Apple Is Really Overdoing It Now

[JB3]

I've played with the galaxy S2 and iPhone 4S... extensively. I myself own an LG Thrill (because of its 3D capabilities). When I got to play with someone's iPhone 5 I saw nothing new to explore. Everything seemed like the same old, same old...boring. When I got to play with the S3, the UI felt fresh and made me want to play around with it and there were so many new features from Samsung to explore, like the popup video, burst shot, all the NFC stuff.

When jellybean hits for S3... there will be a smoother UI and Google Now which will be fun to try out.

It feels like iOS 6 offered just improvements... nothing new.

I would agree generally, but it really depends what you need. I got an iPhone 5, and before that I had a Galaxy S3 and Galaxy Nexus. Both of them were great phones, but each had its issues. This is what I didn't like:

-Cheap construction
-Screens weren't great. If you know what a Pentile Matrix is, then you know why the S3 and Nexus weren't all they could be.
-The apps I use regularly are much lower quality on Android.
-Android phones have gotten too damn big. You sort of get used to it, but after having my 5 for a few weeks, the S3 feels absolutely massive.
-I don't care for Samsung's skin. Samsung is trying really hard to be the 'whole package' with hardware and software, but they're just not very good at the software side yet.
-NFC is useless, at least at Verizon. No Google wallet. No Isis. (yet) All you can do is share stuff, and since I know no one with an NFC-capable phone, its pretty pointless.

It sounds like I hated both, but I didn't. Both were good phones, but ultimately not for me. That is especially true now that the iPhone has a bigger screen and LTE, which were my biggest gripes with the iPhone. HTC has a new phone coming out for Verizon called the Droid DNA, and I may take a look at it. I've always loved HTCs, and even though it has a big 5" screen, the rest may make up for it. I might also try out a Nexus 4 with a prepaid SIM and see if I like it. If I don't, know worries since I'll still have a phone I like.

The iPad Mini is 7.9" while the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD 7 are 7", but they have higher resolutions and better displays, the better resolutions compensates, making them comparable. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...-mini-display/. Also, the iPad Mini was released at such a specific price and time because obviously, it is trying to compete with something popular, e.g., the Nexus 7. Why would the iPad Mini be targeted to compete with something that is outdated by a year (does not include Kindle Fire HD 8.9")? One should compare the most updated mini tablets with each other, if you compare outdated tablets, you won't be comparing the most updated OS version.

Ehh. Apple released it when they did because of Christmas. Part of the reason they didn't release it with a higher spec screen is because the technology for a screen using Apple's retina philosophy (pixel doubling, essentially), doesn't exist. There's speculation they could introduce a new resolution for the Mini so they don't have to make that big of a leap, but that they're waiting until after the iPhone 5's resolution is fully 'absorbed' by delevopers.

Also, the Galaxy 8.9 and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 have a 1" difference vs the iPad Mini 7.9" and the IdeaPad 9"/Nook HD+ 9" have a 1.1" difference with the iPad Mini, this makes them less comparable with it than the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD 7".

Yes, however, the iPad mini is a premium tablet, which the Nexus and Fire HD are not. They may be very good tablets for the price, but they're still budget tablets nonetheless.

From a personal perspective, the Apple iPad Mini advertisements seem to display the iPad Mini as the same thing as the iPad, where everything performs at the exact same speeds. This advertisement is leading me to feel... are they trying to discourage people from buying the iPad?

Apple seems to be slipping...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411811,00.asp

No. The message they're trying to send is that the Mini is an iPad, but smaller, and that it can run all of the same apps as the bigger iPad. Its a subtle shot at the limited nature of the Fires, and the limited tablet app selection on Android.

[Nishin]

D670.713...



Seriously... does the Cupertino bully know any limit??

[Corny]

I have had flash scripts do that 10 years ago ..

[Laufey]

You could argue that every company that uses folders is copying Microsoft.

These copyright laws are to extreme I think.

P.s. The Samsung Galaxy's are much better than the overrated iPhone

[JB3]

D670.713...



Seriously... does the Cupertino bully know any limit??

...Or you could actually do a little research and understand that the design patent is very, very limited. Literally what you see in that picture is what is patented. Anything that is even the slightest bit different would not be in violation of that patent.

[TitaniumSky]

-NFC is useless, at least at Verizon. No Google wallet. No Isis. (yet) All you can do is share stuff, and since I know no one with an NFC-capable phone, its pretty pointless.

I can see your point... since NFC in phones is new, it does not have wide use yet, but it also depends on whether or not you are getting a 2 year contract, because with that, future technology, which has not been fully adopted yet, allows you to stay more up to date.

Yes, however, the iPad mini is a premium tablet, which the Nexus and Fire HD are not. They may be very good tablets for the price, but they're still budget tablets nonetheless.

Well, what exactly is a 'premium' tablet? Just because it is considered 'premium', does not invalidate it's unreasonable cost.
Yes, the iPad Mini may have a faster processor, but the point of all this comparison was to demonstrate how overpriced the iPad Mini is. The 'budget' Android tablets perform, in some aspects close or better, than the iPad Mini, which regardless of labels like 'premium', says that the iPad Mini is overpriced.

'Premium' Android tablets may perform worse than the iPad Mini, but since the cons of a 'budget' tablet are cancelled out by the cons of the iPad Mini, it is overpriced.

Ultimately, it may be better to assign value based on perspective due to the gamut of available features in each tablet; what may be 'premium' to one may not be so for all.

No. The message they're trying to send is that the Mini is an iPad, but smaller, and that it can run all of the same apps as the bigger iPad. Its a subtle shot at the limited nature of the Fires, and the limited tablet app selection on Android.

Yes, but my point was that the apps rendered on the iPad Mini and the iPad both show the same processing speed; naturally, one might assume that the $330 has the same processing speed as the $600. Also, both screens seem to display the same level of sharpness. I understand that the screen images were virtual and pre-rendered, so maybe they should have taken these into consideration.

Also, I can counter argue that displaying 1 or 2 apps does not demonstrate the scope of the app selection.

I will concede to say, though, that the advertisements are highly ambiguous and unsound and consequently, may render any of our interpretations invalid.

[JB3]

I can see your point... since NFC in phones is new, it does not have wide use yet, but it also depends on whether or not you are getting a 2 year contract, because with that, future technology, which has not been fully adopted yet, allows you to stay more up to date.

Only sort of true. Phones out now won't be likely to get the software necessary to use it.

Well, what exactly is a 'premium' tablet? Just because it is considered 'premium', does not invalidate it's unreasonable cost.
Yes, the iPad Mini may have a faster processor, but the point of all this comparison was to demonstrate how overpriced the iPad Mini is. The 'budget' Android tablets perform, in some aspects close or better, than the iPad Mini, which regardless of labels like 'premium', says that the iPad Mini is overpriced.

'Premium' Android tablets may perform worse than the iPad Mini, but since the cons of a 'budget' tablet are cancelled out by the cons of the iPad Mini, it is overpriced.

The market determines it, and it doesn't have a problem with the price.

Ultimately, it may be better to assign value based on perspective due to the gamut of available features in each tablet; what may be 'premium' to one may not be so for all.

The Apple App store alone makes it premium. Google's is trash compared to it. (on tablets only)

Yes, but my point was that the apps rendered on the iPad Mini and the iPad both show the same processing speed; naturally, one might assume that the $330 has the same processing speed as the $600. Also, both screens seem to display the same level of sharpness. I understand that the screen images were virtual and pre-rendered, so maybe they should have taken these into consideration.

This tells me you haven't played with a regular iPad and iPad mini. The big iPad has a much more powerful CPU, and it is definitely noticeable. The screens, similarly, are very different. The big iPad is a retina display and is very, very sharp. The Mini's screen is still very good, but it is nowhere near as crisp. There are also different use-cases for each. But, the big reason for how they are advertising it is that they want to reinforce that its an iPad, just smaller.

Also, I can counter argue that displaying 1 or 2 apps does not demonstrate the scope of the app selection.

The Android ecosystem is a barren wasteland for tablet apps. Even when there are tablet specific apps, they are usually of much poorer quality. Then, you have tablets like the Fire, which have heavily curated app stores with an even more limited selection. So its not hard to see why Apple wants to call out the availability of apps (or the lack of that) on Android.

[TitaniumSky]

I don't think you are perusing my posts very well. You don't seem to be getting the main gist of some of my posts. You seem to be focused on your opinion and reading just a few lines instead of understanding the implications of my concise and concrete arguments.

You argue against opinions or points which I have not made, as if expecting responses from an Android zealot.

This tells me you haven't played with a regular iPad and iPad mini. The big iPad has a much more powerful CPU, and it is definitely noticeable. The screens, similarly, are very different. The big iPad is a retina display and is very, very sharp. The Mini's screen is still very good, but it is nowhere near as crisp. There are also different use-cases for each. But, the big reason for how they are advertising it is that they want to reinforce that its an iPad, just smaller.

I know that the big iPad is more powerful than the smaller one... that was the whole POINT of my post, that the ad is misleading people into believing that actions are processed at the same speed with the same sharpness of resolution. I know that "they want to reinforce that its an iPad"(minus size differences), which leads to my point that they are discouraging the sale of the larger iPad.

The market determines it, and it doesn't have a problem with the price.

If the market had no problems with the price, then there would be no complaints, and critics are not exactly happy. I have already posted a review previously as proof.

The Apple App store alone makes it premium. Google's is trash compared to it. (on tablets only)

And as I explained, this is solely YOUR opinion on value. You may value the App store, but Android users may value the ability to customize their phones with widgets and live wallpapers. My point was that what may be valuable to you may not be so for others. (and yes I know about jail breaking, but this is since we are considering the average smartphone user, because you mentioned that software for NFC would not be available in the future, this is ONLY true for an average smartphone user, software mods are typically available for Android users from xda-developers, if other phones get them first)

The Android ecosystem is a barren wasteland for tablet apps. Even when there are tablet specific apps, they are usually of much poorer quality. Then, you have tablets like the Fire, which have heavily curated app stores with an even more limited selection. So its not hard to see why Apple wants to call out the availability of apps (or the lack of that) on Android.

Again, the point of my post was not to question Apple's motives, nor did I provide an opinion on the availability of apps on either platform.

I had said that the ad itself is ineffective in its demonstration, THAT was my point.

[Nishin]

Cheap shot but funny

[justdra]

Walmart is advertising iPhone 5 for 127 with 2yr contract. Thats a big cut from 199. I think all their Apple products are on sale.

[andysayshi]

I was at a client Christmas party the other night, where there were about 25 people under 25 years of age. We did a quick survey - not one of them owned an iPhone. All used Samsung, except for a couple of other Android variants and one Windows device. Their was a general attitude from them that iPhones were just too closed and overrated.

I think it's quite telling. Apple will continue to do great business with the iPhone, but the market has really tipped. Now that their competition can offer equal or better specs and features, I see their market share dropping quite a bit - unless they really zap the competition with some new innovation nobody has seen coming.

[JB3]

I was at a client Christmas party the other night, where there were about 25 people under 25 years of age. We did a quick survey - not one of them owned an iPhone. All used Samsung, except for a couple of other Android variants and one Windows device. Their was a general attitude from them that iPhones were just too closed and overrated.

I think it's quite telling. Apple will continue to do great business with the iPhone, but the market has really tipped. Now that their competition can offer equal or better specs and features, I see their market share dropping quite a bit - unless they really zap the competition with some new innovation nobody has seen coming.

Apple has never cared about marketshare. As long as they're making 70% of the profits for the entire cell-phone market they're fine with where they are. Apple's overall marketshare has actually increased in recent months, by the way.

Also, Samsung only recently overtook Apple in smartphone market share. The sole reason why is because they offer at least a dozen models, while Apple offers three. All of the other Android makers are struggling mightily, with all losing money and marketshare fast.

[Laufey]

Samsung makes the best smart phones it's that simple.

[JB3]

Samsung makes the best smart phones it's that simple.

Debatable. Their physical quality is at the back of the pack.