Database Info

Why are tablets so hit and miss?

Alright, I'm a bit curious as to why some tablets are bang and some tablets are bust in the XDA community.
I've heard the nook color had a lot of popularity in the dev world, and there already seems to be a stir on the Kindle Fire.
The only real thing that makes the the kindle fire a deal breaker for me as a possible mod friendly tablet is the lack of an SD card option.
I don't "like" the lack of features, but besides the sd card nothing is a deal breaker, it still seems to be getting a good bit of attention and will probably be a really popular tablet with people who like modding.
I understand the sale on the touchpad was a big plus.. but, I'd be worried about the discontinuing of the line meaning a very limited support life, so even if hp does make a few more.. I would hesitate to buy.
Just seems like a lot of options get looked over here in the mod world. Maybe I'm jumping the gun, But I'm worried the A1 for lenovo won't get much support, the Elocity tab for 250$ (with a tegra 2) doesn't seem to have any support..
It just seems like it is really "hit or miss" and I can't help but wonder why?
What makes tablets really appealing around here, and then other tablets spec'd close or higher, don't seem to get a second glance at the same price?

Those are great questions, probably all comes down to user preference though???

smccue said:
Those are great questions, probably all comes down to user preference though???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought about that.. But, I'm not entirely sure it holds up...
I will admit, before I seriously consider a phone or tab, I check dev support to make sure in 2 months if the OEM decides "we don't want to upgrade, so our newer model sells better." I can get the latest updates from devs at least.
Just seems like there would be a rhyme or reason to the tabs that get dev support here.

user preference also Goal, like which market they are aiming for
the smartphone is easy, because the Goal is to "be a phone", everything else is just fancy extra
but as a Tablet, the focus is no longer the same, and unless they know who they are trying to sell to, they will be just shooting in the dark, with random spec, random audience, random targets, random everything.
so if ANY manufacturer or some one who has control in any of the big companies making android tablet and reading this...
it'll be in your best interest to only develop to 2 audiences only:
- Gamers
- Webers (netbook replacement, your regular consumer that don't really know what they want)
now there's a potential for a 3rd audience (not a good time yet, too ripe)
- Work... but as we all well know, currently there are not enough productive Apps that is worth swaying people over, specially in the market mainly dominated by MAC or PC applications such as Photoshop, AutoCad, etc, etc
If a tablet can wow a Gamer, it will easily gain fly time in the web blogs and news, easily subject to reviews and benchmarks
which all translates into ease sales, with enough hypes.
obviously to get such hypes you must really have good tech packaged into the tablet
currently the only tablets worth buying are the ones made by Samsung, everything else are just meh... not quite there yet, or missing this or missing that

Hm.
Interesting points.
As someone who is a bit of a hardware junkie.. I am only just very recently beginning to feel like the tablets are being placed properly in the market.
I hope that the trend continues, just hoping that we see more support by devs. I mean as a gadget enthusiast.. I do admit even now the tabs leave a lot to be desired.. but, the lenovo A1 has my attention.. Especially if it gets a healthy dose of rooted ICS.

[Q] Android- the killer of differences

Hi, i've been thinking about the past and the present, and i've realized that android, no matter how good it is, is killing the beautiful differences that taken place when phones like Touch hd, HD2 were on top.
Why do I think that? Let's go back in time to 2009- the HD2 comes out, and becomes a flagship product of the HTC, people are happy, developers are making lots and lots and lots of fixes and upgrades. As we can see now, the HD2 is still one of the most active boards on xda, with new roms and builds coming every month.
Now look at the present time- HTC released tons of new smartphones, the 7 series and the other ones, which names i didn't even remember... The point is that now, every device equipped with android (i'm not sure about wp7 but i think its likely to be the same) differs from others only by screen size or the processor, now every app is the same, every phone looks like it's been cloned from another.
HD2 looks like it's personalized specially for one owner- it has it's own programs made specially for this one machine (like tcpmp and the other ones). The new ones look like cheap machines sold for 5$- each looks the same. At the moment, the HTC doesn't have a phone, that could become a flagship product like hd2 was and that's sad, cause it doesn't seem to change.
Well, it had to be a small IMHO and it grew up to a large lecture, anyway, what do you think? Does the android make a homogeneous mass from every phone? Or maybe do you think I'm crazy?

The market is certainly diluted. There are a ton of generic devices clogging things up, and honestly there are even too many quality phones, which to your argument, limits how often updates come out and spreads out the field for aftermarket development. It's also cost in terms of hardware in certain areas, as manufacturers aren't going to maximize sound output or still/video capture quality when they know it's only going to be one of ten devices bringing in revenue. If manufacturers would focus on one or two flagship devices and two or three mid-to-low range devices this would be much better all around.
Handsets are also dropping with far too much frequency. I'd rather see quality development than to have pretty good devices come out every few months and then get ignored once the newer phone hits the market. If it weren't for developers bringing out MIUI/Cyanogen, etc to give us the latest features I can't say that I'd stay fully satisfied with the devices.
I understand that people love different features, but there's no reason I should be presented with 34 Android-based phones when I go to look for something new, and that's just from Verizon alone. Over all of the major carriers we're talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of what, probably 75-85 current market android phones? That makes zero sense what-so-ever. The number of models needs to be scaled back so that one, casual users don't feel overwhelmed with the choices, two, updates can remain current and there can be a focus on developing quality product, and three so that aftermarket developers can streamline their work and know that what they code will work smoothly across the platforms available.
It's raining androids right now, and someone needs to stem the tide.

.
Thread moved to Q&A due to it being a question. Would advise you to read forum rules and post in correct section.
Failure to comply with forum rules will result in an infraction and/or ban depending on severity of rule break.

[Discussion]Power Race In Android

I can't believe the ATI(Adreno in spirit) and Nvidia(Tegra 1,2,3) battle is now in the mobile era, although the cpu core race is even more daunting...
It was not that long ago when 1 core dominated the market, but now we have Dualcores & Quadcores...My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware. And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!?
I know I'm gonna get a lot of backlash for thinking this way, but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it. It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case) , if you just take the time to fix the quirks then the device will run smoother. Though, it just seems companies are just interested in marketing gimmicks that most end users won't actually notice, plus most dual cores(S3, exynos,T2, etc) are competent with intensive apps.

The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential. Quad cores, when correctly optimized anyway, have much higher processing capacity and much lower power consumption when doing trivial tasks. The goal is to create interfaces that don't stutter or lag no matter how much you have going on and do so efficiently. There's also the backing of chipsets like the Tegra for high-end mobile entertainment. The end game is superphones, and the game is well afoot.
As to the necessity of it, just depends. I think most business users will be fine on dual core offerings with plenty of ram and a well-implemented overall system. For those who like to max their phones out the possibilities of the high-end development coming out is pretty great. Think about something like the Note with enough processing ability to act as a full input tablet for graphic designers, or that allows programmers to run and edit complex code on the go instead of having to drag a full-size tablet around with them. Think about doctors or researchers being able to monitor multiple sets of real-time data directly from their phones. There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
My $.02; hope that was all coherent.

MissionImprobable said:
The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential.
There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your points are all valid, but I still fear that the Software remains on a level much lower than the hardware; there are tons of Android configurations out there that prevent High Quality HW from performing optimally, due to this, the "potential" of certain devices may never be recognized.
I understand that more cores promotes a sense of efficiency and less power draws, but this tends to lead programmers to optimizing less often. Sense 3.0 was extremely sluggish, same with 4.0, but do you notice the trend? Both Sense 3/4 were made for fast SoCs, to my surprise the result was still horrid. And for your point about the mini tablet(Note), I personally feel you would see those types of Apps on iOS devices instead. For the sake of it, I don't want you to think I am an Apple fan boy(just playing devil's advocate).

Maybe those were the kind of things you only saw on Apple previously, but clearly Samsung and others are serious about competing with them.

I am on a bent for the new Google phones that are going to be being produced. Now, I am not the largest fan of quad core yet but I see great potential in dual cores. Like for running Ubuntu Android, an Ubuntu desktop from your phone to a monitor!
These new phones are looking to have 28nm cortex A15 dual core chips, that would be one hot cookie!
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Ace42 said:
but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Ace42 said:
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!? ...It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "logic" required is elementary economics. A competitive market causes innovation: each firm has to distinguish itself, and match the features of the others in order to stand a chance. Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate. They have to go up asap in order to compete. And so they have.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Now, for the bashing part.
Ace42 said:
My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Ace42 said:
And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.

Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches

goompas said:
Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
completely agree

Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs, and OEMs want to sell hardware, so they only optimize it for the tiny bit that is strictly necessary in order to sell. They'd rather make better hardware than better software, and no need to blame them: they just do what they know better. Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents. Btw, not that one approach is better than the other, choice is good, you pick what you want.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App

vnvman said:
Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs... Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This analysis doesn't make sense (at least, not as gross as it is right now). A company optimizes software when there's some form of competitive pressure, not because they "sell software". Just look at internet explorer: that didn't get seriously worked on for years, until alternative browsers started to become rightfully popular (that is, while microsoft is surely a software company, they still managed not to "give a crap").
Maybe you mean to say that companies only bother to improve something so that it's "good enough" to face off against the competition - and that's pretty much true. For example, after grabbing the market share, apple has only been innovating just hard enough not to be too far behind its competition.
Maybe you also mean to say that companies innovate better, the closer their incentives are aligned with the innovation. This is also true, but highly misleading. For one thing, the factor most affecting one's incentives is not "the thing they are selling", but (you guessed it from above) competition. Selling software or hardware when you have a monopoly, for instance, gives you little or no incentive to innovate (whereas your criteria would've suggested the opposite).
Mind you, I think you are hitting on something; it just requires a much more thorough analysis of the incentives than just "are they selling software or ads?"
And the incentive situation is itself weird. On one hand, android ad profit is (supposedly) pretty low for google, but on the other hand, they are able to delegate the whole manufacturing and execution to other firms. Fewer rewards, but also lower costs. They do have the majority of the phone market right now (getting dangerously close to monopoly there), but this is a fragile equilibrium, with tablets a whole 'nother story. And, since they are dying to get more stock phones out (with those giant "Google" permanant search bars), one can indeed argue that they've started to care not only about selling ads, but the whole damn thing. It's gotten to the point where they need to improve stock itself (and probably the phones too, hence the motorola acquisition + multiple Nexii partnership) in order to improve their ads. And so you see that the incentives may not be nearly as maligned as you'd originally supposed.

I think that we can only benefit from this race

thebobp said:
First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Being "lazy" is the reason why so many Android apps run poorly across the board; fine, I understand more power allows you to offload more work to the cpu, but that doesn't mean that's the correct method. If I were to make an app for a Dual environment I would specifically make sure each core is sharing the burden. When Dual core phones & Ginger were(and still are) united, the result was simply stunning—Ginger was definitely not optimized for dualcores. And it showed, my Sensation was so laggy under 2.3.x, it was so disheartening to see my single core devices could challenge the dual beast with ease.
thebobp said:
Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The average consumer doesn't know or can't even comprehend the raw power that certain SoCs are capable of, so I doubt they care if X phone has 2GHz and the other has 1Ghz. Apple normally doesn't boast about the CPU count in commercials, they boast about their OS & siri, that's how they win over millions each year. Everyone and their grandmothers know how flawless iOS is. Now I know I'm bashing Android severely, though I am a long time Android user and these are some of my views.
thebobp said:
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, WP7 offers the bare minimum when it comes to customization, which is an unfortunate sacrifice for speed. And Microsoft has set HW limitations to prevent fragmentation, which if I may, is devastating the Android market. We have Exynos over there, Snapdragon under there, and Tegra round yonder, and a large variety of screen types.
thebobp said:
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scrolling is slow? Are you using the 1st iPhone or something? Last time I tried my friend's 4S is was quite speedy, iOS has always been the fastest mobile OS available. If memory serves, iOS has also been GPU accelerated since the old days, a feature relatively new to Android and maybe WP7. I pretty sure you can visit every Android forum on XDA & at least 10 users will report that they have lag in X, Y, Z app. However if you did a poll with random iOS users I doubt if you would even find a black sheep.

[Q] Nexus (pure Android) vs iOS simplicity

I know for a lot of average phone users, the argument is always, "Apple is so much easier to use!" It's understandable why people claim it's easier with Apple's focus on simplicity, unchanged UI, and locked down user environment on their OS. I've been using the latest jellybean and I'm trying to be as fair as possible giving my opinion for a non-techie/average phone user. I really think that Nexus (pure Android) is now as simplistic as iOS. Yes, there is a file system on android and other additional features, but average phone users mostly only explore home screens and other basic features. Jellybean UI only has the on-screen three navigation buttons with the three dot menu access either located at the top right of bottom right.
Apple only has the home button, but some times the back button is located in different areas of an app or to access shortcuts, you have to click the home button a certain amount of times which can not be very user friendly for people that just want to 'see' the button to access what they want. I've been using my parents' phones (HTC EVO 4G) and I agree gingerbread or other older android versions for that matter are hard to use for an average user. There's too many navigation buttons, phone's touch input is bad, plenty of needed improvements on an unsupported android version, and gingerbread is slow. I believe new comers can adapt very easily to Jellybean; everything is fast, fluid, attractive, and has become much more simplistic for setting up or accessing everyday features on the phone.
What do you guys think? Have you convinced family or friends to convert to the Nexus line of Android?

Ive been trying so hard to convert my gf from her icrap... Geez she had a droid bionic before i knew her but that had old gingerbread and skinned with blur(the worst ui for android) aosp or nexus is way to go
Sent from an Apple killing JellyBean

moparfreak426 said:
Ive been trying so hard to convert my gf from her icrap... Geez she had a droid bionic before i knew her but that had old gingerbread and skinned with blur(the worst ui for android) aosp or nexus is way to go
Sent from an Apple killing JellyBean
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I need to sit down with some people who own iPhones and just show them side-by-side everyday tasks on Nexus (aosp). For example, telling them to show you how to attach a photo to a text message and then showing how to do it on Android. It's virtually the same and everything is much nicer on Android.

I'll say up front that I've owned Apple products and would consider doing so again.
iOS is a flaming heap of crap when it comes to the UI. It was what the user-base needed when smartphones where new, but we have so much more functionality now that it's ridiculous not to integrate it.
iOS is that person that still thinks it's the 1980s. Really garish and outdated, but not old enough to be classic and cool - or at least make people smile at how quaint it seems. It's everyone in Bruce Springsteen's Glory Days - those people that had an awesome time in high-school and now can't think of anything else.
I understand wanting to keep things the same for "non-tech" people who don't want to learn a new system every time they get a new phone. This is why they need to integrate small changes and improvements over time and teach people how to use them by explaining in a tutorial/greeting on the phone. I feel that Google does a very good job of that.
3/4 of my parents and step-parents have Android devices - and they have all picked it up pretty quickly.
My mom has a dumbphone on which she doesn't text and probably uses less than five minutes a month and still asks me how to attach files in an e-mail. I helped her pick out, buy, and set-up a TF700. She seems to be doing really well with it - a lot of people I've spoken with feel that an Android tablet is more "tech n00b" friendly than even a traditional computer - it's simple, everything is easy-to-find (and you usually don't need to go mucking around in the file-system), and you can reach out and touch what you want to do which is more natural for many than using the mouse.
She originally was thinking of an iPad, but it honestly wasn't the best choice for her. She needed a good camera (work-related) and the iPads that were in her price-range didn't have very great ones - and having a microSD card slot means that she doesn't have to worry about her video-recording taking up too much internal space even if she forgets to delete them when she's done. And she has the processing power and RAM that what she does isn't skipping and struggling when going back and forth through frames of HD video (something she specifically mentioned being worried about).
I think she would have been fine with an iPad, but she didn't have the budget for a newer one. Android offers options, customisation, and competition. Manufacturers are willing to take chances and try new things that might fail - whereas Apple plays it safe. I give credit to Apple for being the force to really push tablets into the mainstream - I just hope that iOS can get some much-needed innovation.
I believe my friend's "tech impaired" mom got an S3 and is doing fine. Touchwiz might be more bloated than Stock, but it does a pretty good job of being simple and teaching new users how to use it without overwhelming them. I think Samsung has done a great job with the S3 and their push behind it - offering something that appeals to many users and many different needs, allowing everyone to get what they want out of it. To me, that's what Android is all about - options, choices, and finding what's best for yourself.

Pennycake said:
I'll say up front that I've owned Apple products and would consider doing so again.
iOS is a flaming heap of crap when it comes to the UI. It was what the user-base needed when smartphones where new, but we have so much more functionality now that it's ridiculous not to integrate it.
iOS is that person that still thinks it's the 1980s. Really garish and outdated, but not old enough to be classic and cool - or at least make people smile at how quaint it seems. It's everyone in Bruce Springsteen's Glory Days - those people that had an awesome time in high-school and now can't think of anything else.
I understand wanting to keep things the same for "non-tech" people who don't want to learn a new system every time they get a new phone. This is why they need to integrate small changes and improvements over time and teach people how to use them by explaining in a tutorial/greeting on the phone. I feel that Google does a very good job of that.
3/4 of my parents and step-parents have Android devices - and they have all picked it up pretty quickly.
My mom has a dumbphone on which she doesn't text and probably uses less than five minutes a month and still asks me how to attach files in an e-mail. I helped her pick out, buy, and set-up a TF700. She seems to be doing really well with it - a lot of people I've spoken with feel that an Android tablet is more "tech n00b" friendly than even a traditional computer - it's simple, everything is easy-to-find (and you usually don't need to go mucking around in the file-system), and you can reach out and touch what you want to do which is more natural for many than using the mouse.
She originally was thinking of an iPad, but it honestly wasn't the best choice for her. She needed a good camera (work-related) and the iPads that were in her price-range didn't have very great ones - and having a microSD card slot means that she doesn't have to worry about her video-recording taking up too much internal space even if she forgets to delete them when she's done. And she has the processing power and RAM that what she does isn't skipping and struggling when going back and forth through frames of HD video (something she specifically mentioned being worried about).
I think she would have been fine with an iPad, but she didn't have the budget for a newer one. Android offers options, customisation, and competition. Manufacturers are willing to take chances and try new things that might fail - whereas Apple plays it safe. I give credit to Apple for being the force to really push tablets into the mainstream - I just hope that iOS can get some much-needed innovation.
I believe my friend's "tech impaired" mom got an S3 and is doing fine. Touchwiz might be more bloated than Stock, but it does a pretty good job of being simple and teaching new users how to use it without overwhelming them. I think Samsung has done a great job with the S3 and their push behind it - offering something that appeals to many users and many different needs, allowing everyone to get what they want out of it. To me, that's what Android is all about - options, choices, and finding what's best for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This post is excellent. Apple does integrate small changes in the software every year, with the same minor upgraded phone that, "Changes it all." Problem is, is their platform is not moving fast enough and every software upgrade is poorly integrated leaving lag for multitasking and the notification bar to name a few. Apple definitely started the revolutionizing of smartphones and tablets into the mainstream, but I feel like they are no longer as innovative or exciting to hear about. Android has many phones across their platform with different themed phones that can deter users to go and choose an iPhone, but like you said it also gives the user many options and customization.
How come you didn't just buy your mom a phone for hd photo/video and rendering? Tablets are kind of awkward to hold for users who want to do that. I know that Apple has more apps optimized for their tablet, but on a budget, they're not the best buy. The best buy right now is the Nexus 7 or 10, but no sd card slot. You think she would need more than 16-32gb and additional cloud storage? Many "tech-impaired" people are still able to use old android phones quite well - more than I would want to. If they could just see what newer android phones offer, they're so much easier to use and it should no longer be said that, "Apple is so much easier to use than Android!" It's simply not true anymore - especially for the Nexus (pure Android) devices I'm talking about.
Google does do a great job of user-interactive tutorials first setting up the phone. I hate to be completely biased; I've had Apple devices in the past and am around them nearly everyday. They don't have that excitement or new features that have been on Android for awhile now. Not to mention how locked down their hardware and software is - slowing down development. I've also heard recently that Apple's new approach for their devices and software, is what they feel is the best for their interest and not the communities interest. That right there completely turns me off of ever owning one of their devices and I'll continue to support Google as they're my favorite company.
Another argument you'll always hear is, "Well Apple just has so many more apps and they work better." Well, they been around longer than Android and recently Android announced they have around 675000 apps now which is nearly identical to the Apple store. Pretty impressive considering how much longer Apple has been out. Also, saying they work better is entirely not true. There's been many tests on apps on both platforms and apps perform better on newer versions of Android. I just bought a Nexus 4 for $300 off-contract featuring a quad-core cpu, 2gb ram, true hd ips+ lcd screen, and the latest purest version of android. Does it get better than that?

Is it (money)wise to upgrade to the new Apple iPhone 13(Pro)?

Hi all,
Since the release of the new Apple 13 (Pro) device, the main question is: do the new features of this new Apple iPhone justify to upgrade from an Apple 11 or Apple 12? In a lot of reviews the new Apple 13 is mainly seen as an/compared to the Apple 12S with minor added features. What are the new features of the new iPhone 13 (Pro)?
1. Better camera's compared to it's predecessors
2. More storage
3. A bit faster processor
4. Faster loading and a bit greater battery
But the question still remains, is it worth to upgrade?
IMPO, this is not the case when you own, as I do, the Apple Pro 12 Max. It's only worth to upgrade when you are a die-hard photographer. Then you will enjoy and appreciate the added new features in the Apple iPhone 13, which are somewhat disappointing regarding the costs. Also the update from iOS 14.8 to iOS 15 do not lead to big improvements, which is Apple unworthy unfortunately. Also the use of the lightning cable has become obsolete as of today. Apple has to switch to the, at this very moment, generally accepted USB C cable. A severe omission. What are your experciences and considerations to buy the new Apple iPhone? Am I right or wrong?
kindest regards, kuzibri

Whether the iPhone are pricey or not, totally depends on what weights more on your value scale.
iPhone is simple, easy to use (ridiculously easy), and very powerful in many aspects.
Apple managed to benefit from this combination.
Of course there's a lot of cons and pros, but there's something you need to know, if you were to buy a phone from Apple, Apple has one line of phones, and they are the company's flagship products.
You know how much flagship devices cost, the difference lays in what each OS offers. I personally don't like Apple products. So much underestimates.

I also disliked Apple products due to their stuberness to let us choose our own home display, etc. I acknowledged though that they made beautiful devices (my wife is an Apple addict). But at a certain moment, Apple released the watch 6 of which I was stunned by it's possibilities compared to the Fitbit Versa 2. I relealized that when I wanted to buy this watch, I also needed to buy an iPhone. Not so an interesting idea, UNTILL Apple released iOS 14.5, with which it was possible to achieve what I wanted, e.g. compose my own home display. This was the moment to make the switch for me and after one year now, I totally do not miss Android at all. Using the Apple now, I noticed a few things in comparison with Android: 1. It never crashes, 2. Updates, in contrast to Android, are not only on a very regular basis, but devices are also supported for a long time. Now iOS 15 is released, which still works on an iPhone 6S. This is not the case with the support of any of the Android devices. Besides that, altough the iPhones are not cheap, the Samsung top devices are also vey expensive. My home display is now exactly the same as I had on my Android devices. Regards kuzibri

I picked up my second new Note 10+, 256gb, 12gb ram for $800 a week ago.
Anything without a SD card slot is dead to me.
A dual drive 1.25tb handheld PC... hell yeah.
Apples run very good, are very easy to use, and bore me to tears. I loathe them; they are overpriced and use CCP sweat cities to manufacture them. The bright icons and pastels drive me insane; Debbie would love them.
Samsung's are the most customizable stock phones on the planet. Unfortunately the 10+ and Android 10 were Samsung's and Android's best releases to date respectively. Which is why I went with a 2nd 10+, sad but true.
It's ok because even after 2 years the 10+ is just plain fun to use; fast, stable, excellent build Q with one of the best displays there is even today. No high refresh rates but better color rendering than even some newer flagship phones. The display has perfectly square corners, none of that horrible CRT roundness here. 7mm thick, even in a good case it's thin. Pics don't do it justice. The spen nests until needed as a remote shutter release or for Smart Capture which is great to have.
No way I would upgrade the Apple, but I'm extremely biased and hate pastels

blackhawk said:
I picked up my second new Note 10+, 256gb, 12gb ram for $800 a week ago.
Anything without a SD card slot is dead to me.
A dual drive 1.25tb handheld PC... hell yeah.
Apples run very good, are very easy to use, and bore me to tears. I loathe them; they are overpriced and use CCP sweat cities to manufacture them. The bright icons and pastels drive me insane; Debbie would love them.
Samsung's are the most customizable stock phones on the planet. Unfortunately the 10+ and Android 10 were Samsung's and Android's best releases to date respectively. Which is why I went with a 2nd 10+, sad but true.
It's ok because even after 2 years the 10+ is just plain fun to use; fast, stable, excellent build Q with one of the best displays there is even today. No high refresh rates but better color rendering than even some newer flagship phones. The display has perfectly square corners, none of that horrible CRT roundness here. 7mm thick, even in a good case it's thin. Pics don't do it justice. The spen nests until needed as a remote shutter release or for Smart Capture which is great to have.
No way I would upgrade the Apple, but I'm extremely biased and hate pastels
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, very glad that I finally stirred up the discussion between Android and Apple users. As already mentioned, used to be a very satisfied Android user, but since Apple introduced the iOS 14, there is no difference anymore between an Android and Apple device. You're now able to make your own Home Screen, just like in Android. And let's be honest, which company gives updates so long to old devices as Apple. The most recent Apple iOS is 15 and runs on an Apple 6S. No Android device supports that long their devices. All in all, I do agree with earlier responders that Apple used to be boring, but that is now just ancient history since the release of iOS 14.5 and certainly now iOS15. Best regards, kuzibri

I haven't played with an Apple in 6 years... so there's that. That icon pack burns my eyes and display out though. Apple is going in unsavory directions on multiple fronts now. No SD card support alone though blows them out of the water.
As for updates once I have firmware that's fast, stable and fulfilling it's mission I leave it be. I rarely update and rarely have issues, that's not a coincidence. I may update my older 10+ running on 9 to 10, the same as the new one but that will be the last update.
Security simply isn't an issue. My current way outdated load is 16 months old, still fast and stable. No breaches.
All my critical data is redundantly backed up, a forced reload is the worst that could happen. Down time 2 hours, 6 if I need to repopulate the SD card. Any major firmware upgrade would cause far more downtime and worse could permanently degrade performance or capabilities.
I see no real advantage to updating an old device with a bloated OS it's hardware wasn't designed to handle. OS's tend to get larger, not smaller and are designed/optimized with the current hardware in use. So that 3, 5 whatever years support doesn't impress me in the least.
Tough choices if you are even considering one platform let alone two. I probably would wait to latter in 2022, even 2023. My next new purchase will be probably 2023 or latter. This year is a bust for Samsung and likely 2022. Apple may or may not be faring as badly, but there are supply chain issues worldwide. China is also having power infrastructure issues as well as a growing political storm both of their own making. I expect especially the latter to grow worse not better in the next 3 years.

kuzibri said:
Hi, very glad that I finally stirred up the discussion between Android and Apple users. As already mentioned, used to be a very satisfied Android user, but since Apple introduced the iOS 14, there is no difference anymore between an Android and Apple device. You're now able to make your own Home Screen, just like in Android. And let's be honest, which company gives updates so long to old devices as Apple. The most recent Apple iOS is 15 and runs on an Apple 6S. No Android device supports that long their devices. All in all, I do agree with earlier responders that Apple used to be boring, but that is now just ancient history since the release of iOS 14.5 and certainly now iOS15. Best regards, kuzibri
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't mean to be rude, I'm sorry, but .. do you really want to compare the customisation level between Apple & Android?
Apple is never close to a customisable OS, it has always been late to the party. Not just the home screen, there's a lot of features took it years to implement, though they were on Android for a long.
I used iPhone 11 Pro Max for about a week. I don't know, but I never got relieved about it. Leaving all the customisation behind, and step into a kindergarten?
One thing I hated was Apple's underestimation, they act & think on your behalf. If they thought a regular user don't need to manage files, they'll not integrate any support for file manager.
That's exactly how their security system works, if they thought something can risk the device, they don't build a firewall, they just eliminate the target. A very good example is the recent Visa payment hacking issue, where a warning was sent to remove the Visa as a payment method.
I see this very ridiculous, it gets the job done, but in a non-professional way.
In the other hand, Android does not think on your behalf, it gives you what an iPhone lacks, an option. A vast range of options, and if something doesn't suit you, you can change it. Or simply, build it.
I think I may use an iPhone when I'm dying or something. At least I won't have anything else to do but socialising.

Hi, "@Mohamedkam000: do you really want to compare the customisation level between Apple & Android?". No that is not my purpose. My point is that untill recentrly there were two incompatible worlds, e.g. the Android world vs the Apple one. Now, due to the the release of iOs 14.5 Apple offers somewhat more possibilities to customize your device. Untill recently I belonged to the Android world and my motto was always "Apple is for dummies", although I was also always under the impression of the build quality of the devices, which is beyond doubt. Since it's possible to customize your iPhone, it has become easier, certainly if you just like me want the Apple watch but not the iPhone, to make the switch to Apple. There is now more or less an "in-between" world. That's my point, no more or less. Kind regards, kuzibri
BTW: let's be honest, the best OS for mobile devices that even existed was Windows Mobile, which was as versatile as it could be. I owned an HTC HD2 with windows mobile, android and apple on one phone and all working perfect.

kuzibri said:
Hi, "@Mohamedkam000: do you really want to compare the customisation level between Apple & Android?". No that is not my purpose. My point is that untill recentrly there were two incompatible worlds, e.g. the Android world vs the Apple one. Now, due to the the release of iOs 14.5 Apple offers somewhat more possibilities to customize your device. Untill recently I belonged to the Android world and my motto was always "Apple is for dummies", although I was also always under the impression of the build quality of the devices, which is beyond doubt. Since it's possible to customize your iPhone, it has become easier, certainly if you just like me want the Apple watch but not the iPhone, to make the switch to Apple. There is now more or less an "in-between" world. That's my point, no more or less. Kind regards, kuzibri
BTW: let's be honest, the best OS for mobile devices that even existed was Windows Mobile, which was as versatile as it could be. I owned an HTC HD2 with windows mobile, android and apple on one phone and all working perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can go ahead and bring the pros and cons of iOS, but that's a long fight. So I'm gonna stick into the reasons you're providing to justify iPhone.
kuzibri said:
due to the the release of iOs 14.5 Apple offers somewhat more possibilities to customize your device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you ever tried custom ROMs on Android phones. CyanogenMod? What about MIUI custom ROMs of 2014? How about the famous LineageOS?
Okay let go of the systems, how about Xposed? Ever used it? Ever used Dr. Ketan's ROMs? I'm asking to see if you had any experience in deep customisation.
Okay, do you know that you can change the home screen launcher on Android? You can change icons? You can use themes? Not just a wallpaper, a full theme.
If you know that, I wonder how can you even think about saying the iPhone is comparable to the customisation level on Android.
kuzibri said:
"Apple is for dummies"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The company does literally acknowledge this phrase. And they are right to assume that. But, they are profiting from their right assumption.
Apple treats people like babies, people don't need the complications of programming and themes and customisation and other stuff. People just need to pay and use the limited things Apple offers.
kuzibri said:
want the Apple watch but not the iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Safety features like Fall Detection, Emergency SOS, and high and low heart rate notifications make Apple Watch great for older family members, even if they don't own an iPhone.
Calling, texting, and location sharing provide an easy way to stay connected with the family. Where I live, no one cares about smart watches, so I can't speak about it.
One last thing:-
iPhone has been released earlier than Android, it was revolutionary back then, and as you know, first impressions has a very huge impact on the customer's preference.
I have a relative that is using an iPhone for appearances, but his actual primary phone is an Android. It simply helps him a lot in his work, for he don't need a laptop to manage files or something.

@Mohamedkam000 said: I don't think you ever tried custom ROMs on Android phones. CyanogenMod? What about MIUI custom ROMs of 2014? How about the famous LineageOS?" Yes in my Android time I have used a lot of custom ROM's, like f.i. CyanogenMod, Artemis Rom, etc. So I'm familiar to customizations. To state that the iWatch is only for older family members is IMPO at least shortsighted. It's by far the best smartwatch available at this very moment (except for battery life). My sole purpose is to bring the Android and Apple world somewhat closer together instead of the current "War of the worlds". Both make beautiful devices with it'own pros and cons. Kind regards kuzibri

kuzibri said:
@Mohamedkam000 said: I don't think you ever tried custom ROMs on Android phones. CyanogenMod? What about MIUI custom ROMs of 2014? How about the famous LineageOS?" Yes in my Android time I have used a lot of custom ROM's, like f.i. CyanogenMod, Artemis Rom, etc. So I'm familiar to customizations. To state that the iWatch is only for older family members is IMPO at least shortsighted. It's by far the best smartwatch available at this very moment (except for battery life). My sole purpose is to bring the Android and Apple world somewhat closer together instead of the current "War of the worlds". Both make beautiful devices with it'own pros and cons. Kind regards kuzibri
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless Apple changes its ecosystem of which it does not allow its devices to work well with other rival products, there's no way the two worlds could join.

Hi @Mohamedkam000 , regarding this "Unless Apple changes its ecosystem of which it does not allow its devices to work well with other rival products, there's no way the two worlds could join." If we're holding on to these points of view, indeed the two worlds will never join. It's a matter of giving and taking. F.i. you ask Apple to change their ecosystem in order to work well with each other. But, what do yo have in return for Apple? That's the main problem for this dead end. As I see it, Apple has a lot of knowledge about securing the privacy of their users, while Android suffers once and a while from mal/ransomware due to the opensource of the OS. See what I mean? Regards, kuzibri
BTW: this does not mean that I'm able on my own to solve that problem not are you, but if we cooperate in this line, we might be able to convince some leading persons of both sides to do something about this.
BTW2: Also see this regarding customizations regarding icons on an iPhone: https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/customizations-on-the-apple-iphone.4342639/. It's only an example of many other apps.

kuzibri said:
Hi @Mohamedkam000 , regarding this "Unless Apple changes its ecosystem of which it does not allow its devices to work well with other rival products, there's no way the two worlds could join." If we're holding on to these points of view, indeed the two worlds will never join. It's a matter of giving and taking. F.i. you ask Apple to change their ecosystem in order to work well with each other. But, what do yo have in return for Apple? That's the main problem for this dead end. As I see it, Apple has a lot of knowledge about securing the privacy of their users, while Android suffers once and a while from mal/ransomware due to the opensource of the OS. See what I mean? Regards, kuzibri
BTW: this does not mean that I'm able on my own to solve that problem not are you, but if we cooperate in this line, we might be able to convince some leading persons of both sides to do something about this.
BTW2: Also see this regarding customizations regarding icons on an iPhone: https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/customizations-on-the-apple-iphone.4342639/. It's only an example of many other apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPhone is safer than Android, but not more secure. For a device that receives so many patches for vulnerabilities, it doesn't seem to be better than Android.
I mean .. I've never heard of an essay alerting Android users to remove their Visa from the device. Android does fix the vulnerability. Apple does remove the reason the vulnerability is their in the first place.
Android is used by many, many people around the world, it is a very attractive target for hackers, of course it'll get some attacks. But, most of them does exploit the negligence of the phone owner. Like the latest report of malware-infected apps.
Example: Samsung has allowed iOS devices to connect to her Watch products for a long, maybe sometimes there's some missing features, but that's because it is created for Samsung devices.
On the other hand, Apple smartwatch does not allow any Android device to pair with it, it simply refuses to pair. If it was really a give-and-take, then Apple will take and not give.

Hi @Mohamedkam000 , regarding this: "On the other hand, Apple smartwatch does not allow any Android device to pair with it, it simply refuses to pair. If it was really a give-and-take, then Apple will take and not give.", see this video:
. It's not flawless, but it's possible.
Pairing Android watches to an iPhone is also not very easy and has it's disadvantages: https://www.lifewire.com/pairing-android-wearables-with-the-iphone-3875746. Regards kuzibri

kuzibri said:
Hi @Mohamedkam000 , regarding this: "On the other hand, Apple smartwatch does not allow any Android device to pair with it, it simply refuses to pair. If it was really a give-and-take, then Apple will take and not give.", see this video:
. It's not flawless, but it's possible.
Pairing Android watches to an iPhone is also not very easy and has it's disadvantages: https://www.lifewire.com/pairing-android-wearables-with-the-iphone-3875746. Regards kuzibri
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought we were talking about what is official, and what can be done without using back-door. Hacks happen due to an existing restriction, iPhone does not need to hack anything to connect to Samsung Watch, it is allowed to. Sometimes with limited features, and you know why.
I know there is Jailbreak on iPhone, too. But have you thought about the word itself? Jail? Break? iPhone is a Jail? Like .. I've never seen a company that makes choices on behalf of their customers like Apple do. It'll probably take them years to, for example, add another user-prefered customisation features.

Mohamedkam000 said:
I thought we were talking about what is official, and what can be done without using back-door. Hacks happen due to an existing restriction, iPhone does not need to hack anything to connect to Samsung Watch, it is allowed to. Sometimes with limited features, and you know why.
I know there is Jailbreak on iPhone, too. But have you thought about the word itself? Jail? Break? iPhone is a Jail? Like .. I've never seen a company that makes choices on behalf of their customers like Apple do. It'll probably take them years to, for example, add another user-prefered customisation features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just replied to your remark that Apple does not allow to pair with Android Smartwatches at all, no more or less. The only Smartwatch I know that supports both Android and, in a bit minor fashion, Apple's iOS, are the Fitbit devices due to their own Fitbit OS. Maybe in the near future Google Smartwatches are able of paring to Apple due to the fact that Google bought Fitbit.

Depending on what factors more heavily on your value scale, you can decide whether the iPhone is expensive or not. The iPhone is straightforward, really simple to operate, and extremely powerful in many ways. Apple was successful in gaining from this combo.
There are undoubtedly many advantages and disadvantages, but if you were to get an Apple phone, you should be aware that the business only produces one line of phones, which are its flagship models.
The pricing of flagship devices is well known; the differences are in the features that each OS provides. Apple items don't appeal to me personally. Much is understated. But I had spent a lot of money to buy it.