisfied with the Apple wired headphones, up until the 12th Apple bundle an adapter, you could choose any wired headphones you wanted. After the 12” it would be $9.99. It’s still not forcing you to buy AirPods.

As far as Bluetooth, there are other non Apple/Beats Bluetooth AAC headphones. Nothing forcing anyone to buy them from Apple.

>> 1. There's really no space for it, if you look at teardowns. So something took its place.

This guy was able to add the headphone jack back into an iPhone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfbE3_uAMA). The argument that there is really no space just isn't true.

…by ruining the Taptic Engine, if I recall correctly, or by spending thousands of dollars on getting this to work. It's not like Apple just left a hole in that spot out of spite.

People who have some kind of weird hate for Apple always assume that everything Apple does is out of spite.

Apple very rarely does things out of spite. And usually when that happens, it's a mistake rather than a conscious, malicious decision.

By breaking the seals that make the phone waterproof, removing a housing component, and breaking the Taptic Engine. He did nothing of the sort.

The S9 has a higher waterproof rating than the iPhone X.

That's why it's great if these thugs come with an [ON|OFF] switch. Let everyone decide what they use but start with secure as default.

It’s most often not features I want change but features I want to have in the first place: Proper PWAs, NFC, wireless charging (things Android has for an while now). Self signed apps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com