iPhone 5s Owners Gobbling “Unprecedented” Levels of Data, Study Finds | Hacker News Reader

iPhone 5s Owners Gobbling “Unprecedented” Levels of Data, Study Finds

techcrunch.com

29 pointsjustinzollars45 comments

The iPhone 3G is a really old and strange device to be using as a benchmark - it was released in 2008, and was already considered rather dated when it was discontinued in 2010. If they're using data from when the iPhone 3G was current, smartphone usage trends have changed drastically since then; if they're using data from users who still have those devices, they're limiting the sample to users who haven't upgraded in at least three and a half years, or who are using a hand-me-down phone (and, either way, probably don't use their phones very much).

The numbers are still interesting to compare between each other, although I'm not sure how significant some of the differences really are.

Agreed. Additionally, many (most?) apps won't even run on the iPhone 3G anymore because they need a newer version of iOS than it supports (4.2.x, I believe).

[edit for spelling]

Oh, good point! Indeed, the iPhone 3G can't be upgraded to iOS 5, limiting what applications can be used on the device. While Apple does have a system for allowing users on older devices to install the latest compatible version of an app, that only helps if a compatible version exists, and it still works with the application servers. With an increasingly small number of applications available to use bandwidth, it stands to reason that average bandwidth usage per iPhone 3G user would go down over time.

Personal experience doesn't bear that out. Back when I had an iPhone 3G, my most-used app was for radio streaming. I consumed 5gigs in a month easy with that. Don't confuse slower with incapable. The real question is if you can't afford a newer phone, can you still afford the more expensive data plans?

Right.. but as time goes on, an increasing number of those applications will have released mandatory updates that require iOS 5 or later, leaving 3G users unable to continue using them. With a shrinking number of working applications to choose from, it's inevitable that usage will drop.

You can download "the last supported version" if you want, the app store offers that now. And any apps already installed or purchased can be re-installed at a later date.

Right, but that only gives you an old version of the application - it doesn't include a matching version of the online service the application is connecting to. If the service has changed sufficiently, the old application may no longer work properly (or may just get a "too old, please upgrade" message).

I just think that the 5s is actually snappy enough to use it in cases you may hesitate to do so before. I actually had a 5 that I accidentally dropped and destroyed. The difference in speed between the 5 and 5s is very noticable to me. I use it much more than the 5 for every day stuff.

I don't have a 5s, but I went from the original retina iPad (with the A5) to the iPad Air (with A7) and the difference is massive, and it does lead to more usage. Just the waiting time could easily result in me going on 20% more webpages per day, or watching an extra youtube video.

How I read this article? (a) Android apps are more efficient about data. (Chrome has a bandwidth saver feature, for instance.) That said, (b) iOS has better, more content- or communication-rich apps that promote interaction and consume data. (c) iPhone owners may be able to afford larger data plans and therefore use more data. Or (d) iPhones tend to backup over the air a lot more thanks to iCloud than most (every?) Android app I've ever used. Plus (e) iOS focuses on background networking and downloads at an API level that Google is only now starting to with projects like Volley.

Which leads me to my last point: There's too many variables here. Focusing on phone model and total data used doesn't speak enough to app preferences, platform differences, and ecosystem maturity. Frankly, as a Nexus 5 lover waiting for the iPhone 6, I really like how iPad raises the bar for iPhone app quality. I don't expect things to take off for Android until Google convinces people that the Nexus 7 isn't just a bigger phablet, perhaps with new APIs. The one thing Google got right vs iOS that no one will argue is their API compatibility layers. It keeps older platforms feeling modern -- when was the last time you saw a pre-5.x app on the App Store? Android goes back to single-digit API numbers easily. (8 or so, at this point.)

Note that this was for one specific iPhone model, so it is hardly (a) or (d) -- that is, not that Android is more efficient and not that iCloud sucks extra bandwidth for backups. Etc.

(To be obvious: If it were those alternatives, or (e), then iPhone models 5C, 5, 4S and 4 would use similar amounts of data. At a minimum, most 5/5C should have iOS 7.)

Indeed. The fact that this is specifically about the 5s and the recent iPad tells me that part of this is probably the speed of the A7. If it's faster to open apps, browse the web, etc, you tend to do more of it. That makes the device more useful to users and reduces friction, which leads to high usage.

In short: They use more data because they're better devices.

But there are also probably some of the other variables mentioned by the parent. They just apply to all iOS devices equally, not just those models.

True. I won't argue that better, faster devices will get more usage. For the day that I owned a 5s, it was incredibly fast. There is one more thing I forgot, however -- there might also be a bias for the 5s in that early adopters (and those who upgrade every year) could be more likely to both own the 5s and have been trained by past iPhones to use as much data as they want. Those who stick with older phones might not use them as often off wi-fi. (Where "as often" is still within reach.) Who knows, though. Perhaps the difference is that the iPhone 5S is easier to unlock, or supports LTE in more places. I'm sick of guessing, at this point. :)

Very likely there is some efficiency stuff going on in here. GSII is on the list but not the GS3, interesting.

Just one more data point in a long list showing iOS users are the most engaged. Developers still have no reason to stop being iOS-first.

You're assuming that Internet usage equates to app usage. I use the Internet a lot on my phone but hardly run apps. In fact my usage of the Internet surely eats into time I might spend running apps.

My business news sites get 3 to 5 times as many visits from iOS versus Android.

Given there's 3x the types of devices in iOS land (phone, iPod and tablet) vs most people using Android phones, the difference isn't that huge. I do find, though, that I tend to browse more on Android because I need to get something done or check up on something. On iPad, sometimes I just tap around for the heck of it. :)

Nope. iPhone traffic alone still crushes all Android devices combined. And there are certainly many more Android devices in the US.

No, he just assumes internet usage equates to more phone usage. The proportion of apps and internet can be whatever, but more phone usage also means more app usage.

The post that you are commenting on does not support this viewpoint. Indeed, significantly more data was uploaded on Android devices vs iOS devices in this study. This is waved off as the result of the camera on the s4, but the s4 is not the biggest uploader in developed markets, the HTC Sensation (a non-lte-capable device) is.

You are very likely correct that iOS users touch their phones more than Android users, and your conclusion may also be right, but this is not really the place. The point of the article is to compare current devices to the iPhone 3G, not iOS devices to Android devices. Further, the comparison is likely only valid between devices running the same version of the same OS - we could say that this only proves that there is a bug in iOS that is destroying data plans if that supported the narrative.

Nobody is engaged with their phone. Their engaged with their SO, and use their phone to reach them. There are no engaging apps on the iOS at all. Name one "killer app" for iPhone, and it would probably be Google Maps, which is of course available on most devices already. (It's been on PalmOS almost a decade ago.) Wow, but it's on iPhone and somehow that's a technological achievement? So what if people can pull data through their phones now at a rate that is comparable to actual daily usage. That is not an achievement, that's just another spin around the sink drain. Putting another layer of abstraction and metadata around it just allows you to control the water's path down the drain.

This is fine, because it's just supposed to be a phone, not a iPod, a phone, and an "Internet communications device" all in one. Nobody who does serious anything does anything serious on the iPhone other than talk or reply to emails like "ok I read this", (or just use it as a social signal).

I feel like all this talk is just a bunch of old money circling the drain of greed that Apple pulled the plug of. People think somehow that if they put the data in the cloud, they'll stop piracy, stop theft and stop deflationary pressures of all the air finally being deflated out the 10,000 year old bullshit-idea economy. The reality, the price of ideas is finally reaching the equilibrium price, nothing, and everyone just keeps fooling themselves that somehow this is for the best, and not the same thing that happened with Microsoft on desktops or at IBM so long ago. Someone's idea that we all are stuck in, but it's just one idea, can we please stop trying it and maybe go for something new, something that actually approves on the printing press instead of emulating it?

Nobody is engaged with their phone. Their engaged with their SO, and use their phone to reach them. There are no engaging apps on the iOS at all.

My son, and millions of others, who continue to feed the coffers of such companies as Supercell, Rovio, etc, demonstrate to me that something is very engaging with their iOS device and apps.

>Nobody is engaged with their phone. Their engaged with their SO, and use their phone to reach them.

Actually a current problem is that people are TOO engaged with their phones, including in social situations where they should be paying attention to their company.

>There are no engaging apps on the iOS at all. Name one "killer app" for iPhone, and it would probably be Google Maps

That's an interesting, if kooky idea, but totally on the outlier side (if you're from an older demographic it might be understandable).

iPhone (and Android) users have apps they find very enganging apps that they spends hours on end with them.

From games like Angry Birds to Instagram, including various clients for stuff like Twitter, apps like Omni's GTD stuff, Paper, and lots more besides.

And if you ask (hobby) musicians and graphic designers around (which are in the million), you'll find they spends tons of time with stuff like music apps and paint apps.

>Nobody who does serious anything does anything serious on the iPhone other than talk or reply to emails like "ok I read this", (or just use it as a social signal).

You'd be surprised.

I might be oversimplifying things... But more data usage is what I would expect given that 5S is faster compared to 5.

I make an assumption that less we wait for apps to start/load data is more time we can use to consume more data. I am sure there are other contributing reasons such as more media rich apps (taking advantage of faster hardware/networks) played significant role as well.

Definitely. Also, early adopters are likely heavier users, so whatever the newest device is will see the most use.

In my case it's the fingerprint sensor, not so much the CPU. I used the passcode with my old phone for basic security in case it was stolen, but it was just annoying enough to keep me from checking the phone for random things.

Now I just touch home and I'm in. I use the phone way more now. I thought the sensor would be marginally useful, but man it's the cat's pajamas.

Certainly having gone from a 4 to a 5S, I use my phone an awful lot more.

This data presentation sucks. When dealing with exponentially growing markets, each new data point will break all previous records. What's interesting is deviations from the expected exponential growth trajectory.

I know that I use a ton more data on my 5S than my previous 4S, but that's because my new phone now supports Sprint LTE, so I can actually stream stuff and download full web pages rather than the bullshit spotty 3g that I was previously using on my 4S.

Not in Australia, they don't. No carrier provides an uncapped plan, and most plans have to be extended with a 'data pack' just to get 1GB/month. If you go over that, you start getting charged per Megabyte.

It's ridiculous.

You guys don't have wifi in Australia?

Do you mean public wifi? There are some areas that have some public wifi (Adelaide has some pretty good coverage in the CBD thanks to Internode, an Adelaide based ISP), but it isn't very common.

If you mean private wifi? Of course we do (in fact the CSIRO - an Australian based research organisation - was pretty pivotal in its invention in the 1990s), but the article is talking about mobile data not wifi.

I recently went on holidays and was merrily tethered away on 4G to Telstra. Hit the cap limit on my plan - 3GB - called Telstra to get a datapack add-on - "I'm sorry, but you are on the highest plan, we can't add on any more data".

Basically I would have had to sign onto a completely new contract to get more data for the 5 days to end of month. Ridiculous.

Are you getting good speeds on 4G? I'm considering turfing my fixed line connection altogether and going pure 4G.

Will the major telecoms drop their charge per GB anytime soon? The going rate of $10/gb is usurious.

I find it interesting when someone is watching what looks like HD video on an iPhone 5s on the train. At arms length I would expect that something less than full res would be sufficient, but I don't know if the phone can let you select.

I think lots of video streaming is adaptive to bandwidth, and if you have an LTE connection that can handle HD video you'll get it. Still doesn't account for why the trend is supposedly 5s specific. Perhaps because the 5s can handle more LTE bands?

That is a good point on the LTE bands, I had not considered that it just may be that now this is more often achievable at an acceptable quality rate.

So am I blind or do I not see the actual amount of data used? Avg MB or GB? if Apple 3g is the measure what was the avg user consuming on the 3g? How do I know how much more 5s users are using if I don't have the baseline?

Does the higher usage related to the high video resolution of the Retina displays? Does more data imply higher res video and graphics, or data in the traditional sense, words and numbers and perhaps maps?

The iPhone 5c surely cannibalized 4s/5 stats, no? I mean, in prior generations people would purchase last year's model. But this time they got the 5c instead.

My guess is the background app updates are contributing to this a lot. A couple large game updates could consume a few gig in a hurry.

Isn't this mitigated by the 100MB limit while on mobile data?

I guess iPhone 5c users can go ahead and eat shit then?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com