Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iPhone X Teardown

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 372 posts

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#101

Post by joering2 »

Qworg wrote: post #70
joering2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new concept seems to be dual-battery. I'm sure they investigated designing simply L-shaped battery but for some reason they decided to go with two batteries instead. I wonder if its because one is supplying power to some critical circuits while other one isn't, or since display and battery are #1s replacement on these phones, they simply run some stats and decided that splitting cells into two separate battery bo…

Manufacturing costs are the most likely reason. Prismatic cells are much less costly to produce in a rectangular format vs. an L shape.

I don't know, but putting 4 cells into one box, versus 2 cells in 2 boxes at the iPhone scale might be more expensive.

My take is that still less expensive that constant replacement (warranty, recalls) that they do on daily basis.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#102

Post by thomasjudge »

tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #88
jack6e wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most impressive thing to me is how similar the iPhone X is to the original iPhone (shown side by side in the second picture). And really, how similar every non-notebook/desktop Apple product has been to each other one. Design-wise, the iPhone was just an iPod with a bigger screen; iPod touch/nano/other variations are obviously just an iPhone in different sizes; the watch is just the iPod nano on a wristband; iP…

Why do you want them to design their products differently from previous models just for the sake of it? Apple iterates on their designs. Few/no changes mean Apple thinks their product is close to perfect (in the context of the available technology and intended usage). I much prefer Apple’s iterative and proven designs than other manufacturers’ products that are seemingly designed without experience from previous gene…

Not to mention the equivalent in software, designers forcing new UI's on us with each major release. Looking at you, MSFT. Especially when those changes are largely w/r/t what's now trendy, such as the recent iteration in design towards everything flat.

Not intending to start a design-related flamewar..

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#103

Post by Terretta »

jack6e wrote: post #33
marze wrote: post #6

The most impressive thing to me is how similar the iPhone X is to the original iPhone (shown side by side in the second picture). Ten years ago, Apple totally nailed the design. Same buttons, same speaker design, same full panel display. Even design work by a company as talented as Apple, you might expect that a new model ten years into the future may look quite different, but it looks the same.

> The most impressive thing to me is how similar the iPhone X is to the original iPhone (shown side by side in the second picture). And really, how similar every non-notebook/desktop Apple product has been to each other one. Design-wise, the iPhone was just an iPod with a bigger screen; iPod touch/nano/other variations are obviously just an iPhone in different sizes; the watch is just the iPod nano on a wristband; iP…

> the UI/UX that transformed interacting in the digital world from using keyboards and mice to using our fingers on touch screens is already old.

The pencil is already old too. So?

It's not clear to me that for things to be usable the way they get used has to change at some particular rate. On the contrary, the most usable user experiences (UXs) seem to be quite stable.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#104

Post by leerob »

timthelion wrote: post #85

I don't understand, when they got rid of the audio jack and added wireless charging, why does the phone have ports at all? Couldn't they make a port-less phone?

I mean, they could. But does that mean they should? Personally, I don't think so.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#105

Post by selectodude »

gurkendoktor wrote: post #98
Illniyar wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Axiom in the tech world is that "Apple is a software company that builds hardware". " Is that really a common belief? I know many people who think the opposite - apple is a hardware company. In fact Tim Cook went out of his way several times to remind people that apple isn't a hardware company.

In terms of profits, yes. But many of us don't buy Apple for the hardware, but because we want to stay in their software ecosystem. I'd rather use a Nexus running iOS than an iPhone X running Android, and I'm even more invested in macOS. That Apple builds nice hardware is a bonus for me (but I'd honestly prefer better software right now). I mean, on paper Apple is making more money from hardware than from software, b…

Apple has been very serious about how they’re a hardware company vs a software company for like 30+ years now. Literally the first thing SPJ did after coming back was kill the Mac clones program. They’re obsessed with the feel of the hardware in every way. The software is just a platform.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#106

Post by vilmosi »

gehsty wrote: post #20
alvis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strategically, I think Apple has made a right move by internalising all the hardware designs. That said, as many have suggested, the new iPhone is no more than just another faster, smaller, and costlier.

Just smaller and faster with new technology, never before seen delivered at this size, capability or scale. What does Apple have to do to impress people? Do all this then give the phones away for free?

>>> Just smaller and faster with new technology, never before seen delivered at this size, capability or scale.

That was happening every year and marginal at best.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#107

Post by DigitalJack »

Illniyar wrote: post #72
mankash666 wrote: post #2

Truly impressive. Smaller, yet faster than the competition. Surprising how many of the chips are now internal Apple components: 1. CPU/GPU 2. Auxiliary Machine Learning/AI chip 3. NAND controller 4. IR Deapth sensor & signal processing chip 5. Power management IC (surprising that Apple is doing Analog IC design too!) Axiom in the tech world is that "Apple is a software company that builds hardware". Above is ample ev…

"Axiom in the tech world is that "Apple is a software company that builds hardware". " Is that really a common belief? I know many people who think the opposite - apple is a hardware company. In fact Tim Cook went out of his way several times to remind people that apple isn't a hardware company.

"Is that really a common belief?"

It was in the pre-iphone era.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#108

Post by djrogers »

jack6e wrote: post #33
marze wrote: post #6

The most impressive thing to me is how similar the iPhone X is to the original iPhone (shown side by side in the second picture). Ten years ago, Apple totally nailed the design. Same buttons, same speaker design, same full panel display. Even design work by a company as talented as Apple, you might expect that a new model ten years into the future may look quite different, but it looks the same.

> The most impressive thing to me is how similar the iPhone X is to the original iPhone (shown side by side in the second picture). And really, how similar every non-notebook/desktop Apple product has been to each other one. Design-wise, the iPhone was just an iPod with a bigger screen; iPod touch/nano/other variations are obviously just an iPhone in different sizes; the watch is just the iPod nano on a wristband; iP…

> Design-wise, the iPhone was just an iPod with a bigger screen

That's revisionist at it's best, and ridiculously untrue at it's worst. iPods in 2007 were about 1/3rd screen, and 2/3rds clickwheel. They were shaped like, and as thick as, a pack pf playing cards, made of plastic and metal (not glass), and basically shared nothing with the iPhone's design. When that device was released, we'd never seen anything like it.

Re: iPhone X Teardown

#109

Post by DRW_ »

selectodude wrote: post #105
gurkendoktor wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In terms of profits, yes. But many of us don't buy Apple for the hardware, but because we want to stay in their software ecosystem. I'd rather use a Nexus running iOS than an iPhone X running Android, and I'm even more invested in macOS. That Apple builds nice hardware is a bonus for me (but I'd honestly prefer better software right now). I mean, on paper Apple is making more money from hardware than from software, b…

Apple has been very serious about how they’re a hardware company vs a software company for like 30+ years now. Literally the first thing SPJ did after coming back was kill the Mac clones program. They’re obsessed with the feel of the hardware in every way. The software is just a platform.

Actually, Steve Jobs emphasised a few times that the reason why Apple was successful is because of the software.

https://youtu.be/dEeyaAUCyZs

Post reply on HN