4 ms·

The pay to write software thing is bullshit, but iPhone’s really aren’t more expensive than androids, per year. The 5g SE (2022) is $429 (or at least $100 less

by hedora 3y ago

The pay to write software thing is bullshit, but iPhone’s really aren’t more expensive than androids, per year. The 5g SE (2022) is $429 (or at least $100 less if you shop carrier deals), and the CPU is current android flagship-grade. You can get the 2020 model refurbished and unlocked at walmart.com for $70-$140. It probably has at least 2-3 more years of security updates, so the longevity is better than many new androids.

lmm 3y ago
When you're poor you don't have the luxury of worrying about security updates, and your credit probably isn't good enough for those carrier deals. You use a phone until the battery explodes, and on that measure even the cheapest of new phones is going to outlast a refurbished anything.
askiiart 3y ago
You're assuming 1) that people need a phone that fancy in the first place, and 2) that a phone's life is up once it stops receiving updates. The Moto G6, and that stopped receiving updates long ago, and was released in 2018 for about $100. I don't need much power, so I could easily get by with such an old, underpowered phone. I did for a while, but I did switch away because I was more phone-reliant at the time, and so an upgrade was needed. And I find the freedom of being able to install anything just from APKs, set another browser as my default, etc. as a huge value-add for Android. And yeah, the iPhone has more security updates, but that doesn't really matter to me. I only install reputable, and mostly open source, apps on my phone so I'm not really concerned about security. So in terms of value: there's the 2020 iPhone SE, with, say, 3 years left, for $120–$40 per year counting just the remaining years and using the current price at Walmart, or $300–$50 per year, assuming MSRP, a carrier discount of $100, and 6 years total. And the Moto G6, with just over of 5 years of life so far, and more value to me due to both the relative freedom of Android, and the fact that I'm used to and prefer Android, for $100–$20 per year. The choice seems obvious to me, for my purposes, but I can absolutely see why an iPhone is better for some people. By the way, fun fact: the Moto G6 has FM radio built-in! P.S. also, there's no way I'd risk becoming one of those arseholes that tries to make their whole family get iPhones so they can FaceTime, just because they can't figure out how to download another damn video calling app, despite being able to download all other apps just fine. Yes I'm looking at you, mother's half of my extended family.
- jon-wood 3y ago
  > And yeah, the iPhone has more security updates, but that doesn't really matter to me. I only install reputable, and mostly open source, apps on my phone so I'm not really concerned about security. As much as I’d love this to be a valid stance if you use the internet then you need to be keeping up with security updates. Recently there was a bug in the open source decoder for webp images, it impacted basically every device, and was being exploited in the wild via nothing but displaying an image.
  - jhasse 3y ago
    ... and libwebp gets statically linked into Chrome which gets updated via the Play Store even on Android devices that "don't receive security updates anymore".
CalamityJohn 3y ago
> but iPhone’s really aren’t more expensive than androids, per year. > The 5g SE (2022) is $429 iPhone absolutely are more expensive than any other phone if you care about things other than the CPU/GPU performance. The 5g SE has a tiny screen with archaic bezel design and still uses LCDs in an era where not giving you an OLED would be seen as a ripoff on the android market. It starts at 64gb of storage for this $429 (in France, it's actually 529 euros), my S20FE from a couple years ago which I bought at 400 euros on deals had 128gb. It has a very big, 120hz OLED screen and the finger print sensor works from underneath the screen. For me, and many others, the phone is primarily a content consumption device. If the CPU is good enough that I don't see stutters all the time then it's good enough. I don't need my smartphone to be a laptop in the pocket. I do need a screen that I enjoy looking at and big enough that I can use it to read ebooks. This in turns is heavily reflected in how many Apple users will splurge the big bucks to get the iPhone models that are comfortable to use despite their insane prices. Right now, the cheapest phone Apple produces with a large screen is the iPhone 14 Plus at 969 euros. There's a reason why the iPhone SE is the least popular of all Apple phones despite having far-more-than-good-enough hardware performance and longevity while being accessibly priced: it lacks what people actually wants out of their phone, Apple knows that and they keep the SE the way it is because they wouldn't want to cannibalize the sales of the expensive phones. If you look at any statistics, the SE is like a rounding error compared to the sales of the other iPhones.
- BoorishBears 3y ago
  See, a lot of people are excited about Android 14, but the S20FE is already on security update-only status... meanwhile the iPhone 13 of the same vintage just got a major OS upgrade. And next year, when the S20FE won't even have security updates, the 13 will get another major upgrade. And probably another after that. _ In fact, if you had bought a refurb $500 iPhone when the S20FE was announced (iPhone 11!), you'd still be getting into the new update the S20FE just missed out on. That is how absurdly abysmal Android support it: you could have gotten a 2 year older phone and actually gained an upgrade cycle. Also fun fact: the 2 year older iPhone 11 would also be faster than the S20 FE
  - 3y ago
fauigerzigerk 3y ago
I have two phones that do the exact same things for me - iPhone 14 and Pixel 7a. Screens are almost the same size. Battery life is very similar. Both are fast for the things I use them for. iPhones typically get OS upgrades for 5 years. Pixel gets 3 years. My iPhone cost £849 including tax, which is £170 p.a. The Pixel was £449, working out to £150 p.a. So the Pixel is £20 cheaper per year. iPhone SE has a much smaller screen, too small to read comfortably. I don't trust refurbished phones. So these options don't matter to me. Far cheaper Android options don't matter to me either because they typically have huge quality and security issues. For people who just keep using their phone for 5 years no matter what, Pixel would be £80 cheaper, but I think performance would no longer be on par in the later years given that the iPhone starts out with higher specs. I'm not saying this comparison is any more correct than yours. My point is that whether or not iPhone or Android phones are cheaper depends on how people use their phones. There is no one true answer to which one is cheaper.

by hedora 3y ago

lmm 3y ago

When you're poor you don't have the luxury of worrying about security updates, and your credit probably isn't good enough for those carrier deals. You use a phone until the battery explodes, and on that measure even the cheapest of new phones is going to outlast a refurbished anything.

askiiart 3y ago

You're assuming 1) that people need a phone that fancy in the first place, and 2) that a phone's life is up once it stops receiving updates. The Moto G6, and that stopped receiving updates long ago, and was released in 2018 for about $100. I don't need much power, so I could easily get by with such an old, underpowered phone. I did for a while, but I did switch away because I was more phone-reliant at the time, and so an upgrade was needed. And I find the freedom of being able to install anything just from APKs, set another browser as my default, etc. as a huge value-add for Android. And yeah, the iPhone has more security updates, but that doesn't really matter to me. I only install reputable, and mostly open source, apps on my phone so I'm not really concerned about security. So in terms of value: there's the 2020 iPhone SE, with, say, 3 years left, for $120–$40 per year counting just the remaining years and using the current price at Walmart, or $300–$50 per year, assuming MSRP, a carrier discount of $100, and 6 years total. And the Moto G6, with just over of 5 years of life so far, and more value to me due to both the relative freedom of Android, and the fact that I'm used to and prefer Android, for $100–$20 per year. The choice seems obvious to me, for my purposes, but I can absolutely see why an iPhone is better for some people. By the way, fun fact: the Moto G6 has FM radio built-in! P.S. also, there's no way I'd risk becoming one of those arseholes that tries to make their whole family get iPhones so they can FaceTime, just because they can't figure out how to download another damn video calling app, despite being able to download all other apps just fine. Yes I'm looking at you, mother's half of my extended family.

jon-wood 3y ago
> And yeah, the iPhone has more security updates, but that doesn't really matter to me. I only install reputable, and mostly open source, apps on my phone so I'm not really concerned about security. As much as I’d love this to be a valid stance if you use the internet then you need to be keeping up with security updates. Recently there was a bug in the open source decoder for webp images, it impacted basically every device, and was being exploited in the wild via nothing but displaying an image.
- jhasse 3y ago
  ... and libwebp gets statically linked into Chrome which gets updated via the Play Store even on Android devices that "don't receive security updates anymore".

CalamityJohn 3y ago

> but iPhone’s really aren’t more expensive than androids, per year. > The 5g SE (2022) is $429 iPhone absolutely are more expensive than any other phone if you care about things other than the CPU/GPU performance. The 5g SE has a tiny screen with archaic bezel design and still uses LCDs in an era where not giving you an OLED would be seen as a ripoff on the android market. It starts at 64gb of storage for this $429 (in France, it's actually 529 euros), my S20FE from a couple years ago which I bought at 400 euros on deals had 128gb. It has a very big, 120hz OLED screen and the finger print sensor works from underneath the screen. For me, and many others, the phone is primarily a content consumption device. If the CPU is good enough that I don't see stutters all the time then it's good enough. I don't need my smartphone to be a laptop in the pocket. I do need a screen that I enjoy looking at and big enough that I can use it to read ebooks. This in turns is heavily reflected in how many Apple users will splurge the big bucks to get the iPhone models that are comfortable to use despite their insane prices. Right now, the cheapest phone Apple produces with a large screen is the iPhone 14 Plus at 969 euros. There's a reason why the iPhone SE is the least popular of all Apple phones despite having far-more-than-good-enough hardware performance and longevity while being accessibly priced: it lacks what people actually wants out of their phone, Apple knows that and they keep the SE the way it is because they wouldn't want to cannibalize the sales of the expensive phones. If you look at any statistics, the SE is like a rounding error compared to the sales of the other iPhones.

BoorishBears 3y ago
See, a lot of people are excited about Android 14, but the S20FE is already on security update-only status... meanwhile the iPhone 13 of the same vintage just got a major OS upgrade. And next year, when the S20FE won't even have security updates, the 13 will get another major upgrade. And probably another after that. _ In fact, if you had bought a refurb $500 iPhone when the S20FE was announced (iPhone 11!), you'd still be getting into the new update the S20FE just missed out on. That is how absurdly abysmal Android support it: you could have gotten a 2 year older phone and actually gained an upgrade cycle. Also fun fact: the 2 year older iPhone 11 would also be faster than the S20 FE
- 3y ago

fauigerzigerk 3y ago

I have two phones that do the exact same things for me - iPhone 14 and Pixel 7a. Screens are almost the same size. Battery life is very similar. Both are fast for the things I use them for. iPhones typically get OS upgrades for 5 years. Pixel gets 3 years. My iPhone cost £849 including tax, which is £170 p.a. The Pixel was £449, working out to £150 p.a. So the Pixel is £20 cheaper per year. iPhone SE has a much smaller screen, too small to read comfortably. I don't trust refurbished phones. So these options don't matter to me. Far cheaper Android options don't matter to me either because they typically have huge quality and security issues. For people who just keep using their phone for 5 years no matter what, Pixel would be £80 cheaper, but I think performance would no longer be on par in the later years given that the iPhone starts out with higher specs. I'm not saying this comparison is any more correct than yours. My point is that whether or not iPhone or Android phones are cheaper depends on how people use their phones. There is no one true answer to which one is cheaper.