561–570 of 874 posts
I don't like Google because they're gonna use my data against me. I don't like Apple because it's a walled garden and millions other reasons. I don't like Samsung because they bloat Android. I don't like Huawei because I don't trust the Chinese government to not do stuff to it. I don't like LG and HTC because the smartphone market is slipping away from them. Am I just getting old?
Why is Google still insisting (with 7.1) that the 3 navigation keys (menu, home and back) need to be on screen - either wasting real-estate or annoyingly hidden - requiring a swipe to expose them? Old Android phones used to have hardware or software keys that were off the bottom of the screen - and in fact my Xiaomi Mi Note Pro still does - it frees the entire screen for content. If the '3 keys' regularly changed mea…
For example, there's an XPosed module which let's you swipe to the right over the navigation keys to change them out for music controls. If you swipe to the left, you can access some apps that you've pinned there as well as quick-toggles for system settings (such as WiFi on/off).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
iOS is in a tough position, the road of incremental changes is coming to an end. The icon-based home screen is showing it's age and will need a revolution rather than an evolution. You can kinda see Apple dipping it toes into the widget arena with the notifications area, yet they're probably hesitant to remake the whole home screen and risk alienating their current users. Tech savvy people won't mind a new home scree…
> The icon-based home screen is showing it's age and will need a revolution rather than an evolution. Why? It is easy, intuitive, and used by millions of people. Change for changes sake?
Notifications are great for things that need your attention but the home screen becomes a little more of a seredipious view of app information that can increase the usefulness and engagement with an app
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not sure I agree with this. I've been on android for a while, so I'm sure I'm biased, but stock AOSP Android is pretty much perfect for me. Very minimal and aesthetically beautiful, but still powerful and customizable. This is the go-to line for every Android fan. How many devices out there run stock Android? Is it possible to buy a device with stock Android? How much comp-sci experience are you going to need to ma…
Other than Nexus/Pixel phones there are plenty of manufacturers that use flavours of Android that are very similar to stock. It's unfortunate that for many people the go-to alternative to the iPhone are Galaxy phones which only helps to tarnish the experience and overall impression most people have for Android.
I don't like Google because they're gonna use my data against me. I don't like Apple because it's a walled garden and millions other reasons. I don't like Samsung because they bloat Android. I don't like Huawei because I don't trust the Chinese government to not do stuff to it. I don't like LG and HTC because the smartphone market is slipping away from them. Am I just getting old?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is a matter of personal taste. I personally don't like the material design. I enjoy the thin typography and design of iOS, and finding myself enjoying the experience of "Messages" in iOS at the moment. The "tapback" feature letting me heart/thumbs up some message is elegantly done IMO. And the knowledge that the receiver is also getting it the way I intended is great.
Design is not a matter of personal taste. It either achieves the goals of the designer or it doesn't. It can be evaluated on a purely objective basis. You're talking about style, which is about expression more than outcomes, and is received in a very personal way. When someone reacts so negatively to material design that they won't use it, that is a failure. There's no matter of opinion there. The purpose of the desi…
I would agree that I don't prefer Material design. It feels, to me, too much of a lowest-common-denominator.
While I wouldn't use it, if I feel frustrated or find usage unpalatable, that to me is an indicator of inferior design.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is a matter of personal taste. I personally don't like the material design. I enjoy the thin typography and design of iOS, and finding myself enjoying the experience of "Messages" in iOS at the moment. The "tapback" feature letting me heart/thumbs up some message is elegantly done IMO. And the knowledge that the receiver is also getting it the way I intended is great.
Design is not a matter of personal taste. It either achieves the goals of the designer or it doesn't. It can be evaluated on a purely objective basis. You're talking about style, which is about expression more than outcomes, and is received in a very personal way. When someone reacts so negatively to material design that they won't use it, that is a failure. There's no matter of opinion there. The purpose of the desi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies that play that loss leader strategy almost always fail. Apple would be over the moon if all their competitors were doing this.
If they fail at doing it, then you'll be able to tell by market share or percentage of industry revenue. But profit share as a metric would have it that even if Google succeeds and lowers Apple's market share and revenue, but in doing so causes itself serious losses, that's somehow good for Apple. Which is stupid, and particularly so in the case of the competing platforms market of this, where even if a strategy ends…
Having money means you can continue to keep up with the investments in technology needed to stay relevant in the mobile phone business.
And the reason people keep bringing up the profit share metric is because companies like HTC, Sony, LG were running at losses for so many years that it put in jeopardy their continued presence in the mobile phone market. And nobody wants to buy a phone that isn't supported in a year or two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see how you conveniently avoided listing their thickness. HTC 10 is 20% thicker then iPhone 7 plus.
Unlike the other dimensions, the difference between ridiculously thin and absurdly thin isn't terribly user-visible, especially given that many people will increase the thickness of their phones by more than that simply through their choice of protective case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what does this have that the year-old Nexus 6P and 5X don't, other than incremental hardware improvements? As someone who owns a 5X: - The Pixel is a premium 5" phone, not a budget one. It has a flagship SoC rather than a mid-tier SoC. - The camera is better and more responsive (the camera on the N5X is slow and annoying). - The body isn't plastic, which means there will be less issues with heat and CPU throttling…
If I'm in the market for a premium phone (and I am) then I either go with Apple which is known to deliver quality (I can buy a products without prior research because they are rarely bad) or I go with something innovative that is high quality. The Samsung Note 7 comes to mind with its phenomenal build (except for the explosions), display and some unusual features like a stylus and microSD slot. But what does the Pixe…