Hacker News Reader

I still remember when the first iPod came out and the tech press called it boring. I was not interested at all, but when I saw one in person I was blown away. I never bought an iPod, because I didn't need one, but right there and then I understood how much the tech press didn't get it.

Same thing with the unibody MacBooks, to say nothing of the Air. Had a MacBook and a much less expensive PC laptop from the same generation in the house; I'm still loving the MacBook, while the PC is long forgotten.

Even bigger effect with the iPhone. That one looked impressive from the start, but it made a world of a difference to actually hold one in your hand.

The iPhone 4 had the Retina display, and so that time the nerds were actually salivating over it, because the higher resolution could finally be expressed as a number and put in a chart. Nah, just kidding, the nerds were adamant that nobody needed that many pixels anyway, and preferred to argue about the "Retina" monicker. As for myself: waited until I saw it in person, was blown away again.

I'm not going to buy an iPhone 5. My iPhone 4 is still serving me fine. But from past experience, I know that the only good way to evaluate an iPhone is to actually hold it in your hand and use it. That's why I'm more interested in the impressions of a Gruber holding an iPhone 5 than in those of a bean-counter holding an iPhone 5 data sheet.

PS: just a small concession to the specs game: are you sure "the S3 beats the pants off the iPhone 5"? If you do a google search, you'll find as many people saying the 5 beats the S3 as those who say the opposite. Geekbench scores for the S3 are all over the place (check the browser). Then there's the question of whether most apps can scale to a 4-core processor as well as Geekbench does. And then there's the fact that the iPhone 4 performed much better in practice than higher-clocked Android phones of the same era. I'm sure Android has gotten "snappier" since then, but we should have learned a few lessons by now.

I recently bought an SIII to replace my old, broken Galaxy Nexus (cracked screen from being hit by an SUV). I ended up buying another Galaxy Nexus, and will sell the SIII.

On paper the SIII blows the Nexus out of the water, but after using both for 2+ weeks, the SIII feels like shit to me, compared to the Nexus. It may just be because the Nexus is on Jelly Bean, and the SIII is (embarrassingly) still on ICS, or maybe its Samsung's TouchWiz that slows the phone down.

So I definitely agree with you; my anecdote matches your experience. But I'd still say the iPhone should be compared to the Nexus, rather than the SIII.

Oh - I should have had a disclaimer.

I had a first gen iPod, iPad, a Powerbook G4, a Macbook, and now a Macbook Pro. I LOVE Apple products, and am in no way disparaging the absolute impact they've had on the rest of the industry. I've influenced a dozen people to go Apple, and told many others that the right phone for them was an iPhone, and not an Android.

But reading Gruber's syrupy review, when the iPhone 5 is just not as 'revolutionary' as it's made out to be, and as if other phones which do better on specs, size, battery life, LTE, don't exist was just a bit too much.

Gruber's 'review' doesn't belong on HN.

On the S3/Specs - I was looking at the 4-core version on geekbench - 1853(S3) vs 1601(iPhone5). Ref: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1052786

Of course, since Android has multi-tasking, at least the OS can take advantage of the cores that the front-end app can't.

Android is definitely not as 'snappy' as iOS. But JB is a LOT 'snappier' even on my single-core Nexus S.

I readily take your point - Apple's iPod, iPhone, iPad were magical when they came out. And they continued that with iPhone 4S, iPad3 displays.

But their competition has not stood still. The improvements in the iPhone 5 are not 'revolutionary' - there's nothing there that's pushing the envelope - 'merely' incremental improvements. Not that it's bad, but it's hyped way over what it is.

Weird, here it says 1344 (S3) vs 1601 (5). Ref: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1052719

Oh wait, that's Android 4.0.4. My bad. Here's with Android 4.1.1: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1045167

You're right about multi-tasking, but single-task performance is still important for many apps. Assuming Geekbench scales linearly, the S3's single-task performance would be about half the iPhone 5's.

So this is the level of discourse the community has decided that best engages with Gruber's review? Just seven lines of banal vitriol and claims--without justification--that the review "reads more like a lover on his last moments of love" and "making a thinner, taller phone is not innovation."

The miniaturization of electronics is arguably one of the most significant trends of our technological era. Many of the great science fiction writers of the 50s and 60s, despite getting so much right, in large part missed miniaturization. What once filled rooms was reduced in the 80s to what could sit on a desk, and now to what can fit in our pockets. So making a thinner, taller phone is not innovation? Why?

I know that Apple isn't popular around these parts, but let's at least have an intelligent conversation about specifically what we find fault with instead of ranting and rage-upvoting incoherent rants.

I would say the relatively low level of discourse around Gruber's reviews are a reaction to his writing. The guy makes a career out of opinionated, mostly unsubstantiated one liners. Of course people are raring to give him a taste of his own medicine.

> The guy makes a career out of opinionated, mostly unsubstantiated one liners.

He also writes really good essays. Can we please also have more people delivering this kind of medicine?

Look, I agree that Gruber has blinders on sometimes. (I thought his posts today about earPods was blindingly positive until the addendum.) But people seem to react with vitriol more than arguments.

>I know that Apple isn't popular around these parts

Except that we know from surveys that most HN readers use Apple computers, phones, and tablets. And yet, even here, you can't appreciate feats of design, engineering, and usability without s vocal minority getting amusingly angry.

The median HN user is a white male who uses Chrome on OSX.

I'm not even sure they read the review otherwise they would've seen their very own selfs and comments prophesied.

He spoke of the 'tech crowd' and of how the iPhone 5 is 'nice' which that certain crowd doesn't get.

The sad/pathetic/embarrassing thing is not that idiotic rants get posted but they are uncritically upvoted because ehrmagahd i hate x/y/z just like him! /click

Actually, I thought it was a point by point addressing his pretty large article dancing around the lacunae.

Make no mistake - I think that the iPhone5 is an impressive piece of technology - as good or better than any other smart phone. But justifying Apple's design choices and changes is a whole other game.

Could you please point out to any factual errors in what I wrote? And I stand by the fact that 'thinner, taller' phone when others have done as thin, and taller is not innovation. Esp when the thinner compromises battery life - which is much more important to most of those with iPhones.

don't you get tired of this blah?

HN is about founders and the IT industry. mobile technology is the biggest growth area right now. Apple and Google are dominating, with different concepts software and hardware wise. Samsung is in there as a hybrid with many different approaches, incl. WP8 which is Nokia's and Microsoft's stake. RIM is practically dead in the water.

Instead of going full nerd retard, shouldn't you be keen on understanding what is going on? Why Apple is breaking records? Why, as Gruber notes in his review, there is a target group very attracted to Samsung (or just bigger form factors)?

Imagine you're in the automotive industry, producing accessories for various brands. wouldn't you approach customers driving a BMW differently than the ones driving a Lexus? There might be hostility and sneering between those groups, but what does it matter to you?

It feels like the horrible mindset of sports fans, just within nerd circles. My team is better than yours, even though I just sit on the sidelines and have no impact on the actual play. Cause there is nothing else in my life to get excited about.

I don't think there's any requirement that says "because HN caters to starts ups, one shouldn't go off about gear".

I think it is a fair summation of the article.

I mean really. What is actually new? Very little is the answer.

Apple have bumped up the specs... everyone does after a year or two. That is really about it. Its a hardware upgrade. Well. A hardware upgrade with a new adapter... because that is exactly what the world needed. Fuck standardization. Realistically Apple wanted to milk more money from people. You have no choice but to get an adapter, otherwise all your docks and peripherals will no longer connect to your iPhone. YES! GET THE IPHONE5!

> The question everyone who hasn’t yet pre-ordered wants answered: Should you upgrade? My answer is simple. If you can afford it, yes.

Your answer is wrong. If your phone function's fine, you have no complaints with its responsiveness etc. No you do not need to upgrade. The iPhone5 brings nothing which is compellingly new to the table. It is a minor update. A bit like a new XBOX. Does exactly the same stuff as your current xbox, looks slightly better, loads games slightly faster.

If your iPhone breaks, hell, check out the iPhone5. If you don't have an iPhone and can justify the cost look into it. Otherwise buy a cheap android handset which - while rougher around the edges - has all the same phone functionality (You are buying a phone) for a fraction of the cost.

What is your point ? Every phone upgrade is a hardware upgrade.

> Realistically Apple wanted to milk more money from people

No, they wanted to make the phone thinner and lighter. They gained 20% with an adapter that's 80% smaller.

My guess is that the Lightning adapter will be, at minimum, USB 3.0 speeds, if not better. It's also entirely digital, meaning the adapters have to have DACs in them to output analog, hence the price.

I wonder why each iteration of the iPhone has to be science fiction?

see, cheap and functions as well appeals to a certain demographic. by that mindset you would never by a BMW (to stay out of mobile) - which is perfectly fine, you can argue that this brand of car does not add anything useful to the table. a prius gets you from A to B as well, as a commuter you never use all that horsepower anyway.

this is one side of the argument, represents a demographic and target group. no need to invest in luxury for your products, focus on utilitarian approach. can be rough around the edges, but needs to get the job done.

but what about BMW buyers? why is BMW selling like hotcakes? is it just about the marketing? all an illusion? just like with a mobile device, you need to try it to find out. Gruber calls it "niceness", which is a pretty good term. Attention to detail, materials, the composition of it all. No rough edges. Apple is showing of the micron-precision manufacturing in their latest iPhone video. Why does a phone need that? BMW does the same, visit BMW world in Munich to get a grasp of it.

There is a target group that responds to level of detail. Even superfluous one, think of classic traits attributed to Japanese handiwork or cooking. Does sushi need to look that good? Does a wooden temple need such intricate structures?

No surprise that Jobs' was infatuated with Japan and Sony.

Do specs and factsheets appeal to everyone? Obviously not. BMW exist. Apple as well. Both can be described as overpriced, overhyped items of self-indulgence that are being surpassed by a lot of competing products. But that 'surpassed' is subjective. Once you add taste and design into the mix, it becomes a very different picture.

Now think of your target group. Is your own taste a good indicator or does it cloud what your users would actually like?

The problem with your BMW comparison is this. When buying a car, you want something that is going to last (or at least hold some value if you sell it off sooner). If you are spending $50K on something you want it to be solid, dependable. You want it to still be as solid and dependable in 6 or 8 years. The quality you get from the BMW is going to remain for the life of the car. You probably don't get that out of a $17k Hyundai Elantra. If you want it to last a long time... you need the quality build. But with a phone, meh. It'll be replaced in a year or two anyway. Sooner if you drop it in the toilet or leave it at the bar. I don't think most people (even iPhone people) keep a phone long enough to get the long term benefits of this "micron precision" beyond just that subjective "it feels nice" you might have at first. My phone is plastic. It probably doesn't have micron precision in the manufacturing. But it looks nice. And it feels nice too. It even feels like it will last as long as I need it to last before I'm ready to get a new one.

No, that's not the problem with his BMW comparison. The problem is that you think you know why people buy BMWs. You think that people buy BMWs for the same reasons as you, and that is why you're missing the point.

If you want to understand why other people do things, you have to first stop thinking about why you do things.

That is true as well. We're all talking out of our asses here. I don't buy an iPhone because I don't like Apple's business... not because it is a crap product. It is probably a fine device. I think mine is too. I'm happy with it.

> see, cheap and functions as well appeals to a certain demographic. by that mindset you would never by a BMW (to stay out of mobile) - which is perfectly fine, you can argue that this brand of car does not add anything useful to the table. a prius gets you from A to B as well, as a commuter you never use all that horsepower anyway.

Wrong analogy - these two brands have very high resale values. For every non-BMW Prius-class vehicle there are 10+ Ford Focus (gets job done, but loses resale fast).

What's new? Well, the

- processor

- baseband

- antennas

- camera

- display

- case

- OS

- and, yes, the Lightning adaptor which you baselessly claim Apple instituted just to milk money from people

A great deal of iPhone 5 is entirely new. Yes, it is a hardware upgrade, but you're simply being disingenuous if you claim very little is new.

I'd also like to point out that "free" is a very affordable price for an iPhone 4, for those who are looking for a cheap handset.

i think his summary is spot on. Daring Fireball has always been a terrible blog to read.

The iphone 5 is a fine phone IMO, even thus they failed to advertise it as such, use a crappy new connector and "forgot" about NFC.

The screen looks good, the CPU looks excellent, its finally lighter, it also finally has LTE, and the rest, well, is mostly on par with rest anyways.

Amen bro :)

I like to think of Apple and Google as different "eigenvectors" for building a big, profitable company. Apple represents one extreme -- closed, premium, vertically integrated, resulting in highest profits but lower marketshare. Google is almost the opposite -- open, ad-supported, trying to get its search box and ads onto everything, resulting in highest market share but lower profits.

Being able to pick pieces from each approach for your own company is the real lesson here.

And for me, personally, I could get excited working at either Apple or Google -- just like it's interesting to play chess on either the white or black side. My goal is to understand the game!

Pinaceae - I am in no way disparaging Apple here. The iPhone and Apple are breaking records.

What I really didn't like was the vapidness and hypocrisy of Gruber's review. Gruber's talking as if this is the second coming - when in reality this is a good evolutionary upgrade.

BTW - I bought a first gen iPod/iPad, have owned 3 Apple notebooks, and have made a dozen or so people buy Apple computers and iPhones. I have no hesitation recommending an Apple product to those it would be best suited for.

I've read or skimmed through another 10 reviews today and Gruber's review was arguably the most critical.

"Apple has added ZERO product innovation this time in software or hardware."

This is just exposing your ignorance and bias. In hardware alone this phone:

(1) has the best SoC available;

(2) has a solid unibody metal construction but weighs less than creaky plastic phones;

(3) pairs world class thinness with world class battery life (according to Engadget);

(4) has a camera that's only beaten by the nokia 808 pureview;

(5) supports beamforming, something almost no other high end phone does;

(6) supports HD audio, another something almost no other high end phone does;

(7) has a full sRGB screen, something we've only seen in mobile from in iPad 3 and ???;

(8) probably has the best included headphones of any phone.

>(6) supports HD audio, another something almost no other high end phone does;

Well. Unless you count Nokias and SGS3... Also it won't be available in USA, which I guess is its primary market.

"SGS3"

US model does not support. Imagine how bad people would freak if Apple shipped a significantly higher spec phone to China and the shitty version for the US.

I stand corrected on Nokias though. I had thought the new EVO was the first phone in the US with it but it looks like Nokia's whole range has it.

You must have confused innovation with improvement. This time on, they picked safe improvements from the competitors and integrated them. Very nice improvements which make a very nice phone, but nothing I would call innovation.

I hope at least the competitors will come up with truly novel ideas. Hardware improvements are more than expected from every manufacturer as time goes. But no one can predict innovation.

Would you not call the manufacturing process for the aluminum case innovating?

"You must have confused innovation with improvement."

You're mistaken, there's a good deal of overlap between improvement and innovation. Thomas Edison didn't invent the light bulb (nor did Swan the only other person remembered in connection to it). Edison's actual technical innovations for the light bulb boiled down to more efficient materials (higher resistance, longer lasting) and more exacting industrial standards (better evacuation). He also had a better ecosystem.

The "revolutioniphone revolution occurred at the precise time that a large number incrementally improving technologies -- processors, batteries, flash memory, screens, capacitive touchscreen, multitouch language library -- first allowed you to build something like the iphone at a consumer price.

Yes sometimes improvements are just improvements. But sometimes improvements lead to a new level of viability for consumers. Miniturization matters when you hit certain levels. A clock you can put in your pocket was one such level, the next was the pocketwatch small enough to put on your wrist. Incrementally better hardware and software has by many accounts erased Android's lag deficit. Lag still exists for all devices of all OS's but the key step is the one that takes you over a certain level of perception and if you look at early iOS they employed all sort of hacks and tricks to help erase the perception of lag. If you're making an audio product CD quality is one such plateau that matters. Audiophile quality may be the next major one. Similarly for tiny computers console quality graphics is an important improvement.

This is not really a comment - reads more like an Apple hater mocking John Gruber for cheap HN karma. Personally, I think you're just regurgitating the notion that the iPhone 5 is disappointing, based purely on the fact that features are more interesting to write about than things like design or fit and finish.

To summarize your "comment"

0. I was really just skim reading the post because I already had my mind made up before I even read it.

1. I also reinterpreted long passages of Gruber discussing his personal experiences as polemic arguments in defense of Apple.

2. And threw in irrelevant comparisons to the Samsung S3 and phrased them as if Gruber mentioned the product a single time in the entire post.

3. I knew all along the other Android fanboys and Apple haters would upvote me for this so I didn't really try that hard to say anything insightful.

Actually - I went there expecting an insightful article on why the iPhone5 is good.

Instead I got a mind-warping justification of why 4" is now great, glass vs aluminum, no mention of the Lightning plug, no mention of iOS6.

If you look at Gruber's article, you'll find that few if any of what he's talking about have major impacts on your daily usage of the phone, and what's great about the iPhone5 have been done before (screen, non-glass, display, LTE, battery life, CPU perf) - but he spins it as if Apple's doing that for the first time in the universe.

BTW, I am an Apple fan - first gen iPad/iPod, 3 Apple laptops, and a dozen people buying Apple prods because of me.

This was NOT a pro-Android, anti-Apple comment - it was an anti-Gruber spin-fluff piece comment.

> mind-warping justification of why 4" is now great

Did we read the same article? Gruber clearly seemed to think it was more unwieldy to use and spent a lot of time weighing tradeoffs on that issue. His conclusion seemed to be little more than his resignation to get used to the iPhone 5's 4" screen. I think you're expecting Gruber to be a loyal apologist, so you're a little thrown for a loop when he seems a little unsure about the merits of Apple's decisions.

He does spend the 750 words raving about the industrial design of the phone. The lede is that the iPhone 5 is "nice", not that it's a technological breakthrough (other than the manufacturing processes at least). It's clear that that's where Apple focused their innovation for this cycle. If you're only looking for technical specs and you're blind to this sort of thing, don't be surprised when other people interpret you as an Apple hater. To be perfectly honest, the fact that you now come out claiming to be an Apple fan indicates more than anything that you were trolling the whole time.

I love the little snarky Android comments, really makes it obvious where you stand lol.

What's the difference between the SG3 and the SG2? Slightly bigger, slightly different shape, new OS (not that this has anything to do with Samsung), slightly worse camera, slightly bigger battery, blah blah blah...

You can pretty much say the same thing about any device, there is very little "innovation" between device versions. Mostly it's just more of some and less of some in a new case.

In which case any review would be 'a lover on his last moments of love, desperately rationalizing things'.

You want difference how about Nokia 920 and Nokia 900 Lumias. That is a huge leap

Apple's own hyperbolic marketing is to blame. If you want to describe every new product as revolutionary you should make a little more effort to make it so.

And the jump from SG2 with 2.3 to SG3 with 4.0 is a night & day improvement.

Rumours have it Apple made it's own chip. But that's beside the point. I really really don't understand this "no innovation, blah" attitude. I think people parroting it have the least chance to innovate at anything, they are condemned to mindlessly repeat the same stuff over and over again, and that staff is not true most of the time.

Ant btw, Gruber does criticise Apple sometimes. Those who read what he writes know that.

Well I doubt he'll be winning many new converts with this article. It is dense with straw-clutching and credulity. Some it seems to be simply borne of delusion. This sentence, for example:

"The bored-by-the-iPhone tech press/industry experts surely value niceness, but they do not hold it in the same top-tier regard that Apple does. They are not equipped to devote an amount of attention to niceness commensurate with the amount of effort Apple puts into it."

is the fruitiest thing I have read in a while

I think there is some strange website redirect happening. I clicked on daringfireball.net and ended up at boringfanboy.net

You know, you're right.

It's definitely a very "nice" phone. Innovative? Not so much.

29MP cameras taking pictures of parts to match the case? Cool, but 99% of people won't care. I know Jony does. And I have A LOT of respect for that. It's like a $30k Patek Philippe watch - a lot of polishing, precision, care, subtlety, microscopic advancements - but most buy it because of the name; the brand.

Gruber's reviews are very Apple influenced. I wonder how much cash they're giving this guy. I remember reading one of his posts where Phil Schiller met him in a hotel room to intro Mountain Lion, how perfect the presentation and the conversation was. Clearly a very pro-Apple journalist (blogger? reviewer?) There's nothing wrong with this but his iPhone 5 post is pure "this is the best iPhone yet"

Anyway - nice phone, best iPhone? Sure, why not. It's the "biggest thing to happen to iPhone since iPhone" That kind of says it out. We're out of ideas here, thinner, smaller, lighter, different materials - whatever.

I don't remember where I read it but I remember reading a piece that mentioned a few very wise things: smartphones will become so standardized in the next few years that we won't even notice what it is we are using. After all, we can't really go much thinner and lighter, we're reaching an apex here. Smaller? Not happening. People have hands that are a certain size. Smartphones will be replaced by something - be it Google Glass, foldable displays, chips in our brains (can't wait for this one! haha) --- the bottom line is that we're reaching levels of engineering where we just can't go much farther.

a lot of polishing, precision, care, subtlety, microscopic advancements - but most buy it because of the name; the brand

In Apple's case, I think you're putting the cart before the horse. The brand surely is created by that precision, care and subtlety.

Yes, it is not that many years ago that allmost all people in the HN demographics would have found the idea of using a mac as their main coding workstation amusing.

Did you really expect anything different from a non-paid PR rep of Apple?

Gruber's considerable effort to rationalize about the increased size of iPhone5 is mildly humorous.

[Remember this golden scroll?](http://dcurt.is/3-point-5-inches) Yes, that article that began the mass religious revelation that revealed why iPhone 4S is 3.5 inch big, while the other Android phone, Galaxy S II is not as user-friendly it's too big.

Since Apple's bigger screen creates discrepancy between his reasoning and the reality, he is now trying to prove why he was not wrong a year ago.

>Such people surely think the iPhone 5’s display remains too small. But, trust me, there are going to be many long-time iPhone users complaining that it’s too big after they upgrade.

But what about millions of other who are happier with bigger screen? What about the possibly larger return on convenience and usability who genuinely prefer larger screen? None is spoken of.

Good spot. Now folk like to claim that the bigger screen on the iPhone is better than the even bigger screen on non-iPhones. It's absurd.

Gruber did make fun of himself for predicting that Apple will never make an iPhone with a bigger screen.

But what about millions of other who are happier with bigger screen? What about the possibly larger return on convenience and usability who genuinely prefer larger screen? None is spoken of.

A less negative way to parse what he wrote is: "Previous iPhone users who are upgrading to iPhone 5 will feel the screen is too big, but they'll get used to it."

That's almost certainly going to be true. I fully expect to feel iPhone 5's display is too large. I also expect I'll get used to it and will eventually feel the 4's screen is too small if I ever move back. Furthermore, he ends that section with this paragraph:

But if Apple offered me an otherwise identical iPhone 5 with a 3.5-inch 3:2 display, which one would I choose? Last week, in the first few days of use, I’d have chosen the 3.5-inch one. Now, though, one week in, I’m not so sure. My trusty old iPhone 4S feels better to use for tapping those back buttons and the status bar, but, it really is starting to look squat to my eyes. Give me another week and I suspect I won’t look back.

"I suspect I won't look back." Sounds like he agrees that the larger screen is ultimately a step forward.