iPhone 5
apple.com
apple.com
Trying to take the subway to unfamiliar parts of the city forces me to use google maps in the browser. Addresses seem to be hit or miss -- I've often spent time searching for an establishment or address just to give up and use google maps in the browser.
I've basically had to revert to how I got around the city prior to having a smartphone -- use my computer and remember how I need to get there before I leave.
Apple Maps is potentially a huge fail for anyone living in a major city.
Maps has a huge local revenue opportunity for Google. It has user intent, most of the searches are commercial, you know the user's tastes and hangouts (through past searches), and the user is addressable (since they are close to the item of interest). This means high CPC rates (or equivalent) if you can deliver a real ad product. Thus, I'd bet pretty strongly that a maps product will be coming to iOS since Google would hate to risk losing those valuable eyeballs.
Apple Maps is a regression in certain areas (public transit, as noted above), and advances others (the turn-by-turn experience), so it's a mixed bag.
At the end of the day, most of these things are reconciled through the app ecosystem: if you are heavily dependent on public transit, Google and other app providers support you well. If you're a driver, Apple and TomTom provide worthy solutions. And so on with walking and biking directions. We, as consumer, get choices and it's relatively easy to switch between them.
That said, even if they do submit one immediately, I'm afraid Apple will tie it up in review for a month or two to allow their version to gain a userbase. I know if a Google version were available upon upgrade to iOS 6, I'd download it immediately. Transit directions are a must-have feature for me.
I hope you're not talking about the "fly around" view when turning a corner, because that is the most useless feature I've ever heard of for turn-by-turn navigation. NO ONE should be looking at their phone while making a turn.
So while this looks like it will fill a gap on iOS, it's something I'm unwilling to wait for.
I also need correct search results. For example, searching for "Flatbush Farm" -- a bar/restaurant near my apartment in Brooklyn -- yields the correct establishment on Flatbush and 6th, as evidenced by the Yelp reviews, but drops a pin in Queens. I've reported many incorrect listings over the past couple of months and none of them have changed.
I can't believe this is something they're actually going to release. I hope that it might be better on release, but it seems like the backend should be continually upgraded.
That said, your example is pretty shocking considering Apple's historically stringent quality standards.
It this something that would have happened with Steve at the helm? I mean, the business case for moving off of your competitor's flagship map product is clear. You want to get them out of your product development cycle, you want to deny them revenue, you want to dilute their brand. I get that.
But still, Apple is ultimately achieving this by pushing what seems to be universally regarded as an inferior product out to its customers. It's basically a downgrade. When has Apple ever done that before?
iPhoto however, I think, could use some rethinking...
Do you think Apple hasn't been working in this direction since before Steve left the helm?
Placebase acquisition: Jul 2009
Poly 9 acquisition: Jul 2010
C3 acquisition: Aug 2011
I mean obviously if it was a disaster they would have to go back and cut another deal with Google (or Nokia/MS) but it now becomes obvious why they held back turn by turn from the old Maps app for so long. Because you can legitimately argue that 6.0 Maps with some weak spots that can be improved over time but with turn by turn plus possibly Google Maps in the App store is better then 5.0 Maps powered by Google's superior data but without turn by turn.
As far as Google I'd guess they would have been fine to continue powering the default Maps app. Google's price might have gone up from 2007 but the quality increased by a similar amount.
I think the maps feature that Apple believed they could produce, at the time they made the decision, was probably very different from the maps feature they were actually able to produce.
Now your are taken to some dead end Google MaP in the browser that does nothing.
WTH Apple?
Absent that, surely you see the problem with a maps.google.com link taking you to Apple's Maps app (no longer associated with Google in any way)?
Don't type: "21st and 6th", type "21st and 6th, CITY".
Apple is reporting heavy traffic only on Flatbush, Atlantic, and the BQE (major traffic arteries for those not familiar with Brooklyn).
Google is reporting what Apple has, plus traffic patterns on a lot of other local avenues (3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, Vanderbilt, Fulton, Union St, etc).
Granted most excursions don't necessitate the public transit directions in the Bay Area, it was amazing to have while traveling to new cities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/technology/many-sites-char...
Google walked back some of the worst effects of the changes:
http://googlegeodevelopers.blogspot.ca/2012/06/lower-pricing...
but by then the damage had been done in terms of Apple's (and developers') perception of the Google API.
(for developers, AFAIK there has been no cost for using Map Kit in iOS or a MapView in Android)
You sound like those soccer moms I make house calls for who just think it's easier to throw away a working system and buy something else.
(irrelevant fact: Maps is the MOST important app on the iPhone for me - after the browser, of course. I've put my life on its "hands" an infinite number of times...)
And how many people have switched to Mac due to an inferior product feeling? Sure you can still use the computer but if one of the main purposes of having it doesn't work for your needs, why keep using it?
Normal situational example: I'm in a neighborhood, say Fort Greene, and I'm meeting a friend for dinner at a restaurant I've never heard of in the East Village. First, I need to be able to find that restaurant by searching for it in Maps -- this largely doesn't work anymore. I often get results that are totally incorrect.
But say I do find the location, I then need to figure out how to get there from a neighborhood I don't actively live in. Do I take the A train and transfer to the F and walk from the lower east side? Maybe it's faster to walk to the Q and get off at Union Square. Or maybe the manhattan bridge is under construction, and it actually would be faster to take the G to north Brooklyn and transfer to the L. This subway system is so massive that even native New Yorkers get turned around and need directions.
If you don't actively live in NYC I think it might be hard to realize how significant losing transit directions is, not to mention useful location search.
The same thing is happening here. A lot of people who live in big cities now depend on their phones for directions, and a lot of them need transit directions in addition to driving directions. A phone that can't do that has greatly diminished value. Not everyone wants a phone as a status symbol: some want it to actually do useful things.
Remember: When Steve Jobs was first defending the 30% app store cut he said something to the effect that it wouldn't matter in the long run because everybody was using web apps anyway.
The people for whom this is a big issue are a fairly small proportion of the global population. Basically those in the US who live in major cities and are users of the transit system. In San Diego and New York this is a big issue and those are centres of the HN readership and probably also the tech media which might be important but the practical impact of this limitation may be limited.
I think this is why Apple's plan to relegate public transport directions to external apps might be a good idea: there's no way a single company -- even one the size of even Google! -- can keep track of all the minutiae involved in planning routes for every public transport system around the world, whereas app makers can. Even today, every public transit system that I've been on has one or more apps, so I doubt uptake will be a problem. And with the new APIs in iOS6, it should be much easier to get directions via external apps, since they show up in a list right in the Maps app.
Oh, and the app worked offline, which as you might know is mighty helpful in large parts of the subway. :)
Jobs/Apple was never about bundling tons of irrelevant features together (wireless charging? Please...), and winning by ticking feature checkboxes.
Jobs used to introduce a new iPod model every year or so. And he also got to introduce 4 iPhone models. Lots of times the changes were incremental (3G -> 3GS for example).
Heck, back in the day, a new color or some more storage was considered a huge improvement over the previous iPod model. People literally went bezerk in the possibility that the next iPod could also play video (imagine that!).
And now you have a mature phone, in it's 6th version, fast as hell, with a GPU that you would have killed for to have in your laptop half a decade ago, camera, gyro, retina, bigger screen, thin, new extremely featured iOS, some 500.000+ apps etc. What exactly do you want with that? Magic sprinkle dust?
I would be satisfied even if Apple had only sticked to making computers/OS. They have far surpassed that. Nobody even asked them to make mp3 players, phones, or tablets in the first place. Since we will be using all of the above for the next 20 years, I think they will be fine, even if they dont pull another market/device out of their hats...
It's trivial for the phone to be better than 5+ year old tech. But that's a completely irrelevant comparison.
IMHO, it's better than any Android phone out there, bar none. From the construction, to the display, to the weight and size, to the cpu/gpu combo, and more importantly to the huge app ecosystem that makes use of standard gizmos inside it, and ties it all together. Plus the media ecosystem. Plus the third-party peripheral ecosystem.
>It's trivial for the phone to be better than 5+ year old tech. But that's a completely irrelevant comparison.
Yes, completely irrelevant, since it's also better than any 1 month old tech, or the previous iPhone itself.
What's the competition? Some Android phone that will be left without an update to the next Android version and which has the subpar Android app ecosystem and subpar construction/design? Or the Lumia that doesn't even have an OS out of beta yet and is "due to arrive later this year"?
As if Apple had invented all of those things. They didn't. Far, far from it.
What matters is who made them popular and got them in our collective hands en masse.
That's when the revolution starts, when people start buying them so you have improvements and cheaper price due to economies of scale, and you also get an ecosystem of apps, etc.
Tablets pre-iPad might as well have been non-existing. Same for smartphones pre iPhone. I had several (Nokia, Sony Erricson etc. After the iPhone you couldn't stand this crap for a moment).
I also had 2-3 mp3 players pre iPod. Including some bizarro Sony's own format players. Not even close to what we expect post-iPod.
And they did the same with the tablet, they created a market that did not exist before - from existing technologies.
Apple stands on the shoulders of giants like Nokia, Palm and Blackberry (aka Crackberry).
There's no doubt that they packaged things very nicely and have been very successful, but it's not as if they created this market out of thin air. They surely did not invent the general concept that they've been so successful implementing.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/06/jobs-focus-is-about-saying-...
I imagine AAPL are not worried about turning off the hyper-literal critics amongst the crowd.
Good lord, what am I doing debating/discussing a marketing headline... Anyway.
NFC and wireless charging? Who promised you that? And who delivers those at the moment?
You might want to see this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk
This isn't to say it's a bad device, just infinite hype for zero payoff.
LTE
As an android (GS3) user I would have liked the iPhone to get NFC (and NFC based mobile payments) for the simple reason that the more phones capable of NFC payments the more merchants are likely to support it which benefits all of us (or at least all of us interested in paying for things with our phones).
The same argument would hold true for wireless charging, but it would probably be unlikely for Apple to adopt the emerging "Qi" wireless charging standard and instead roll it's own.
I know I'm going to take down votes for this, but for 90% of the population NFC is a solution in search of a problem. For most people cash, credit, or debit work just fine. NFC isn't a 10X better payment solution. Most people have to carry something on them to carry cards, drivers licenses, etc in which they will place their payment card. Instead of fiddling with your wallet, now you're fiddling with your phone.
NFC is as silly as using bump for payments.
Phones worked just fine for most people in 2006. Phones' screens were just fine in 2009...
Paypass and Paywave are a considerable improvement over chip and PIN or singing a slip of paper. Faster, less fumbling. Necessary, no; an improvement, yes.
The iPhone was a 10X improvement over what was out there, if you upgraded your whole phone experience got better.
Retina was a 4X improvement (4X as many pixels) after looking at retina the 3GS looked ugly, if you upgraded your entire phone experience got better.
Now lets take a look at what happens if you get an NFC phone, you still have to take your wallet, and then you have to ask everyone whether their payment system supports NFC. 95% of the time you're going to be taking out your wallet. It's not a 10X improvement therefore adoption will be slow.
And it still doesn't work when the power is out unlike cash. I'm actually starting to go away from any payment system that isn't cash, because cash is universally accepted, even the Olympics takes cash.
If NFC was on par with the aforementioned features it would be in the new phone.
Have you ever used Paypass? The readers are pretty conspicuous, large pad above the chip card reader, no need to ask just like you don't need to ask if someone takes cards when you see the reader.
> And it still doesn't work when the power is out unlike cash.
Sure, and phones don't work when the cellular network is down, unlike shouting. But the last time I was unable to pay with a card because power or network were down was in 2010 and that's the only instance I can actually remember since, like, 2005.
Let's not get into the parts where POSes will probably go down too if power goes out...
I'm sure any day now Apple will come out with NFC in the iPhone 5S as they realize they've missed out on a huge opportunity.
Please pay no attention to the ticketing app of which they will probably take a 30% cut. NFC is where the money's at which is why people have stopped buying iPhones and are instead only buying phones with NFC.
I just tossed my wallet, 4S, debit/credit cards, and cash into the garbage, now I just carry around my Galaxy Nexus looking for someone who wants to me to beam them bitcoins. I'm looking forward to walking 5 KM to get to a grocery store to buy food now that I can't drive (my drivers license just got revoked because the police won't accept a picture of it) and theres no where to sell me food in < 5KM (they don't support NFC).
NFC really does change everything, it's a whole new way of living.
As a point of interest I can buy food with NFC within a 12 minute walk, and I don't even have an NFC phone.
The reason why the iPhone was revolutionary wasn't because it had a touch screen it was because it didn't suck. When NFC stops sucking I'll stop saying it sucks.
I thought bump was awesome too, then I realized how inconvenient it was. I could hand you a business card, or I could fiddle with my phone, show you how to download the app, etc. NFC is bump with out the bumping. It's still too fiddly.
The iPaq, Newtown, Palm Pilot, and the Android G1 were solutions in search of a problem just like the current incantation of NFC is.
Have you used a mainstream credit card NFC payment system such as Paypass or Paywave? What did you think sucked about it?
Have you used a mobile device NFC payment system such as Google Wallet? What did you think sucked about it?
I think their decision to go with PassBook will backfire (like Thunderbolt did - It's even more niche than Mac itself!) and they'll add NFC in iPhone 6 like they added USB3 support.
That said, I'm not in a market that either of these technologies are likely to be used in the foreseeable future (5-10 years), so I personally don't care one way or another :) NFC/PassBook catching on just make me more jealous!
OK, then NFC is just a slightly improved Wifi+Bonjour.
That's not to say incremental improvements to existing features, such as LTE, can't be reason enough to sell a device (note that wasn't the question, though). As others have pointed out, though, Edge to 3G felt like a more significant step than 3G to LTE, though, just as 56k to 1 Mbit DSL felt like a more significant step than 1 MBit to 16 Mbit or 16 Mbit to 50 Mbit.
If you want to see "infinite hype", check the Microsoft Courier and other hypeware, in which videos were made, the press touted it for months, it was announced to be "the future" and nothing came of it.
"Zero payoff"? Really? It's an amazing device to upgrade to, after your 2-year contract ends, even if it doesn't have magic unicorn powers. It's the best iPhone YET made, period, I don't think someone can argue against that (and no, it's not a guarantee with any product update to be better than the last one).
Your response amounts to the proverbial: "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame".
>Name for me one brand new feature
"Brand new" is used here to preempt any mention of the tons of incremental improvements?
Other then that copy and paste and enough memory to keep more then 2 tabs open in safari were what I remember.
The 5 seems like a solid step. I don't see the need to upgrade every year but if you compare back to the 4 rather than the 4S the performance should be a massive jump. Support for 5GHz wifi could mean a real speed boost too and the bigger screen should be nice.
Looking at the construction, the 3G was never something to write home about. The technology forced Apple's hand and they had to make that plastic monster. Acceptable, not great. Like the 5, the 3G improved every aspect of its predecessor and it added 3G.
The 5 is just like the 3G – only that this time around the construction is at least on par or better (likely, looking at first hand ons, still, only speculation at this point) than that of the predecessor. It’s also, quite obviously, less fragile. So Apple has done much more on the construction front, but the jump from 3G to LTE is also arguably not as important than the jump from Edge to 3G.
Looking at the specs and comparing them with other phones you get the same picture you always got. It’s a wash. Those kinds of comparisons never mattered.
In conclusion: no 3GS to 4 jump, but certainly a 1 to 3G jump.
Also a familiar sight since the 3G, geeks are disappointed, the phone sells faster than Apple can make it.
This phone is no surprise. It’s Apple doing what they have always done.
But what really irks me is the way Apple marketing team is hyping it up - "This is the best <insert iDevice> we have ever made!", "This is revolutionary!", "This will change everything you were doing before!"... A slathering of these so often during the entire event and then on with their advertisements makes me cringe and shake my head with disappointment. This iPhone and the iPod[x] are pretty much an iteration and minor upgrade, not what the actual 'revolutionary' things were - iTouch, iPhone, iPad, retina display, etc.
I don't expect 'revolutionary' every year or any time, I just expect some sincerity announcing.
Are you an idiot?
And it is the best iPhone they've ever made. And the iPhone is arguably the best phone out there, so they sort of have a fair bit of credibility when they say that stuff.
"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Unless they're going the linux kernel route and changing their version numbering ;)
A few years ago, yes the iPhone was the best in specs and had the most innovative and unique features. I don't think it holds true any more.
Yeah, some people will always wait for the next iPhone. But for others, who have a more "neutral" point of view, this iPhone might look very bad in 10 months.
But as to why I think it's the best phone? The Eco system, it looks good and it's works seamlessly with all my other stuff.
1) Construction (machining, materials, fitting them inside the case, industrial design). Unparalleled.
2) Screen. Top notch (high dpi, improved saturation).
3) Camera. One of the best in the business. Tons of apps for it, even photo books and indie movies videos done with it.
4) Apps ecosystem. Unparalleled in number and quality.
5) OS. Mature, not laggy, full featured, designed with far more coherence than Android and far more functionality in mind than just modernist design compared to Metro.
6) OS Upgrades. You do not even get any with most Android phones. And don't happen to the new Windows mobile os version.
7) Peripherals ecosystem: from health tracking devices, to tripods, to MIDI, unparalleled.
8) No carrier branded bullshit (apps, look etc): priceless.
9) Support ecosystem: Applestores etc. Top notch.
10) Resale value: high.
Did they say this?
I think what is pissing most people off is that up until iphone 4 (not 4s), the iphone was arguably the best smart phone around. 4s and 5 have been improvements to the iphone but have not added anything over its competitors. Most of the competitors can do what the iphone 5 does and more (such as NFC and / or wireless charging).
Bottom line: There is no reason to stick with the iphone 5 other than "I am stuck in the eco system", or "I love apple" or "It is good enough". The "better than the others" argument doesn't fly anymore.
Navigation App
> Why does every new phone have to be a fucking revolution?
But Apple has a habit of making it seem like everything they do is revolutionary. It's very good marketing.
> Apple reinvents the phone [1]
> This changes everything. Again.
> The biggest thing to happen to iPhone since iPhone
> A magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price
> Resolutionary
[1] http://web.archive.org/web/20070113215301/http://apple.com
Every marketing team ever has created hype. Ever.
I don't understand why so many people blame Apple for this.
> people for some reason buy into it
> I don't understand why so many people blame Apple for this.
- Slightly larger screen - Faster CPU - Improved camera - Added LTE - Faster Wifi - Added NFC - Added a couple of sensors - Better battery life - Heavier
Not a whole lot different from the iPhone changelist, and I bet it's not a whole lot different from any other phone maker's changelist between generations either.
Last time the iPhone had such a changelist was in june 2010. The S2 came out 12 months prior to the S3.
When you only release one phone every 24 months people are right to expect more.
That, or you could compare the S2 with S3 against the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S...
So what is left then? What COULD they have added to floor people? Nuclear reactor? Drones? I cannot think of anything.
Larger screen. It's a BFD for some people, for they have been tearing their hearts out at forums for ages how Android has that and the iPhone doesn't.
And 3G -> 3GS didn't bring anything to the table. Or 4 to 4S for that matter, considering that Siri was already available as an app.
If you look at the changes between previous models it really is. Just about every single component has been upgraded. There have never been this many changes at once in an iPhone. The 3GS->4 upgrade comes close but when you get into the sort of second tier of features the 4S->5 list is quite a bit longer. If you're judging it by significance of the upgrades that may be a little different. I think the 3GS->4 still wins out there. On the raw numbers though the 4S->5 simply has more changes.
I don't understand all the negative reactions - name one brand new and truly "wowing" feature the new Galaxy brought to the table? Pretty much all modern smartphones are at the technological cutting-edge and I cannot think of much they could possible squeeze into those things. You already have all sorts of sensors and pretty much all connectivity options you could possibly want and it can do frakking 3D games in the palm of your hand too and play music and videos and etc.
NFC could be interesting but I am happy enough with paying with my CCs or directly playing with my ATM card in a LOT of stores here in Europe. I don't see what paying-over-NFC could do for me. And wireless charging? Sounds incredible and very "sexy" for the average user but really, very "meh" for me. You still going to have to plug something in somewhere... I could not care less.
I can understand people feel a little disappointed but really, what was everyone expecting??? ALL current smartphones were just relatively small updates to existing models. Everyone is doing the "xx% slimmer/lighter/longer/bigger" increments and has been for some time now. There was no "paradigm shift" in ANY one of them. What were people hoping Apple would do... add a nuclear reactor or some drones or what?
How is "new connector" a good thing? It's still not USB.
Looks like iPhone is playing catchup. How times change!
Well, it's smaller enabling the phone to be thinner, more durable design, can go in either side up, and it's faster.
>Looks like iPhone is playing catchup. How times change!
Catchup to what? Phones with USB chargers?
There are several the S3 has that aren't there on an iPhone.
Even just counting hardware, a giant battery and a much better processor enable a lot of use cases. Does the S3 have three mics, equivalent WIFI speed, as good a camera?
I like to keep it simple. Larger screen, faster processor, expandable storage, Flash, Google Navigation, freedom to from Apple's draconian grip...take my money Samsung!
It's no wonder Apple is suing. They know they're playing catch-up.
And I'm far from alone. Over a half million people downloaded it from Google's app store and I'm sure that just as many have put it onto their phone without going through the store. - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.adobe.flas...
1) iOS apps vs. Android apps is subjective
2) My Android has seamless integration to my Samsung TV and home media as well as laptop and PC via OSS apps and software. Again, we're debating branding at this point whether you want to say your AppleTV is better than my media solution, subjective.
Objectively your points about speed and camera are true though. I'm wont deny its a quick phone but I have to agree with others saying it didn't bring anything innovative or new.
True but saying The Dark Knight is better then Clooney Batman is also a subjective judgement. Despite being a subjective judgement, if an overwhelming number of reasonable people agree with something you can comfortably assert it.
"didn't bring anything innovative or new"
Well console quality graphics will certainly be new if they deliver on this.
Wideband audio + beamforming promises superior telephone performance which the iphone has always been sort of meh at. I'm only aware of one phone each that brings either of those (latest evo has HD audio and HTC one has beamforming) and none that have both
So you're saying even if the majority is wrong, they're always right?
"always right" =/= "comfortably assert"
Nice demonstration of how to construct a straw man though.
It's all subjective. Even if you have an objective, measurable difference (processor speed), that only matters if I value the difference (subjective) -- which I don't. The iPhone 4S is fast enough for me -- I can't make use of an improvement in speed.
I can make use of new iOS apps (and do on almost a daily basis). If there were apps I wanted that needed the iPhone 5 to run, that might persuade me. If a Samsung phone could run iOS apps, then I would choose based on price (probably).
If you don't agree, then of course, the iPhone isn't interesting. It's just a glass box with components without the apps. I wouldn't even have a smart phone at all without the App Store.
The Nokia 920 announced last week has all of that too, plus wireless charging, and a genuine leap forward in camera technology for phones.
Apple is under no obligation to match anyone feature for feature, but for people who follow phones of various types, it seems bizarre and somewhat frustrating the way new iPhones get vastly outsized publicity for devices that are increasingly becoming trailing indicators of where the mobile industry is going.
They are however very good implementations of where the industry currently is.
It does take a little more circuitry to detect orientation, but it seems like it would be worth it for a connector that gets used a lot.
Making it something completely new and unstandard and charge 30$ for an adaptor to everything up to your car that supported the old connector does not seem to be that much of an improvement. I see a lot of trouble in adopting the new iPhone and not many gains other than its faster lighter and lasts longer.
Which increases the price of small peripherals by a considerable amount.
Where was the innovation in the S2, S3 or the Nokia 920? And no, nfc nor wireless-charging don't really floor me. These are pretty small.
I believe the new Lumia 920 by Nokia has both NFC and wireless charging. Not that those alone make one better than the other but just pointing out that they do exist.
All the webOS devices had wireless charging (although with the earlier ones you had to buy a replacement back cover)
But no NFC
Sorry, false dilemma and totally disingenuous. Just because no one promised it doesn't mean that one couldn't hope for it or be disappointed at its absence. Similarly, having big deal features like those are reasonable expectations for comparison to the original Iphone for "bigness" which I interpret as "important new features that will change how most people use phones in a radical way".
It would in fact be a really big deal if Apple included those - NFC is a fantastic idea that the Iphone could really launch into big-time use. It would in fact be a really big deal if they had wireless charging. Both those would more or less require all the other phones did it too, drastically changing the landscape for a lot of things.
And I'm disappointed that Apple isn't giving everyone a pony. They never promised it, but I'm disappointed that it's not there. I was going to call mine Bob.
I fail to see how being disappointed when features that were never promised aren't delivered is valid disappointment. Apple never promised it because they aren't doing it for this device. It could be coming in the future, or it might not. If, for example, Apple had made official statements about including NFC or wireless charging(not the "rumors" that seem to be the replacement for actual journalism in tech), then disappointment would be warranted. But Apple hasn't done that at all. Would it be nice if they included it? Sure. But they didn't.
This happens just about every time a new piece of tech is announced by everyone, and, quite frankly, it's getting annoying. People complaining about how Samsung isn't doing retina-style displays on their midrange tablets. Or complaining that Nokia is making Windows phones. Or that Apple hasn't included everything that everyone has ever wanted in a phone. With a cherry on top.
There are valid complaints about the new phone and news today: I'm skeptical of the reported battery life, considering all the new tech in the device, and that they made it that much smaller. Or that the majority of the iOS6 features won't be available to the pre-4S iPhones. Or that iTunes is still going to be a resource hog. Or that there's a new connector.
You know what is equally tiring, companies saying "you want existing tech in the products we build? Too bad, you will take what we give you and like it", instead of you know, building things people want to spend money on.
What I think is stupid is people(mostly tech "journalists") that go "I'm disappointed that this device doesn't have this thing that isn't on the spec sheet and was never announced by the company that makes it as a feature". That's the rough equivalent of being disappointed that you don't get everything you wanted for Christmas as a kid. It's silly.
Seriously, it's appalling that you are having trouble understanding this, and are strawmanning it down to "wanting a pony."
On the weekends, I go fly fishing. Full waders and everything. And I take my phone with me. In a plastic sandwich bag, which has kept the phone completely dry even after I accidentally submerged my bag. I could invest in a case if my phone spent more time in the water, but I don't feel the need to.
So yes, I understand your entire point, and yes, it IS pretty much down to wanting a pony.
It is hard, but Apple has $117 billion in cash. They could make an elegant and waterproof smartphone if they wanted.
If you seriously thought that was even a miniscule possibility with the iPhone 5, then you are in for a lot of disappointment.
Further, you are comparing someone who hoped to see NFC and wireless recharge in his phone to a kid not getting everything he wanted. It could very well be that the kid asked for a dog, got an ant farm was disappointed. You're the father shouting "it's a pet dammit" when sure, it is, but missed the point that the features really wanted aren't fulfilled by the ants.
I'm not going to "leave the cult" if you're going to use the exact same kind of logic. From an objective (i.e. comparing sizes and weights) standpoint, the Galaxy is bulkier. From a "features important to wahsd / unit area" standpoint, it's much more space efficient. Neither of those points make his argument invalid.
The iPhone 5 is 3.9oz and is 7.6mm thick.
The iPhone 5 is around 18% lighter and 12% thinner than the S3.
I often see people fumble with the S3, especially one-handed, so I'm not sure the size is a good thing.
The iP5 is clearly thinner and lighter, but does it matter? I don't know, not really to me. Maybe to women and kids.
I think confirmation bias may be affecting your anecdotal evidence.
NFC is set to permeate many aspects of our lives, including payments, access control, transportation ticketing. It also enables some neat new marketing possibilities.
Right now the industry is solving the much talked about 'chicken and egg' situation by getting NFC handsets out there. High end phones shipping without NFC are now a rarity (which is why I'm disappointed tonight) and things are getting into position for the technology being revealed with a splash and folks finding that their existing handsets already have the right hardware that allows them to be part of the big new thing.
In short, you should be looking for NFC in your next handset not because it will be useful today or tomorrow, but because you'll be wanting it during the 18-24 month lifetime of the phone.
There is a huge amount of work going on all over the world on putting NFC into place. It's not very visible yet, but it is happening. Notably, hardware is being quietly rolled out on both the user and merchant side. It's always possible something else might 'win' in the end, but I'd say it is increasingly unlikely...
If anything, it makes more sense to have NFC in a card. I'm not sure how convenient it is to have a method of payment that can run out of battery.
So that's not such a great set of features for me. In fact, it's actually worse.
A number of chipsets do 802.11ac + NFC/RFID + (wifi,etc) in the same package. I suppose we won't know until teardowns begin appearing...
http://www.marvell.com/company/news/pressDetail.do?releaseID...
As someone working in the 'Internet of Things' space, I wasn't so much disappointed with the lack of NFC - as Zigbee/802.15.4. Again, thanks to integrated radios, NFC and Zigbee can be done on the same chip.
The (mass adopted) future will have to wait for another product/hype cycle.
[1] Feb. 2012 - http://www.ti.com/general/docs/wtbu/wtbuproductcontent.tsp?t...
It's marketing, sheesh.
What I think the grandparent was getting to isn't pointing out the silliness of the ad copy, but that the actual device being advertised is an underwhelming incremental improvement. This is less of an improvement on the 4S than the 4S was over the 4, and the 4S was uniformly dinged for being a disappointing (most of the best new stuff was software) iteration.
Really, this isn't even to ding Apple: smartphones are becoming commdities. The years of rapid evolution are behind us. The Android market is seeing similar pressure, as the most recent phones all more or less look and work identically.
Sure, there was some rapid change as things like Android and WinCE dumped their old-style geek-centric interfaces and moved toward a more iPhone-ish consumer-centric approach. But after "the big switch" each one has had a similarly deliberate schedule of updates.
Note that all of those features are required for a modern smartphone, and almost all of them were driven first by an iPhone release.
The iPhone 5 just isn't like that. There's nothing "new" here that we'll expect to see later on in other phones. It's just more of the same, but slightly better.
That part is quite clever and will perfectly communicate to people what's new about the iPhone.
It's a comparison to the state of previous iPhones, not a comparison to the state of all phones on the market.
</pedantic>
Apple understands that hardware is less important than software in the day to day experience of using the phone, they continue to focus on improving the experience of using the device, not the spec sheet. Thats why major hardware changes tend to be battery, screen, and camera: those are the features that most affect the day-to-day experience of the user.
Consumers outside HN aren't going to base a purchase decision on specs, so shiny toys like NFC or wireless charging end up compromising battery life or size, it's probably a pretty easy call for the company to make given the focus on the core experience.
From an industry point of view, I think it makes small transactions extremely secure - with the secure element in the NFC chip, tapping it to the payment terminal provides complete physical proof of the presence of the card. That's way better than even having a sales person sight the card or magnetic stripe etc. which be easily forged.
Once the transactions themselves are very secure there's no longer a need for things like signatures or PINs or other layers of security. That means you as a consumer can just walk into a store, take some things, tap your card / phone and leave. It's a bit hard to describe, but once you've done this you realize (at least I did) how much anxiety the barrier of payment at the end was detracting from your shopping experience. It's not rational, but my personal experience is that there's a strong level of anxiety about being challenged as to your identity and this removes it and makes the whole experience really easy and pleasant.
You know what? Just like any startup that posts here, Apple is filled with real people who take real pride in what they do, and I can imagine that for any of the thousands of folks who worked really hard on designing this product and manufactured to absurdly low variances, the sentiment you just expressed was deeply hurtful, and, in fact, wrong. There's a lot to be impressed by here. Lots of tiny details that aren't captured on a feature checklist.
If you don't like it, don't buy it. Don't sling shit publicly on their announcement day because your pet features weren't included (1).
In fact, it seems to be a play on words that the 'biggest change is the fact that it's so thin' and not the 'biggest change is the biggest screen'.
The implication being that employees who work at corporations that make luxury goods don't have feelings worth considering?
I don't know if wireless charging has improved since the Palm Pre days or not but it wasn't really setting the world on fire back then. NFC is pretty neat but my guess is Apple is looking at their own system they can control and profit from. If NFC becomes a big deal before they do their own system it may turn out to be a bad gamble.
“As for wireless charging, Schiller notes that the wireless charging systems still have to be plugged into the wall, so it’s not clear how much convenience they add."
This collective "meh" has been said over and over again in techie forums about every iteration of the iPhone (including the first one), as Apple's marched from a bit player to the most profitable company in the world on the iPhone's success. Actually, this was pretty much the response to every iPod, too.
Especially the odd approach they're taking with NFC & Passbook in iOS 6. Why make a product perfectly suited for NFC, then just not use it in your newest products?
I was holding off on a new handset until the iPhone 5, but the Nokia's Lumina series seems to do more.
The hardware's not ready yet? After all, the original iPhone was arguably "perfectly suited" for 3G and GPS, though the hardware for those things wasn't ready until the iPhone 3G. Maybe NFC is on the roadmap for iPhone 5S?
This seems like it must be a joke, but I read a lot of people saying things like this. The sum of a phone are the features that come with it right out of the box, like little checkboxes to look for, without regard for the quality of their implementations or their usefulness in general. And here of all places, Hacker News, to show such complete disregard for the 3rd party app market (and the quality of their apps). iOS has much, much higher quality apps available in general than either Android or WP7. And while iPhone may not yet have NFC capabilities that the average user probably has little or no use for right now anyway, it does have things like a very nice music player that stomps on Android's. A fucking music player, that's like the first app that both iPhone and Android had, and the one in iOS has always been superior. But somehow iOS is the one playing catch-up.
I just don't understand this new mindset that iOS has fallen behind Android, much less WP7.
As for the music player? What are you talking about? Not only is the Google Play Music app great, it supports 20,000 songs in the cloud for free, it autoconverts FLAC to 320 kbps, and you don't have to use some bloated music suite to upload it all. Plus, it's not like there isn't a ton of viable replacements out there (Apollo, PowerAmp, Winamp, GoneMad, VLC).
Android played catch-up since the G1 launched. It caught up with Ice Cream Sandwich, and it got in front with Jelly Bean. No, it's not in every Android phone, but it's unfair to compare the Android ecosystem to the iPhone. Nexus vs. iPhone? I think it's pretty clear now...
iOS has visually slicker apps, but they are less functional, because iOS is more locked down. With Android, I use a custom home screen and a whole bunch of widgets that make the device far more useful to me than iOS devices which seem like toys in comparison. For example, the 3G Watchdog's widget showing quota usage, and calendar and weather displays. The fact I can use rsync to sync folders between my phone, tablet and home NAS without storing my files in the cloud somewhere or having the files siloed in a specific application or generic "photos, movies or music" buckets is a game changer for me.
The only time I use my iPad these days is on transatlantic flights when I want to watch my own movies or play some slick games. But that's even being transplanted by my Nexus 7, which is much nicer to use owing to lower weight - and bonus, I get most of the apps that also work on my phone.
iOS reminds me a little of DOS circa 1993, while Android feels a bit like Windows 3.1 of the same era. DOS apps were typically silos using custom graphics libraries, while Windows apps were drab but more consistent and had some pretense at integration (early OLE).
Just because you don't use a niche feature doesn't mean others don't.
There's a saying in photography how everyone only uses 80% of their DSLR's capability, but it's a different 80% for everyone.
You and I might use a niche feature like rsync, but the people that constantly complain that company X didn't include niche feature Y in product Z is, frankly, ridiculous.
That is, it's not this particular niche. It's the enabling of the existence of such niches in the first place.
Nobody in the population is average (this mythical "general population"). Everyone is odd in their own way. A product narrowly targeted at the average will lose to something more open. I believe this to be an almost natural law, like how free markets are better than the planned alternatives.
Maybe you're right, maybe 'open' will win. But if it does, I'm fairly certain it won't be your definition of 'open'. At the very least, it's not the case right now. The most successful systems/devices are most certainly not 'open' and are trending towards being 'less open' aka designed for that 'general population' that you so actively deny exists.
Thanks for explaining that rsync isn't an Android feature. That explains why I've been using it for the last decade on Linux and FreeBSD.
This is why I said it wasn't a feature; what you wrote implied it was. Stock Android has no rsync. It doesn't even have cp.
More importantly, I was trying to describe the structural strategic advantage I think Android has which will lead to it winning out in the longer term, in a similar way to how the PC beat the Mac.
For me, a mobile phone is not a replacement for a computer. There are a number of things that I can do on a phone now that I couldn't do 10 years ago.. but there are a ton more things that I hope I never have to do on a phone. There are already plenty of things that phones do now, in their race to out-feature one another, that I think are just plain retarded as fuck. Do I want to watch a movie on a 4" screen? Fuck no. That sounds like the most awful cinematic experience imaginable.
I own a Galaxy Nexus right now, and I think it's a really nice phone except for a few things that drive me nuts (like the music player being awful). I used to use an iPhone 3GS, and everyone at work has iPhone 4 or 4S, and I think the iPhones just feel like nicer phones. Better quality cameras, generally nicer apps with it (with the obvious exception of maps.. Android's navigation feature has been the one thing I loved better about it for years), nicer designs in general, etc.
It's all about what you get out of the phone though. The two apps that I use the most are music and maps/navigation. That's been kind of an issue for me since Android has had the nicer maps app, but iPhone had the nicer music app.
I'd love to own an iPhone - but only the hardware. I'd want to run Android on it.
But maybe I just put too much value in the experience of watching a movie. I love live concerts, but I don't refuse to listen to pre-recorded albums so maybe I'm just being absurd about demanding to watch a movie under certain conditions.
On planes with seat rear screens are probably even closer than 30cm to your eyes when the guy in front is leaned back and you're not.
(Not a fan of live concerts; sound is much better on studio recorded albums in any case.)
I recently got a Galaxy Nexus and I remember reading here a while ago about your app that crowd sources barometer readings from phones that have it but I couldn't remember what it was called when I got the GNex. I'll go sign up. Thanks.
But why on Earth does any phone ship with a barometer? Weather is the only application I can think of, and surely it's easier just to pull weather conditions from the network.
Edit: They probably carry barometers already, but AC installer people could make use of phones with this hardware.
[0] https://plus.google.com/112413860260589530492/posts/jVJhPyou...
EDIT: relevant thread
As far as I know, aGPS as found on modern devices is all about getting that almanac faster (which is why my iPhone only requires two seconds), not about using a rough fix to then get a better fix.
I realize that isn't your post, but it seemed appropriate to reply here since you posted the link.
Your phone takes two seconds (and so does mine) probably because you have WiFi on and you live in the States. Try living in the middle of nowhere in, say, Serbia, and see how fast you get a lock, regardless of WiFi.
Your iPhone takes 2 seconds because it's never a cold start. You're always connected to at least one cell tower you know the location of, you have several nearby wifi access points, etc. It might not be a feature you need for your limited use case. Cool. Then you won't miss it.
Every phone with A-GPS support actual GPS. A-GPS is additional feature on top of regular GPS.
One is the bad kind where GPS only works when you have a cell signal. It offloads a lot of the processing to the cell tower. This is used by cheap phones to comply with FCC requirements for location reporting for 911 calls, and isn't found much elsewhere.
The other is the good kind where it grabs the almanac off the network when possible for faster cold start times. This kind still works fine when you have no connection, it just takes longer to figure out your location when you turn it on, because it has to download the almanac the slow way.
They're basically unrelated except for the name, which is confusing.
I've used the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, and 4S extensively in the wilderness. Every version since GPS was introduced has been "real" GPS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GPS#Modes_of_operation
I can't find anything about chipsets that only do that, but I'd be surprised if nobody had ever done it.
The main things I would have liked: * "geofencing" in some security-strong way to let a phone use a 4-digit pin when in home/office, and a longer PIN when outside the home/office. Could ninja this on Android I think (you'd do some kind of low-latency challenge-response on a LAN -- depending on the threat model, even 802.1X might be ok, but wouldn't resist an RF relay over a long tunnel...)
* Biometric authentication on the device
* Integrated credential management ("Passbook for Websites") where SSL client certs, passwords, or something got managed inside the secure element of the phone
And, a real stretch, but a 128 or 256GB "pro" version of the phone, even if it cost 2x as much. Kill the iPod Classic.
Kindle x-ray is an amazing feature, and the front lit display is really an achievement.
I guess apple doesn't have the same fire to innovate that it used to. This might be proof that Patents don't spur innovation.
Apple held back calling last year the iPhone 4S, the 5 because it wasn't good enough to bare the name, but this time there are hardly any core feature upgrades, and you get pulled further away from good google services.
the iphone 5 is more about flashy hardware and dumping google than it is about wowing customers.
the iphone 4s had a focusing lens, siri and was twice as fast as the iphone4.
this phone really doesn't wow me at all.
The iPhone 5 may not wow you, but what does that matter? In general each iPhone generation has only really been compelling to owners of two year old iPhones. I thought the iPhone 4S was nice enough but hung onto my iPhone 4. I thought the 3GS looked nice, but held onto my 3G.
(For contrast, I have an original Kindle Fire and the new Kindles do nothing for me. Indeed, having bought a Kindle Fire I probably won't buy another Amazon tablet because they're far more crippled than anything Apple has ever done. E.g. I can't read epubs on it.)
The iPod Touch is a huge upgrade. It's literally an iPhone without the cellular plan (it has a 4S CPU, but an iPhone 5 screen).
Look specifically at the data plans
Why is Verizon so popular in the U.S.? I see no (absolutely no) reason why someone should choose Verizon over Sprint... Verizon plans are about a hundred times more expensive.
There are many factors for choosing your carrier outside of price.
http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iph...
Is there even such thing in US? Also, most likely they are not going to sell nano-SIMs for pre paid plans.
You can actually get a nano sim from T-Mobile, all you need is the IMEI number from the sim in order to register for their 4G prepaid plan.
There are other carriers too, like boostmobile, cricket, virgin, etc.
FWIW, there are map directions in iOS 6.
Also, I've heard repeatedly that iOS 6, and its new built-in Maps, lacks transit directions. Has that changed?
i was thinking there are third party apps with transit directions but i could be wrong about that.
Where is the feature in this phone which makes you stop and think "wow, how did we not have this before?". There isn't one. That's not good.
Apple set the stage for something revolutionary, and what they unveiled was not. It's boring. Again. Come on Apple.
When a friend handed me his S3 I immediately felt a little wow'd by the screen size, responsiveness & general look / feel of the phone, this new iphone does not look like it will give me the same "wow factor".
I am extremely disappointed that Apple have not worked harder to improve the battery life, it has been & remains pathetic, primarily for this reason I will not be buying an iphone 5.
Come on Apple, I want to give you my money - but please start putting some creative innovations back into your products, if you cannot do that then at least give us a phone with a battery which can last for a full / busy day.
Impressive screens & faster chips are all well and good but only if their is enough power in the dam thing to actually keep the device powered on.
Update: Discussion on Quora: http://www.quora.com/iOS-Development/From-a-developers-persp...
iWork (for Mac and iPad) are both amazing. So sad iWork for Mac is still called "iWork '09".
slimmer - because that thick fat iphone 4 taking up way too much room in my pocket
faster - because my iphone 4 is too slow?
what I'd upgrade for: screen that is readable in direct sunlight or when wearing polarized sunglasses, camera that takes picture the instant I touch the button, better phone reception
camera that takes picture the instant I touch the button – sounds like you want the 40% faster image capture time.
readable in direct sunlight or when wearing polarized sunglasses – yeah, me too. Still waiting on OLED to beat LCD.
EOM
[1] that wouldn't stop me from wearing them, but as soon as my wife sees the hole the shirt vanishes.
A few missteps, from my perspective: * Apple Maps -- while this may prove good for mapping technology in the long run, I think the iPhone users will miss Google Maps quite a bit, for now. * Seemingly no fundamental improvement to Siri. "Conversational Searching" is the best way for Apple to bring the fight to Google, because this is the natural evolution of search. Why type queries into a search engine, when you can have a conversation with an AI instead? Google sees this danger and is developing Google Now, leaping ahead quickly. * No signs of trying to get into the emerging mobile payments battle.
All in all I didn't get the feeling of a large vision being played out or of an arc of forward advance, but rather a feeling of slowing momentum.
Doesn't say if it's USB 3, and doesn't say if in the future, it could be Lightning to Thunderbolt.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/34865/Screenshots/Screen%20Shot%202...
I don't understand what this discussing is helping. It doesn't have one and I'm pretty sure it will never have a dedicated button. I can understand why Apple is not going the way others are going. This is a phone not a dedicated camera, so why would you mix these things? I know the camera these days are pretty good and a lot of people are using only their phones to point-and-shot but I think it would and it is (on different phones) feels wrong to have dedicated button for camera.
This is all my opinion. Others do different views but this mine. I respect every other view.
It's for my mother (who is taking one-on-one classes in an Apple store), it's for my partner who is just starting to get work done on her phone (she's had an iPhone 4 since they came out) and its for everybody that's just trying to understand mobile.
Apple's network and ecosystem is now mature. Any change has to be so thoroughly considered. Anything at all risky (say NFC) gets binned until its proven because they can't upset what they have.
Unfortunately this isn't about technology, it's about strategy.
It's sad but that just shows little hype there are around this new iphone. =\
http://www.apple.com/iphone/#video
And at about 3:35 when they're showing the step-by-step driving directions and I was like WTF:
Super attention to every detail, state-of-the-art everything, and then that scratchy godawful synthesized computer voice comes on and it's sounding slightly worse than my Amiga back in the 1980's... srsly Apple...
Why aren't all bandwidths supported by a single GSM model? It seems odd that Apple would create one CDMA model and 2 GSM models, but I'm sure there's a technical/financial reason for that decision. Does anyone know what it is?
If you don't like the phone don't buy it, it's that simple.
I'm sure we can all remember the time when the cpu & gpu were separate chips.
> GSM model A1428: UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 4 and 17)
> CDMA model A1429: CDMA EV-DO Rev. A and Rev. B (800, 1900, 2100 MHz); UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 3, 5, 13, 25)
> GSM model A1429: UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 3, 5)
Vertical video is about to get even worse.
Now replace Redmond with ...http://farm1.staticflickr.com/29/43356340_36deb98522.jpg :)
Who's we? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_statistics
Personally I use it on a separate browser but wanted to point out that you (and me) are in the minority.