iPhone 5 review
engadget.com
iPhone 5 review
1–10 of 71 posts
Re: iPhone 5 review
#2It's sad that every time the authors chose to compare the phone they compared it with iPhone 4S instead of comparing it with any of the newer phones out there in the market such as Lumia 920 or GSIII. That is like taking a page from Apple's marketing book. Of course it is going to be better than the older version released last year. How does it compare to the phones of this generation?
That question is left unanswered. May be that is because the audience won't like the answer...
Re: iPhone 5 review
#3It's sad that every time the authors chose to compare the phone they compared it with iPhone 4S instead of comparing it with any of the newer phones out there in the market such as Lumia 920 or GSIII. That is like taking a page from Apple's marketing book. Of course it is going to be better than the older version released last year. How does it compare to the phones of this generation? That question is left unanswere…
This is simply false they compared the Sunspider mark (924) to SG3 (1400) and HTC one (1700) and the battery life (11:15 rundown) to industry leading Droid RAZR Maxx (+10 min longer).
Re: iPhone 5 review
#4Roundup of links to early reviews:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57515524-37/initial-iphone...
I found David Pogue's early review hilarious if only because, reading between the lines, it boils down to: David Pogue has spent thousands of dollars on third party Apple dock gadgets and does not appreciate compatibility being broken.
Re: iPhone 5 review
#5The more I see that Lightning port, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just do the obvious and go for micro USB. I'm wholly confident Apple could design the highest of quality micro USB connector to satisfy even the biggest of haters that claim its too flimsy while silencing the constant gripe of obsolescence.
Re: iPhone 5 review
#6The more I see that Lightning port, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just do the obvious and go for micro USB. I'm wholly confident Apple could design the highest of quality micro USB connector to satisfy even the biggest of haters that claim its too flimsy while silencing the constant gripe of obsolescence.
Another reason might be that they pipe analog audio out of it?
I don't know much about hardware, would it have been possible to use the standard micro USB connector and still provide those features?
From the article:
> the adapter will provide the power and analog audio that the vast majority of docks and accessories (and cars) in the world need
Re: iPhone 5 review
#7The more I see that Lightning port, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just do the obvious and go for micro USB. I'm wholly confident Apple could design the highest of quality micro USB connector to satisfy even the biggest of haters that claim its too flimsy while silencing the constant gripe of obsolescence.
Yeah, and they could've waited a year longer to switch directly to micro-USB 3.0, especially considering their new laptops are also supporting USB 3.0, and it would've improved the transfer speed for iTunes files anyway.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/247507/usb_30_to_reach_smartp...
Apple didn't use Lightning for the users, they did it for the lock-in with the accessories (in the future).
Re: iPhone 5 review
#8It's sad that every time the authors chose to compare the phone they compared it with iPhone 4S instead of comparing it with any of the newer phones out there in the market such as Lumia 920 or GSIII. That is like taking a page from Apple's marketing book. Of course it is going to be better than the older version released last year. How does it compare to the phones of this generation? That question is left unanswere…
Sure, comparisons with the 920 or GSIII are interesting to those who are watching the market, but frankly only comparisons to previous iPhones are useful.
Nowadays iPhones and flagship Androids have gotten good enough that the pain of switching ecosystems far outweighs any benefit to be gained by switching ecosystems.
Re: iPhone 5 review
#9The more I see that Lightning port, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just do the obvious and go for micro USB. I'm wholly confident Apple could design the highest of quality micro USB connector to satisfy even the biggest of haters that claim its too flimsy while silencing the constant gripe of obsolescence.
This post explains that a little bit: http://brockerhoff.net/blog/2012/09/13/boom-2/
Essentially, his conclusion is that micro USB can't support everything Apple wants the connector to do.
Re: iPhone 5 review
#10The more I see that Lightning port, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just do the obvious and go for micro USB. I'm wholly confident Apple could design the highest of quality micro USB connector to satisfy even the biggest of haters that claim its too flimsy while silencing the constant gripe of obsolescence.
Micro-USB is not reversible.
Spend any time with an iPad or iPhone, try plugging it in in a dark room, and you'll curse Apple for having such a lame 30-pin connector.
Problem solved, finally. In fairness, it's hard to make a 30-pin connector reversible. And Apple probably didn't want to annoy legions of customers by switching until they had something that was incontrovertibly better, and that they could hang their hat on for a good long time.
The real question is: why does micro-USB suck so badly? The standards committee could have gotten it right all those years ago. They just didn't bother.
Apple bothers. I appreciate this, so I send them some money every few years.