xmhillx

Baldwyn said:

I don't even have to turn my phone on for Samsung Pay. With the screen off, I swipe up from the home button and my card comes up. I touch the fingerprint sensor, it vibrates and I'm done. With the iris scanner, I'll swipe up, look at my phone, and tap it to the POS reader. What could be easier? 

BTW, you have the weight of the N7 listed as 345 grams, where It should be at 169. Big difference there. 

I'm afraid it won't be as simple as "I'll swipe up, look at my phone".

I assume most likely you'll have to position the phone correctly in front of your face, you know, so the iris scanner is scanning your iris. You can't just say "look at my phone", that implies you can look at your phone while the camera is angled away towards the ceiling or something; in other words, you can look at your phone while the camer isn't looking at your face. You can touch the fingerprint scanner in any orientation and any position the phone is in, but the iris scanner would need to be directly in front of your face and close enough to your eyes. It's a little more cumbersome, so I don't see it as an improvement or replacement. But rather as an optional supplement to security authentication. 

The FBI was able to pay $1.3m to get into the particular phone. The FBI could ask for those specific funds in their yearly budget.

Why have Apple make a back door to their general iOS intended for the government, yet available to everyone, when there are alternative ways to get into a phone rather than compromising the entire iOS. The juice isn't worth the squeeze, you bastards. You couldn't stop the entire world hacker community, professional and amateur, from constantly trying to break into the back door that would be KNOWN to exist for a fact. You think everyone's just going to ignore the #1 tech company in the world's purposely placed vulnerability? No, they wouldn't.

The cherry on top is the FBI found no useful evidence on the phone they tried to use to as justification for judges to compel Apple to comply....... geezus.

Before the FBI was able to pay to get into the phone, they said they had exhausted all other avenues and legally ordering Apple to make a back door was the only possible way left. It's madenning. 

Yes, I say let's get rid of the 3.5mm jack. It'll be inconvenient for some, like all technology jumps. But, sorry for you, get an adapter. Maybe new headphones even. It reminds of that time I had to use a cassette adapter to listen to music on my iPhone because my truck had a cassette player but no auxiliary jack, let alone bluetooth. But they sold cassettes with a cable running out one end to connect via 3.5mm jack to your phone. Imagine industry stayed with cassette players because of the inconvenience placed on those few consumers from the switch to auxiliary ports and bluetooth stereos in cars. Fuck that. Those people, like I did for a couple years, need to buy an adapter.

I don't want to hinder technological progress for the sake of catering to the potential inconvenience of the few. Is that what you're saying when you want to keep the 3.5mm because it'll be a pain in the ass to switch? "No, don't switch! None of my headphones will work. None of my speakers will work. I'll have to get a stupid adapter! And I'll lose it because I just lose things easily! Etc etc etc."

Have some vision. Like others have said, Bluetooth technology is always evolving and the new Bluetooth 5.0 is coming fall of 2016. Many that have complaints about inferior sound quality have a legitimate concern; but BT 5.0 solves this. It'll have more data throughput, twice as fast, more power efficient, and also gets an increase in data broadcasting capacity by 800%. THEN you have evolving technology in wireless charging; where before the efficiency was dog shit, it required specific alignment (no drop-and-play), and was much slower. In other words, the technology exists but it's significantly inferior to existing wired technology while offering no significant benefits to wired charging. It's a novelty with no benefits. In short, if it's worse in every way than current technology, then why use it? There are patents where devices can charge wirelessly from a distance (5 - 10 feet) within range of a hub that's broadcasting the wireless charging through the air, rather than having to be physically touching a charing pad like current "wireless charging." Essentially your phone could be charging constantly as you walk from room to room, office to office, or sitting at your desk as long as you're in range of the hub. Then, we have battery improvements and chip efficiency improvements that are expected every year.

So you marry all those things
1) Bluetooth 5.0
2) Wireless charging from a distance
3) Battery/processor efficiency improvements 

.... and you get a scenario where you don't have issues with having one single port (e.g. plug in headphones and charger simultaneously, inferior audio quality, big battery drain, constant worry about having to recharge devices including the phone and wireless earphones).

My bet is that Apple will get rid of the 3.5mm jack, ship lightning EarPhones, increase battery size, and increase processing efficiency to the point that regular use will have an insignificant impact on overall battery life congruent with the average use today. In other words, battery life will remain the same (even though lightning earphones use more energy and you can't charge simultaneously).

Apple will take that gamble to prepare for 2017, which by that time BT 5.0 is well established and true wireless charging (from a distance) is ready, and the industry is more accustomed to the No-3.5mm-Jack-Era.

But it's just a vision. I guess they could stick with 3.5mm; less work less uncertainty more safe.

foggyhill said:

What's your point, it is about the credibility of Samsung as a company, not just this phone..
It is a big scandal and people and Androidcentral and Phonearea (Android sites) are kicking Samsung's ass about this.

Your not pragmatic at all BTW.

Apple never claimed their phone were indestructible yet Android morons went beserk about it for weeks when morons specifically did things that were above spec.

The S7 active is plain a total absolute abject fraud.
The Chance of picking two phones at random that are supposed to be water resistant and fail the first time they are used as such,
is probably more than one several million
(because Samsung would normally have built enough margins so it would not fail even if it went slightly above its stated spec).

BTW, Samsung is not even honoring the warantee for water damage on those phone and people are rightfully mad about that.

Right. So you're rightfully concentrating on the S7 Active.

This is my point: I'm shedding perspective on people's comments about S7 and S7 Edge being frauds, even though this article emphasized S7 Active.
Like I said, S7 and S7 Edge passed the waterproof test at Consumer Reports, yet failed the tests in Cnet's article. So what's with the conflicting reports? If you're pragmatic, you don't take that data set and conclude "it's total fraud." You say that it's inconclusive and warrants conclusive testing. They passed here, but failed over there, hmmm that's weird. Yet it seems people are saying  "total fraud" for S7 and S7 Edge from the content in this article alone.

Ok, I get that. It's not good for Samsung's credibility regarding the S7 Active. Agreed, the chances of both those S7 Active phones failing is virtually zero. Which would indicate something majorly wrong or deceptive. And if it's true that a large amount of users are claiming water damage and being denied their warranty, then that's amazingly disappointing to hear. That would be ridiculous and stupid of Samsung. I wonder when that would make it to main-stream news, because it sounds like a giant scandal. The largely advertised waterproof (and champagne proof) phones are not actually as waterproof as we're told? Not good.

And again, I'm being pragmatic because I'm not using a whole bunch of ad hominem about Android users.

I haven't seen anyone comment on this, so I'll give it a shot.

This Apple Insider article is reporting on a article from Consumer Reports.
Consumer Reports released an article where they said two Galaxy S7 Active phones failed waterproof tests, and they said Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge were also tested but those passed.
The Cnet article reported on some other company that tested S7 and S7 Edge and they failed. They didn't test S7 Active.

So it's mixed results. In essence:

Consumer Reports (July):
S7 = Pass
S7 Edge = Pass
S7 Active = Fail

Cnet (March):
S7 = Fail
S7 Edge = Fail
S7 Active = n/a

So this Apple Insider article mentioned S7 Active's failed test, but didn't mention the S7 and S7 Edge passed tests from Consumer Reports. Kind of convenient that they left that out while also pointing to the failed tests at Cnet.

It's mixed results. Yet everyone's saying that there's a scandal and S7 is horse crap and they're lying. But again, S7 and S7 Edge passed the tests by Consumer Reports, soooooo you can't really conclude Galaxy S7 sucks and they're lying and etc etc. The models that passed here actually failed there, and the one that failed here wasn't tested over there. Mixed results.

I love Apple by the way, iPhones MacBooks and Apple TV since 2009, and have never owned an android device and I actually have a negative opinion on them; before anyone starts saying I'm some android fan. Just being pragmatic.