4 ms·

Honestly want to know: why buy iPhone then? There’re plenty of alternatives.

by f6v 5y ago

thayne 5y ago
Not really. Almost everything else runs Android which is only marginally better. The only devices where you really have full control over your device are barely functional, and cost more for lower specs.
- endisneigh 5y ago
  If people bought alternatives they’d be better, tho
- jsjohnst 5y ago
  > cost more for lower specs That's in part because of economy of scale, but also another major factor IMHO is the subsidizing by other revenue sources (App Store commissions in case of Apple/Google, advertising/essentially spyware in the case of some others).
  - thayne 5y ago
    That might be a small part of it, but I think the economy of scale, and inability to buy the same parts at the same price as the bigger players is a much larger factor.
- f6v 5y ago
  But it’s much easier to root and install FOSS on Android hardware.
withinboredom 5y ago
There’s not, really. I bought the first iPod touch because it was a cool toy. I got the iPhone and I remember jail breaking it and using Cydia. Then, years later, it turns out Apple is a dick when it comes to the App Store. But now I’ve invested hundreds (if not thousands) on apps and features. Simply switching over wouldn’t be easy. Some apps I have were single-purchase apps originally, but now have monthly subscriptions (that I don’t pay because of my original license!); if I were to switch os’s, I’d have to pay a monthly fee. I can’t use FaceTime on other OS’s, which is (sadly) the only way to talk to my parents. So, as of right now, there’s no alternative for me. I have had androids in the past, and I prefer them. But the switch-over cost is huge. It’s not simple. I’m looking forward to the day with “multi-platform stores” where I make a single purchase and the OS is merely a personal choice… this is the future Apple and Google are trying to avoid, imho.
- g_p 5y ago
  The UK's competition/antitrust regulator (CMA) is investigating online platforms just now, and is specifically looking at whether the switching cost is a factor that furthers the case to argue for a monopoly and anti-competitive situation requiring remedies. Similarly for a lack of interoperability of services (like facetime) - I guess they're trying to pre-empt Apple's common argument that "smartphones" should be the defined market, and side-step that by demonstrating Apple has created structural barriers to switching that discourage it or make it expensive, or leverage network effects to frustrate users who switch. What you describe as the future is certainly what I could envisage a CMA action resulting in - they've already stated their view that Facebook may need to unwind their acquisition of Giphy. It seems likely they could decide to push for forced competition in app stores and payment processing, which should effectively decouple OS vendor from store ecosystem and achieve the end goal. Under a competitive ecosystem, Apple would have to lower payment fees and compete on price, as well as developer experience. Otherwise they'd haemorrhage developers and lose all their revenue from the store, and someone more innovative would be able to take that up. If it swings too far to a free-for-all, someone will build a store with more consumer protections, and compete back... It strikes me Apple and Google could offer competitive stores (without the suspiciously identical platform fees and mandatory use of their payment processing) that use user safety and convenience as a competitive differentiator, coupled with an amazing experience and set of tools for developers. They'd have to start improving soon on their tools and experience though!
  - azinman2 5y ago
    If this was a thing, then any software you buy on windows should work on Mac and Linux, and any titles for PlayStation should work on Xbox etc. I don’t know that I’m opposed per se, but it also seems like a system one could game. It’s also never been the case in software.
    - withinboredom 5y ago
      When I bought Minecraft at $11 almost 10(?) years ago, I got a Java version that worked pretty much everywhere. When I buy a game on Steam, it works on Mac/Linux/Windows or some combination at virtually no extra cost. When I buy tools online, usually it allows me to download a version that works with whichever OS. My Visual Studio license works on Mac and Windows, as does my IntelliJ license. I don’t know what argument you are making here. Sure, there are products that only work on one OS, but that’s usually a point that competition uses against the product, not the expected default unless it’s a product specifically for that OS. Edit: clarity.
echelon 5y ago
In the same way that the majority of Americans were unable to understand the market dynamics that required the break ups of Standard Oil, AT&T, and the regulations placed on Microsoft, the 50% of Americans that own iPhones aren't necessarily able to weigh in on this issue. The majority of the population are unable or unqualified to make decisions about drug approvals, judicial topics, and military strategy. This is why our government has people and systems in place to keep our population and economy healthy without our 100% direct involvement on every issue. I trust our policy makers to listen to qualified experts in industry about this issue so that they can understand the steps that need to be taken to create a better future that is fairer and more equitable for all. Certainly one that is better for the 99% of companies that are not Apple. If Apple is regulated, the chances are that it will emerge as a healthier company because of it.
alerighi 5y ago
Because iPhone hardware is not that bad, and iOS is not that bad. If there is a procedure to "jailbreak" a device without risking breaking it and voiding your warranty, as it's the case with most Android phones, I would get one. I don't either think that closing down the device is good for Apple: people that nowadays are not so expert will continue to use iPhone locked down as they are, people that wants to hack them they always find a way anyway, and with opening up the devices you would attract the power users that nowadays mostly uses Android. And if you ask why Apple should bother of doing something to attract the power users that are a minority, the answer is because these are the users that recommends which phone to buy to less expert family members and friends and provide support to them.

Honestly want to know: why buy iPhone then? There’re plenty of alternatives.

by f6v 5y ago

Honestly want to know: why buy iPhone then? There’re plenty of alternatives.

Not really. Almost everything else runs Android which is only marginally better. The only devices where you really have full control over your device are barely functional, and cost more for lower specs.

endisneigh 5y ago
If people bought alternatives they’d be better, tho
jsjohnst 5y ago
> cost more for lower specs That's in part because of economy of scale, but also another major factor IMHO is the subsidizing by other revenue sources (App Store commissions in case of Apple/Google, advertising/essentially spyware in the case of some others).
- thayne 5y ago
  That might be a small part of it, but I think the economy of scale, and inability to buy the same parts at the same price as the bigger players is a much larger factor.
f6v 5y ago
But it’s much easier to root and install FOSS on Android hardware.

withinboredom 5y ago

There’s not, really. I bought the first iPod touch because it was a cool toy. I got the iPhone and I remember jail breaking it and using Cydia. Then, years later, it turns out Apple is a dick when it comes to the App Store. But now I’ve invested hundreds (if not thousands) on apps and features. Simply switching over wouldn’t be easy. Some apps I have were single-purchase apps originally, but now have monthly subscriptions (that I don’t pay because of my original license!); if I were to switch os’s, I’d have to pay a monthly fee. I can’t use FaceTime on other OS’s, which is (sadly) the only way to talk to my parents. So, as of right now, there’s no alternative for me. I have had androids in the past, and I prefer them. But the switch-over cost is huge. It’s not simple. I’m looking forward to the day with “multi-platform stores” where I make a single purchase and the OS is merely a personal choice… this is the future Apple and Google are trying to avoid, imho.

g_p 5y ago
The UK's competition/antitrust regulator (CMA) is investigating online platforms just now, and is specifically looking at whether the switching cost is a factor that furthers the case to argue for a monopoly and anti-competitive situation requiring remedies. Similarly for a lack of interoperability of services (like facetime) - I guess they're trying to pre-empt Apple's common argument that "smartphones" should be the defined market, and side-step that by demonstrating Apple has created structural barriers to switching that discourage it or make it expensive, or leverage network effects to frustrate users who switch. What you describe as the future is certainly what I could envisage a CMA action resulting in - they've already stated their view that Facebook may need to unwind their acquisition of Giphy. It seems likely they could decide to push for forced competition in app stores and payment processing, which should effectively decouple OS vendor from store ecosystem and achieve the end goal. Under a competitive ecosystem, Apple would have to lower payment fees and compete on price, as well as developer experience. Otherwise they'd haemorrhage developers and lose all their revenue from the store, and someone more innovative would be able to take that up. If it swings too far to a free-for-all, someone will build a store with more consumer protections, and compete back... It strikes me Apple and Google could offer competitive stores (without the suspiciously identical platform fees and mandatory use of their payment processing) that use user safety and convenience as a competitive differentiator, coupled with an amazing experience and set of tools for developers. They'd have to start improving soon on their tools and experience though!
- azinman2 5y ago
  If this was a thing, then any software you buy on windows should work on Mac and Linux, and any titles for PlayStation should work on Xbox etc. I don’t know that I’m opposed per se, but it also seems like a system one could game. It’s also never been the case in software.
  - withinboredom 5y ago
    When I bought Minecraft at $11 almost 10(?) years ago, I got a Java version that worked pretty much everywhere. When I buy a game on Steam, it works on Mac/Linux/Windows or some combination at virtually no extra cost. When I buy tools online, usually it allows me to download a version that works with whichever OS. My Visual Studio license works on Mac and Windows, as does my IntelliJ license. I don’t know what argument you are making here. Sure, there are products that only work on one OS, but that’s usually a point that competition uses against the product, not the expected default unless it’s a product specifically for that OS. Edit: clarity.

echelon 5y ago

In the same way that the majority of Americans were unable to understand the market dynamics that required the break ups of Standard Oil, AT&T, and the regulations placed on Microsoft, the 50% of Americans that own iPhones aren't necessarily able to weigh in on this issue. The majority of the population are unable or unqualified to make decisions about drug approvals, judicial topics, and military strategy. This is why our government has people and systems in place to keep our population and economy healthy without our 100% direct involvement on every issue. I trust our policy makers to listen to qualified experts in industry about this issue so that they can understand the steps that need to be taken to create a better future that is fairer and more equitable for all. Certainly one that is better for the 99% of companies that are not Apple. If Apple is regulated, the chances are that it will emerge as a healthier company because of it.

alerighi 5y ago

Because iPhone hardware is not that bad, and iOS is not that bad. If there is a procedure to "jailbreak" a device without risking breaking it and voiding your warranty, as it's the case with most Android phones, I would get one. I don't either think that closing down the device is good for Apple: people that nowadays are not so expert will continue to use iPhone locked down as they are, people that wants to hack them they always find a way anyway, and with opening up the devices you would attract the power users that nowadays mostly uses Android. And if you ask why Apple should bother of doing something to attract the power users that are a minority, the answer is because these are the users that recommends which phone to buy to less expert family members and friends and provide support to them.