iPhone 5

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

I'm sure I've seen some statistics that show the iPhone is phenomenally successful in the UK against all other smartphones - I believe it is Apple's best percentage of that segment outside of the USA.

ETA: http://www.newmediatrendwatch.com/markets-by-country/18-uk/154-mobile-devices

I wonder if it's anything to do with a perceived 'status symbol' that us Brits attach to phones? The guy who I share an office with has an S3 (the only other one I've seen in the wild), and I have an iPhone 5. If my phone is out, on my desk or whatever, visitors to the office (and our cleaner) regularly comment "Oooh! Is that the iPhone 5?! Let's have a look!", then engage in conversation, but nobody seems to be interested in my colleagues S3 - and his is ALWAYS on his desk.

This, of course, proves nothing, but I mention as an interest point.

 

[Darat]

Slightly related: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jan/25/apple-eradicate-child-labour

I really hope this is a change in corporate culture rather than a PR exercise, willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt for now. If they really can embed this behaviour into their supply chain they will be doing a lot of good within their supply chain but also given their size I suspect it will have a considerable effect with other suppliers - after all if they want to chase for Apple's business they are going to have to tighten up their own practices to stand a chance.

 

[Darat]

I wonder if it's anything to do with a perceived 'status symbol' that us Brits attach to phones? The guy who I share an office with has an S3 (the only other one I've seen in the wild), and I have an iPhone 5. If my phone is out, on my desk or whatever, visitors to the office (and our cleaner) regularly comment "Oooh! Is that the iPhone 5?! Let's have a look!", then engage in conversation, but nobody seems to be interested in my colleagues S3 - and his is ALWAYS on his desk.

This, of course, proves nothing, but I mention as an interest point.

I think that is a large part of it - Apple in the UK is definitely considered a (if not the) premium brand in its market segments. Problem for Apple is of course that is a perception, and since that's not based on objective facts then that perception can quickly change. Which is why I think they reacted so apparently "out of character" with the problems with their new mapping software. They know how important that perception is to their bottom line.

I also think something that has helped Apple in the UK is that for a long time there really was only the iTunes store for easy straightforward buying and downloading of a wide range of music. That has created a very large population already primed for an Apple product. With the move to "the cloud" and the likes of Spotify I think that is changing but people hate change so their is a lot of consumer inertia that anyone else has to overcome.

 

[Hungry81]

I wonder if it's anything to do with a perceived 'status symbol' that us Brits attach to phones? The guy who I share an office with has an S3 (the only other one I've seen in the wild), and I have an iPhone 5. If my phone is out, on my desk or whatever, visitors to the office (and our cleaner) regularly comment "Oooh! Is that the iPhone 5?! Let's have a look!", then engage in conversation, but nobody seems to be interested in my colleagues S3 - and his is ALWAYS on his desk.

This, of course, proves nothing, but I mention as an interest point.

So if your observations are correct, they lead me to conclude iphones are not only overpriced, but they decrease productivity due to constant interruptions.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

I think that is a large part of it - Apple in the UK is definitely considered a (if not the) premium brand in its market segments. Problem for Apple is of course that is a perception, and since that's not based on objective facts then that perception can quickly change. Which is why I think they reacted so apparently "out of character" with the problems with their new mapping software. They know how important that perception is to their bottom line.

Functionality aside, I'd agree on the perception issue - iPhones look sleek, and look and feel premium.

In terms of functionality, there is also still a perception among a certain type of consumer that the iPhone represents a peak of technological excellence; my Dad wanted a new phone because the car he has ordered has bluetooth technology - he ended up buying some horrible Blackberry smartphone because he said that he'd not use the technology offered by an iPhone to full capacity, not realising that most smartphones broadly do the same thing.

I suppose it helps that - brand loyalty aside - the iPhone and IOS offer a very slick and polished experience.

I also think something that has helped Apple in the UK is that for a long time there really was only the iTunes store for easy straightforward buying and downloading of a wide range of music. That has created a very large population already primed for an Apple product. With the move to "the cloud" and the likes of Spotify I think that is changing but people hate change so their is a lot of consumer inertia that anyone else has to overcome.

I'm not sure if subscription-based streaming will take off for a while in the UK - if at all. Based on my own personal perception, people still like to physically 'own' a product - even digitally, as opposed to 'renting' it. Before anyone mentions it - I am fully aware of how iTunes works, and the T&Cs regarding ownership of the media you 'buy', but it's a lot closer to ownership than subscription streaming.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

So if your observations are correct, they lead me to conclude iphones are not only overpriced, but they decrease productivity due to constant interruptions.

Dunno about 'overpriced' - I got mine on contract at a reasonable monthly rate, with great allowances.

In terms of decreasing productivity, that's a big fat "yes"; mine also decreases the amount I watch TV, read books and generally physically respond to people when I'm fiddling with it!

 

[OCaptain]

My unit has had a strange problem develop. It randomly screams a fire alarm loud screeching beep. Only a power cycle will stop it.

Apples advice? Restore from backup and test. Never mind that its happened randomly 4 times in the last month with no seeming commonality amongst the events.

Think I may need a replacement.

They're probably telling you to try out what they would try first if you took it into a store to have the Genius look at it.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

As I said earlier in the thread, I have been paying a bit of attention to what phones people around me are using, and thought I’d add a few more points to this thread.

Spoke to my colleague about his S3, and he said that what attracted him was the bigger screen, because he likes to watch Netflix on it and play games. He used to have the iPhone 4S, so I asked him how he was finding the difference between the two. He said he’s glad he has the bigger screen, but he misses the ‘smoothness’ of the iPhone. He’s glad that he could get ‘most’ of the apps he had on the iPhone, but if he’d known about the iPhone 5, he’d have got that instead. I asked him if he customizes the Android OS with apps or features that allow you to do this; he didn’t really know what I meant. I explained (albeit with my limited Android knowledge) some of the things he could do, but he said he wasn’t interested as long as he could text, play games and watch films. There’s that ‘Android Freedom’ for you…

Another colleague of mine has just bought an S2, upgrading from his HTC. His main concern was battery life, which he’s now happy with. I started asking him about customizing the OS, and he cut me off saying he “wasn’t bothered about that carp..” as long as he could WhatsApp, call, and check FaceBook. Again with the ‘Freedom’… I asked him what he thought of the iPhone 5, and he said he’d love one, but prefers to buy his and his wife’s phones outright, and she’d not let him have one unless she got one too, so he couldn’t afford it. ETA: I also asked why he didn't go for an S3, and he said "Remember when mobiles first came out and we all complained about how big they were? It's going that way again - I'd feel like I was holding a Laptop to the side of my head!"

However, the cleaner has bought an iPhone 5!

 

[Hungry81]

As I said earlier in the thread, I have been paying a bit of attention to what phones people around me are using, and thought I’d add a few more points to this thread.

There’s that ‘Android Freedom’ for you…

“wasn’t bothered about that carp..” as long as he could WhatsApp, call, and check FaceBook. Again with the ‘Freedom’…

However, the cleaner has bought an iPhone 5!

Just because someone elects not to use a freedom does not mean that its not there to be used if wanted. Having the option to do something if you want is not a drawback. Particularly if it is less expensive than a brand with more restrictions.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Just because someone elects not to use a freedom does not mean that its not there to be used if wanted. Having the option to do something if you want is not a drawback. Particularly if it is less expensive than a brand with more restrictions.

Firstly, I did not say that having the option to do something if you want is a drawback. The freedom offered by the Android OS is fantastic – if you have the knowledge or inclination to use it.

Secondly, you’re missing an important point about the nature of ‘freedom’ in the real word, and not as a dictionary definition.

I’ll use my ‘walking on the moon’ analogy again – remember I am talking about the real-world concept of freedom; not comparing walking on the moon to using a phone:

I am technically free to walk on the moon if I wish – certainly nobody has forbidden it. The chances of this actually happening in the real world – no matter how determined I may be – are effectively zero; I’ll never walk on the moon. Now, compare this to my being explicitly told that I am not legally allowed to walk on the moon. What’s the difference in outcome?

My colleagues who bought Android phones did not buy them for the OS; one bought his for the larger screen (and freely admits that if he’d known the iPhone 5 was coming with a larger screen, he’d have waited and bought it); the other bought his because it was the best smartphone he could afford two of outright (he also admits he would prefer to have an iPhone 5). Both have the ‘freedom’ to customize their phones – neither have the knowledge or inclination to do so, and are never likely to by their own admission. So, in the real world, how would either be ‘restricted’ by owning an iPhone 5, when all they want to do is phone, text, Facebook, watch films and play games?

 

[Hungry81]

Firstly, I did not say that having the option to do something if you want is a drawback. The freedom offered by the Android OS is fantastic – if you have the knowledge or inclination to use it.

Secondly, you’re missing an important point about the nature of ‘freedom’ in the real word, and not as a dictionary definition.

I’ll use my ‘walking on the moon’ analogy again – remember I am talking about the real-world concept of freedom; not comparing walking on the moon to using a phone:

I am technically free to walk on the moon if I wish – certainly nobody has forbidden it. The chances of this actually happening in the real world – no matter how determined I may be – are effectively zero; I’ll never walk on the moon. Now, compare this to my being explicitly told that I am not legally allowed to walk on the moon. What’s the difference in outcome?

My colleagues who bought Android phones did not buy them for the OS; one bought his for the larger screen (and freely admits that if he’d known the iPhone 5 was coming with a larger screen, he’d have waited and bought it); the other bought his because it was the best smartphone he could afford two of outright (he also admits he would prefer to have an iPhone 5). Both have the ‘freedom’ to customize their phones – neither have the knowledge or inclination to do so, and are never likely to by their own admission. So, in the real world, how would either be ‘restricted’ by owning an iPhone 5, when all they want to do is phone, text, Facebook, watch films and play games?

Ok so you meant so much for android freedom because they are not going to use it anyway? Meaning its not a reason they bought the phone? That's fine no issue there.
However your anology is unreasonable and flawed. The difference you are looking for is effort and time. If I am free then with effort and time I can plausibly do it, if I am prohibited then I can not get the parts for a rocket and if I do it will be shot down.
By your logic a mute person does not have the freedom of speech because he cannot speak, and a limbless person living in the U.S does not have the right to bear arms, because he cannot hold onto them. But a mute person can compose a letter and have someone read it, and a limbless person can have guns attached to his chair and a trigger switch placed below his chin.
If you want to go to the moon then you are free to work out how to get there, but saying you are not free just because you cannot be bothered spending the time and doing the work to get there Is incorrect. (Pro tip: China allegedly wants to go in the next 10 years maybe you can work out a deal with them?)
Here's another example: people say I'm free to win the lottery, however My numbers never get picked and I cannot be bothered buying a ticket and watching the draw. Therefore I am not free to win the lottery. Or: I am free to drive a car. I do not want to buy petrol or inflate the tyres. Therefore I am not free to drive a car.

Its also plausible (but unlikely) that your colleagues do not know how to download apps widgets, wallpapers, launchers and themes from the google app store and that they have kept everything on the homescreen the same as the day they bought it. (I find Shortcuts to commonly used apps including facebook and maps very handy on my home screen). If this is equivalent to landing on the moon then NASA will be getting a job application from me very shortly.

In any case it is good that one if your colleagues was able to find two decent phones at an affordable price and did not have to go over budget.
It is a shame he did not manage to get a couple of older apple devices if that is what he truly wanted

And if your other colleague does enjoy larger screens then the s3 was a good choice as the iPhone 5s screen is still quite small as it is only a little bit longer and not really wider than the 4

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Ok so you meant so much for android freedom because they are not going to use it anyway? Meaning its not a reason they bought the phone? That's fine no issue there.
However your anology is unreasonable and flawed. The difference you are looking for is effort and time. If I am free then with effort and time I can plausibly do it, if I am prohibited then I can not get the parts for a rocket and if I do it will be shot down.

I think you’re over-thinking it. I’m looking at difference in outcomes between being free to walk on the moon and being forbidden to do it.

I AM free to walk on the moon; the basic requirements to do so are all there. However in real terms, it’s never going to happen, so I am in no different a position having the freedom to do it than I would be if I was forbidden to do it.

By your logic a mute person does not have the freedom of speech because he cannot speak, and a limbless person living in the U.S does not have the right to bear arms, because he cannot hold onto them. But a mute person can compose a letter and have someone read it, and a limbless person can have guns attached to his chair and a trigger switch placed below his chin.

You’ve kind of broken your own example there by showing that these people have the freedom, and the ability (and/or inclination) to use it. I’d make the trigger switch a foot-pedal by the way, might be difficult to aim reliably if you’re moving your head to use a chin-switch.

If you want to go to the moon then you are free to work out how to get there, but saying you are not free just because you cannot be bothered spending the time and doing the work to get there Is incorrect. (Pro tip: China allegedly wants to go in the next 10 years maybe you can work out a deal with them?)

I think you may be over-thinking it again. Once again, in the real world, I’m just talking about the probability that I will ever walk on the moon. I’m allowed to do it, but with the greatest will in the world, it’s never going to happen. My colleagues are ‘free’ to customize their Android OS, but they are highly unlikely to do so (for whatever reason), so are no better off owning an Android phone than an iPhone, or Windows Phone.

Here's another example: people say I'm free to win the lottery, however My numbers never get picked and I cannot be bothered buying a ticket and watching the draw. Therefore I am not free to win the lottery. Or: I am free to drive a car. I do not want to buy petrol or inflate the tyres. Therefore I am not free to drive a car.

In terms of outcome – if you have absolutely no intention of ever buying a lottery ticket – then you are not free to win the lottery. The difference in outcome is the same in real terms. Yes, I acknowledge that you have the freedom to buy a ticket at any time, so potential freedom to win exists all the time, but it hinges on buying a ticket. If you don’t buy a ticket, then you’re not free to win the next draw.

Its also plausible (but unlikely) that your colleagues do not know how to download apps widgets, wallpapers, launchers and themes from the google app store and that they have kept everything on the homescreen the same as the day they bought it.

That’s pretty much the case; they know how to add a wallpaper and download an app, obviously, but beyond that, they don’t really care about changing the way the OS works from its original settings. One of my colleagues isn’t even aware you can do that; he only downloads ‘what he knows’ anyway – he’s the S3 owner – and he only downloads apps that he had on his iPhone (where he can)or from popular app developers, because he doesn’t trust the Android App store.

However, neither of my colleagues are interested in widgets, or modifying the OS – they have the potential freedom to do so, but the real world outcome of having that freedom is the same as if they didn’t have the freedom.

(I find Shortcuts to commonly used apps including facebook and maps very handy on my home screen). If this is equivalent to landing on the moon then NASA will be getting a job application from me very shortly.

I specifically said that my analogy was regarding the practicalities of ‘freedom’ in real terms, not a comparison to operating a mobile phone.

In any case it is good that one if your colleagues was able to find two decent phones at an affordable price and did not have to go over budget.
It is a shame he did not manage to get a couple of older apple devices if that is what he truly wanted

What he truly wanted was two iPhone 5’s. He could have got them on contract for a small up-front cost, but he absolutely does not want to be locked into a 2 year contract.

And if your other colleague does enjoy larger screens then the s3 was a good choice as the iPhone 5s screen is still quite small as it is only a little bit longer and not really wider than the 4

Indeed, and having seen the iPhone 5, he wishes he had waited instead of buying the S3.

 

[Darat]

... Snip... I



You’ve kind of broken your own example there by showing that these people have the freedom, and the ability (and/or inclination) to use it. I... Snip... D


That’s pretty much the case; they know how to add a wallpaper and download an app, obviously, but beyond that, they don’t really care about changing the way the OS works from its original settings. One of my colleagues isn’t even aware you can do that; he only downloads ‘what he knows’ anyway – he’s the S3 owner – and he only downloads apps that he had on his iPhone (where he can)or from popular app developers, because he doesn’t trust the Android App store.

However, neither of my colleagues are interested in widgets, or modifying the..... Sno
IP....

To borrow your phrase you've broken your own example you are describing a colleague using one of those freedoms that an iPhone owner does not have!

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

To borrow your phrase you've broken your own example you are describing a colleague using one of those freedoms that an iPhone owner does not have!

In what way?

 

[Darat]

Your colleague is choosing to use his freedom to not download an app from the official play store, an iPhone user does not have that freedom, plus to exercise that freedom he's has had to customize his phone by altering his phones default setup as by default you can't install any app not from the party store.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Your colleague is choosing to use his freedom to not download an app from the official play store, an iPhone user does not have that freedom, plus to exercise that freedom he's has had to customize his phone by altering his phones default setup as by default you can't install any app not from the party store.

You'll have to forgive my ignorance - when I say 'Android Store' I mean whatever the default store his OS is set up to use.

I'd have to question the nature of that freedom as well if he is wary of only downloading things he knows to be from safe sources. An iPhone user may be restricted to only using the App Store (unless your phone is jailbroken), but at least they don't have to worry about what they're downloading.

 

[Darat]

You'll have to forgive my ignorance - when I say 'Android Store' I mean whatever the default store his OS is set up to use.

That would be the "Play Store". So as I said that means he is using a freedom that the iPhone user doesn't have because an iPhone owner can only download apps from their official store.

For him to have decided to not use the Play Store has meant that he has had to delve into some pretty esoteric settings and had to customise his phone in a way that an iPhone cannot be customised.

I'd have to question the nature of that freedom as well if he is wary of only downloading things he knows to be from safe sources. An iPhone user may be restricted to only using the App Store (unless your phone is jailbroken), but at least they don't have to worry about what they're downloading.

And now we are into the realms of perception and irrational assessments of risks - which of course are real things and have to be addressed but that is slightly a different point.

As far as I am aware all the major apps are on the Play Store so what he has decided to do is to hunt down non-Play store versions of certain apps - which usually means an illegal copy by the way* - and that is certainly a hell of lot riskier than say downloading "Flipboard" from the Play Store. Also I don't know how he finds these files without having to go to sites that for a non-techie person can be extremely difficult to understand as well as looking decidedly dodgy!

Plus to download and install an app in such a way involves again having to delve into some (for most users) esoteric gubbins e.g. simply finding where the download has been downloaded to before you can install it. And if he is using a latest Samsung Galaxy phone he has had to ignore I think 3 different security warnings before being able to do this for the first time.

Your colleague is making some rather irrational decisions!




*Just been and checked and Flipboard for example has to be downloaded from Apple's App Store or Google's Play Store - they do not give you an option of downloading the app outside of the official stores. So can I ask which apps available for iOS and Android he has downloaded in the way you describe?

 

[This is The End]

For him to have decided to not use the Play Store has meant that he has had to delve into some pretty esoteric settings

There's an app for that!

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

That would be the "Play Store". So as I said that means he is using a freedom that the iPhone user doesn't have because an iPhone owner can only download apps from their official store.

For him to have decided to not use the Play Store has meant that he has had to delve into some pretty esoteric settings and had to customise his phone in a way that an iPhone cannot be customised.





And now we are into the realms of perception and irrational assessments of risks - which of course are real things and have to be addressed but that is slightly a different point.

As far as I am aware all the major apps are on the Play Store so what he has decided to do is to hunt down non-Play store versions of certain apps - which usually means an illegal copy by the way* - and that is certainly a hell of lot riskier than say downloading "Flipboard" from the Play Store. Also I don't know how he finds these files without having to go to sites that for a non-techie person can be extremely difficult to understand as well as looking decidedly dodgy!

Plus to download and install an app in such a way involves again having to delve into some (for most users) esoteric gubbins e.g. simply finding where the download has been downloaded to before you can install it. And if he is using a latest Samsung Galaxy phone he has had to ignore I think 3 different security warnings before being able to do this for the first time.

Your colleague is making some rather irrational decisions!




*Just been and checked and Flipboard for example has to be downloaded from Apple's App Store or Google's Play Store - they do not give you an option of downloading the app outside of the official stores. So can I ask which apps available for iOS and Android he has downloaded in the way you describe?

I'll be honest, I have no idea what you're talking about now, as my Android knowledge is limited. He downloads his apps from whatever Store is default to the phone, and only downloaded the apps he had on his iPhone, and/or apps he considers 'safe' (known developer, or extremely popular). I'll ask him for further details on Monday when he's in again.

 

[Darat]

I'll be honest, I have no idea what you're talking about now, as my Android knowledge is limited. He downloads his apps from whatever Store is default to the phone, and only downloaded the apps he had on his iPhone, and/or apps he considers 'safe' (known developer, or extremely popular). I'll ask him for further details on Monday when he's in again.

Ah sorry I got the wrong end of the stick - let me wipe my hands and I'll start again.

From what you've summarised above what is different for him than if he did have an iPhone? You seem to be saying he does exactly what someone with an iPhone would do when it comes down to apps.