5 ms·

This seems like a weird request. Are iPhones supposed to be more addictive than Android phones or something?

alphonsegaston 9y ago
I suppose its possible to argue that they are by virtue of the superiority of their UI design and a more robust app ecosystem. In my own experience, I find myself far more impulsive about phone use on an iPhone than when I was using android devices.
- nicolashahn 9y ago
  I've had a couple iPhones and now currently use Android, but I never noticed this in myself. Can you give a little bit more detail?
  - innagadadavida 9y ago
    I’ve seen kids ask silly questions to Siri and having a ball getting silly answers back. Is G-now any fun?
    - cryptoz 9y ago
      I think this is a super silly debate, but yes, Google Now is tons of fun. It will tell stories to you (way more than Siri knows), it will play games with you (way more games than Siri can play), it will do all kinds of unexpected and fun, nearly-natural things that are not just search. Siri's answers are monotonous and boring compared to Google's.
- saagarjha 9y ago
  > I find myself far more impulsive about phone use on an iPhone than when I was using android devices Looking through a tinted lens, is it possible that iOS devices are just nicer to use, leading you to use them more?
the_common_man 9y ago
IMO, it's all the same. But if I had to make an argument: People who buy iPhones are more likely to get their kids an exclusive iPad in their homes, thus making their kids prone to addiction. (Just a theory!)
dang 9y ago
The connection is presumably that they're Apple shareholders asking something of Apple.
kosmet 9y ago
Probably because Apple is a hardware company and Google (read Android) is an advertising company. Stopping addiction is more harmful to Google than Apple. Hence it can improve their market share.
- tyingq 9y ago
  Makes sense. Apple wants you to buy the phone, that's enough. Google needs you to use the phone, the more the better.
  - rock_hard 9y ago
    Sorry. But no, just buying the phone is not enough for Apple! If somebody would buy a iPhone and then rarely/never use it, then they would never or only in very long cycles buy a new iPhone...people also talk less about things they rarely use and it would therefore hurt brand awareness...and if you believe that Apples singular motivation to exist is to make more profit then that’s not a good thing! Armchair commenters like to focus on how making profit is a company’s singular purpose and motivation...the bigger the company (Apple, Google, etc) the more kitties they are willing to poison to do so...but that’s absurd! Making a lot of money is the ‘outcome’ of providing something people want...and the companies who do this successfully are simply the ones that focus on metrics that measure how much use users get out of their products...it’s that simple...and I would imagine that anyone who ever worked at a successful company would be able to attest that. I have never ever in my career sat in a team meeting in a successful company where somebody suggested doing something because it would make us more money...that kind of thinking is shortsighted...I can see how it could work temporarily but it’s not a way to build a mission driven company like the ones at hand! I am all for being critical...but we need to stop being cynical about everything...that doesn’t lead to any place worth going! Try this: At first assume good intent and then think about why a company build their product the way they did...and then do the same but assume bad intent. Always almost will you notice that if the company was truly ill intended they would have driven it way farther.
    - tyingq 9y ago
      I don't know that heavy use vs light use drives when they buy a new phone.
Arainach 9y ago
It's not a relative thing - Camels may not be more addictive than Marlboros, but either company would presumably want to understand the impact of its products addictive tendencies to stay ahead of any regulation.

I suppose its possible to argue that they are by virtue of the superiority of their UI design and a more robust app ecosystem. In my own experience, I find myself far more impulsive about phone use on an iPhone than when I was using android devices.

nicolashahn 9y ago
I've had a couple iPhones and now currently use Android, but I never noticed this in myself. Can you give a little bit more detail?
- innagadadavida 9y ago
  I’ve seen kids ask silly questions to Siri and having a ball getting silly answers back. Is G-now any fun?
  - cryptoz 9y ago
    I think this is a super silly debate, but yes, Google Now is tons of fun. It will tell stories to you (way more than Siri knows), it will play games with you (way more games than Siri can play), it will do all kinds of unexpected and fun, nearly-natural things that are not just search. Siri's answers are monotonous and boring compared to Google's.
saagarjha 9y ago
> I find myself far more impulsive about phone use on an iPhone than when I was using android devices Looking through a tinted lens, is it possible that iOS devices are just nicer to use, leading you to use them more?

the_common_man 9y ago

IMO, it's all the same. But if I had to make an argument: People who buy iPhones are more likely to get their kids an exclusive iPad in their homes, thus making their kids prone to addiction. (Just a theory!)

dang 9y ago

The connection is presumably that they're Apple shareholders asking something of Apple.

kosmet 9y ago

Probably because Apple is a hardware company and Google (read Android) is an advertising company. Stopping addiction is more harmful to Google than Apple. Hence it can improve their market share.

tyingq 9y ago
Makes sense. Apple wants you to buy the phone, that's enough. Google needs you to use the phone, the more the better.
- rock_hard 9y ago
  Sorry. But no, just buying the phone is not enough for Apple! If somebody would buy a iPhone and then rarely/never use it, then they would never or only in very long cycles buy a new iPhone...people also talk less about things they rarely use and it would therefore hurt brand awareness...and if you believe that Apples singular motivation to exist is to make more profit then that’s not a good thing! Armchair commenters like to focus on how making profit is a company’s singular purpose and motivation...the bigger the company (Apple, Google, etc) the more kitties they are willing to poison to do so...but that’s absurd! Making a lot of money is the ‘outcome’ of providing something people want...and the companies who do this successfully are simply the ones that focus on metrics that measure how much use users get out of their products...it’s that simple...and I would imagine that anyone who ever worked at a successful company would be able to attest that. I have never ever in my career sat in a team meeting in a successful company where somebody suggested doing something because it would make us more money...that kind of thinking is shortsighted...I can see how it could work temporarily but it’s not a way to build a mission driven company like the ones at hand! I am all for being critical...but we need to stop being cynical about everything...that doesn’t lead to any place worth going! Try this: At first assume good intent and then think about why a company build their product the way they did...and then do the same but assume bad intent. Always almost will you notice that if the company was truly ill intended they would have driven it way farther.
  - tyingq 9y ago
    I don't know that heavy use vs light use drives when they buy a new phone.

Arainach 9y ago

It's not a relative thing - Camels may not be more addictive than Marlboros, but either company would presumably want to understand the impact of its products addictive tendencies to stay ahead of any regulation.