Hacker News Reader

Comment by batista | Hacker News Reader

Plus, "simply a taller screen and newer processor", really? New screen, new processor, new innards, new machining and construction, new connector, new iOS, new camera, improved battery life AND lighter.

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

View on HN

Name for me one brand new feature. This is a product update, this isn't deserving of a new version number, and it certainly isn't "the biggest thing to happen to the iphone since iphone".

This isn't to say it's a bad device, just infinite hype for zero payoff.

> Name for me one brand new feature.

LTE

That's just an implementation detail of an improvement of an existing feature.

Then wireless charging and NFC could be counted as mere improvements (of existing features, i.e. cable charging and scanning barcodes) too!

Well, to be fair, NFC is capable of two way communication where scanning a barcode is one way communication. You are comparing galaxies to apples ;)

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.

You could use the front facing camera and display a barcode on the iPhone screen. Voila NFC.

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.

Fair enough, but there are at least some point of sale systems that have NFC already, I have yet to see a system that is set up to display a barcode for the phone to read and then read a barcode on the phone (without moving the phone).

> For most people cash, credit, or debit work just fine.

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.

Ok... lets rehash...

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.

> you have to ask everyone whether their payment system supports NFC.

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...

You know, after reading your post I have to agree that yes, NFC being vulnerable to the same problems as it's alternatives makes it 10X better.

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.

Your reactions are amusingly similar to reactions people had to touchscreen phones before the touchscreens became good. Yes, of course, take away my keyboard, I'll just type my BBMs on shitty glass! Those damn touchscreens, a solution in search of a problem.

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.

Yes, you've hit the nail on the head, my reactions to NFC before it became good is the same reaction I had to touchscreens before they became good.

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.

> When NFC stops sucking I'll stop saying it sucks.

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 Apple is betting heavily on PassBook, which I think is superior to NFC, but would eventually fail if it's not an open standard (and even if it was open, Google and others would never use it because not using it would hurt Apple more). Maybe they should've integrated PassBook with NFC...

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!

I don't think they are betting heavily against NFC or that passbook is superior to NFC. I think Apple sees more profit potential in leveraging Apple IDs for payment and they are cautiously hoping it will take off faster then NFC but won't hesitate to swap NFC chips in if that starts to see widespread adoption.

> Well, to be fair, NFC is capable of two way communication where scanning a barcode is one way communication.

OK, then NFC is just a slightly improved Wifi+Bonjour.

Exactly. I was really looking forward to p2p payments over NFC phones.

That kind of thinking would have said that the WWW was just a slight improvement over gopher back in the 90's.

I'm not sure what you mean. 3.5G to LTE is a simple improvement along a one-dimensional axis - bandwidth. Maybe two metrics, if you want to account for the latency improvement. There are no such straightforward metrics for comparing Gopher and WWW. So no, that kind of thinking does not arrive at WWW being a slight improvement over Gopher.

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.

Most cellphone makers will come up with a new product name or number because someone sneezed at the factory, and you're complaining that Apple went from 4 to 5 in two years merely because they improved every single aspect of the phone? Gee. Tough crowd.

"infinite hype"? Where? They announced an event, the day came, they announced the product. A slogan like that on the product announcement/product page, does not amount to "infinite hype".

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?

Every previous iPhone had a new feature that was a pretty BFD. This is the first without.

LTE

Funny, I seem to recall that the disillusioned techie reaction to the 4S was that it was also a non-update. Same shell. Modest internal updates and the only feature of note (Siri) was panned as an app that Apple bought that merely caught it up to other phones that already had voice control.

One problem with the 4S was the rumors of an iPhone 5 with a tapered design. (If you Googled for iPhone it would autocomplete "iPhone 5" — I guess bad rumors are now self-reinforcing.) At least this time the rumors were accurate and people can't complain that they were expecting more.

What was the the big feature of the iPhone 3GS?

For me it was that my original iPhone contract was finally up and I could get 3G. Is that the one with gyroscope? -- Jobs playing Jenga during the keynote?

When 3GS was released, it was an evolution of a 3G that was still at light years from competitors.

The S really was the feature. Besides the performance bump for everything (e.g. loading web pages twice as fast) it let you run a class of apps you simply couldn't only earlier iphones (e.g. unreal engine).

Other then that copy and paste and enough memory to keep more then 2 tabs open in safari were what I remember.

It was the first I bought but key features it hit included tethering, stereo bluetooth support, compass (and maybe improved GPS) and performance.

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.

The S variants certainly didn’t – and this adds more than every S variant ever did.

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.

Larger screen is a "new feature" since we are talking about hardware. LTE would be a new feature as well. Not having a big piece of glass on the back seems like a new feature too (my iPhone 4S has had a cracked back for a couple of months). I know this may seem silly, but a new dock connector that is symmetrical and is easier to plug in without looking is a new feature as well. Also, something about a panorama camera, but I wouldn't call that a BFD)

Faster, slimmer, lighter and longer lasting - yes, these are really good updates in a small piece of equipment that iPhone 5 is, there's no denying that.

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.

Yeah you're right, they should get up on stage in front of the worlds media and say "It's an OK iPhone. You know, not great great, but pretty good... pffffft, we really could do better but hey ho, here's the new iPhone".

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.

Please try to refrain from ad hominem attacks. It doesn't help in any way to prove your point.

no, because it clearly does help to articulate my point.

how?

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"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."

I don't follow this stuff closely, but isn't that what they said when they announced the 3gs and the 4s ? There isn't anything really new in the phone they announced today, so it's more like a 4ss than a 5.

Unless they're going the linux kernel route and changing their version numbering ;)

I would like to ask your criteria for deciding the best phone.

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.

A better question is maybe: Will it be the best in 10 months?

How is that a better question? Do you need one NOW, or in 10 months? In 10 months we'll be waiting for the iPhone 6 anyway...

Since they only release once a year, this one doesn't only have to hold its own against the competition right now, but also against whatever the others put out in 10 months.

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 that's the same for all phones.

True, but if you look at it like Apple vs Android, the Android camp has many releases a year. So if you're a consumer and you're buying a smartphone in 10 months, your choice is between the "outdated" iPhone or one of the latest Android phones.

"arguably the best phone"- I left room in there for other peoples opinions.

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.

Criteria?

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.

It's almost like the keynote was specifically made to market a product or something...

"This is revolutionary!"

Did they say this?

>It's the best iPhone YET made, period.

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.

And NFC/wireless charging automatically makes them better than the iPhone 5?

Open, let's not forget open. So yeah, marginally.

I said they do more, and most top of the line phones from other manufacturers have them. Even if it does not make the other phones better, lacking those features only makes it worse.

what about that 90% of 3rd party apps have a much higher quality on iOS ? (Disclaimer: i own an android device)

>Name for me one brand new feature.

Navigation App

Third party apps exist and it's in no way a new feature. Next thing you know you'll call Angry Birds a new feature if they ship it with the phone.

Why does every new phone have to be a fucking revolution? It's a better phone than the last one. If you're not impressed, don't buy one.

  > Why does every new phone have to be a fucking revolution?

I completely agree.

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

Again, I agree with you. But what I'm getting at is that Apple's brand of marketing creates a lot of hype and I'm sure they like it that way.

[1] http://web.archive.org/web/20070113215301/http://apple.com

Dear Mister Obvious,

Every marketing team ever has created hype. Ever.

Right. And when Apple creates hype, people for some reason buy into it. In droves.

I don't understand why so many people blame Apple for this.

  > people for some reason buy into it

It's not just "some" reason. They have one of the best marketing departments in the world who do an excellent job.

  > I don't understand why so many people blame Apple for this.

I'm blaming Apple for doing a damn good job of marketing their products.

What I don't get is why the comments of "meh" are getting attacked with so much vitriol.

Did you see the live keynote? At the end and thoughout it, they kept saying how revolutionary it is.

It's not about phones. People want to be distracted from everyday life. "Revolutionary" tech releases satisfy that need, especially for a slice of society which is both intellectual and a bit manic-depressive. It's sad, but for a lot of these people, new phones/tech are the only real things they have to show off/feel excited about/have strong opinions on/argue about/dream about. It's fundamentally about fantasy, and the reaction you see today is what happens when reality fails to satisfy that fantasy.

Let's compare this to the changes in Samsung Galaxy S3 compared to the S2:

- 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.

Let's compare the time-frame.

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...

But Samsung didn't deliver any magic in the S3 - and what could Apple have delivered as a super-duper-WOW feature? I cannot think of any technologies out there that they haven't squeezed in there yet and I don't think "wireless charging" is anything to really care about, novelty and "OMG!" factor aside. Adding NFC would have also been just catching up and personally, I cannot see the benefit from NFC and it looks like Apple can't either.

So what is left then? What COULD they have added to floor people? Nuclear reactor? Drones? I cannot think of anything.

I'm not aware of any phone shipping this month that's a true Cortex A15 device. There are a lot of Krait phones, but that's a half step away.

>Every previous iPhone had a new feature that was a pretty BFD. This is the first without.

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.

I think people complaining about the tag line are missing out on the obvious pun.

This isn't deserving of a new version number? Tell me, how many Samsung Android devices are there?

it certainly isn't "the biggest thing to happen to the iphone since iphone"

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.

> Name for me one brand new feature

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?

NFC and wireless charging? Who promised you that?

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.

>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".

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.

So you think it is stupid of people to want manufacturers to make good technology. Got it. In the mean time, I am going to go ahead and keep hoping that tech gets better, and that manufacturers put good things in new devices - because you know what, they are my dollars, and I get to say what I want in a device before I spend them.

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.

No, I don't think it's stupid of people to expect that manufacturers make good technology. As a matter of fact, I expect manufacturers to make good products. I expect manufacturers to produce what they promise to produce. I don't expect companies to deliver on things they don't talk about, though. If they produce something new, that's great!

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.

It's not stupid. When people are vested in an ecosystem, they want devices in that ecosystem to be able to satisfy their specific use cases. This is why I wanted a waterproof iPhone: I play a lot of water sports, and it would be awesome to not have to rely on a second device to take photos/videos. So, as a dedicated Apple user, I started imagining how I would use such a device. When it didn't come, I was disappointed.

Seriously, it's appalling that you are having trouble understanding this, and are strawmanning it down to "wanting a pony."

Do you have any idea how hard it is to waterproof electronics? Not only do you need to keep water out of the device, but you also need to make sure that it can't collect anywhere and corrode away parts. There's a reason that hardened waterproof electronics are the way they are: big and heavy.

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.

>>Do you have any idea how hard it is to waterproof electronics?

It is hard, but Apple has $117 billion in cash. They could make an elegant and waterproof smartphone if they wanted.

Yes, and if a significantly large portion of the market was clamoring for a waterproof smartphone, Apple probably would make one.

I believe it was Steve Jobs who said that people don't know what they want until you give it to them.

A waterproof iPhone is definitely the equivalent of a unicorn that shits Skittles.

If you seriously thought that was even a miniscule possibility with the iPhone 5, then you are in for a lot of disappointment.

A MacBook that fits in a manila envelope? Ha ha unicorns and rainbows!

You are raging about some random person on the internet being disappointed that reasonable (and existing in other phone) features not being available in the new IPhone, not about some tech journalist. Scope matters.

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.

Apple hired Benjamin Vigier a few years ago. Their mobile payment solution is Passbook which is currently not NFC based.

Samsung Galaxy S3, of course. And has for about four months now. NFC, wireless charging, quadcore processor, and a 4.8" screen all in a lighter, thinner package than the iPhone 5. EDIT I meant iPhone 4

Its not lighter. The galaxy s3, is also bulkier.

http://mashable.com/2012/09/12/iphone-5-compared/

Depends on your definition of bulky. Considering it has a larger screen and all the other features mentioned, your argument is invalid. The GIIS has a larger, wider screen, three times the battery, and a microSD slot weighs only .7 oz more and will be getting jelly bean soon...dude, you're rationalizing. It's sad. I know, it hurts. But you have to grow up and realize that Apple is not a God. You can leave the cult. Dear Leader is dead.

> Considering it has a larger screen and all the other features mentioned, your argument is invalid.

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 S3 weighs 4.7oz and is 8.6mm thick.

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.

Honestly, as an adult male (with adult male sized hands), a difference of 1 oz and 1mm seems insignificant to me. I suspect those measures are well within the variations caused by different cases. I suppose it could make a difference when the thing is in your pocket all day, but I'm not even sure about that.

The iP5 is clearly thinner and lighter, but does it matter? I don't know, not really to me. Maybe to women and kids.

Sorry. I should have been clearer. The length and width were the fumbling points I noticed. Not the weight or thickness.

Sure when you look at the mm and g it seems ridiculous but 20% lighter, 33% slimmer and stronger hardware and battery? I don't think this is SO insignificant in terms of miniaturization. They are already extremely thin and light, then managed to reduce if yet again by a fifth and a third. And the variations for their parts are below tenth of 1mm.

My wife, who has tiny hands and zero hand-eye coordination, operates the S3 without a problem.

I think confirmation bias may be affecting your anecdotal evidence.

It's only my observations of the few people I have seen interact with the S3. I haven't seen anyone operate it successfully or elegantly with one hand. Often I see people set it down on a surface and use it like a small tablet. Just observation. I have only seen a few people actually using the device.

I definitely fumble my Galaxy Nexus on a regular basis. I can't quite accept I am unable to reach the top of the phone from my normal bottom grip so I stretch and stretch and try to balance it on my palm.

New processor, new internals, new OS, new camera are all just expected upgrades at this point. Where's the innovation? That's what I'm expecting.

What about the reversible cable connector? When was the last time you had a cable that didn't require looking at the cable before plugging it in? I know it's not really an innovation, but I don't understand why all cables can only have one way of going in -- when you plug in your usb cable, it's not obvious that it's upside down. Nobody looks at their audio cable when they plug in earphones; why can't normal computer cables be like this?

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.

Since forever, audio jack cables (I'm 25).

Digital cables, then?

Optical SPDIF

Yes... But the micro USB cable is interchangable between many devices. There is always one somewhere when you forgot yours.

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.

I think everyone understands the reasoning behind preferring micro usb, but why can't engineers consider users when designing a new connector? I feel like Apple is probably the only company who would go that extra mile to make cables user friendly -- I just don't see other companies making an effort to make cables friendlier to users. It's probably why Apple chose to design a connector themselves instead of choosing a universal standard.

It does take a little more circuitry to detect orientation

Which increases the price of small peripherals by a considerable amount.

> Where's the innovation?

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.

> new connector

How is "new connector" a good thing? It's still not USB.

Looks like iPhone is playing catchup. How times change!

No more putting in the connector upside down

>How is "new connector" a good thing? It's still not USB.

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?

Name a feature the iPhone has, that say a Samsung S3 doesn't have.

There are several the S3 has that aren't there on an iPhone.

There are many. The easiest answer is being able to run iOS apps -- which for many overrides almost anything else. Another is deep integration with Macs and AppleTV -- that solves real problems for me that (for example) wireless charging does not -- it's better, but not along a vector I care about (i.e. would make a decision on or pay for).

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?

Cmon man, besides the fact that it's thinner, lighter, sturdier, has a higher density screen, a better screen technology, better graphics performance, better phone quality, a better camera, better media ecosystem, better apps, and will get timely & regular OS updates for several years what else have the Cupertinians done for us lately?

A list of barely perceptible (and some unproven) differences won't help Apple as the market share steadily trends away from them.

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.

Sorry.. Flash? I think the market pretty much gave its opinion on that one.

I hate Apple (as a company) with the passion of 10,000 suns, but I gotta agree, I hate flash even more.

The value judgement on Flash wasn't the point. The point is that I can do what I want to regardless of someone else's value judgement.

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...

They are getting all of the profit share (and actually increasing market share slightly). In the long term, if you take all the profits, others can't compete unless they do so asymmetrically (make profit some other way). No one has shown that they are doing this yet -- Google and Amazon have plays, but I don't see how Samsung can do this -- they need to make profit from the phone, and they don't make enough to compete long-term.

You're comparing brands and not features here.

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.

"iOS apps vs. Android apps is subjective"

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

> if an overwhelming number of reasonable people agree with something you can comfortably assert it

So you're saying even if the majority is wrong, they're always right?

"majority" =/= "overwhelming number"

"always right" =/= "comfortably assert"

Nice demonstration of how to construct a straw man though.

It's the same principle and you're using it to suppport your subjective claims as fact.

Being able to run an app I want is a feature of my phone.

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.

I'm not sure about real-life speeds, but the iPhone's 802.11n is the bare-minimum 1 antenna, 1 channel version. Even my 3-year old laptop has a 300 Mbps chip built in.

Features are a quantitative measure, until we invent some qualitative measures, these comparisons are worthless.

Airplay

Phones with larger screens, widescreen, higher resolution (1280x720 is common now), NFC, and LTE. Like last year's Galaxy Nexus and the HTC One X and Galaxy S 3 that have been out for months.

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.

A large screen is not always a feature. You can type on an iPhone screen with one thumb, I couldn't comfortably manage that on my old Evo 4G. The DPI is the same as last year's iPhone, basically identical with the Lumia 920 due out later this year (330 vs 332).

yet the dpi on iPhone gets touted like its the greatest one made ever!

It almost was at the time, I think only 2 phones had been produced with higher DPI before, and the iPhone blew them away on color gamut, viewing angles, etc.

increasingly becoming trailing indicators of where the mobile industry is going

They are however very good implementations of where the industry currently is.

> NFC and wireless charging? Who promised you that? And who delivers those at the moment?

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.

NFC: http://www.nfcworld.com/nfc-phones-list/#available Wireless charging: Lumia http://mashable.com/2012/09/05/nokia-wireless-charging/

Didn't some of the old webOS devices have wireless charging as well?

c /some/all/

All the webOS devices had wireless charging (although with the earlier ones you had to buy a replacement back cover)

But no NFC

Everybody delivers NFC in their high-end handsets now.

http://www.nfcworld.com/nfc-phones-list/

Why are people clamouring for NFC? What are people doing with it that I don't know about! Is there some magical dimension I'm not privy to where NFC is everywhere?

Yes, the magical dimension is short way forward along the 't' axis. There are a whole bunch of big NFC programmes being lined up in various countries, many backed by multiple mobile networks. In the US Isis is looking interesting and in the UK there is Project Oscar. France has Cityzi.

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 no guarantee that what's being put in phones today is going to be necessary or compatible with what ends up "winning" mobile payments. Notably last month a group of major retailers (walmart/target/711/sears/best buy...) announced they are going to push what sounds like a non-chip solution.

The MCX solution doesn't yet sound like anything and I believe it is simply a gun that is being brought along in case there is a fight over merchant fees.

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...

How do I pay for something with NFC when I'm actually on the phone? And how do I pay for something if I don't have my phone. Or if my phone is out of charge. Genuine questions by the way.

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.

NFC, as it was originally envisioned, was supposed to allow for use even when the phone was without power just as the cards today are without power. In traditional RFID technology, from which NFC was derived, there was a powered transceiver (aka reader) and non-powered transponder (aka card). The promise of NFC was to be able to have a transceiver and transponder in one, where the power is derived from the inductive coupling of the antennae. You can see this by reviewing the ISO documents for ISO 14443 (RFID) and ISO 18092/ 21481 (NFC).

Check out Nokia's accessories for Lumia 920. All of them pair with NFC and some of them even charge the phone. Without cables or connectors. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4zx2xy6VjE

That's great. But um... I can't use NFC anywhere, and I sometimes like to use my phone when it's plugged into the charger.

So that's not such a great set of features for me. In fact, it's actually worse.

"David Lindberg, Executive General Manager at Commonweath Bank, shared his vision of what the future may look like and the very probably demise of ‘cash’. Already more than 50% of transactions at 7-Elevens use contactless payment methods. Only three years ago, less than one percent of financial transactions were done via a mobile phone, yet this month in Australia there will be more financial transactions completed via mobile phone than on the internet." https://innovation.govspace.gov.au/2012/09/12/an-optimistic-...

Neither credit card nor ATM-cards managed to get rid of cash. Honest question: why should NFC-paying and what does it have to offer more when compared to just using your CC or ATM card?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com