crosslad

I believe iMore did a blind camera test last year and iPhone didn't come out on top. Most smartphone cameras these days are good. I'm not convinced someone would switch platforms over the camera though.

elijahg said:

entropys said:

The best bit of the slide was how irrelevant surface sales are, a little blip waaaay out on the end. Although I find 0.3m hard to believe, you see them around a fair bit.

anyway, back on topic, what What NHT and Soli said.

Here in the UK I see people with Surface tablets more often than iPads, but both are much less common than laptops. How about comparing iPads to the rest of the tablet market, Timmy? Once upon a time Apple was miles out ahead in terms of tablet sales. I do think they have missed the boat a bit with the iPad: iPad is still essentially a giant iPhone, whereas the Surface tablet is a full blown Windows PC. I find I still can't do a lot of things I need to on an iPad, so I still need a "proper" computer to do the rest. I expected the iPad's OS to slowly evolve toward more of desktop metaphor, but it seems Apple pretty much abandoned it software wise between about 2012 and 2016, and even now it's still really a giant iPhone. The UI still feels simplified and lacking power. For some of course this is great, it allows you to focus on one task and carry it out really well, but as soon as you try and do something that's not in Apple's very structured workflow, it's a real hassle.

The danger is when developers decide not to put their apps in the App Store, forcing you to side load from the web. 

gatorguy said:

An app from Apple's AppStore will be just as secure and malware-free as it is now whether 3rd party stores/sideloading is permitted or not. It changes nothing for an iPhone owner who uses only the first-party store. 

No one is saying Apple needs to make it as easy to sideload as not. FWIW Google makes it fairly difficult to do so now, so even if it can be done they definitely strongly discourage it with change settings in an obscure place most people would never see. Allowing a user choice of what applications to load on their own personal $1000 expenditure puts the onus where it belongs. The only legitimate reason not to is purely profit-based and not because they're "saving us from ourselves". 

We buy homes and add furniture we choose from whatever source we wish, no payment to the architect or the builder. We buy cars and change out the audio, headlights, et.al sourced from wherever we wish, no permission required from the auto manufacturer or fee to be paid.  We buy computers and laptops and add programs from any developer we wish, no stipend needs to be paid to the computer vendor or manufacturer. But we buy a smartphone and can only add applications that the provider further profits from and/or offers themselves?

EDIT: As I said, it's not a simple thing to sideload on Android now. It requires more than a bit of familiarity with the system structure and so not something Cesar's grandmas and aunts would accidentally do.

Pull down from the top and tap Settings. Then nestled among a dozen or so main collections from Security (which is where I would have expected it to be) to Privacy to System, go to Apps. where you're presented with all your recently opened ones and an option to see all of them. Nothing there indicates anything about outside sources or 3rd party stores or anything else. Where they've hidden it is in yet another sub-menu; Special App Access. Even there you won't find it on the first page of options.

Down near the bottom if you scroll far enough will be "Install unknown apps", a disconcerting title.  Now tapping that makes it even more difficult because you then are offered several different categories of personal devices, products, files and browsers where you will choose to allow it, but which one?? By default they are all disallowed.  Yup, daunting for someone with little knowldege.

Apple can do the same, make it pretty darn hard, in fact near impossible, for mom, pop and that great aunt to accidentally load an app that comes from an unsafe place. Only the knowledgeable will be able to do so.

GeorgeBMac said:

crosslad said:

But hypocritical coming from someone who made a fortune with PayPal.

Paypal was the first major effort into FinTech which is revolutionizing the financial industry.   That's what Musk does.

Paypal still takes a cut of every payment made, which is what he is accusing Apple of. 

avon b7 said:

coolfactor said:

Who thinks these look good? They almost have a retro feeling to them. Modern? Futuristic? No.

And case makers will have a fun time wrapping around that bar.

I think they look very ugly. Like something from a faded 70's sci-fi film.

But...

There will be no camera bump wobble for those who dislike that, and once encased in your favourite case, could look much more modern.