Apple's iPhone 5c ate up Android while Google's Moto X flopped: why everyone was wrong

15791011

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 220
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

     
    Sharing files via AirDrop, iMessage, etc are extremely easy and more convenient than using external storage. I'm not sure why you're caught up on sharing files with USB. Why would you want to carry around a 2nd device just to share a file when in 2-3 taps of the phone (or iPad) you can push a file to someone more easily. Again, trying to make an iOS device a computer. 

     


    Remember when you could copy files to, or from, your Mac with an iPod? In fact, you could even boot your Mac from an image on your iPod. You also could store any kind of file on your iPod, even a Windows .exe file if you wished. The reason that Apple discontinued that feature and does not allow access to the file system is because it is a security risk, not because they wanted to make your life more difficult, or as you say, easier. The walled garden is for your safety, not for general convenience, although not getting infected with viruses is quite convenient in the long run if you think about it. If you jail break your phone you would clearly see that there is a file system, it is just not user accessible in a normal configuration, for security reasons.

     

    And iPhones do have a USB port, but again, it is restricted for your security, however, you can use it to import camera memory card images and other specialized uses. 

  • Reply 122 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post





    My God, man. New Coke was introduced in 1985, some 29 years ago. I surmise that you were not even born then.



    It was just a friendly query, I was genuinely interested, figured if you were stating something, you'd have a source for it so I could check it out. I did do search, but found no evidence, only that it bombed all over the U.S.

     

    BTW, you surmise incorrectly. In 1985 graduate school was already 10 yrs in my past, I was on my 2nd career, and had been working for 20 years. Having lived in Detroit and the surrounding area since birth, New Coke was just as big a bomb here as it was everywhere else in the U.S. And no, I'm not suffering from dementia, if you go to the other extreme.

  • Reply 123 of 220
    macxpress wrote: »
    Sharing files via AirDrop, iMessage, etc are extremely easy and more convenient than using external storage. I'm not sure why you're caught up on sharing files with USB. Why would you want to carry around a 2nd device just to share a file when in 2-3 taps of the phone (or iPad) you can push a file to someone more easily. Again, trying to make an iOS device a computer. 

    Price, well you lost there too. Even low income families can afford an iPhone of some model. Apple doesn't make cheap crap. If you want cheap crap, go buy an android phone and thats exactly what you'll get. 
    Absolutely!! Sharing stuff with Android users is such a pain!! I have to figure out a way to point family members who don't have an iOS device of some sort to pics and videos of my son via email to Dropbox or Microsoft's OneDrive (which is just TERRIBLE, by the way), or figure out some inconvenient way to get it onto a usb, then transfer it to their phone or whatever, then remember to get my usb back, then not to forget to clear it all off of there because those damn things are always getting full. So annoying! All my iOS-using family and friends get shared stuff very regularly from me. It's so EASY!
  • Reply 124 of 220
    chiachia Posts: 712member

    Originally Posted by GrangerFX View Post



     I am very much an Apple fan but


    No surprises where this post is going...

     

    ... I have to say that factoring in the price, the larger screen, the FM radio and the Google apps and features, the $40 Android smart phone I just purchased from Amazon is a better phone than the Apple 5c.

     

    You consider:


    • the lower resolution of a physically larger screen on the $40 Android phone better than the retina display on a 5c?

    • the $40 Android phone lacking  a flash, autofocus and even 3G cellular data to be better than the iPhone 5c with LTE data and an 8 MP autofocus camera with flash?

     

    You also consider a radio in a phone as a strength when it's actually a weakness.

    There are pocket radios for $2-10 which are better than what can be built into a phone.

    Incorporating a radio into a phone means leaving less resource for battery and other features. 

     


     For one thing, you could carry this Android phone around and never worry about it getting damaged, lost or stolen. Neither it or the iPhone 5c can resist water damage but at least with the Android phone I am only out $40 in the worst case. The 5c will cost you $550 to replace since Apple Care does not cover water damage.


    Funnily enough I lost an iPhone 3GS in a field.  I found it after two days, two days of rain.

    It was lying face down partially submerged in mud, when I picked it up there was actually a worm sheltering on the screen.

     

    I thought all was lost but I had a charging battery with me.  Wiped away the mud, plugged it in and 15 minutes later the thing started up as if nothing had happened.

    I doubt a $40 Android phone would have been as durable.

     

    This happened in 2010.  That 3GS served me well till 2013 when it was replaced with an iPhone 5.

  • Reply 125 of 220
    djkikromedjkikrome Posts: 189member
    Another good read.
  • Reply 126 of 220
    arlorarlor Posts: 528member
    Sometimes I think the media coverage is the same phenomenon that affects political races. All through the summer and fall of 2012, Nate Silver and other boring pedants (/s) said that Obama was going to win. But that hardly suits the interests of the media.

    The media doesn't want to write "Apple dominates again" and "Apple makes the best phone again" over and over. That might sell ads on AppleInsider (although even here it frequently seems like there are pointless posts about competitors just to win more clicks), but it wouldn't be good for the broader business press.
  • Reply 127 of 220
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    blastdoor wrote: »
    Apple would never have moved to compete with Google in these areas.

    And you know this how? Who can say this with absolute certainty? Or that Apple would never screw Google? It's never a good idea for a company to rely on a big bulk of its business to another company.
  • Reply 128 of 220
    Someone is a little scared it seems to write a long article comparing the Moto X to the 5C. Here's one that'll nullify the 5C: Customizability.
  • Reply 129 of 220
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,595member
    blastdoor wrote: »
    "Google desperately needs a hardware business"

    Maybe this is true now, given the choices that Google has made over the last 10 years, but it did not have to be this way. Google makes its money off of search, advertising, web services. If Google had played the role that Steve Jobs had envisioned, Apple would never have moved to compete with Google in these areas.

    I wonder how much money Google has lost since Apple introduced its own maps app and how much more google will lose as apple shifts to yahoo and Microsoft. Google should have stuck to its knitting rather than trying to take on apple in hardware. Android may go down as the biggest strategic blunder in tech in the first two decades of this century -- not only is it a money loser for Google as it's own business, it also damaged Google's core business.

    Excellent points. Google shot themselves in the foot. Moronic move. The fact that they also flaunt it as open and open source is also insulting to those in the tech industry who know better. They are getting their just rewards, oops, punishment....
  • Reply 130 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ChiA View Post

    the lower resolution of a physically larger screen on the $40 Android phone better than the retina display on a 5c?


    • the $40 Android phone lacking  a flash, autofocus and even 3G cellular data to be better than the iPhone 5c with LTE data and an 8 MP autofocus camera with flash?


    This is an Alcatel Onetouch Fierce 4G. It has a 5MP camera with a flash. I can't tell if it has autofocus or not but the image is in focus and looks OK to me. Not sure what the screen resolution is but my eyes are not good enough to see retina pixels anyway. Bigger is better for me. No comparing the camera quality to an iPhone's certainly but I come back to the 14x price difference. We are going to see a lot of decent $40 and under Android phones this year and I still question why anyone would pay the premium for a second best iPhone? If I am going to shell out that kind of cash, I only want the best and that is the 5s.

  • Reply 131 of 220
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    dbam987 wrote: »
    Someone is a little scared it seems to write a long article comparing the Moto X to the 5C. Here's one that'll nullify the 5C: Customizability.

    App Store install what you want, buy whatever case you want.

    Enough customisation for over 99% of the people out there, the ones who didn't buy a Moto X.
  • Reply 132 of 220
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    GrangerFX wrote: »
    This is an Alcatel Onetouch Fierce 4G. It has a 5MP camera with a flash. I can't tell if it has autofocus or not but the image is in focus and looks OK to me. Not sure what the screen resolution is but my eyes are not good enough to see retina pixels anyway. Bigger is better for me. No comparing the camera quality to an iPhone's certainly but I come back to the 14x price difference. We are going to see a lot of decent $40 and under Android phones this year and I still question why anyone would pay the premium for a second best iPhone? If I am going to shell out that kind of cash, I only want the best and that is the 5s.

    Why pay the same premium for a Galaxy S?

    A lesson Samsung is learning right now.
  • Reply 133 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post





    Why pay the same premium for a Galaxy S?



    A lesson Samsung is learning right now.



    Agreed! I can't understand the premiums Samsung is getting.

  • Reply 134 of 220
    vvswarupvvswarup Posts: 334member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post



    "Google desperately needs a hardware business"



    Maybe this is true now, given the choices that Google has made over the last 10 years, but it did not have to be this way. Google makes its money off of search, advertising, web services. If Google had played the role that Steve Jobs had envisioned, Apple would never have moved to compete with Google in these areas.



    I wonder how much money Google has lost since Apple introduced its own maps app and how much more google will lose as apple shifts to yahoo and Microsoft. Google should have stuck to its knitting rather than trying to take on apple in hardware. Android may go down as the biggest strategic blunder in tech in the first two decades of this century -- not only is it a money loser for Google as it's own business, it also damaged Google's core business.

    There is nothing wrong with a company attempting to develop core competencies in other areas. If Google wants to try to develop a core competency in hardware, that's okay. If Google was trying to compete against Apple in hardware, Google was going about it the wrong way entirely. For years, Apple has been derided for its model of vertical integration. The fact that Google bought Motorola's phone business and manufactured a phone was Google going against its own philosophy of universal licensing. The fact that Samsung is the only Android OEM making money is more proof of the fact that the universal licensing model totally sucks for OEMs. For all the talk about about how Android is dominating iOS, it's questionable as to how much it actually adds to Google's bottom line. I don't know if Android is actually a money loser for Google but I'm pretty sure that for all the "success" of Android, it hasn't amounted to much for Google financially.

     

    As for your other point about how Apple will replace Google with Yahoo and Microsoft, I'm afraid it's a long time in the making. I don't buy the Google hype for a second. I take media reports glorifying Google's ventures into self-driving cars and smart contact lenses with a grain of salt because (1) those products are years away from going on the market and a lot has to happen for those to get there and (2) Google's track record with products besides search is not good at all. However, Google search is the best search engine on the market. Yahoo and Bing are simply no match for Google. 

  • Reply 135 of 220
    joshajosha Posts: 901member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppeX View Post



    The main iOS failures:



    - Missing true USB ports. Just connect a USB pendrive to share files.

    - Missing a decent file system (like the Mac has). Just connect a USB pendrive to see and share files.

    - Jailed. Just connect a USB pendrive to share files.

    - Sanboxed files and applications. Open any file with any application.

    - Expensive. Price should be slashed in half.



    Those are deal breakers for hundreds of millions of people. Will Apple learn or will it go the path of the Mac and iOS will eventually become a niche market?

    Those who I know who got an android phone instead of an iPhone, didn't mention your reasons. Their reasons were:

    -The android phone was lower cost.  (But I say only up front! Sometimes carriers actually pay customers to buy the others)

    -They wanted a larger screen. A valid point for those without good close vision.

    -The iPhone wasn't presented to them as an option.   (typical because carriers struggle to sell other phones)

  • Reply 136 of 220
    Thank you for these editorials. They are soothing springs of reason in the barren desert of tech journalism.
  • Reply 137 of 220
    enzosenzos Posts: 344member

    Like I've been saying all along: I'm seeing lots of 5c's in the wild in the hands of young women and in particular young east asian women (I live in a touristy area in Oz). Which is most likely just the demographic Apple was going after. People who want a well-designed easy-to-use reliable device that takes good selfies and doesn't look intimidating or geeky-gizmo fugly. 

     

    Cheers for the analysis, Dan! Funny how hundreds of millions lost can look better than billions in profit to some people !?

  • Reply 138 of 220
    formosaformosa Posts: 261member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GrangerFX View Post

     



    Agreed! I can't understand the premiums Samsung is getting.




     And I can't believe Verizon is offering a discount on the Samsung S5 (buy one, get one "free" promotion). That phone has hardly been out a month, and it's already discounted!!!  Is Samsung trying to flood the US market before the iPhone 6 comes out?

  • Reply 139 of 220
    mrbofusmrbofus Posts: 35member
    "Apple's iPhone 5c ate up Android"
    "While we don't have exact sales numbers for either model, it is now clear that iPhone 5c was a remarkable success"
    "Tim Cook stated that 69 percent of iPhone 5c buyers were new to iPhone, while 60 percent had switched from an Android phone."

    It's entirely possible that I missed this in the article, but how can the first two statements be made based on the third? Without sales numbers for the 5c, how do we know if it sold 100 or if it sold 1 million? As much as I want Apple to succeed, without the sales numbers for the 5c, how can we say it "ate up Android"? If they only sold 100 (I'm assuming they sold more, but aren't we all just assuming that?), then 60 of those were from former Android users, but I'd hardly call that a situation where the 5c "ate up Android". What did I miss?
  • Reply 140 of 220
    mrbofus wrote: »
    "Apple's iPhone 5c ate up Android"
    "While we don't have exact sales numbers for either model, it is now clear that iPhone 5c was a remarkable success"
    "Tim Cook stated that 69 percent of iPhone 5c buyers were new to iPhone, while 60 percent had switched from an Android phone."

    It's entirely possible that I missed this in the article, but how can the first two statements be made based on the third? Without sales numbers for the 5c, how do we know if it sold 100 or if it sold 1 million? As much as I want Apple to succeed, without the sales numbers for the 5c, how can we say it "ate up Android"? If they only sold 100 (I'm assuming they sold more, but aren't we all just assuming that?), then 60 of those were from former Android users, but I'd hardly call that a situation where the 5c "ate up Android". What did I miss?

    You missed that Apple is on record stating that the 5c considerably outsold its middle-tier predecessor from the year before, the 4s. I guarantee that was more than 100 units.
Sign In or Register to comment.