Live data from Hacker News

iPhone 6

apple.com

291–300 of 319 posts

Re: iPhone 6

#291
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure this will be downvoted into oblivion but I have Karma to burn preaching some truth. Between big phones (even the small iphone 6 is bigger!), the watch and NFC, Apple is clearly repositioning themselves as fast followers and letting Samsung et. al. foot the bill on R&D and market building. First, there's not much (if anything) they have gotten off of Samsung about these devices, except maybe how not to do s…

> And obviously the same thing holds for the Watch and the bigger iPhone: they were in development for at least a couple of years, iterating and refining them. Sources or guessing? I think the similarity of how the iWatch and the Android watches work is too similar to be a coincidence. There's some cool software work on Apple's watch, and I believe it'll generally be a better product overall. But it looks just like s…

>Sources or guessing?

Neither. For one, it's obvious that any such products needs at least 1-2 years to design, manufacture prototypes, etc. Second, we've seen several previous exposes of how Apple developed new stuff (iPad was in the labs for 7-8 years, the iPhone the same, etc, and there have been galleries of the tons of prototypes they checked published). So, I was basically just stating the obvious.

>I think the similarity of how the iWatch and the Android watches work is too similar to be a coincidence

Well, people already had a uncanillity similar experience to Android watches 5 or so years ago, by strapping an iPod mini to a wrist strap. It's a watch that talks to a smartphone and has a computer screen, so of course its similar in that, but that's inevitable. The kind of interface, the controls, the fashion styles for the straps and everything, and the internal design / sensors / etc are unique.

>Basically your story doesn't make any sense. The public story is that all Samsung knew was "Apple is working on a watch", and with that information, completely independently tossed together (with a little help from Google) a device that, in the Gen 2 version of Android Smartwatches, just so happens to work almost exactly like the iWatch minus the nub. The probably of that happen are only slightly less than throwing a bunch of parts into a dryer and at the end of the cycle getting a clock.

For one, the "almost exactly" is only in the sense that one car and another car do mostly the same things. The design, controls, software and everything is different, from the "nub" to the style choices to the sensors to the charging, to the e-payments, to the app selection UI etc. The Samsung version is sub par in every way.

>If Samsung developed the smartwatch based on nothing more than a rumor and just slapped it together, then they did one hell of a job because that's the template all new smart watches are currently following and they deserve a little more credit. (...) Samsung slapped together a watch based on a rumor, the gen 2 devices were pretty good and Apple simply went the direction with the idea that Samsung had pioneered.

What are those ideas again? Can you name one thing Samsung did that was a) non obvious part of a smartwatch, b) better?

Re: iPhone 6

#292
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure this will be downvoted into oblivion but I have Karma to burn preaching some truth. Between big phones (even the small iphone 6 is bigger!), the watch and NFC, Apple is clearly repositioning themselves as fast followers and letting Samsung et. al. foot the bill on R&D and market building. First, there's not much (if anything) they have gotten off of Samsung about these devices, except maybe how not to do s…

First, there's not much (if anything) they have gotten off of Samsung about these devices I have a black Samsung Galaxy S3. I held it up against the image of the iPhone 6, and they're barely different. The s3 has slightly bowed sides, and the two phones have a home button with a different shape. Oh, and the Apple phone doesn't have 'Samsung' written on the front (I haven't seen an image of the back, so you never know…

>I have a black Samsung Galaxy S3. I held it up against the image of the iPhone 6, and they're barely different.

Was talking about the watches.

But since you mentioned it, I had a look: http://www.hitechmobiles.co.nz/uploads/images/Samsung_Galaxy...

This is like iPhone 6 in the sense that Times New Roman is like Helvetica. They are both fonts after all.

Different buttons, different curves, different materials, different home button, different back design, different colors...

Where exactly do you see the similarity?

Not to mention the whole "huge touch screen, minimal buttons smartphone" thing was pioneared by Apple already since the first iPhone, when Samsung did keyboard smartphones that looked nothing like this?

Re: iPhone 6

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you bought your music after Apple finally ditched DRM, you can upload your AAC files to Google Music for free and sync/stream them to all your Android devices as well as your laptops/desktops. If you "bought" your music with Apple DRM, you can pay another fee to actually own it and be able to play it on a non-Apple devices. If you "bought" your videos with Apple DRM, consider it a lesson learned.

Taking the entire migration process you describe changes the "price" to be paid for similar phone, so my claim of false equivalence still stands. There's no "lesson" when I have made the conscious decision to stick with Apple all these years. I may have paid a premium paying for iPods and iPhones, but I feel my time is valuable enough to not have to mess around with my media files in any way you describe. Nor do I fe…

The 'mess around' process would just mean loading your existing music into Google Music one time. Heck, on a Mac, it may just ask by default if you want to sync your iTunes library. Then they're available everywhere you run Google Music... which means not being artificially locked to a single company's hardware.

Most people make the mistake to think they 'bought' a movie or DRMed music file when they really just rent/lease it long term.. And then they realize they're screwed when they want to the freedom to buy whatever device they want and have 'their' music they 'bought' on it. After all, most people didn't grow up buying a CD from Best Buy and having it work on their Best Buy CD player but not on their Sony CD player.

You may have realized what you bought into and consciously made the decision that you accepted the limitation in rights/etc in exchange for convenience/etc, but most average consumers do not.

Re: iPhone 6

#294
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And obviously the same thing holds for the Watch and the bigger iPhone: they were in development for at least a couple of years, iterating and refining them. Sources or guessing? I think the similarity of how the iWatch and the Android watches work is too similar to be a coincidence. There's some cool software work on Apple's watch, and I believe it'll generally be a better product overall. But it looks just like s…

> Sources or guessing? Neither. For one, it's obvious that any such products needs at least 1-2 years to design, manufacture prototypes, etc. Second, we've seen several previous exposes of how Apple developed new stuff (iPad was in the labs for 7-8 years, the iPhone the same, etc, and there have been galleries of the tons of prototypes they checked published). So, I was basically just stating the obvious. > I think t…

> Neither. For one, it's obvious that any such products needs at least 1-2 years to design, manufacture prototypes, etc. Second, we've seen several previous exposes of how Apple developed new stuff (iPad was in the labs for 7-8 years, the iPhone the same, etc, and there have been galleries of the tons of prototypes they checked published). So, I was basically just stating the obvious.

Good, so then you must agree that Samsung couldn't possibly have just slapped together a design and manufactured hundreds of thousands of watches in a few months. Even Samsung must take time to bring a product to market. If you truly believe Samsung just craps out devices, then you're also claiming they're among the most efficient design, production and marketing organizations on the planet. Nobody would even come close.

> Well, people already had a uncanillity similar experience to Android watches 5 or so years ago, by strapping an iPod mini to a wrist strap.

Can you link to what you're talking about?

> It's a watch that talks to a smartphone and has a computer screen, so of course its similar in that, but that's inevitable.

I don't think it's inevitable or obvious at all. Given the instructions "go make a smart watch" I can think of half a dozen completely different ideas right off the bat, none of which are what smart watches look like or how they work -- I never would have required tethering at all for example. I personally think cramming down the pinch and swipe smartphone metaphor into a device that size is not a good solution, I think all of the competitors (except pebble) failed in that respect.

It's like if somebody told you to "make me a device that will transport me distances using an engine". While you could have come up with anything from a boat to a train to rocket propelled rollerskates, instead you and your competitor both "independently" arrive at solutions which are basically different trim levels of this year's Toyota Camry, except one has a stick shift.

Odds of that happening are close enough to zero to be effectively the same. So either Samsung has the best industrial espionage team on the planet (doubtful) or Apple just waited for the competition to jump first and then just followed the trendlines and produced a really polished as hell version of what they were fumbling around with (likely).

In fact, Apple could have copied and refined the Pebble instead and knocked it out of the park. By so blatantly copying what's going on in Android land, it leads to too many unfavorable comparisons. They could have completely broken away from that path Samsung has set and gone with a smaller, sleeker, more elegant device. By refining the Samsung template, Apple just leads itself to comparisons, even if the final product is super polished. Basically, if Apple was going to make a car, they needed to make a Tesla or an Ariel Atom, not a top spec Camry (with a stick shift).

> The Samsung version is sub par in every way.

On this we can completely agree. I'm not impressed with the Android smart watches at all. I don't see a good use for them, they're overpriced, underspec'd and don't provide me with anything I wouldn't rather just do with my phone (and in fact require my phone to be nearby anyway).

That's why I'm so disappointed with Apple's offering, even though it's just the Android watch polished to the n-th degree. In the end the whole direction is just a "meh" idea to me.

Imagine instead an Apple polish to a pebble style watch, no tethering required, all the watch faces and notifications and canned responses, week-long battery life, none of this swipe and nub nonsense, beautiful Apple design (Pebble watches all look like something I would have loved when I was 12, but not 40) and flawless execution.

Apple's refinement of Samsung's ideas aren't even particularly tasteful. Imagine if the interface looked like this instead http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/7/5477768/gabor-balogh-circul... or this https://dribbble.com/shots/1197072-My-iWatch-Concept-Overvie...

Or used a pixel qi display so you could use it equally well indoors or outdoors.

Or a long thin screen http://www.tuvie.com/wp-content/uploads/nissan-nismo-smartwa...

Or hell like the Samsung Gear Fit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ro1sRmxu4BM

What you're failing to understand is that I'm not saying Apple copying Samsung is bad because they copied Samsung (who gets credit isn't important), it's bad because, given a possible universe of ideas they could have followed instead, they copied a crappy design idea and then polished that turd until it shined. But it's still just a ball of poo.

Re: iPhone 6

#295
post #233
post #171

I like the look of my iPhone 5s much better. This iPhone 6 thing looks like a Galaxy. The throwback to iPhone 1 is interesting but count me out. Not liking the design at all The protruding camera is also really weird. I wonder if Jobs would have signed off on that... Who knows though. Maybe once I hold one personally I'll end up liking it more than the 5s. But I would be surprised :)

Most people put Apple phones in cases anyway, so does it really even matter much how the bare phone looks? It doesn't to me. The protruding camera lens housing will probably be flush with a case.

I may be in the minority, but I don't use a case. Kind of defeats the purpose of a nice looking, slim phone.

Re: iPhone 6

#296
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

".... as well as DSLRs". Dammit, better sell off those Zeiss master primes and get me some Apple glass ;)

It's got "Focus Pixels" man! You'd be crazy not to!

Woah guy ... you mean to say focus can pixels now? Now I'm impressed.

Re: iPhone 6

#297
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have absolutely no need or desire for more than 16gb and certainly no need for a micro-SD card slot on my iPhone 5s. I barely use 8GB. I would imagine many people are the same way.

I keep a lot of pictures and videos I've recorded on my phone, as well as music. In addition I like having TV shows stored on my phone, for instance, every season of Archer, because I love that show and I don't want to use up my battery by streaming it constantly(especially when I'm on 6hr runs). My 5s is the 64GB model so I'm still doing quite fine on space, but I can definitely say I've used more than half of it al…

But that's why there are options. No need to up the minimum from 16GB IMO. Not everyone uses their phone as a mobile entertainment device. But some do.

Re: iPhone 6

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I like Apple products in general, but the whole overpriced/underpowered thing gets a little old. Funny, I'd say the same thing about the people who've been repeating the "overpriced/underpowered" trope ever since it stopped being true over a decade ago.

So you're OK with Safari crashing and other issues due to lack of RAM?

I still have an iPhone 4 and don't have Safari crashing issues.

Re: iPhone 6

#299
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, there's not much (if anything) they have gotten off of Samsung about these devices I have a black Samsung Galaxy S3. I held it up against the image of the iPhone 6, and they're barely different. The s3 has slightly bowed sides, and the two phones have a home button with a different shape. Oh, and the Apple phone doesn't have 'Samsung' written on the front (I haven't seen an image of the back, so you never know…

> I have a black Samsung Galaxy S3. I held it up against the image of the iPhone 6, and they're barely different. Was talking about the watches. But since you mentioned it, I had a look: http://www.hitechmobiles.co.nz/uploads/images/Samsung_Galaxy... This is like iPhone 6 in the sense that Times New Roman is like Helvetica. They are both fonts after all. Different buttons, different curves, different materials, diffe…

The iPhone 6 looks like the Galaxy S3 in the same way that the Galaxy S2 looked like the iPhone.

Not to mention the whole "huge touch screen, minimal buttons smartphone" thing was pioneared by Apple already

So? It's irrelevant to my point: Apple took Samsung to the cleaners over a visual design patent (amongst others), and I'm saying that this phone looks a hell of a lot like the S3.

Yes, if you look at the screen, it's android vs ios and doesn't look similar, but the hardware lines, button placement, curled edges, earpiece are all very similar. The home button is a little different - but again, these kinds of difference are the same in magnitude as S2 v iPhone. For example, the home button on the S2 was an oblong ringed with metal, wheras the home button on the iPhone is a circle. Apparently that's visual-design-patent-infringing for Samsung, but a marker of innovative distinction for Apple?

Was talking about the watches.

Then make that clearer, because you sound diversionary in saying this. The article is about the iPhone. The parent comment mentions watches in passing, but is primarily about the iPhone. You spent half your comment talking about ipads and iphones right after the bit I quoted.

Re: iPhone 6

#300
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BTW, a quick review of Gruber's analysis. http://daringfireball.net/2014/08/larger_iphone_display_conj... Spot on for the 6, off for the 6+. So what does this mean for 6+ users and developers?

With hindsight, I don't think a resolution higher than 1080p was ever an option for Apple. Wasn't the original Retina display touted close to the limit of human perception ? Regardless of marketingspeak, higher resolution displays have unclear benefits, since possibly people won't notice difference in sharpness, and clear drawbacks, as increased battery consumption: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/06/lg-g3-review…

Regardless, it seems that Gruber was partly right:

https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/status/50943816728054988...

Post reply on HN