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.
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.
I have been a mac user since the Mac II.
I have never used Windows as a daily machine. Not even now.
I am older and wiser so I can understand some people seeing things through rose tinted glasses but I am not someone who is going to defend Apple or its products 'whatever' as some people do.
Likewise I am not going to criticise things I don't know very well. There is a vocal minority here who regularly slam Google/Samsung/Huawei and the rest without having any idea what they are talking about. I try to limit myself to subjects I know well enough to discuss.
I don't see Apple, Samsung, Google or Huawei as the 'enemy'. I am not embittered by some weird notion that Apple is held to some impossible bar or is overly hit on by the press/analysts while all the rest get all the love.
If you tell me and try to defend that shipping 5W chargers in the box in 2019 is in some way totally OK, I will debate that. If you try to tell me that glueing batteries to top cases, making keyboards so susceptible to breakage that they become time bombs etc is in some way a great consumer benefit I will challenge that, too. If you think differently that's fine but discussion isn't only for people who think the same as everyone else.
I am happy with most of my Apple gear but I do not like many current Apple products for various reasons. That doesn't make me 'disgruntled'. It doesn't mean I have to up and get a Windows machine or sell my iPads because of those people who always pop up to say 'Apple isn't for you, move on'. Those are the people who have no idea. The same people that said the iPad Mini was dead, the Mac Mini was dead, the Air was dead only to tell us what the 'future' is and get it all wrong. It's weird but those people are probably wrong more than they are right!
No. I vote with my money which is the only paper Apple truly understands. You can send off feedback, answer surveys or whatnot but at the end of the day Apple only ultimately responds to dropping sales.
Apple employees are popping in here regularly, lurking and taking note. I'm glad that not everyone here feels the need to 'defend' the company at every turn.
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.
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.
I got a question though, was the haptic feedback on the 11 Pro (Max) any weaker than the Xs (Max)? The Taptic engine is a bit smaller in comparison.
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.
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.
I got a question though, was the haptic feedback on the 11 Pro (Max) any weaker than the Xs (Max)? The Taptic engine is a bit smaller in comparison.
Feels about the same as the one in an iPhone X and an iPhone XS Max.
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.
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.
I got a question though, was the haptic feedback on the 11 Pro (Max) any weaker than the Xs (Max)? The Taptic engine is a bit smaller in comparison.
Feels about the same as the one in an iPhone X and an iPhone XS Max.
That's interesting. If it feels the same, the engine might be more efficient, or because the pressure layer is gone.
Thanks, I’ll pass. Lack of a Home Button is the 100% deal breaker for me. If I wanted an Android phone, I’d have one. When Apple brings back TouchID (and an associated virtual Home Button), and gets rid of the notch - ie fixes most of what Jonny Ive has screwed up, I’ll be first in line - until then, my iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 will do just fine).
Again, I’m not poo-poo’ing the tech, which is superbly executed, but I’m not going to spend good money to support incompetence and (IMO) Ive’s clueless stupidity. Good riddance that he’s gone, and I have confidence in Tim Cook and Jeff Williams fixing this mess starting next year.
None of those things are ever happening, so you're never buying a new iPhone. Getting rid of the Home Button went flawlessly, and the swipe to go home is the most natural and intuitive thing they've done since pinch to zoom. You're confused, and wrong.
"No, there is no 5G on the iPhone 11 Pro family at all, and there shouldn't be this year. Standards are still shaking out, carriers are still getting their act together. What works this year is probably not going to be even close to a full array of what 5G will support in the future."
If we take an educated guess from the rumours, it is almost certain that Apple was aiming for a 5G modem this year but intel didn't deliver.
Releasing a 5G modem next year will not change the 'standards are still shaking out' claim. The relevant standards for current 5G modems were finalised at the end of 2017. Commercial deployment is now a reality and Apple probably wanted to be part of that reality.
Long before Apple ships anything with a 5G modem, Huawei alone will have shipped 2,000,000 5G base stations worldwide. Add in Ericsson and Nokia, plus Qualcomm and Samsung and it is clear that Apple is at both a marketing and technological disadvantage. 5G will roll out far faster than previous generations.
5G coverage will vastly improve through 2020. China is accelerating an already accelerated 5G roll out. Korea has massive plans. Europe too. The devil is in the details but Release 15 is finalised. The only changes to that will be stabilisation efforts. NSA is what current modems (with the exception of Huawei which claims SA support too) are using and that is finalised and real.
Apart from the brute speed angle, things like 4GLTE/5G (NSA/SA) network slicing will also bring big advantages to everyone. Apple is obviously going to find it harder to compete in even a 5G NSA world without a product and when it does have a 5G product, the standard will still be 'shaking out'. I think it matters today from a purchasing perspective and no doubt a fair amount of potential buyers will put purchases off to wait for it along with the rumoured body redesign. Users looking for a phone to take them through a three or four year cycle might be even more reluctant to upgrade now.
It is hilarious to see 5G-obsessed goons like this, as if this pattern hasn't already repeated several times.
All of the same empty promises around 5G are exactly the same things we heard with 3G, and 4G, and LTE.
- Not one of these networks ever reached its potential speed, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next. - Not one of these networks ever reached a respectable deployment so that people could actually use them, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next. - Not one of these networks changed the way people use cellular data: sparsely, as little as possible, in short hops between Wi-Fi networks. - Not one of these networks made cellular data any less limited or expensive.
"No, there is no 5G on the iPhone 11 Pro family at all, and there shouldn't be this year. Standards are still shaking out, carriers are still getting their act together. What works this year is probably not going to be even close to a full array of what 5G will support in the future."
If we take an educated guess from the rumours, it is almost certain that Apple was aiming for a 5G modem this year but intel didn't deliver.
Releasing a 5G modem next year will not change the 'standards are still shaking out' claim. The relevant standards for current 5G modems were finalised at the end of 2017. Commercial deployment is now a reality and Apple probably wanted to be part of that reality.
Long before Apple ships anything with a 5G modem, Huawei alone will have shipped 2,000,000 5G base stations worldwide. Add in Ericsson and Nokia, plus Qualcomm and Samsung and it is clear that Apple is at both a marketing and technological disadvantage. 5G will roll out far faster than previous generations.
5G coverage will vastly improve through 2020. China is accelerating an already accelerated 5G roll out. Korea has massive plans. Europe too. The devil is in the details but Release 15 is finalised. The only changes to that will be stabilisation efforts. NSA is what current modems (with the exception of Huawei which claims SA support too) are using and that is finalised and real.
Apart from the brute speed angle, things like 4GLTE/5G (NSA/SA) network slicing will also bring big advantages to everyone. Apple is obviously going to find it harder to compete in even a 5G NSA world without a product and when it does have a 5G product, the standard will still be 'shaking out'. I think it matters today from a purchasing perspective and no doubt a fair amount of potential buyers will put purchases off to wait for it along with the rumoured body redesign. Users looking for a phone to take them through a three or four year cycle might be even more reluctant to upgrade now.
It is hilarious to see 5G-obsessed goons like this, as if this pattern hasn't already repeated several times.
All of the same empty promises around 5G are exactly the same things we heard with 3G, and 4G, and LTE.
- Not one of these networks ever reached its potential speed, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next. - Not one of these networks ever reached a respectable deployment so that people could actually use them, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next. - Not one of these networks changed the way people use cellular data: sparsely, as little as possible, in short hops between Wi-Fi networks. - Not one of these networks made cellular data any less limited or expensive.
Same story. Different Number.
It definitely isn't the same story for a lot of reasons.
Speed isn't the only metric. You clearly have little idea about what you are talking about.
For deployment alone there is a huge difference with regards to 4G. It is far, far cheaper to deploy 5G than 4G and 5G NSA can actually use existing 4G equipment (after some modifications).
4G often required expensive rents, multi personnel deployments and cranes. Power consumption was also a huge factor in costs.
zinkdifferent said: Thanks, I’ll pass. Lack of a Home Button is the 100% deal breaker for me. If I wanted an Android phone, I’d have one. When Apple brings back TouchID (and an associated virtual Home Button), and gets rid of the notch - ie fixes most of what Jonny Ive has screwed up, I’ll be first in line - until then, my iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 will do just fine). Again, I’m not poo-poo’ing the tech, which is superbly executed, but I’m not going to spend good money to support incompetence and (IMO) Ive’s clueless stupidity. Good riddance that he’s gone, and I have confidence in Tim Cook and Jeff Williams fixing this mess starting next year.
Not enough laughing emojis for this absolute embarrassment of a post.
Comments
I have never used Windows as a daily machine. Not even now.
I am older and wiser so I can understand some people seeing things through rose tinted glasses but I am not someone who is going to defend Apple or its products 'whatever' as some people do.
Likewise I am not going to criticise things I don't know very well. There is a vocal minority here who regularly slam Google/Samsung/Huawei and the rest without having any idea what they are talking about. I try to limit myself to subjects I know well enough to discuss.
I don't see Apple, Samsung, Google or Huawei as the 'enemy'. I am not embittered by some weird notion that Apple is held to some impossible bar or is overly hit on by the press/analysts while all the rest get all the love.
If you tell me and try to defend that shipping 5W chargers in the box in 2019 is in some way totally OK, I will debate that. If you try to tell me that glueing batteries to top cases, making keyboards so susceptible to breakage that they become time bombs etc is in some way a great consumer benefit I will challenge that, too. If you think differently that's fine but discussion isn't only for people who think the same as everyone else.
I am happy with most of my Apple gear but I do not like many current Apple products for various reasons. That doesn't make me 'disgruntled'. It doesn't mean I have to up and get a Windows machine or sell my iPads because of those people who always pop up to say 'Apple isn't for you, move on'. Those are the people who have no idea. The same people that said the iPad Mini was dead, the Mac Mini was dead, the Air was dead only to tell us what the 'future' is and get it all wrong. It's weird but those people are probably wrong more than they are right!
No. I vote with my money which is the only paper Apple truly understands. You can send off feedback, answer surveys or whatnot but at the end of the day Apple only ultimately responds to dropping sales.
Apple employees are popping in here regularly, lurking and taking note. I'm glad that not everyone here feels the need to 'defend' the company at every turn.
Probably, but any improvements might be only marginal.
You can't blame Dolby for wanting to play some part in mobile audio. Doesn't mean it is anything other than a gimmick.
It is hilarious to see 5G-obsessed goons like this, as if this pattern hasn't already repeated several times.
All of the same empty promises around 5G are exactly the same things we heard with 3G, and 4G, and LTE.
- Not one of these networks ever reached its potential speed, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next.
- Not one of these networks ever reached a respectable deployment so that people could actually use them, before being abandonded in favor of what comes next.
- Not one of these networks changed the way people use cellular data: sparsely, as little as possible, in short hops between Wi-Fi networks.
- Not one of these networks made cellular data any less limited or expensive.
Same story. Different Number.
Speed isn't the only metric. You clearly have little idea about what you are talking about.
For deployment alone there is a huge difference with regards to 4G. It is far, far cheaper to deploy 5G than 4G and 5G NSA can actually use existing 4G equipment (after some modifications).
4G often required expensive rents, multi personnel deployments and cranes. Power consumption was also a huge factor in costs.
5G vastly reduces ALL of those areas.