iPhone 11 Pro review - Buy for the better camera, stay for the battery life

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 90
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    M68000 said:
    tyler82 said:
    Until these are notchless, I’ll pass.
    Apple seems to like it for whatever reason.  They must think that tiny bit of screen space is a good thing.  But it comes at a price.  The notch is both futuristic looking and distracting at the same time.  The eye is drawn to it often when looking at the new phones.   It may be possible to deal with it but it remains distracting.
    I'm slowly coming round to the conclusion that the notch hasn't aged well from a design perspective.

    At the time it was a necessary compromise for the objectives at hand. All notches were, but two years later, the exact same design with basically no improvement is beginning to look 'clunky' when compared to alternative options.

    Don't get me wrong, I never had a problem with them from the get go and my current phone has one. For me it is not a problem at all, but times change.

    We now have some spectacular full screen (or almost full screen) options on the market and choice in how to get them (sliders, pop-ups, hole punches).

    The main reason for Apple's notch was FaceID (a simple biometric) and that hasn't really changed to this date. They haven't really moved forward with it in other ways either. In fact, the hardware is basically the same. I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors but since the iPhone X, in-screen biometric options have come a long way. They are performing well.

    Two years later you look at the iPhone 11 Pro and the bezels and notch look bigger than they should be when others are doing more in less space or eliminating notches altogether.

    I'm not sure why reducing the notch space hasn't been tackled on the new iPhones.
    You lost me at "I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors".

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors were awful ergonomic design from day one because it was unavailable with the screen face up on a table or other surface. "But look how easy it is to slide your finger behind the phone to use it" you would state, which is still by definition. awful ergonomics.

    I would be surprised if any device maker still uses it.

    For the record, Apple fussing with the size and configuration of the notch, which isn't currently an issue at all, isn't going to happen because Apple already has a roadmap in place to fully replace Face ID sans notch.

    Why waste engineering resources shrinking it?
    We've been down this road before and nothing has changed since then.

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors are perfect ergonomic options. Many phones still use them.

    If you are are going to actually use your phone there is no better place than in your hand.

    If it is on a flat surface there is no problem. Why do you think double tap to wake was implemented? If it is 'mounted' (sat nav) there is no problem either as the screen doesn't turn off in the first place.

    It is strange that after using rear mounted scanners for years and having literally zero problems with ergonomics and use, the only people that tell me they are bad/wrong are those that have never even used one.

    As for making the notch smaller, it would make a massive difference in how the phone looks, competitors have not only already done this with dramatic results but they have managed to cram more tech inside and given that tech more uses.

    If Apple hasn't done the same it very probably only cost related and has little to do with engineering resources.

    The result is that it currently takes up most of the top part of the screen, which, as I said further up, may have been reasonable in 2017 but two years later (and unchanged) is now looking clunky. Especially as competitors have managed to free up much more space around it.

    As I've stated numerous times, Apple's iPhone mostly doesn't  compete in the same market as Android OS Device makers have to compete in. Given that there is net transfer of users to iPhone, the user base continues to grow. To date, there has been very little crossover of Apple users to flagship Android OS devices, even in China, where nationalism has made Huawei the countries champion, especially over other Chinese OEM's. And yeah, I've seen your posts on that.

    The constant change (chaos?) that is the Android OS device market, is really quite inefficient, and substantially effects margins, to the point that Apple's margins are over 4 times higher than Huawei's margins for its entire revenue (easily provable fact based on published revenue) while selling fewer iPhones at just under 3 times the ASP of Huawei (also an easily provable fact based on published revenue / units sold).

    Apple makes substantially more revenue selling fewer iPhones, and magnitudes fewer models, and of course gains a massive difference in profitability for that. Given the you are always noting that "Apple had to reprice iPhones to compete", I would state that tactic has likely only cost them a single point of margin to date. Considering that Apple's margins are about 38% and Huawei's 8.7%, there's a lot of room for Apple to maneuver on price, it they decide to. 

    Huawei will ship about 240 Million units this year, and Apple probably about 180 Million units, but considering the ASP and margins of Apple, it's not even a close contest. Note that Huawei publishes its revenue for its "consumer" portion, which is about 55% of its overall revenue, and given that, Apple does in fact have a higher level of R&D devoted to it's consumer products, than Huawei does, and it's actually quite apparent that Apple is applying that R&D to new products, not just its "mature" iPhone product line. Huawei's feature set for it's flagships is certainly an impressive spec list, but given that Apple sells more of it's highest end iPhone by far that Huawei sells its Mate and P lines, again it really isn't a contest.
    R&D efforts know no boundaries.

    If the Mate 30 Pro managed to cram 21 antennas into it, the R&D behind it definitely came from a different part of the company, as did the graphene breakthroughs in the battery. There is a lot of crossover.

    Take a look at the Atlas 900:

    https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/huawei-launches-atlas-900-worlds-fastest-ai-training-cluster-109150

    That is as far removed from the consumer division as you could imagine but there is Ascend silicon in earbuds!

    Apple competes in exactly the same market as Android and runs exactly the same risks.

    Given that Apple's share of the handset market is stable ir tending to fall I am not seeing the net transfer to iOS that you speak of and AFAIK Apple isn't exactly precise when it details iOS user base.

    As for moving on price "if they want to", why on earth would they want to cheapen the product line?

    You are claiming 38% margins, net Android to iOS transfer, 3 times the ASP of Huawei...

    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    No. It isn't if Apple "wants to".

    It is Apple "has" to.
    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    I've acknowledged that flat sales of from 180 million to 200 million iPhones for at least 4 or 5 quarters, and since the profit warning was some 9 months ago, I'm not seeing its relevance today. As for falling behind on technology, how do you explain Apple's revenue at almost double Huawei's and just over 4 times the margins?

    One would have to assume that Huawei is buying marketshare, in 5G and in smartphones, which there is evidence of (and I have posted it before),

    <snip>

    Don't let Apple's overall business performance cloud your view. We are focusing on iPhone here.

    Huawei has always been competitive on price without being afraid to put $2,000 dollar phones on the market for that small segment that wants them. Every single one of those special lines has sold out (so, obviously meeting expectations). That's why we got another PD Mate RS at 2,000€ last week.

    They have done far, far more than Apple with far less revenue but obviously billion+ dollars a year seems to get them by.

    <snip>

    What?

    Sure. Let's go ahead and look at Wal*Mart's overall business as a function of cereal sales. Related, let's go ahead and call Apple doomed because iPod Touch sales aren't what they were previously.
    When we talk about Apple (the iPhone Apple). The single product that put Apple where it is today and all those millions in the bank, we are talking one product. We aren't talking iPods, Macs, or even Air Pods or even services. iPhones (and smartphones in general) are convergence devices so iPod functionality and computer functionality etc was superceded and incorporated into one kind of device.

    It is important to set that perspective straight from time to time. If Mac sales tanked while iPhones raged, no one would really care - on the markets. If Mac sales hit a 30% YoY boom for one quarter but iPhones tanked, it would be panic stations and all hands meetings at Cupertino. That last point has already happened.

    When more than half your business rides on the success of one very limited product (it used to be two models per year - now it's three) obviously there is a lot of relevance attached to it.

    My comments historically have been on Apple's iPhone business and from time to time I point it out because some people like to mix it up and alter the context or forget it completely.

    This becomes even more important to take into account as Apple weans itself off iPhone dependence and iPhone reduces its relevance. It has only been over the last few years that services have come into their own as an important revenue driver. As have Air Pods etc. Now we have a completely new services arm based on subscription models and aren't necessarily going to be tethered to iPhone going forward. Tim Cook made a small reference to this in a recent earnings call.

    The more legs you have on your revenue table the better.

    If we take Apple - as a whole - into consideration and look at where things are going, there are far more things to take into account but for the time being at least, iPhone is still that leg which still means the most and in all probability will bounce back to represent over 50% of Apple's total revenue again over the Christmas quarter.

    We'll see how that plays out over time  but I've said for a few years now that I think Apple is working to a 'post iPhone' roadmap.

    Cereal sales at Walmart aren't comparable to iPhone sales at Apple for this reason.


    edited September 2019 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 62 of 90
    sirozha said:
    kevin kee said:
    If they get rid of FaceID, you bet I would not be in line at all. You win some, you lose a few. That’s how it is.
    I have a Motorola G7 Play phone that I bought brand new and unlocked for $145 on eBay. It has both “TouchID” and “FaceID” analogous features. I use the Motorola G7 Play in my car for Android Auto. If Motorola can do this in a $150 phone, Apple can do it for 10 times the price. 
    Which comes with a notch AND a bezel. I started to think you are just trolling here.




    StrangeDaysSoliwatto_cobra
  • Reply 63 of 90
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    sirozha said:
    kevin kee said:
    If they get rid of FaceID, you bet I would not be in line at all. You win some, you lose a few. That’s how it is.
    I have a Motorola G7 Play phone that I bought brand new and unlocked for $145 on eBay. It has both “TouchID” and “FaceID” analogous features. I use the Motorola G7 Play in my car for Android Auto. If Motorola can do this in a $150 phone, Apple can do it for 10 times the price. 
    Then tell us why people continue to buy iPhones every year? Analysts are predicting 180-200 million this year. I mean if the Moto G7 does everything the iPhone does , and does it better for a tenth of the price, why hasn’t the G7 killed the iPhone yet? Come on now, you can do it. 
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 64 of 90
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member

    avon b7 said:
    M68000 said:
    tyler82 said:
    Until these are notchless, I’ll pass.
    Apple seems to like it for whatever reason.  They must think that tiny bit of screen space is a good thing.  But it comes at a price.  The notch is both futuristic looking and distracting at the same time.  The eye is drawn to it often when looking at the new phones.   It may be possible to deal with it but it remains distracting.
    I'm slowly coming round to the conclusion that the notch hasn't aged well from a design perspective.

    At the time it was a necessary compromise for the objectives at hand. All notches were, but two years later, the exact same design with basically no improvement is beginning to look 'clunky' when compared to alternative options.

    Don't get me wrong, I never had a problem with them from the get go and my current phone has one. For me it is not a problem at all, but times change.

    We now have some spectacular full screen (or almost full screen) options on the market and choice in how to get them (sliders, pop-ups, hole punches).
    You’re “slowly” coming to this conclusion? Riiiight. You’ve been arguing this nonsense about Apple design for over a year. We get it, you don’t like iphones and you love a certain chinese knockoff brand that you for some reason are quite devoted to propping up on this Apple forum. Cool story, bub. 

    Enjoy your sliders and pop-up solutions. Don’t sound like clunky alternatives at all. 
    We're talking about the notch in this case but you are mixing other stuff into the soup.

    Some people hate them. I've said from the outset that I have no issue with them and understand why they are there.

    That doesn't mean those who hate them have to have a notch. A couple of years ago it was basically a notch of varying sizes and capabilities or a forehead/chin option.

    That isn't the case now. Now we have different solutions which include sliders, pop-ups and hole punches.

    That is choice. And if you think they are in some way clunky, try to get your hands on one and just maybe you will see they look simply awesome. Yes, there are compromises but notches are compromises too.

    However, designs progress. The problem is that the iPhone notch hasn't progressed. It might even be the exact same notch from 2017.

    If nobody progressed on design, (don't forget the sole reason for the notch from a design perspective was to maximise the screen to body ratios) we would still have chins and foreheads everywhere.

    If the idea in the first place was to increase screen real estate and competitors are doing just that (while adding to the technology inside the notch), why are you having issues understanding that, as time goes by, the iPhone notch is starting to look big and clunky. That is inevitable in exactly the same way the iPhone 8 looks dated today when compared to full screen phones (notched or otherwise).

    Apple is the company that made a name for itself highlighting milimetrical design changes but suddenly, in the case of the notch, that has all changed. I wouldn't notice a milimetre or two in width, thickness or height but I definitely would notice those changes in the notch. In fact, I'm already seeing them and with each new generation the difference is getting bigger.

    That is why I mentioned it in the first place.

    By the time the next refresh comes around it will have been three years with the same design.

    Maybe I'm wrong and someone will correct me but to my eye (haven't seen the new iPhones in person yet) the notch looks the same.

    If that is the case you should at least understand that introducing a feature solely to increase screen 'size' but then not continuing the pursuit of that goal (when it is technically possible) is a curious situation to be in.

    muthuk_vanalingamchemengin1
  • Reply 65 of 90
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,311member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    M68000 said:
    tyler82 said:
    Until these are notchless, I’ll pass.
    Apple seems to like it for whatever reason.  They must think that tiny bit of screen space is a good thing.  But it comes at a price.  The notch is both futuristic looking and distracting at the same time.  The eye is drawn to it often when looking at the new phones.   It may be possible to deal with it but it remains distracting.
    I'm slowly coming round to the conclusion that the notch hasn't aged well from a design perspective.

    At the time it was a necessary compromise for the objectives at hand. All notches were, but two years later, the exact same design with basically no improvement is beginning to look 'clunky' when compared to alternative options.

    Don't get me wrong, I never had a problem with them from the get go and my current phone has one. For me it is not a problem at all, but times change.

    We now have some spectacular full screen (or almost full screen) options on the market and choice in how to get them (sliders, pop-ups, hole punches).

    The main reason for Apple's notch was FaceID (a simple biometric) and that hasn't really changed to this date. They haven't really moved forward with it in other ways either. In fact, the hardware is basically the same. I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors but since the iPhone X, in-screen biometric options have come a long way. They are performing well.

    Two years later you look at the iPhone 11 Pro and the bezels and notch look bigger than they should be when others are doing more in less space or eliminating notches altogether.

    I'm not sure why reducing the notch space hasn't been tackled on the new iPhones.
    You lost me at "I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors".

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors were awful ergonomic design from day one because it was unavailable with the screen face up on a table or other surface. "But look how easy it is to slide your finger behind the phone to use it" you would state, which is still by definition. awful ergonomics.

    I would be surprised if any device maker still uses it.

    For the record, Apple fussing with the size and configuration of the notch, which isn't currently an issue at all, isn't going to happen because Apple already has a roadmap in place to fully replace Face ID sans notch.

    Why waste engineering resources shrinking it?
    We've been down this road before and nothing has changed since then.

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors are perfect ergonomic options. Many phones still use them.

    If you are are going to actually use your phone there is no better place than in your hand.

    If it is on a flat surface there is no problem. Why do you think double tap to wake was implemented? If it is 'mounted' (sat nav) there is no problem either as the screen doesn't turn off in the first place.

    It is strange that after using rear mounted scanners for years and having literally zero problems with ergonomics and use, the only people that tell me they are bad/wrong are those that have never even used one.

    As for making the notch smaller, it would make a massive difference in how the phone looks, competitors have not only already done this with dramatic results but they have managed to cram more tech inside and given that tech more uses.

    If Apple hasn't done the same it very probably only cost related and has little to do with engineering resources.

    The result is that it currently takes up most of the top part of the screen, which, as I said further up, may have been reasonable in 2017 but two years later (and unchanged) is now looking clunky. Especially as competitors have managed to free up much more space around it.

    As I've stated numerous times, Apple's iPhone mostly doesn't  compete in the same market as Android OS Device makers have to compete in. Given that there is net transfer of users to iPhone, the user base continues to grow. To date, there has been very little crossover of Apple users to flagship Android OS devices, even in China, where nationalism has made Huawei the countries champion, especially over other Chinese OEM's. And yeah, I've seen your posts on that.

    The constant change (chaos?) that is the Android OS device market, is really quite inefficient, and substantially effects margins, to the point that Apple's margins are over 4 times higher than Huawei's margins for its entire revenue (easily provable fact based on published revenue) while selling fewer iPhones at just under 3 times the ASP of Huawei (also an easily provable fact based on published revenue / units sold).

    Apple makes substantially more revenue selling fewer iPhones, and magnitudes fewer models, and of course gains a massive difference in profitability for that. Given the you are always noting that "Apple had to reprice iPhones to compete", I would state that tactic has likely only cost them a single point of margin to date. Considering that Apple's margins are about 38% and Huawei's 8.7%, there's a lot of room for Apple to maneuver on price, it they decide to. 

    Huawei will ship about 240 Million units this year, and Apple probably about 180 Million units, but considering the ASP and margins of Apple, it's not even a close contest. Note that Huawei publishes its revenue for its "consumer" portion, which is about 55% of its overall revenue, and given that, Apple does in fact have a higher level of R&D devoted to it's consumer products, than Huawei does, and it's actually quite apparent that Apple is applying that R&D to new products, not just its "mature" iPhone product line. Huawei's feature set for it's flagships is certainly an impressive spec list, but given that Apple sells more of it's highest end iPhone by far that Huawei sells its Mate and P lines, again it really isn't a contest.
    R&D efforts know no boundaries.

    If the Mate 30 Pro managed to cram 21 antennas into it, the R&D behind it definitely came from a different part of the company, as did the graphene breakthroughs in the battery. There is a lot of crossover.

    Take a look at the Atlas 900:

    https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/huawei-launches-atlas-900-worlds-fastest-ai-training-cluster-109150

    That is as far removed from the consumer division as you could imagine but there is Ascend silicon in earbuds!

    Apple competes in exactly the same market as Android and runs exactly the same risks.

    Given that Apple's share of the handset market is stable ir tending to fall I am not seeing the net transfer to iOS that you speak of and AFAIK Apple isn't exactly precise when it details iOS user base.

    As for moving on price "if they want to", why on earth would they want to cheapen the product line?

    You are claiming 38% margins, net Android to iOS transfer, 3 times the ASP of Huawei...

    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    No. It isn't if Apple "wants to".

    It is Apple "has" to.
    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    I've acknowledged that flat sales of from 180 million to 200 million iPhones for at least 4 or 5 quarters, and since the profit warning was some 9 months ago, I'm not seeing its relevance today. As for falling behind on technology, how do you explain Apple's revenue at almost double Huawei's and just over 4 times the margins?

    One would have to assume that Huawei is buying marketshare, in 5G and in smartphones, which there is evidence of (and I have posted it before),

    <snip>

    Don't let Apple's overall business performance cloud your view. We are focusing on iPhone here.

    Huawei has always been competitive on price without being afraid to put $2,000 dollar phones on the market for that small segment that wants them. Every single one of those special lines has sold out (so, obviously meeting expectations). That's why we got another PD Mate RS at 2,000€ last week.

    They have done far, far more than Apple with far less revenue but obviously billion+ dollars a year seems to get them by.

    <snip>

    What?

    Sure. Let's go ahead and look at Wal*Mart's overall business as a function of cereal sales. Related, let's go ahead and call Apple doomed because iPod Touch sales aren't what they were previously.
    When we talk about Apple (the iPhone Apple). The single product that put Apple where it is today and all those millions in the bank, we are talking one product. We aren't talking iPods, Macs, or even Air Pods or even services. iPhones (and smartphones in general) are convergence devices so iPod functionality and computer functionality etc was superceded and incorporated into one kind of device.

    It is important to set that perspective straight from time to time. If Mac sales tanked while iPhones raged, no one would really care - on the markets. If Mac sales hit a 30% YoY boom for one quarter but iPhones tanked, it would be panic stations and all hands meetings at Cupertino. That last point has already happened.

    When more than half your business rides on the success of one very limited product (it used to be two models per year - now it's three) obviously there is a lot of relevance attached to it.

    My comments historically have been on Apple's iPhone business and from time to time I point it out because some people like to mix it up and alter the context or forget it completely.

    This becomes even more important to take into account as Apple weans itself off iPhone dependence and iPhone reduces its relevance. It has only been over the last few years that services have come into their own as an important revenue driver. As have Air Pods etc. Now we have a completely new services arm based on subscription models and aren't necessarily going to be tethered to iPhone going forward. Tim Cook made a small reference to this in a recent earnings call.

    The more legs you have on your revenue table the better.

    If we take Apple - as a whole - into consideration and look at where things are going, there are far more things to take into account but for the time being at least, iPhone is still that leg which still means the most and in all probability will bounce back to represent over 50% of Apple's total revenue again over the Christmas quarter.

    We'll see how that plays out over time  but I've said for a few years now that I think Apple is working to a 'post iPhone' roadmap.

    Cereal sales at Walmart aren't comparable to iPhone sales at Apple for this reason.


    Shorter Avon B7;

    Sure, both Apple (50%), and Huawei (55%), are reliant on smartphones for the bulk of their revenue, but Apple makes so much frickin revenue from their share, which is actually twice that of Huawei in real dollars, and over four times greater margins, that any fall will be catastrophic for Apple. That Huawei has to sell 50% more smartphones to get to just half the revenue of Apple's iPhone revenue, isn't news.

    Huawei, on the other hand, isn't making much profit anyway, and as a State Owned Enterprise, will continue to see Chinese Government subsidies so that they can continue to sell all their products as loss leaders around the world, especially now, lacking Google Services for any new product, including the Mate 30. One has to wonder where all of that Huawei R&D money is coming from, yet another Chinese Government subsidy?

    Really, this is just some kind of gears not meshing, mental contortion, by Avon B7 to yet again state that, "Apple is doomed"!

    Edit:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/09/22/huawei-confirms-another-nasty-surprise-for-mate-30-buyers/#1c0aec1a4fed

    "So, put very simply, Huawei’s smartphone boss said the company would make a change to enable a complex install of Google services onto Mate 30 devices, and then the company reached out to say he was wrong and that’s not the case at all. Not good. Publicly awkward and another Google disappointment for potential Mate 30 buyers."

    This just get better and better...
    edited September 2019 StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 66 of 90
    sirozha said:
    sirozha said:
    Let’s not forget that 10 years ago, a smartphone costing $500 was a shock to the consumer. We all remember what Steve Ballmer said about a $500 iPhone. Today Apple advocates present the notion of a $500 as a joke, as if were impossible to manufacture a decent smartphone and sell it at a profit for $500. 
    If you want the features of what was new 10 years ago I’m sure you can find a $500 phone. But if you want the features of a modern flagship smartphone, which incur higher development costs, it will cost more. In early days development was less expensive because it was all low-hanging fruit then. Also factor in inflation - $500 in 2007 is $617 today. Not too far off from the iPhone 11, a premium phone at $699. 
    I bought a $150 brand new Motorola G7 Play, which for $150 is a phenomenal phone. In fact, had we not been so deeply entrenched in the Apple ecosystem for over a decade now, I would NEVER consider getting my kids anything beyond a $150 Android phone. Again, the Motorola G7 Play is phenomenal. 

    For $500, you can get an amazing Android phone that rivals iPhone 11. By the way, the iPhone 11's price of $699 is a 64GB model, which really insufficient for a phone in this price range. It's true that the Android hardware manufacturers don't make quite as much profit margin as Apple does. We are not here discussing profit margins, though. We are discussing the price that the consumer pays. 
    Nonsense - I’m a software dev pro user, and am again buying 64gb. It’s more than enough. Check out those iCloud services you claim are child’s play. Oops. 

    Like I said, for cheap dollar you get cheap phone. iPhone is $699, which isn’t much more than 500 in 2007’s dollars — for a best in class flagship. Your 150 knockoff simply can’t compete. Have fun with it. 
    edited September 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 67 of 90

    ... or pass for next year's redesign and save up to $1500. Let the kids in China get out of the factories and go back to school.
    What is this absolute nonsense? Why not cite the upper prices of the korean and chinese knockoff brands? $2,000 last I heard. China already has labor laws. If you’re unhappy with how they’re enforced by the chinese government and people, take your complaint to the CCP. 
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 68 of 90
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,192member
    sirozha said:
    I have a Motorola G7 Play phone that I bought brand new and unlocked for $145 on eBay. It has both “TouchID” and “FaceID” analogous features. I use the Motorola G7 Play in my car for Android Auto. If Motorola can do this in a $150 phone, Apple can do it for 10 times the price. 
    That would be open box new, not really new. I will bet its face unlock feature is insufficiently secure for authenticating EMV transactions... which means it's insecure and really just a parlor trick. Geekbench-wise, it's less than 1/4th the single-core speed of an iPhone 11 and less than 1/3rd the multi-core speed. The cameras don't compare. The ecosystem doesn't compare. Long-term support is nonexistent. And it comes with who-knows-what spyware in addition to Android installed.

    The G7 user manual includes these instructions:

    "Notes:

    • Someone who looks similar to you could unlock your phone.
    • To improve how well your device recognizes you in different conditions touch Improve face matching and follow the on-screen instructions.
    • This option can be disabled by administrators."
    Apple Face ID is so accurate, easy and secure, none of that is necessary. But if you enjoy spending your valuable time tweaking a smartphone, Android is your go-to!
    StrangeDaystmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 69 of 90

    sirozha said:

    sirozha said:
    tmay said:
    sirozha said:
    The fact that the iPhone 11 Pro can last 4-5 years is trouble for Apple. It means that sale volumes will continue to drop year after year unless Apple creates a sub-$500 iPhone to lure Android users into the Apple ecosystem and then try to upgrade them to the premium-tier iPhone that can last them 5 years.  

    Currently, the 2-year-old lower-tier iPhone 8 costs $499. It’s the third holiday season in a row that the iPhone 8 is offered as a lower-end alternative to the flagship that costs over $1,000. Android users can choose among mid-level modern Android phones or a two-year-old iPhone if they don’t want to spend more than $500 for a smartphone. For those in the Android ecosystem, making the jump to the 2-year-old iPhone for $500 makes no sense. 

    Let’s not forget that 10 years ago, a smartphone costing $500 was a shock to the consumer. We all remember what Steve Ballmer said about a $500 iPhone. Today Apple advocates present the notion of a $500 as a joke, as if were impossible to manufacture a decent smartphone and sell it at a profit for $500. 
    If Apple's users base is considered 900 million and growing, that's 180 million units a year at 5 years of life. Pretty much where we sit today, and growing means that the iPhone is already picking up net users. I agree that it makes no sense for those in the Android ecosystem to jump to the iPhone, but then again, jumping to Apple's ecosystem does in fact make sense for some Android OS users, especially those that are looking for an iPad, or Apple Watch, given the limited state of Android OS devices compared to those in Apple's ecosystem.

    I don't find just comparing Apple's iPhone to Android OS devices as being particularly useful, hence, why I usually consider the whole Apple ecosystem vs Android.
    The Android ecosystem is much more solid than Apple’s. Apple’s iCloud is child play compared to similar Google services.
    Hahahah. Ohohohoho.. Good one, mate. 
    What kind d of business can you run on Apple’s iCloud? Can you share any folders and give different people different access level to the files in the folder? Can you use iCloud as the platform for a public or private school? 

    iCloud lacks even in a home setting, as you can’t share a folder with a family member. I have a 2TB iCloud storage plan but yet have to use Dropbox to share folders with my wife. 
    iCloud had folder sharing in iOS 13. My SO is dropping the excessively over-priced Dropbox and runs her business on iCloud. Oops. 
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 70 of 90

    cpsro said:
    The improved speed of the telephoto lens is nice. Night Mode is okay but often not very sharp results when handheld and moving objects are a blur. If you've never used a DSLR or (better yet) full-frame mirrorless camera (Sony A7r series or Nikon Z series), you're missing out on what real (not pretend) low-light sensitivity offers. Sharp photos, stopped action, great color, oh, and over 60 megapixels. Compared to a discrete camera, iPhone 11 cameras are still poor, but I upgraded from XS anyway.

    The U1 ultra-wideband chip offers unprecedented levels of tracking without our knowledge or permission.

    btw: Face ID is vastly superior to Touch ID.
    No one has ever claimed a cell phone camera can obtain the optics of a SLR. That’s absurd. They are completely different form factors and glass, and I can’t bring my SLR into dinner in my pocket. 

    Night Mode is getting great reviews. TechCrunch days best in class. 

    https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after-dark/

    And now we’re dinging the 11 for unaccounted, imagined features of the U1 chip? Ok...
    edited September 2019 tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 71 of 90
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    M68000 said:
    tyler82 said:
    Until these are notchless, I’ll pass.
    Apple seems to like it for whatever reason.  They must think that tiny bit of screen space is a good thing.  But it comes at a price.  The notch is both futuristic looking and distracting at the same time.  The eye is drawn to it often when looking at the new phones.   It may be possible to deal with it but it remains distracting.
    I'm slowly coming round to the conclusion that the notch hasn't aged well from a design perspective.

    At the time it was a necessary compromise for the objectives at hand. All notches were, but two years later, the exact same design with basically no improvement is beginning to look 'clunky' when compared to alternative options.

    Don't get me wrong, I never had a problem with them from the get go and my current phone has one. For me it is not a problem at all, but times change.

    We now have some spectacular full screen (or almost full screen) options on the market and choice in how to get them (sliders, pop-ups, hole punches).

    The main reason for Apple's notch was FaceID (a simple biometric) and that hasn't really changed to this date. They haven't really moved forward with it in other ways either. In fact, the hardware is basically the same. I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors but since the iPhone X, in-screen biometric options have come a long way. They are performing well.

    Two years later you look at the iPhone 11 Pro and the bezels and notch look bigger than they should be when others are doing more in less space or eliminating notches altogether.

    I'm not sure why reducing the notch space hasn't been tackled on the new iPhones.
    You lost me at "I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors".

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors were awful ergonomic design from day one because it was unavailable with the screen face up on a table or other surface. "But look how easy it is to slide your finger behind the phone to use it" you would state, which is still by definition. awful ergonomics.

    I would be surprised if any device maker still uses it.

    For the record, Apple fussing with the size and configuration of the notch, which isn't currently an issue at all, isn't going to happen because Apple already has a roadmap in place to fully replace Face ID sans notch.

    Why waste engineering resources shrinking it?
    We've been down this road before and nothing has changed since then.

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors are perfect ergonomic options. Many phones still use them.

    If you are are going to actually use your phone there is no better place than in your hand.

    If it is on a flat surface there is no problem. Why do you think double tap to wake was implemented? If it is 'mounted' (sat nav) there is no problem either as the screen doesn't turn off in the first place.

    It is strange that after using rear mounted scanners for years and having literally zero problems with ergonomics and use, the only people that tell me they are bad/wrong are those that have never even used one.

    As for making the notch smaller, it would make a massive difference in how the phone looks, competitors have not only already done this with dramatic results but they have managed to cram more tech inside and given that tech more uses.

    If Apple hasn't done the same it very probably only cost related and has little to do with engineering resources.

    The result is that it currently takes up most of the top part of the screen, which, as I said further up, may have been reasonable in 2017 but two years later (and unchanged) is now looking clunky. Especially as competitors have managed to free up much more space around it.

    As I've stated numerous times, Apple's iPhone mostly doesn't  compete in the same market as Android OS Device makers have to compete in. Given that there is net transfer of users to iPhone, the user base continues to grow. To date, there has been very little crossover of Apple users to flagship Android OS devices, even in China, where nationalism has made Huawei the countries champion, especially over other Chinese OEM's. And yeah, I've seen your posts on that.

    The constant change (chaos?) that is the Android OS device market, is really quite inefficient, and substantially effects margins, to the point that Apple's margins are over 4 times higher than Huawei's margins for its entire revenue (easily provable fact based on published revenue) while selling fewer iPhones at just under 3 times the ASP of Huawei (also an easily provable fact based on published revenue / units sold).

    Apple makes substantially more revenue selling fewer iPhones, and magnitudes fewer models, and of course gains a massive difference in profitability for that. Given the you are always noting that "Apple had to reprice iPhones to compete", I would state that tactic has likely only cost them a single point of margin to date. Considering that Apple's margins are about 38% and Huawei's 8.7%, there's a lot of room for Apple to maneuver on price, it they decide to. 

    Huawei will ship about 240 Million units this year, and Apple probably about 180 Million units, but considering the ASP and margins of Apple, it's not even a close contest. Note that Huawei publishes its revenue for its "consumer" portion, which is about 55% of its overall revenue, and given that, Apple does in fact have a higher level of R&D devoted to it's consumer products, than Huawei does, and it's actually quite apparent that Apple is applying that R&D to new products, not just its "mature" iPhone product line. Huawei's feature set for it's flagships is certainly an impressive spec list, but given that Apple sells more of it's highest end iPhone by far that Huawei sells its Mate and P lines, again it really isn't a contest.
    R&D efforts know no boundaries.

    If the Mate 30 Pro managed to cram 21 antennas into it, the R&D behind it definitely came from a different part of the company, as did the graphene breakthroughs in the battery. There is a lot of crossover.

    Take a look at the Atlas 900:

    https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/huawei-launches-atlas-900-worlds-fastest-ai-training-cluster-109150

    That is as far removed from the consumer division as you could imagine but there is Ascend silicon in earbuds!

    Apple competes in exactly the same market as Android and runs exactly the same risks.

    Given that Apple's share of the handset market is stable ir tending to fall I am not seeing the net transfer to iOS that you speak of and AFAIK Apple isn't exactly precise when it details iOS user base.

    As for moving on price "if they want to", why on earth would they want to cheapen the product line?

    You are claiming 38% margins, net Android to iOS transfer, 3 times the ASP of Huawei...

    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    No. It isn't if Apple "wants to".

    It is Apple "has" to.
    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    I've acknowledged that flat sales of from 180 million to 200 million iPhones for at least 4 or 5 quarters, and since the profit warning was some 9 months ago, I'm not seeing its relevance today. As for falling behind on technology, how do you explain Apple's revenue at almost double Huawei's and just over 4 times the margins?

    One would have to assume that Huawei is buying marketshare, in 5G and in smartphones, which there is evidence of (and I have posted it before),

    <snip>

    Don't let Apple's overall business performance cloud your view. We are focusing on iPhone here.

    Huawei has always been competitive on price without being afraid to put $2,000 dollar phones on the market for that small segment that wants them. Every single one of those special lines has sold out (so, obviously meeting expectations). That's why we got another PD Mate RS at 2,000€ last week.

    They have done far, far more than Apple with far less revenue but obviously billion+ dollars a year seems to get them by.

    <snip>

    What?

    Sure. Let's go ahead and look at Wal*Mart's overall business as a function of cereal sales. Related, let's go ahead and call Apple doomed because iPod Touch sales aren't what they were previously.
    When we talk about Apple (the iPhone Apple). The single product that put Apple where it is today and all those millions in the bank, we are talking one product. We aren't talking iPods, Macs, or even Air Pods or even services. iPhones (and smartphones in general) are convergence devices so iPod functionality and computer functionality etc was superceded and incorporated into one kind of device.

    It is important to set that perspective straight from time to time. If Mac sales tanked while iPhones raged, no one would really care - on the markets. If Mac sales hit a 30% YoY boom for one quarter but iPhones tanked, it would be panic stations and all hands meetings at Cupertino. That last point has already happened.

    When more than half your business rides on the success of one very limited product (it used to be two models per year - now it's three) obviously there is a lot of relevance attached to it.

    My comments historically have been on Apple's iPhone business and from time to time I point it out because some people like to mix it up and alter the context or forget it completely.

    This becomes even more important to take into account as Apple weans itself off iPhone dependence and iPhone reduces its relevance. It has only been over the last few years that services have come into their own as an important revenue driver. As have Air Pods etc. Now we have a completely new services arm based on subscription models and aren't necessarily going to be tethered to iPhone going forward. Tim Cook made a small reference to this in a recent earnings call.

    The more legs you have on your revenue table the better.

    If we take Apple - as a whole - into consideration and look at where things are going, there are far more things to take into account but for the time being at least, iPhone is still that leg which still means the most and in all probability will bounce back to represent over 50% of Apple's total revenue again over the Christmas quarter.

    We'll see how that plays out over time  but I've said for a few years now that I think Apple is working to a 'post iPhone' roadmap.

    Cereal sales at Walmart aren't comparable to iPhone sales at Apple for this reason.
    Your goalpost moving is beyond absurd. Apple has multiple product lines that by themselves each generate more revenue than other entire leading Silicon Valley companies. This is fact and has been explained to you many times. Yet you still pretend they’re in a precarious position because iPhone. 

    You try so, so hard. I hope whatever you get in return is worth the effort you put into this charade. 
    edited September 2019 tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 72 of 90

    kevin kee said:
    sirozha said:
    kevin kee said:
    If they get rid of FaceID, you bet I would not be in line at all. You win some, you lose a few. That’s how it is.
    I have a Motorola G7 Play phone that I bought brand new and unlocked for $145 on eBay. It has both “TouchID” and “FaceID” analogous features. I use the Motorola G7 Play in my car for Android Auto. If Motorola can do this in a $150 phone, Apple can do it for 10 times the price. 
    Which comes with a notch AND a bezel. I started to think you are just trolling here.




    If this dude is pretending his crappy unpowered moto with forehead & chin is the same as an iphone, or that it’s insecure “Face ID equivalent” is the same as Face ID, he is def living in a world of cognitive dissonance if not trolling. 
    edited September 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 73 of 90
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,241member
    I didn't bother reading through all the mostly negative comments but as someone who's had an iPhone from almost the very beginning I really like Face ID on my ProMax. iOS 13 changed some things so adding those changes to a non-TouchID phone means I actually have to read about the new procedures (something the haters should do as well). I have begun to try the triple camera and like how I can zoom from extra wide angle to telephoto. I also tried (I think) night mode and it's amazing. I got my phone Friday at 9:15 am but didn't transfer from my 8 Plus until later in the day. I fully charged the phone by 10pm and so far I haven't charged again. It's 5:30PM and I still have at least 20% of my battery left. No, I'm not a heavy user but yesterday I was away from the house for half the day so it was using cellular for data, a much heavier usage than being around WiFi. The only way I ever got this much time without recharging was to have the phone turned off.




    Here's my Geekbench 5 CPU benchmark results. Remember, Geekbench 5 is totally different from Geekbench 4 so the numbers are much lower.

    Model: iPhone12,5
    OS: iOS 13.0
    Single-Core Score: 1330
    Multi-Core Score: 3217
    GPU using Metal 6394

    Geekbench 4 results
    Single-Core Score: 5431
    Multi-Core Score: 12804
    GPU using Metal 30338
    edited September 2019 tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 74 of 90
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,311member
    rob53 said:
    I didn't bother reading through all the mostly negative comments but as someone who's had an iPhone from almost the very beginning I really like Face ID on my ProMax. iOS 13 changed some things so adding those changes to a non-TouchID phone means I actually have to read about the new procedures (something the haters should do as well). I have begun to try the triple camera and like how I can zoom from extra wide angle to telephoto. I also tried (I think) night mode and it's amazing. I got my phone Friday at 9:15 am but didn't transfer from my 8 Plus until later in the day. I fully charged the phone by 10pm and so far I haven't charged again. It's 5:30PM and I still have at least 20% of my battery left. No, I'm not a heavy user but yesterday I was away from the house for half the day so it was using cellular for data, a much heavier usage than being around WiFi. The only way I ever got this much time without recharging was to have the phone turned off.




    Here's my Geekbench 5 CPU benchmark results. Remember, Geekbench 5 is totally different from Geekbench 4 so the numbers are much lower.

    Model: iPhone12,5
    OS: iOS 13.0
    Single-Core Score: 1330
    Multi-Core Score: 3217
    GPU using Metal 6394

    Geekbench 4 results
    Single-Core Score: 5431
    Multi-Core Score: 12804
    GPU using Metal 30338
    Thanks,

    Hopefully there will be a thread coming up on AI for all of the early buyers to give their personal take.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 75 of 90
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    M68000 said:
    tyler82 said:
    Until these are notchless, I’ll pass.
    Apple seems to like it for whatever reason.  They must think that tiny bit of screen space is a good thing.  But it comes at a price.  The notch is both futuristic looking and distracting at the same time.  The eye is drawn to it often when looking at the new phones.   It may be possible to deal with it but it remains distracting.
    I'm slowly coming round to the conclusion that the notch hasn't aged well from a design perspective.

    At the time it was a necessary compromise for the objectives at hand. All notches were, but two years later, the exact same design with basically no improvement is beginning to look 'clunky' when compared to alternative options.

    Don't get me wrong, I never had a problem with them from the get go and my current phone has one. For me it is not a problem at all, but times change.

    We now have some spectacular full screen (or almost full screen) options on the market and choice in how to get them (sliders, pop-ups, hole punches).

    The main reason for Apple's notch was FaceID (a simple biometric) and that hasn't really changed to this date. They haven't really moved forward with it in other ways either. In fact, the hardware is basically the same. I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors but since the iPhone X, in-screen biometric options have come a long way. They are performing well.

    Two years later you look at the iPhone 11 Pro and the bezels and notch look bigger than they should be when others are doing more in less space or eliminating notches altogether.

    I'm not sure why reducing the notch space hasn't been tackled on the new iPhones.
    You lost me at "I'm a big fan of rear mounted fingerprint sensors".

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors were awful ergonomic design from day one because it was unavailable with the screen face up on a table or other surface. "But look how easy it is to slide your finger behind the phone to use it" you would state, which is still by definition. awful ergonomics.

    I would be surprised if any device maker still uses it.

    For the record, Apple fussing with the size and configuration of the notch, which isn't currently an issue at all, isn't going to happen because Apple already has a roadmap in place to fully replace Face ID sans notch.

    Why waste engineering resources shrinking it?
    We've been down this road before and nothing has changed since then.

    Rear mounted fingerprint sensors are perfect ergonomic options. Many phones still use them.

    If you are are going to actually use your phone there is no better place than in your hand.

    If it is on a flat surface there is no problem. Why do you think double tap to wake was implemented? If it is 'mounted' (sat nav) there is no problem either as the screen doesn't turn off in the first place.

    It is strange that after using rear mounted scanners for years and having literally zero problems with ergonomics and use, the only people that tell me they are bad/wrong are those that have never even used one.

    As for making the notch smaller, it would make a massive difference in how the phone looks, competitors have not only already done this with dramatic results but they have managed to cram more tech inside and given that tech more uses.

    If Apple hasn't done the same it very probably only cost related and has little to do with engineering resources.

    The result is that it currently takes up most of the top part of the screen, which, as I said further up, may have been reasonable in 2017 but two years later (and unchanged) is now looking clunky. Especially as competitors have managed to free up much more space around it.

    As I've stated numerous times, Apple's iPhone mostly doesn't  compete in the same market as Android OS Device makers have to compete in. Given that there is net transfer of users to iPhone, the user base continues to grow. To date, there has been very little crossover of Apple users to flagship Android OS devices, even in China, where nationalism has made Huawei the countries champion, especially over other Chinese OEM's. And yeah, I've seen your posts on that.

    The constant change (chaos?) that is the Android OS device market, is really quite inefficient, and substantially effects margins, to the point that Apple's margins are over 4 times higher than Huawei's margins for its entire revenue (easily provable fact based on published revenue) while selling fewer iPhones at just under 3 times the ASP of Huawei (also an easily provable fact based on published revenue / units sold).

    Apple makes substantially more revenue selling fewer iPhones, and magnitudes fewer models, and of course gains a massive difference in profitability for that. Given the you are always noting that "Apple had to reprice iPhones to compete", I would state that tactic has likely only cost them a single point of margin to date. Considering that Apple's margins are about 38% and Huawei's 8.7%, there's a lot of room for Apple to maneuver on price, it they decide to. 

    Huawei will ship about 240 Million units this year, and Apple probably about 180 Million units, but considering the ASP and margins of Apple, it's not even a close contest. Note that Huawei publishes its revenue for its "consumer" portion, which is about 55% of its overall revenue, and given that, Apple does in fact have a higher level of R&D devoted to it's consumer products, than Huawei does, and it's actually quite apparent that Apple is applying that R&D to new products, not just its "mature" iPhone product line. Huawei's feature set for it's flagships is certainly an impressive spec list, but given that Apple sells more of it's highest end iPhone by far that Huawei sells its Mate and P lines, again it really isn't a contest.
    R&D efforts know no boundaries.

    If the Mate 30 Pro managed to cram 21 antennas into it, the R&D behind it definitely came from a different part of the company, as did the graphene breakthroughs in the battery. There is a lot of crossover.

    Take a look at the Atlas 900:

    https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/huawei-launches-atlas-900-worlds-fastest-ai-training-cluster-109150

    That is as far removed from the consumer division as you could imagine but there is Ascend silicon in earbuds!

    Apple competes in exactly the same market as Android and runs exactly the same risks.

    Given that Apple's share of the handset market is stable ir tending to fall I am not seeing the net transfer to iOS that you speak of and AFAIK Apple isn't exactly precise when it details iOS user base.

    As for moving on price "if they want to", why on earth would they want to cheapen the product line?

    You are claiming 38% margins, net Android to iOS transfer, 3 times the ASP of Huawei...

    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    No. It isn't if Apple "wants to".

    It is Apple "has" to.
    Seems hunky dory in your world where you skip around the flat sales, profit warning, falling behind on technology etc...

    I've acknowledged that flat sales of from 180 million to 200 million iPhones for at least 4 or 5 quarters, and since the profit warning was some 9 months ago, I'm not seeing its relevance today. As for falling behind on technology, how do you explain Apple's revenue at almost double Huawei's and just over 4 times the margins?

    One would have to assume that Huawei is buying marketshare, in 5G and in smartphones, which there is evidence of (and I have posted it before),

    <snip>

    Don't let Apple's overall business performance cloud your view. We are focusing on iPhone here.

    Huawei has always been competitive on price without being afraid to put $2,000 dollar phones on the market for that small segment that wants them. Every single one of those special lines has sold out (so, obviously meeting expectations). That's why we got another PD Mate RS at 2,000€ last week.

    They have done far, far more than Apple with far less revenue but obviously billion+ dollars a year seems to get them by.

    <snip>

    What?

    Sure. Let's go ahead and look at Wal*Mart's overall business as a function of cereal sales. Related, let's go ahead and call Apple doomed because iPod Touch sales aren't what they were previously.
    When we talk about Apple (the iPhone Apple). The single product that put Apple where it is today and all those millions in the bank, we are talking one product. We aren't talking iPods, Macs, or even Air Pods or even services. iPhones (and smartphones in general) are convergence devices so iPod functionality and computer functionality etc was superceded and incorporated into one kind of device.

    It is important to set that perspective straight from time to time. If Mac sales tanked while iPhones raged, no one would really care - on the markets. If Mac sales hit a 30% YoY boom for one quarter but iPhones tanked, it would be panic stations and all hands meetings at Cupertino. That last point has already happened.

    When more than half your business rides on the success of one very limited product (it used to be two models per year - now it's three) obviously there is a lot of relevance attached to it.

    My comments historically have been on Apple's iPhone business and from time to time I point it out because some people like to mix it up and alter the context or forget it completely.

    This becomes even more important to take into account as Apple weans itself off iPhone dependence and iPhone reduces its relevance. It has only been over the last few years that services have come into their own as an important revenue driver. As have Air Pods etc. Now we have a completely new services arm based on subscription models and aren't necessarily going to be tethered to iPhone going forward. Tim Cook made a small reference to this in a recent earnings call.

    The more legs you have on your revenue table the better.

    If we take Apple - as a whole - into consideration and look at where things are going, there are far more things to take into account but for the time being at least, iPhone is still that leg which still means the most and in all probability will bounce back to represent over 50% of Apple's total revenue again over the Christmas quarter.

    We'll see how that plays out over time  but I've said for a few years now that I think Apple is working to a 'post iPhone' roadmap.

    Cereal sales at Walmart aren't comparable to iPhone sales at Apple for this reason.
    Your goalpost moving is beyond absurd. Apple has multiple product lines that by themselves each generate more revenue than other entire leading Silicon Valley companies. This is fact and has been explained to you many times. Yet you still pretend they’re in a precarious position because iPhone. 

    You try so, so hard. I hope whatever you get in return is worth the effort you put into this charade. 
    Trying to debate with this troll is like debating with a manikin. Why even try? What’s interesting is that this troll joined AI in 2004, meaning it has been here for 15 years. That can mean only one thing, a former Apple fan that has become disgruntled and angry, and is on a blood vendetta against Apple and its users. That's the worst kind of troll because they’ll do anything to advance their revenge. I doubt it posts in any Android forums and not only because Android forums are incredibly boring and dull.
    tmaythtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 76 of 90
    Thanks, I’ll pass.
    Lack of a Home Button is the 100% deal breaker for me.
    What is it with the home button that you won't accept loosing? Do you just like it more, or is there a specific reason? The only thing that I find might have a slight advantage is being able to unlock with touchID without showing your face in the faceID zone. Other than that I got used to the buttonless swipes in minutes and I like it so much more than the button in all cases. I feel that the home button is kinda inefficient, old and clunky now, compared to the buttonless swipes.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 77 of 90
    It's been five days since I last charged my Xs....But of course I know that plenty of other people seem to go through their batteries much faster...
    You'd probably get 1-2 extra days ;-) I typically go through a full charge throughout a day. Sometimes I need to charge mid day, a bit depending on the use. I often end up using the phone 90% for communication, like e-mail, safari, forums, managing my channel, answering comments, messaging throughout the day. I rarely use my computer for any of that. I don't have any good internet in my studio, so I often end up using tethered internet from my phone when I need internet for my computer, like for uploading/ downloading/ sharing files etc. The iPhone XS is a work horse for me. Sometimes I run through two charges in a day. 4 hours extra battery life sounds really great for someone me.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 78 of 90
    I was hopping that Apple will use computational photography to fix ultra wide lens distortion. Maybe later.
  • Reply 79 of 90
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,192member

    cpsro said:
    The improved speed of the telephoto lens is nice. Night Mode is okay but often not very sharp results when handheld and moving objects are a blur. If you've never used a DSLR or (better yet) full-frame mirrorless camera (Sony A7r series or Nikon Z series), you're missing out on what real (not pretend) low-light sensitivity offers. Sharp photos, stopped action, great color, oh, and over 60 megapixels. Compared to a discrete camera, iPhone 11 cameras are still poor, but I upgraded from XS anyway.

    The U1 ultra-wideband chip offers unprecedented levels of tracking without our knowledge or permission.

    btw: Face ID is vastly superior to Touch ID.
    No one has ever claimed a cell phone camera can obtain the optics of a SLR. That’s absurd. They are completely different form factors and glass, and I can’t bring my SLR into dinner in my pocket. 
    Did I write that? Nope. I wrote that iPhone photos are still a disappointment. The "Pro" in the name for the cameras will still leave a professional (and amateur) photographer wanting. "Pro" is just Phil Schiller's latest marketing tactic. I am unafraid to say the king wears only underwear.
    edited September 2019
  • Reply 80 of 90
    Although the video reviews says differently, video at 4K 60fps was already available on the iPhone XS.
Sign In or Register to comment.