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

Apple Debuts iPhone 17

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 290 posts

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#191

Post by smlavine »

Macha wrote: post #159
fsflover wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you are searching for Librem 5 (my daily driver). It runs PureOS (a Debian derivative) and turns into a desktop when connected to a screen and keyboard.

It doesn't run my banks' apps so it can't be more than a secondary device for playing around.

Out of curiosity, how often do you use your bank's app? I don't have my bank's app on my phone. Pretty much nobody ever gives me paper checks, and all of my employers have strongly encouraged/required direct deposit as part of the usual onboarding process. If I want to check balance or move between checking/savings, I use their website. I have a debit card, and my (Android) phone has tap-to-pay built-in.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#192

Post by gumby271 »

Macha wrote: post #159
fsflover wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you are searching for Librem 5 (my daily driver). It runs PureOS (a Debian derivative) and turns into a desktop when connected to a screen and keyboard.

It doesn't run my banks' apps so it can't be more than a secondary device for playing around.

It appears there's a third priority then. That's not a criticism, it's true of all of us, I'm curious where it ranks and how you make that work with the other two. I'm in the same boat of being pissed at Google for destroying Android.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#193

Post by lazycouchpotato »

_aavaa_ wrote: post #177
lazycouchpotato wrote: post #173

256 GB base storage without a price increase is good to see. Makes the Mac Mini look weird now with 256 GB base storage. Pretty shameful of Google to stick to 128 GB on the Pixel 10.

The pixel 10 is different trade off. Base pixel is cheaper than base iPhone and has an extra camera, upgrading it to 256 gets you slightly more expensive. And for the pro models it flips with the pixel cheaper even with same storage.

Base Pixel 10 is the same as iPhone 17 at USD 800.

Yes the Pixel 10 now has telephoto but they nerfed the cameras from the Pixel 9 for that.

In the Pro models for both the pricing is comparable, yeah.

Also realized that Apple charges $200 to jump from 256 GB to 512 GB. That's ridiculous.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#194

Post by pertymcpert »

smlavine wrote: post #191
Macha wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't run my banks' apps so it can't be more than a secondary device for playing around.

Out of curiosity, how often do you use your bank's app? I don't have my bank's app on my phone. Pretty much nobody ever gives me paper checks, and all of my employers have strongly encouraged/required direct deposit as part of the usual onboarding process. If I want to check balance or move between checking/savings, I use their website. I have a debit card, and my (Android) phone has tap-to-pay built-in.

Millions of people in the US use their banking online apps. A lot of people don’t own a computer at all, just a mobile device.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#195

Post by secabeen »

mschaef wrote: post #165
prmoustache wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having said that you also have the midway option with large sensor compact cameras. A ricoh GR III/IV with an APS-C sensor is heavier than a smartphone but not overly so and more compact as it actually fit a pocket. A Canon G9X is even lighter with a 1" sensor.

Some of it's size, some of it the fact that the camera is a second device, and some of it's workflow. I tried a Sony RX100 (1" sensor) when they first came out, optimistic about the possibility of using it for 'general purpose' photography. After all, it's small enough. The problem was, it's a second device to carry around and keep charged. Then once you capture the image, it's largely stuck on the device until you f…

> Then once you capture the image, it's largely stuck on the device until you find a way to offload your images. I briefly experimented with cables that would let me do things like transfer images from the RX100 to my (Android at the time) mobile phone, for archiving and sending to family and friends. That turned the whole thing into the sort of science fair project that I didn't have time for as the parent of a very young child. (Although in fairness, I can't think of a single time in my life when I'd have had the patience, kids or not.)

Most modern cameras now have a WiFi-based photo transfer system that works pretty well. It's not instantaneous, but it is quick enough to copy the photo you want to share with a friend or partner while you finish a meal or drink your coffee.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#196

Post by exabrial »

I would really like stainless as a material, not AL/TI alloy. It'd be a few grams difference, but infinitely more scratch and bend resistant.

Maybe if the Larrin Thomas came up with some catchy new stainless formulation and called it AppleCut or something...

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#197

Post by rafram »

exabrial wrote: post #196

I would really like stainless as a material, not AL/TI alloy. It'd be a few grams difference, but infinitely more scratch and bend resistant. Maybe if the Larrin Thomas came up with some catchy new stainless formulation and called it AppleCut or something...

Pre-iPhone 15, the Pro models used stainless steel for the frame. Not sure exactly why they ditched it, but it did have a reputation for collecting fingerprints.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#198

Post by NoPicklez »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #148
skydhash wrote: post #3

Still no reason to upgrade. My shift from iPhone 8 to iPhone 13 was qualitative. Now much of the barrier to improvement is software, and they’re all gated by Apple.

USB C by itself is enough of a reason to upgrade. I have one set of cords that work everywhere and the iPhone supports all of the standard USB-C standards - video, storage, audio, and networking using the same devices you use on computers. And MagSafe charging and stands.

I don't know if it is enough of a reason, I still use by 12 and charge it and my Airpods all via magsafe which is USB-C

If I don't need to use the lightning port, I don't need to use what would be the USB C port.

I am looking to upgrade to the 17 potentially, but USB-C to me isn't a key factor.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#199

Post by NoPicklez »

kotaKat wrote: post #63
devrand wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the concern here? Can the phone not just be bought outright?

If I trade in my phone, I want my trade-in offer now . Instead, the full value of whatever trade-in deal provided is split over 36 months as bill credits. While the new phone might actually be “free” in one of these promotions, it’s not, naturally, because you’ve been thrown into a 36 month installment agreement separate of the cellphone service they’ve sold you on (that they also claim is “price locked” while indepe…

Then I'd just buy the phone outright and sell it at the end or use another trade in route through Apple directly

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#200

Post by npunt »

rafram wrote: post #197
exabrial wrote: post #196

I would really like stainless as a material, not AL/TI alloy. It'd be a few grams difference, but infinitely more scratch and bend resistant. Maybe if the Larrin Thomas came up with some catchy new stainless formulation and called it AppleCut or something...

Pre-iPhone 15, the Pro models used stainless steel for the frame. Not sure exactly why they ditched it, but it did have a reputation for collecting fingerprints.

The weight difference in the hand between the 14 pro in stainless and the 15 pro in titanium is considerable, I use both every day. Sometimes weight is a way to denote solid and premium like in watches, but with the size of phones and how we use them, being lightweight is really where it’s at.
Post reply on HN