If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
If you go back to the very origins of Android (ala the Andy Rubin era) and the phones built using it, it sure as heck was knocking off everyone in sight. Prior to the iPhone coming out, Android-based phones were modelled after Blackberry (the market leader at the time). Once the iPhone was released and became a success, every Android-based phone suddenly looked like an iPhone.
So that's where I see the whole argument that the "Pixel wouldn't exist" as being valid. It probably would exist, but it would be a clone of whichever phone was the market leader and look nothing like an iPhone. You can argue that Google's services differentiate Android phones, but I'm talking about the base look and feel of the hardware and software/GUI.
I find it crazy how many people simply dismiss the whole field of industrial and visual design (and UX). My wife worked as a graphic designer and, at a couple of places, management thought that they were just playing around because they had colourful things on their screens all day instead of spreadsheets and/or Word documents (i.e. it wasn't real work). They used to joke about how they could just speak into the mouse and say, "Computer, make pretty design!"
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
If you go back to the very origins of Android (ala the Andy Rubin era) and the phones built using it, it sure as heck was knocking off everyone in sight. Prior to the iPhone coming out, Android-based phones were modelled after Blackberry (the market leader at the time). Once the iPhone was released and became a success, every Android-based phone suddenly looked like an iPhone.
So that's where I see the whole argument that the "Pixel wouldn't exist" as being valid. It probably would exist, but it would be a clone of whichever phone was the market leader and look nothing like an iPhone. You can argue that Google's services differentiate Android phones, but I'm talking about the base look and feel of the hardware and software/GUI.
I find it crazy how many people simply dismiss the whole field of industrial and visual design (and UX). My wife worked as a graphic designer and, at a couple of places, management thought that they were just playing around because they had colourful things on their screens all day instead of spreadsheets and/or Word documents (i.e. it wasn't real work). They used to joke about how they could just speak into the mouse and say, "Computer, make pretty design!"
I found a video of Avon b7 defending his ripoff of McDonald's...
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
If you go back to the very origins of Android (ala the Andy Rubin era) and the phones built using it, it sure as heck was knocking off everyone in sight. Prior to the iPhone coming out, Android-based phones were modelled after Blackberry (the market leader at the time). Once the iPhone was released and became a success, every Android-based phone suddenly looked like an iPhone.
So that's where I see the whole argument that the "Pixel wouldn't exist" as being valid. It probably would exist, but it would be a clone of whichever phone was the market leader and look nothing like an iPhone. You can argue that Google's services differentiate Android phones, but I'm talking about the base look and feel of the hardware and software/GUI.
I find it crazy how many people simply dismiss the whole field of industrial and visual design (and UX). My wife worked as a graphic designer and, at a couple of places, management thought that they were just playing around because they had colourful things on their screens all day instead of spreadsheets and/or Word documents (i.e. it wasn't real work). They used to joke about how they could just speak into the mouse and say, "Computer, make pretty design!"
Android was intended to be a ripoff of the Blackberry, until the iPhone was revealed, then they copied that instead. It’s why it took over a year for the first Android phone to come out. You can see the before and after.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
If you go back to the very origins of Android (ala the Andy Rubin era) and the phones built using it, it sure as heck was knocking off everyone in sight. Prior to the iPhone coming out, Android-based phones were modelled after Blackberry (the market leader at the time). Once the iPhone was released and became a success, every Android-based phone suddenly looked like an iPhone.
So that's where I see the whole argument that the "Pixel wouldn't exist" as being valid. It probably would exist, but it would be a clone of whichever phone was the market leader and look nothing like an iPhone. You can argue that Google's services differentiate Android phones, but I'm talking about the base look and feel of the hardware and software/GUI.
I find it crazy how many people simply dismiss the whole field of industrial and visual design (and UX). My wife worked as a graphic designer and, at a couple of places, management thought that they were just playing around because they had colourful things on their screens all day instead of spreadsheets and/or Word documents (i.e. it wasn't real work). They used to joke about how they could just speak into the mouse and say, "Computer, make pretty design!"
Android was intended to be a ripoff of the Blackberry, until the iPhone was revealed, then they copied that instead. It’s why it took over a year for the first Android phone to come out. You can see the before and after.
For sure. That and they needed to figure out how to leverage Java (for Android app development) but not pay the licensing fees. Clone and own was their design mantra.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
So much very wrong in all of that and I have little time but I'll answer it, eventually.
WiFi6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
So much very wrong in all of that and I have little time but I'll answer it, eventually.
WiFi6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
So much very wrong in all of that and I have little time but I'll answer it, eventually.
WiFi6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
Boy, you’re great at making excuses.
No excuses, just facts (and supported).
Here is what you said:
"Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t."
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
So much very wrong in all of that and I have little time but I'll answer it, eventually.
WiFi6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
Boy, you’re great at making excuses.
No excuses, just facts (and supported).
Here is what you said:
"Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t."
You were wrong.
Nope. Show me which Huawei phones currently have WiFi 6.
If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.
What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.
A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.
The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:
"Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".
It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.
That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.
Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.
Many people consider that akin to be far LESS, not more. The entire reason these OEMs do that is to compete with each other, in trying to offer a look, and features that others don’t. But interestingly, they’re always considered to be worse than plain Android. Say what you will, but you can read that in almost every article or review.
no matter how you look at it, Apple’s phones are still better, as is the OS.
Some people prefer plain Android. Others don't. Of the hundreds of millions of Huawei users out there, very, very few would prefer plain Android. Too much would be lost in the move. One of those advantages is the 'born fast, stays fast' feature.
Along with features like Desktop Mode, One Hop or Multi Screen collaboration:
One of the things Apple users talk about is eco-system but there isn't just one.
For the camera shootout between the latest Pixels, iPhones, Galaxys and Huawei phones, the differences won't be as dramatic as before but at least Apple has woken itself up now (not only on camera tech of course but also things like price). Competition is good but the S11 and P40 are literally just around the corner. No rest for the wicked!
You’re wrong g when. You use the word “prefer”. The fact is that they are t given a chance, since pure android is only on Google’s phones, and I believe the OnePlus phones, or some other small vendor. Google’s phones have never so,d well for a number of reasons, despite their best in the android industry of supporting with is updates.
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
Not sure why you say the word prefer is wrong. People that prefer stock Android have options and can use them.
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
It’s pretty simple. When almost all OEMs offer a changed android experience, even not offering “real” Android, but AOSP instead, most people don’t have a real choice as to whether they can buy a pure Android phone or not. After all, Google itself was late to the hardware Android market. That’s one reason they never achieved any traction. The other is poor distribution, even here in the USA.
So mist buyers do t even see the phones, much less have a chance to buy them. Google pulled out of the Chinese market long ago because of the increasingly Chinese authoritarian movement. It’s the main reason why some Chinese software and services have grown so rapidly after they left.
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
You went from 'second rate' to 'perfectly fine but not great'.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
Perfectly fine but not great is second rate. Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t. Apple hasn’t tried to make a modem until recently. Trying to get away from qualcomm is something that I’m sure Huawei itself can understand. In practical terms, where almost nobody can get more than, at most 100Mb/s from their models, real world, maximum speeds don’t really matter. The fact that Huawei has been doesn’t make them great. Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving. NPU, you’re joking with that, right?
Their cameras were good, I’ll grant you that, but not that much better, and not all of them were that good. They’re night mode is good, but as with Google’s, Apple, which doesn’t like to rush things, is now better, by most accounts, particularly from the photo sites and channels.
Huawei’s battery life has been also good, but not great. This year, apple is kicking Huawei to the curb there, and pretty much everyone else. So, of course, you unsuccessfully try to minimize that. most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
So much very wrong in all of that and I have little time but I'll answer it, eventually.
WiFi6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
Boy, you’re great at making excuses.
No excuses, just facts (and supported).
Here is what you said:
"Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t."
You were wrong.
Nope. Show me which Huawei phones currently have WiFi 6.
I quoted you directly.
I will now quote myself from a reply to you:
"The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not". The Mate 30 Pro, that is.
That's an honest reply.
That's one thing. Another is if Huawei has 802.11ax or not.
As I said, it does. Very much so.
So much so in fact that it has at least five executives chairing different committees which are establishing standards.
So much so, that it was one of the first vendors to bring products to market. So much that all of its Huawei 5G showcase venues are also equipped with 802 .11ax.
So much so that it has a plethora of enterprise grade 802.11ax solutions available too.
As you can see very clearly, your claim that Huawei doesn't have wi-fi 6 is very, very wrong. Spectacularly wrong.
As to exactly why they chose not to include it in the latest phones I have no official answer (I am not Huawei) but it is patently clear that it was not because they 'don't have WiFi 6'.
If we speculate I could give you a lot of suggestions and the biggest one is that the signal the phones need, has to come from somewhere. Where exactly? Well, a WiFi 6 AP, of course. Without that you won't get much (if anything) out of WiFi 6 and some tests are showing iPhone 11s connecting to WiFi 6 APs and still not performing as well as expected.
Time for a whole 802.11ax mesh system too? I doubt it (see above link on Amazon and Google re 802.11ax support).
802.11ax is great to have but there are practical realities in the consumer space that completely limit the benefits, which, at the moment, are on the other side of the WiFi 6 coin. Enterprise grade AP deployment.
Time to rewind a full year now and the unveiling of the Hi1103 chipset. At the time, the world's fastest mobile WiFi chipset. Designed completely in house by Huawei and so fast that the only way for it to perform as fully as it could was through a WiFi 6 AP (even though it isn't a WiFi 6 chipset). That's because those 802.11ax APs are a whole different monster to the chipsets in phones.
Hi1103 WiFi chipset supports 802.11ac (wave 2), up to 1732Mbps speeds and 2x2 MIMO of up to 160MHz wide channels.
Commercial enterprise grade 802.11ax solutions not only offer high speeds but suffer from none of the limitations imposed by phones with 802.11ax (power, heat, spatial streams, number of concurrent users, antenna limitations etc).
It is possible that Huawei felt that it's in-house offerings were more than good enough in real world scenarios right now.
Apple’s GPS is as good as anyone’s, and better than most everyone. For years, it was the only phone that could pick up a GPS track when the it was in vehicle was moving.
This is the kind of stuff that you throw in without care for reality and not knowing the facts or including supporting links.
Dual frequency GPS has been gaining traction for a few years now:
Huawei has been trotting out direct GPS tracking comparisons withiPhones for years now at major product presentations.
This is what they were doing back in 2017:
Huawei GEO enhanced GPS technology. Multi-sensor navigation (GPS, WiFi, G-Sensor and Gyro). Inertia tracking plus offline data to maintain tracking without a signal. Barometric information.
These elements back then made all the difference in challenging scenarios (tunnels, multipath roundabouts, flyovers etc). They also had the fastest reconnection to satellites when links did break.
Back then it was the iPhone 8 that was used for comparative purposes in a driving context
This year it was accuracy on a jogging plan.
Huawei has also covered the subject of 'coverage' while moving at high speed. This isn't only a GPS factor but also more of how the phone can handle the cell tower handovers at speed. No mean feat.
Thousands of kilometres testing how their phones handle high speed rail travel in Germany and China. Perhaps the U.S is lacking in high speed rail transport and you are unaware of how important this capacity is.
Dual frequency GPS and, equally as important, stellar antenna design have played a key role in keeping Huawei well served in these areas.
It might not even be long before tri-frequency chipsets appear in mobile hardware.
In the meantime, Google appears to be readying support for dual frequency on the Pixel 4 soon:
Comments
So that's where I see the whole argument that the "Pixel wouldn't exist" as being valid. It probably would exist, but it would be a clone of whichever phone was the market leader and look nothing like an iPhone. You can argue that Google's services differentiate Android phones, but I'm talking about the base look and feel of the hardware and software/GUI.
I find it crazy how many people simply dismiss the whole field of industrial and visual design (and UX). My wife worked as a graphic designer and, at a couple of places, management thought that they were just playing around because they had colourful things on their screens all day instead of spreadsheets and/or Word documents (i.e. it wasn't real work). They used to joke about how they could just speak into the mouse and say, "Computer, make pretty design!"
not impressed. Huawei can do wwnatever they want, it’s still second rate.
https://www.androidauthority.com/best-smartphones-stock-android-844672/
A Huawei user isn't going to give up the things that make the phone stand out. The AI frameworks alone are essential. Everything from battery management through voice enhancement and of course all the computational photography would be lost.
That's what makes the OPs claim fall under its own weight. The 'Android' on millions of phones is vastly different to the Android on many others millions of phones in spite of sharing the same base.
How is Huawei 'second rate' when it has left Apple catching up in key areas for the last few years?
There are still things that iPhone should be able to do but can't. Why on earth won't FaceID work if the phone is horizontal? Why can't the AI rotate the screen to match the orientation of the user if the user isn't holding it?
despite you denials, it’s well known how Chinese OEMs get favorable treatment from the government there, while foreign companies are hampered. Yeah, you can continue to deny it, but it’s true nevertheless. Even though a few years ago, a Chinese minister almost bw]egged Apple to increase its presence there because, as she said “the Chinese peop,e love Apple products, but they’re too hard to buy here”, Apple has been harassed there for not entirely toeing the official Chinese government line.
Huawei has phones that a perfectly fine, but not great. Their Kirin SoCs, for example, whi,e around the top of the Android market, are miserable when compared to Apple’s. I don’t know how you’ll try to get around that one. They’re cameras are good, but no better. Their screen is ok, but not great. Battery life is good, but not great. I could go on.
There is a big difference between the two claims.
We went down the SoC path last year! Apple had, let's use your terminology, 'second rate' modem, WiFi, GPS tracking, NPU use etc.
Well, Apple hadn't even managed to get ANY modem on its SoC much less a 5G modem.
Huawei batteries were well ahead of Apple's and I'm including the whole shebang here (charger, cable and internals). Have been for years. Camera versatility blew Apple out of the water. Quality is what it is, best in class.
Only now, and as highlighted by Anandtech for example, is Apple catching up. Now, as also pointed out by Anandtech, they have to stay up.
As for stock Android, I gave you a link to a list of phones. If you really want stock Android I don't see any problem getting one.
most of those stock manufacturers are very small, and most people haven’t heard of them.
https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/article/3034296/apple-fan-and-huawei-ceo-ren-zhengfei-pictured-ipad
WiFi 6?
Maybe you missed Huawei's role in that (hardware, software and standards) and
that it was also one of the first vendors with commercially deployed WiFi 6 products. Even before the certification was finalised.
https://e.huawei.com/en/products/enterprise-networking/wlan/wifi-6/
Obviously if they didn't include it on the latest phones it definitely wasn't because they couldnt do it but they chose not to include it. The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not but I can tell you for sure that last year's Kirin 980 phones had the world's fastest WiFi chipset (designed in house) and were so fast that the only way to hit the top speeds was by connecting to a 802.11ax router. Of course, Huawei had those too.
Where was Apple? Trying to catch up. It's as simple as that.
Did you know that when Ren's daughter was arrested she had a iPhone 7?
You clearly did but I wonder if you knew she also had a $2,000 Mate 20 RS on her.
Here is what you said:
"Apple has WiFi 6 as does Samsung. Does Huawei? No, they don’t."
You were wrong.
I will now quote myself from a reply to you:
"The truth is I don't actually know if the latest phones support it or not". The Mate 30 Pro, that is.
That's an honest reply.
That's one thing. Another is if Huawei has 802.11ax or not.
As I said, it does. Very much so.
So much so in fact that it has at least five executives chairing different committees which are establishing standards.
So much so, that it was one of the first vendors to bring products to market. So much that all of its Huawei 5G showcase venues are also equipped with 802 .11ax.
So much so that it has a plethora of enterprise grade 802.11ax solutions available too.
As you can see very clearly, your claim that Huawei doesn't have wi-fi 6 is very, very wrong. Spectacularly wrong.
As to exactly why they chose not to include it in the latest phones I have no official answer (I am not Huawei) but it is patently clear that it was not because they 'don't have WiFi 6'.
If we speculate I could give you a lot of suggestions and the biggest one is that the signal the phones need, has to come from somewhere. Where exactly? Well, a WiFi 6 AP, of course. Without that you won't get much (if anything) out of WiFi 6 and some tests are showing iPhone 11s connecting to WiFi 6 APs and still not performing as well as expected.
Then there is this:
https://www.cnet.com/news/ready-for-wi-fi-6-not-yet-say-google-and-amazon/
That timeframe is very similar to the one Huawei provided for 802.11ax consumer grade demand in a recent whitepaper.
And this:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/371040/the-iphone-11-doesnt-show-wi-fi-advantages-over-the-iphone
Time for a whole 802.11ax mesh system too? I doubt it (see above link on Amazon and Google re 802.11ax support).
802.11ax is great to have but there are practical realities in the consumer space that completely limit the benefits, which, at the moment, are on the other side of the WiFi 6 coin. Enterprise grade AP deployment.
Time to rewind a full year now and the unveiling of the Hi1103 chipset. At the time, the world's fastest mobile WiFi chipset. Designed completely in house by Huawei and so fast that the only way for it to perform as fully as it could was through a WiFi 6 AP (even though it isn't a WiFi 6 chipset). That's because those 802.11ax APs are a whole different monster to the chipsets in phones.
Hi1103 WiFi chipset supports 802.11ac (wave 2), up to 1732Mbps speeds and 2x2 MIMO of up to 160MHz wide channels.
Commercial enterprise grade 802.11ax solutions not only offer high speeds but suffer from none of the limitations imposed by phones with 802.11ax (power, heat, spatial streams, number of concurrent users, antenna limitations etc).
It is possible that Huawei felt that it's in-house offerings were more than good enough in real world scenarios right now.
Dual frequency GPS has been gaining traction for a few years now:
https://www.gpsworld.com/dual-band-gnss-market-moving-from-insignificant-to-billions-in-less-than-5-years/
Huawei has been trotting out direct GPS tracking comparisons with iPhones for years now at major product presentations.
This is what they were doing back in 2017:
Huawei GEO enhanced GPS technology.
Multi-sensor navigation (GPS, WiFi, G-Sensor and Gyro).
Inertia tracking plus offline data to maintain tracking without a signal.
Barometric information.
These elements back then made all the difference in challenging scenarios (tunnels, multipath roundabouts, flyovers etc). They also had the fastest reconnection to satellites when links did break.
Back then it was the iPhone 8 that was used for comparative purposes in a driving context
This year it was accuracy on a jogging plan.
Huawei has also covered the subject of 'coverage' while moving at high speed. This isn't only a GPS factor but also more of how the phone can handle the cell tower handovers at speed. No mean feat.
Thousands of kilometres testing how their phones handle high speed rail travel in Germany and China. Perhaps the U.S is lacking in high speed rail transport and you are unaware of how important this capacity is.
Dual frequency GPS and, equally as important, stellar antenna design have played a key role in keeping Huawei well served in these areas.
It might not even be long before tri-frequency chipsets appear in mobile hardware.
In the meantime, Google appears to be readying support for dual frequency on the Pixel 4 soon:
https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/10/18/dual-band-gps-pixel-4/
Whichever way you look at it though, claiming Apple's GPS is 'as good as anyone's' simply isn't true.