In article <tpi1lp$9v9f$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> However for smart phones it's not the case. Just look at the history.
> The iPhone was later than Android with 3G,

nope. the first iphone with 3g came out *before* the first android
phone of any kind, which amusingly enough, did not have an analog
headphone jack.

now if you had said android was first with no analog headphone jack,
you would have been correct.

> 4G,

technically true, however, the first android phone with 4g had battery
run time of a couple of hours. it could not last past lunch time, which
meant people had to turn*off* 4g to get a day's worth of use.

in other words, it was useless. not only that, but the 4g cellular
infrastructure was not built out, so even with it on, it didn't make
much of a difference.

> 5G,

technically true, however, as you did above, you're ignoring is that
the first android 5g phones also had poor battery life and overheated
as well. joanna stern couldn't complete her testing without putting the
phones into a cooler.

as with 4g, 5g wasn't built out at the time and it was extremely rare
for the early 5g phones to actually get 5g service. this is still true
today indoors with mmw.

worse, some of those early 5g phones were based on draft standards and
are not compatible with the final version, which means early buyers
need to buy a new phone to use on the existing network. sometimes it's
best to *not* be first.

> NFC,

true, although there was very little use for it until apple pay, which
was first to use industry standard emv processing.

> IP68, OLED
> screens,

lower quality ones, yes.

> multi-lens cameras, phablets,

phablets happened because battery life with 4g was poor and needed a
larger phone to house a larger battery.

> wireless charging, 120Hz LTPO
> displays,

true, however, the first ones did not run at full resolution and also
drained the battery faster. note that 120hz is not needed for most
common tasks, such as taking and viewing photos, texting, reading
email, etc.

apple was first with variable refresh rate displays, which are *far*
more power efficient.

> reverse wireless charging (except for the MagSafe battery
> pack),

that is a completely useless feature.

for iphones, it's only to simplify charging both the battery pack and
the phone at the same time, using one cable.

> hole punch cameras,

that's because the camera is less functional due to not having face id.

obviously, if you have a lesser functional camera array, you can use
less space for it. that's not a benefit.

> USB-C,

true, however, lightning predates usb-c.

usb-c doesn't offer much real world advantage over lightning. 15-20w
charging is more than sufficient in nearly every case and data transfer
is almost entirely done wirelessly.

apple is transitioning their entire product line to usb-c over several
years.

> folding displays,

that's a gimmick with technology that's nowhere near mature.

folding phones are significantly less durable and it is more than twice
as thick (including the gap at the hinge).

the first samgung galaxy fold review units failed within a day, forcing
samsung to delay the actual product introduction.

what might be interesting is a folding *tablet* that can fold to
roughly the size of a large phone.

> active styluses,

low quality ones, sure.

nothing comes close to the apple pencil, another apple first.

> under-screen fingerprint readers,

those do not work particularly well. they are slow, unreliable and less
secure than face id or even touch id, both apple firsts.

> and eSIMs.

nope. apple was first with the apple sim, which is what eventually
became an esim.

> These all came later than
> Android phones (or are all likely coming on future iPhones).

you're ignoring all of the numerous features that were first on ios.
here's a list of just some of them:

retina display, 64-bit processor, gorilla glass, bluetooth le, uwb,
secure enclave, satellite sos, colorsync, truetone, face id, wide gamut
displays, airprint, heif/hevc, apple sim, 3d touch, magsafe, find my
network, airdrop, universal control, lidar, arkit, healthkit, homekit,
gymkit, carplay, continuity & handoff, quick transfer, bitcode, thread,
matter, passkey, continuity camera facetime handoff, centerstage, tap
to pay, dynamic lock screen, apple pencil, apple pencil hover, apple
watch mirroring, app tracking transparency, deskview, bluetooth pair
sync, icloud wifi calling, safety check, simultaneous vpn, live listen,
differential privacy and instant hotspot.

note that most of those are actually very useful in the real world,
versus a checklist of things such as 'hole punch camera' or 5g that
causes the phone to overheat and shut down.

> Even when the technology is ready, Apple tends to carefully meter out
> the inclusion of new features in order to create continuous demand for
> upgrades.

nope. they definitely do *not* do that. that is nothing more than
another easily debunked myth.

what apple does is release features when they're ready.

other companies often release features *before* they're ready, which is
why the first android 4g phone couldn't last past lunchtime and why the
under-screen fingerprint sensors are awful.

releasing a feature just to be first when it doesn't actually work that
well (or at all) is not a good business strategy.

> For Android, there's competition among Android device makers to bring
> out new features to not be left behind, but there's not the similar
> pressure on Apple.

nonsense. the entire android ecosystem is competition.

> Few users are going to move from iPhone to Android in
> order to get a new feature a year or two sooner, they'll just wait for
> Apple to bring out that feature.

the opposite it far more common because of all of the features ios has
that android lacks or has a worse implementation. see above for a
partial list.

On 2023-01-09, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2023, nospam wrote
> (in article<060120231724072811%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>
>> In article<tpa1gk$c37$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
>> <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > > > Even so, Apple's intense resistance to fitting to common standards wasn't
>> > > > due to the royalty fees, imho, and I doubt you believe it was either.
>> > >
>> > > except that apple was first to adopt usb-c with the retina macbook,
>> > > more than 7 years ago, transitioning other products over time.
>> >
>> > And yet, we're on an iPhone newsgroup talking about iPhone ownership cost.
>> >
>> > Not macbooks. Not iPads. But iPhones.
>>
>> your claim is that apple has 'intense resistance to fitting to common
>> standards'.
>>
>> if that were at all true, then they would not be first to adopt usb-c
>> on anything.
>>
>> you are wrong. again.
>
> Apple was also early to USB 1, with the original iMac, more than 20 years
> ago. And early to USB 2. And FireWire. And Thunderbolt. And were pioneers in
> the move away from floppies. And the move to SSDs.
>
> Arlen’s an idiot.

Yes, and his trolls are extremely weak.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2023-01-09, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <tphsmt$d8e$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
><spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> If Apple loves USB as much as you desperate revisionists would want
>> it to be, then why is Apple only now just beginning to replace the
>> completely non-standard now-worthless POS iPhone lightning connector
>> with USB-C?
>
> apple started moving to usb-c *eight* years ago, with the first laptop
> in the industry to have usb-c.

Yes, and Lightning is actually a terrific connector as well. It's
actually superior to USB-C in significant ways, not the least of which
is port longevity and robustness. But that doesn't fit the troll
narrative so it is ignored by the dimwits.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

In article <k241kpF7e4qU3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> If Apple loves USB as much as you desperate revisionists would want
> >> it to be, then why is Apple only now just beginning to replace the
> >> completely non-standard now-worthless POS iPhone lightning connector
> >> with USB-C?
> >
> > apple started moving to usb-c *eight* years ago, with the first laptop
> > in the industry to have usb-c.
>
> Yes, and Lightning is actually a terrific connector as well. It's
> actually superior to USB-C in significant ways, not the least of which
> is port longevity and robustness. But that doesn't fit the troll
> narrative so it is ignored by the dimwits.

there are advantages and disadvantages to everything.

usb-c on a macbook in 2015 made sense.

usb-c on an iphone in 2015 did not, especially since apple had *just*
switched to lightning three years earlier. switching to a new connector
that soon would have *really* pissed off customers.

nospam wrote:

> apple started moving to usb-c *eight* years ago, with the first laptop
> in the industry to have usb-c

Then Apple is incompetent as hell because even today, Apple still can't
figure out how to put a USB-C port on the latest thousand dollar iPhone.

Jolly Roger wrote:

> Yes, and Lightning is actually a terrific connector as well.

Think about what you just said, Jolly Roger, and think logically.

If that laughably poorly designed now-worthless lightning connector wasn't
such a non-standard piece of crap, don't you think everyone would have put
lighting ports on their smartphones by now?

nospam wrote:

> usb-c on an iphone in 2015 did not, especially since apple had *just*
> switched to lightning three years earlier. switching to a new connector
> that soon would have *really* pissed off customers.

Hi nospam,

You say Apple started trying to design using the USB standards eight years
ago, right, and yet Apple is so incompetent they _still_ can't figure out
how to put a USB-C port on an iPhone, right?

Your argument that Apple is incompetent even I have trouble believing.

sms wrote:

> However for smart phones it's not the case. Just look at the history.
> The iPhone was later than Android with 3G, 4G, 5G, NFC, IP68, OLED
> screens, multi-lens cameras, phablets, wireless charging, 120Hz LTPO
> displays, reverse wireless charging (except for the MagSafe battery
> pack), hole punch cameras, USB-C, folding displays, active styluses,
> under-screen fingerprint readers, and eSIMs. These all came later than
> Android phones (or are all likely coming on future iPhones).
>
> Even when the technology is ready, Apple tends to carefully meter out
> the inclusion of new features in order to create continuous demand for
> upgrades.
>
> For Android, there's competition among Android device makers to bring
> out new features to not be left behind, but there's not the similar
> pressure on Apple. Few users are going to move from iPhone to Android in
> order to get a new feature a year or two sooner, they'll just wait for
> Apple to bring out that feature.

I commend Steve for his assessment above, which he got correct as far as I
can tell, which is that Apple is always behind the curve on new tech for
smartphones - where Apple is a MARKETING company - NOT a design house.

Apple simply copies the hardware that works on Android, since Apple is a
leader in MARKETING and a distant third or fourth in smartphone hardware.

On the flip side, Android makers COPY Apple marketing gimmicks (like
removing the sdcard so people are forced to pay more for storage).

In summary, Steve seems to know the iPhone hardware situation better than
the iKooks who always seem to be ignorant of all the things Apple does.

nospam wrote:

> now if you had said android was first with no analog headphone jack,
> you would have been correct.

One way it's easy to tell the iKooks have no education and low IQ is their
arguments are ridiculously sophomoric in that an early twenty dollar phone
with no headphone jack doesn't have any bearing on the fact that Apple
designed the iPhone to cost more in terms of almost everything you connect
to it - which is why Apple removed the headphone jack.

Apple removed the headphone jack to make it more expensive to buy it back.

Meanwhile, most Android have a headphone jack and an sd card slot, both of
which the iPhone lacks because the iPhone is _designed_ for higher TOC.

> technically true, however, the first android phone with 4g had battery
> run time of a couple of hours. it could not last past lunch time, which
> meant people had to turn*off* 4g to get a day's worth of use.

Again, your arguments, nospam, are that of a kindergarten child given the
iPhones of today all have laughably puny batteries compared to Androids.

> technically true, however, as you did above, you're ignoring is that
> the first android 5g phones also had poor battery life and overheated
> as well. joanna stern couldn't complete her testing without putting the
> phones into a cooler.

Again, all your arguments show you're completely unaware of the fact that
iPhone batteries will ALWAYS die sooner (far sooner in fact) than Android
batteries simply because the aging process is the same on both - but - the
iPhone batteries start at a laughably puny size - which is just ridiculous.

> as with 4g, 5g wasn't built out at the time and it was extremely rare
> for the early 5g phones to actually get 5g service. this is still true
> today indoors with mmw.

If Apple hadn't surrendered to Qualcomm to the tune of about ten billion
dollars (enough to equip an entire navy), Apple would be bankrupt today.

That's how important 5G is.

> worse, some of those early 5g phones were based on draft standards and
> are not compatible with the final version, which means early buyers
> need to buy a new phone to use on the existing network. sometimes it's
> best to *not* be first.

I wonder if you realize Apple would be bankrupt today without Qualcomm?

>> NFC,
>
> true, although there was very little use for it until apple pay, which
> was first to use industry standard emv processing.

The fact is Apple spends almost nothing in R&D compared to a tech company
like Samsung - where almost all of Apple's spending is in MARKETING.

On 2023-01-09 19:57, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> apple started moving to usb-c *eight* years ago, with the first laptop
>> in the industry to have usb-c
>
> Then Apple is incompetent as hell because even today, Apple still can't
> figure out how to put a USB-C port on the latest thousand dollar iPhone.

This is a more obvious brand of bullshit than your usual, Arlen.

Apple has put USB-C onto several iPads now, so clearly they can do it on
an iPhone if they want to do it.

On 2023-01-09 19:59, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Yes, and Lightning is actually a terrific connector as well.
>
> Think about what you just said, Jolly Roger, and think logically.
>
> If that laughably poorly designed now-worthless lightning connector wasn't
> such a non-standard piece of crap, don't you think everyone would have put
> lighting ports on their smartphones by now?

Because Apple owned it and wouldn't license it for anyone else's use.

On 09/01/2023 22:35, nospam wrote:

>> The iPhone was later than Android with 3G,
>
> nope.

The point goes to nospam (iphone).
That's 0 for sms (android) & 1 for nospam (iphone)
>> 4G,
>
> technically true

1 for sms (android) & still 1 for nospam (iphone)

>> 5G,
>
> technically true

2 for sms (android) & still 1 for nospam (iphone)

>> NFC,
>
> true

3 for sms (android) & still only 1 for nospam (iphone)

>
>> IP68, OLED screens,
>
> yes

4 for sms (android) & still only 1 for nospam (iphone)

>> multi-lens cameras, phablets,
>
> phablets happened

5 for sms (android) & still only 1 for nospam (iphone)

>
>> wireless charging, 120Hz LTPO displays,
>
> true

+5 & +6 for sms (android) and still only 1 for nospam (iphone)

> apple was first with variable refresh rate displays

6 for sms (android) and now 2 for nospam (iphone)

>> reverse wireless charging (except for the MagSafe battery
>> pack),
>
> that is a ... feature.

7 for sms (android) and 2 for nospam (iphone)

>> hole punch cameras,
>
> that's because

8 for android and 2 for iphone

>> USB-C,
>
> true

9 for android and 2 for iphone

>> folding displays,
> the first samgung galaxy fold

10 for android and only 2 for iphone

>
>> active styluses,
> sure.

11 for android and only 2 for iphone

>> under-screen fingerprint readers,
> they are slow

12 for android and only 2 for iphone

>
>> and eSIMs.
>
> nope. apple was first with the apple sim, which is what eventually
> became an esim.

13 for android and only 2 for iphone (esim is not sim)

> other companies often release features *before* they're ready

You mean like Apple Maps?

On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 8:47:09 PM, Alan wrote:

> they can do it on
> an iPhone if they want to do it.

Then why don't they do it?

On 1/9/2023 8:54 PM, cris wrote:

Yes, it's true that the iPhone 3G, while not the first 3G phone, came
out three months before the first Android 3G phone. My mistake. Made
that clear in the document as well.

On 2023-01-09 21:06, Thomas wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 8:47:09 PM, Alan wrote:
>
>> they can do it on
>> an iPhone if they want to do it.
>
> Then why don't they do it?

They have a large customer base that has a great number of devices and
accessories for which Lightning is the required connector.

Why do you think they don't do it?

You agree that they very clearly can, right? You're not that pigheaded
and/or ignorant, are you?

On 09/01/2023 17:36, Jerry wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 08:42:47 -0800, sms wrote:
>
>> Samsung - Galaxy S22 Ultra 128GB (Unlocked) - $1099
>> Google - Pixel 7 Pro 128GB (Unlocked) - $899
>> Apple - iPhone 14 Pro Max 128GB - $1099 (locked, Best Buy doesn't sell
>> it unlocked)
>>
>> Bottom line, the TCO for comparable Android and iPhone devices is not
>> very different, even when you don't take into account other factors.
>
> That's only the sales price.
> What about the other costs of ownership?
> Where are they?

There aren't any ;-P

On 1/10/2023 4:30 AM, Chris wrote:
> On 09/01/2023 17:36, Jerry wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 08:42:47 -0800, sms wrote:
>>
>>> Samsung - Galaxy S22 Ultra 128GB (Unlocked) - $1099
>>> Google - Pixel 7 Pro 128GB (Unlocked) - $899
>>> Apple - iPhone 14 Pro Max 128GB - $1099 (locked, Best Buy doesn't
>>> sell it unlocked)
>>>
>>> Bottom line, the TCO for comparable Android and iPhone devices is not
>>> very different, even when you don't take into account other factors.
>>
>> That's only the sales price.
>> What about the other costs of ownership?
>> Where are they?
>
> There aren't any ;-P

Sure there are.

One advantage of the iPhone TCO is the incredible selection of low-cost
after-market accessories. I can walk over to my local variety store,
Daiso, and buy iPhone accessories like cases and screen protectors at
very low prices, usually $1.75. Can't do that for Android phones, there
are just way too many different devices to make this possible.

For Android phones, since no models sell in such huge quantities, buying
those accessories generally requires ordering them from Amazon,
Aliexpress, eBay, or from the carrier where you bought the phone.

For after-market chargers, the same USB-C PD chargers can be used on
both iPhones and Android phones, there is no cost difference.

If you want to buy accessories from the manufacturer, prices are
comparable. A Samsung 25W USB-C PD wired charger is $19.99. An Apple 20W
USB-C PD wired charger is $19.00.

In any case, those extra costs for Android devices are not enormous.

In article <tpirok$309cm$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Thomas
<canope234@gmail.com> wrote:

> Then why don't they do it?

because of an install base of more than 1 billion devices, whose owners
are not going to be happy to be forced to replace all of their cables
and accessories for a different connector that offers little real world
benefit.

families with more than one phone will now have to manage multiple
cables and accessories, unless they decide to replace every phone in
the family, which is unrealistic.

In article <tpir1u$2nd2s$1@news.mixmin.net>, cris
<cris@removespam.me.com> wrote:

> >> reverse wireless charging (except for the MagSafe battery
> >> pack),
> >
> > that is a ... feature.
>
> 7 for sms (android) and 2 for nospam (iphone)

you are editing to alter context.

rest of your edited crap deleted.

I broke out the Total Cost of Ownership data into a separate document.

See
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BUZuX-i1set7ktS4lbfGBmzdiCLAoOKfqp0ZSOrZlhk/>

Let me know if anyone sees any errors.

On 1/10/2023 8:05 AM, sms wrote:

> One advantage of the iPhone TCO is the incredible selection of
> low-cost after-market accessories. I can walk over to my local
> variety store, Daiso, and buy iPhone accessories like cases and
> screen protectors at very low prices, usually $1.75. Can't do that
> for Android phones, there are just way too many different devices to
> make this possible.

The wife's iPhone is over 2 years old and my Galaxy s10+ is over 3 years
old. I don't find any specific accessories for either model in my local
stores anymore these days. Likely because they wouldn't sell well anyway.

> For Android phones, since no models sell in such huge quantities,
> buying those accessories generally requires ordering them from
> Amazon, Aliexpress, eBay, or from the carrier where you bought the
> phone.

Perhaps true if you needed anything. We haven't needed anything since
the beginning. Neither case has broken or worn out...

> For after-market chargers, the same USB-C PD chargers can be used on
> both iPhones and Android phones, there is no cost difference.

We both use aftermarket wireless chargers that service both phones.

> If you want to buy accessories from the manufacturer, prices are
> comparable. A Samsung 25W USB-C PD wired charger is $19.99. An Apple
> 20W USB-C PD wired charger is $19.00.
>
> In any case, those extra costs for Android devices are not enormous.

They've been zero in my case (after initial purchases) but I'm just one
example, and probably not the norm. New phones are likely on the horizon
and since we always get the premium models the extra costs are a small
consideration in comparison. YMMV of course...

On 1/10/2023 8:56 AM, AJL wrote:
> On 1/10/2023 8:05 AM, sms wrote:
>
>> One advantage of the iPhone TCO is the incredible selection of
>> low-cost after-market accessories. I can walk over to my local
>> variety store, Daiso, and buy iPhone accessories like cases and
>> screen protectors at very low prices, usually $1.75. Can't do that
>> for Android phones, there are just way too many different devices to
>> make this possible.
>
> The wife's iPhone is over 2 years old and my Galaxy s10+ is over 3 years
> old. I don't find any specific accessories for either model in my local
> stores anymore these days. Likely because they wouldn't sell well anyway.

In the stores near me, you can usually find accessories for iPhones 0-3
years old. Older than that, unless the phone has the same size body or
screen as a newer model then the accessories are not available. For new
models, the accessories don't appear for three to four months after release.

For screen protectors, since many new models have the same screen and
cutout as older models, you can still get screen protectors.

For a phone like the Xr, the cases for the 11 still fit, though you have
a larger camera cutout on the 11.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 1/10/2023 4:30 AM, Chris wrote:
>> On 09/01/2023 17:36, Jerry wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 08:42:47 -0800, sms wrote:
>>>
>>>> Samsung - Galaxy S22 Ultra 128GB (Unlocked) - $1099
>>>> Google - Pixel 7 Pro 128GB (Unlocked) - $899
>>>> Apple - iPhone 14 Pro Max 128GB - $1099 (locked, Best Buy doesn't
>>>> sell it unlocked)
>>>>
>>>> Bottom line, the TCO for comparable Android and iPhone devices is not
>>>> very different, even when you don't take into account other factors.
>>>
>>> That's only the sales price.
>>> What about the other costs of ownership?
>>> Where are they?
>>
>> There aren't any ;-P
>
> Sure there are.

Whoosh

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> I broke out the Total Cost of Ownership data into a separate document.
>
> See
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BUZuX-i1set7ktS4lbfGBmzdiCLAoOKfqp0ZSOrZlhk/>
>
> Let me know if anyone sees any errors.

It's mostly useless outside of the US. Please don't post it in an
international forum.

In article <tpkcr3$k3sp$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:

> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> > Let me know if anyone sees any errors.
>
> It's mostly useless outside of the US. Please don't post it in an
> international forum.

or at all, since it's deeply flawed.