dominosixtyseven

StrangeDays said:

rogifan_new said:

StrangeDays said:

rogifan_new said:

So AI must be worried about Samsung and the S8 becoming popular otherwise no reason to write this piece.

Your employers must be worried because you're always worried that AI is worried. 

Clearly if DED was confident about Apple he wouldn't need to write these overly defensive and biased editorials. Same with everyone who throws out the Apple makes the most profit argument as if the only measure of success is generating massive profits. I don't remember Apple fans in the past being so obsessed with how much profit it makes. 

Clearly that's pure opinion on your part and not fact based whatsoever. 

Profit as a metric in debates about platform matter because 1) profit means people are voting with their dollars. 2) profit is the air corporations breathe, not market share. Note that even you would not be foolish enough to argue Mercedes was "worried" about their market share compared to Honda and Toyota. Yeah, because it doesn't matter to anyone but those looking to win pretend arguments on a rumor site. Profit share always trumps market share. 

avon b7 said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

avon b7 said:

minglok50 said:

You are citing `the Verge as a credible balanced site...

You are posting in thread hanging off a DED article. Balance is not something that springs to mind.

I agree with the sentiment that DED articles cannot be considered balanced, but somehow I found this article to be a balanced one. May be, my own biases!!!

Bias isn't a bad thing per se. We all have an element of It. When necessary we can all filter much of that bias out. I've worked in government and know how important it is to gIve everyone the same treatment Iindependently of my own personal opinion or feelings.

In this article it's his opinion but as usual soaked in bias. Sometimes I get through them, others I don't. This time I didn't.

I'm not forced to read them.

I think in this article I hit on two unbalanced points and then threw in the towel.

One was the stab at facial recognition. The company tells you you shouldn't use it as a security feature and it won't even allow you to  make payments with it. On the other hand they offer you an iris scanner which no iPhone has, and AFAIK at this point, is very secure. Nevertheless it seems ok to take a gratuitous poke at facial recognition because it is 'weak' and just skip the iris scanner, as mentioning that would make the stab less effective.

Of course, to work, you would need some kind of ssocial engineering. You need a photo of the person. The last time I checked, Apple would allow you to not even set a passcode and would definitely accept ultra weak passcode. In that regard, it is just as weak as facial recognition. 

The other point was services. The article's sets out the stand very clearly. S8. iPhone. The lead in then just opens the door to everything under the sun because it wants to include historical context (biased of course :-))

But why did it slam Samsung's entire mobile division with that direct non historical comparison to Apple Services? The relevance of Services is very recent and is derived from the entire Apple spectrum, not just iPhone. I didn't see any balance there. 

It's true that I just stopped reading anyway so maybe there was some kind of justification elsewhere in the article. Anyway, that's how I saw when I started reading.

cali said:

avon b7 said:

minglok50 said:

saltyzip said:

As long as the faithful stay with an iPhone then Apple has many more profitable years ahead.

The problem for the iPhone is not Samsung, like appleinsider seems to think, it is Android in general.

Google, LG, Motorola, Huawei all make great phones and most eclipse iPhone on the camera too. Look at the verge website for their latest camera shootout and you'll see iPhone doesn't even make the podium.

Apple phone inovation has plateaued​, technical advancement takes a long time, and because they are running out of features to entice people to upgrade they are now falling behind what was the chasing pack.

As long as the Apple faithful continue buying iPhones, then nothing will change, but don't expect to get best bang for your buck.

You are citing `the Verge as a credible balanced site...

You are posting in thread hanging off a DED article. Balance is not something that springs to mind.

DED presents facts and shoves them down your throat. Somethingvthe oaid Sammy shills won't do. 

saltyzip said:

blastdoor said:

The thing that really is kind of crazy is how bad Android phones are at web browser performance when "the open web" is supposedly central to Google's existence. You'd think that of all things on an Android phone, the web browser would be highly optimized and would be competitive with the iPhone. But you'd be wrong. So weird. 

Pop into your local phone shop and pickup an internet connected android phone such as the pixel and fire up chrome. See if your perception on web browsing on android changes. Google have made strives in the past two years, I can't say if it rivals the iPhone, but from my experience its fast and almost silky smooth.

Can you direct me to an android browser that doesn't collect my personal data?

if not the knockoff iPhones aren't even in the same league.