Apple May Start Accepting Android Phones As Trade-Ins

HughPickens.com writes Bloomberg reports that according to a person with knowledge of the matter, Apple plans to start accepting non-Apple devices as trade-ins as the company seeks to extend market-share gains against Android smartphones. Apple is seeking to fuel even more iPhone 6 and 6 Plus sales after selling 74.5 million units in the last three months of 2014. Thanks to record sales, shipments of iPhones surpassed Android in the US with 47.7 percent of the market compared with Android's 47.6 percent. According to Apple CEO Tim Cook Apple "experienced the highest Android switcher rate in any of the last three launches in the three previous years." While Android phones don't hold their value as well as iPhones, it still makes sense for Apple Stores to accept them, says Israel Ganot, former CEO of Gazelle Inc., an online mobile device trade-in company. "Apple can afford to pay more than the market value to get you to switch over," says Ganot, "on the idea that you're going to fall in love with the iOS ecosystem and stay for a long time."

Comments

Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Chrisq]

They have such a markup that they can afford to buy market share. On the other hand I don't know how attractive a change would be though. I think that a lot of people buy one system and stick with it because of the integration. Either you use hangouts, gmail, google calendar etc, or facetime, iCalender, and so on. Changing from one to another would be a pain.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Lumpy]

Oh yes SUCH a high markup....

Ignore that the HTC M8 and the soon to be released M9 cost as much as the iphone 6 plus.

But then we have the Samsung S6 that will only cost....... $899 to $1199

So what it your point again? ALL cellphones are expensive as hell.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[alex67500]

Yep, I was just thinking the same, and I'm a hardcore HTC fan. But the markup thing hardly stands anymore. It sounds like HTC and Samsung have decided that the only way to make your phone as cool as an iPhone 6 is to price it like an iPhone 6... :-(

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[oodaloop]

Apple had the most profitable quarter ever recently and is the most profitable company in the world. How do you do that without heavy markup?

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[lloy0076]

I have an Android because my ex-Apple device got stolen at basically the wrong time between technology cycles and my pay cycle. I'd gladly trade my Android piece of crap in for something that does what I expect.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Totenglocke]

I'd argue that for most non-business users, the main issue is DirectX forcing anyone who wants to play games to use Windows.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[itzly]

ALL cellphones are expensive as hell.

I just got a new Sony Xperia phone for $300. Nice screen, fast CPU. Works great.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Although the ecosystems are separate - some of the items you call out are one way. Apple doesn't let you use facetime, iCalendar, etc. on anything but Apple devices. The other items you mention - hangouts, gmail, google calendar - all work fine on both Android and iOS. (Windows Phone users don't get Google provided versions though). It seems Apple wants to keep their users so badly that they won't make those services available on other platforms.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[XxtraLarGe]

I think that a lot of people buy one system and stick with it because of the integration. Either you use hangouts, gmail, google calendar etc,

Google was kind enough to provide most of those things for the iOS ecosystem as well.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Chrisq]

ALL cellphones are expensive as hell.

I just got a new Sony Xperia phone for $300. Nice screen, fast CPU. Works great.

Exactly. GP is like a Ferrari owner objecting to the high cost by saying "All cars are expensive - just look at the Lamborghini. And the Bugatti is more expensive than the Ferrari".

I still use a perfectly usable Nexus 4 and my daughter has just bought a Moto-G for a fraction of the price of an iPhone and that works really well

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[rvw]

we're back to the days of cherry picking the most expensive not apple vendors and using those to justify apple's prices. There's more to the android market than samsung and HTC, and they're losing marketshare to other smaller players that are allowed to exist in the android model unlike apple's ecosystem.

My next phone will absolutely not be one of these overpriced locked down messes.

Well at least he named examples, you just made claims so who are those smaller vendors who offer smartphones that have the same performance and are qualitatively comparable to the HCT and Samsung flagship smartphones, but at significantly lower prices?

He didn't make the claim that those cheaper devices were comparable in performance. I'm with him. My Sony Z1 is good enough for me, and for half the price. Paying $900 for a phone that will last for two years - not for me!

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[gnasher719]

Apple had the most profitable quarter ever recently and is the most profitable company in the world. How do you do that without heavy markup?

You don't get highly profitable by adding a huge markup. Instead, you have to do two things: First, make production of your product as efficient as possible so that production cost plus markup isn't too high. Second, create a product that is so good that people buy it instead of competing products, even at the higher cost.

If you don't manage these two things, then a high markup only makes you uncompetitive, you don't sell anything, and instead of profit you make losses.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[BasilBrush]

A 64GB iPhone 6 is $750, not $900. And those who are price conscious can get a 5S from $550.

And they'll last longer than 2 years. The 2 year thing applies to people who have contracts that let them get a new phone after 2 years. Since we're talking unlocked prices, that's irrelevant. People will tend to use them longer.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[iluvcapra]

Apple had the most profitable quarter ever recently and is the most profitable company in the world. How do you do that without heavy markup?

Right, but why don't Samsung or HTC have such a high margin on their phones? Do they sell at a lower price because they want to be nice to you? Or because the people who set the prices at Samsung and HTC only want to charge you a "fair" price?

Their phones are just less desirable. Supply and demand.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[erp_consultant]

One PlusOne comes to mind https://oneplus.net/

The reviews I have read say that it's a very good phone, and an amazing phone for the price. It starts at $299 for 16 GB of storage and only $50 more for 64GB of storage. I'm pretty sure this is going to be my next phone.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[MachineShedFred]

That's only the definition if you fail to think about it for 5 seconds.

Hint: there are different components in different phones, and different components have different costs. These costs are a component of the retail price.

Yes, there is a margin markup in the price because electronics companies are not charities. But the price difference between an android handset and an iPhone is not all margin.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[MachineShedFred]

It must be a kindness, because they certainly don't do much to update them.

Google Voice was finally updated to support iOS 7 two days after iOS 8 shipped.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[gnasher719]

Congratulations, you have just defined "markup"!

Congratulations, you just proved to me and the rest of the world that you can't read.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[dimeglio]

I understand are running a limited by invitation only "beta" programme. Hopefully all they bugs are being worked out. Regardless that's a good price except it's financing some of the debugging. Perhaps the price will go up once they go full production.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Plumpaquatsch]

A 64GB iPhone 6 is $750, not $900. And those who are price conscious can get a 5S from $550.

And they'll last longer than 2 years. The 2 year thing applies to people who have contracts that let them get a new phone after 2 years. Since we're talking unlocked prices, that's irrelevant. People will tend to use them longer.

And the same 2 years go for Android phones - the difference is, the iPhone will be sold for a couple hundred bucks or given to a family member you love. The Android will be given to someone you don't like much or goes straight to the trash.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Plumpaquatsch]

Apple had the most profitable quarter ever recently and is the most profitable company in the world. How do you do that without heavy markup?

By not selling at a loss, unlike most others. And by selling more phones than every other company but Samsung (and being head-to-head with them).

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Plumpaquatsch]

Apple had the most profitable quarter ever recently and is the most profitable company in the world. How do you do that without heavy markup?

You don't get highly profitable by adding a huge markup. Instead, you have to do two things: First, make production of your product as efficient as possible so that production cost plus markup isn't too high. Second, create a product that is so good that people buy it instead of competing products, even at the higher cost.

Congratulations, you have just defined "markup"!

Congratulations, you have just defined "dumb" - there is a picture of you.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[cheesybagel]

Or maybe for Samsung that profit margin is good enough and they prefer to increase their market share even if it eats into their margins a bit.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[BitZtream]

Older iPhones are $100, so it's not a fraction of the price, is it?

What your doing is comparing your pinto to a vette and pretending the you got the same car for 1/10th the price.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[Chrisq]

Older iPhones are $100, so it's not a fraction of the price, is it?

What your doing is comparing your pinto to a vette and pretending the you got the same car for 1/10th the price.

Read the thread, the assertion was that "all phones are expensive" because high end Samsungs and HTCs cost as much or more than the iPhone.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[GrumpySteen]

How the hell did this get marked as insightful?

The COGS on a $750 iPhone 6 is less than $250. A 200% markup is a high markup.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[iluvcapra]

I don't think Sammy has anything to gain by cutting prices to get marketshare. It's good to sell more units but they don't benefit in the slightest by having a marginally higher percentage of the pie. From a platform perspective and drawing developers and mindshare, the Android share is the important number, and that's mostly out of Samsung's control, eating HTCs business is a wash and even at the prices they charge their flagship phones are still basically the same price as iPhones for the same specs and generation.

If you're Samsung you have to ask, I'm cutting my prices under the prevailing market price point, so I'm going to lose X million dollars in prospective revenues in order to get more marketshare. So exactly what is an additional 5% of smartphone marketshare worth? It's not worth much of anything. it'd be worth a lot if you were selling that 5% of phones at a good profit, but you already sacrificed that.

The whole point of marketshare is that share should give you leverage, like you get more bargaining power with sales channels, or you make it more profitable to sell complementary goods (like apps); you have Network Effects that draw in more consumers because of the perception that they need to have a Samsung phone over and above any other. But if Android is a commodity, and the phones are a commodity, market share is useless; it can be an indicator of your health in a competitive market but it does not itself reify into something you can use to your advantage. It's an indicator, not a cause.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[cheesybagel]

Or it may just be that Samsung spends large amounts of money on things like factories and process R&D which they need to keep at full capacity and at some profit in order to sustain their business model. It's not like they're Apple who has basically no manufacturing capability whatsoever.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[iluvcapra]

This is definitely an issue, Apple's supply chain model is much more efficient than Samsungs. Like most west asian conglomerates it maintains a bloated, 20th century heavy industrial infrastructure.

Why doesn't Samsung run its factories and supply chain like Apple? Because they're a byzantine Korean chaebol that doesn't know half the time if it's making a cellphone, a car or an oil tanker, and measures its success by how many little paternalistic fiefdoms it can sustain.

Re:Commercially makes sense ... maybe

[cheesybagel]

Lately there has been a backlash against outsourcing in several fields. It may just happen that Apple's strategy is going to bite them in the end.

Samsung is like the world's #2 semiconductor manufacturer. They used to produce low quality products at low prices before they changed to a high-quality strategy in the 90s. They are no stranger to mass production of dirt cheap products at razor thin margins. That's how they got to where they are in semiconductors after all. The Koreans basically wiped everyone else out of that market, which has cut-throat pricing, including Intel and the Japanese. The idea is to leverage high quality semiconductors and other components across their entire product line.

Apple, IMO, relies on product design and marketing to keep a hold of their market but I think they are holding something really thin indeed. They have already felt the pinch when the decided to switch their CPU manufacturing from Samsung to TSMC and TSMC failed to deliver them in the latest generation processes. There are just some things you cannot easily outsource without losing a quality edge. Apple is no stranger to a situation like this, they did keep their loyal fan base during the G5 fiasco, but not everyone is that gullible.

Android today is like GNOME 3.

[Anonymous Coward]

Recent versions of Android have suffered from many of the same problems that GNOME 3 suffers from. The UI is changed not because there's a good reason to, but just because it can be changed. These changes don't actually make the software more usable. In fact, the software is much less usable in most cases. And these unnecessary changes prevent beneficial changes from happening. Android's default camera software is still total crap compred to Open Camera, for example. Even when new functionality has been added, it's rarely about benefitting the user, but more about benefiting Google in some way. GNOME 3 wasn't developed with the user's best interest in mind, and I see the same thing happening to Android. Hopefully the Android situation is reversed before it becomes a disaster like GNOME 3 became.

Re:Android today is like GNOME 3.

[Anonymous Coward]

Recent versions of Android have suffered from many of the same problems that GNOME 3 suffers from. The UI is changed not because there's a good reason to, but just because it can be changed. These changes don't actually make the software more usable. In fact, the software is much less usable in most cases. And these unnecessary changes prevent beneficial changes from happening. Android's default camera software is still total crap compred to Open Camera, for example. Even when new functionality has been added, it's rarely about benefitting the user, but more about benefiting Google in some way. GNOME 3 wasn't developed with the user's best interest in mind, and I see the same thing happening to Android. Hopefully the Android situation is reversed before it becomes a disaster like GNOME 3 became.

That's your opinion, a whole lot of other users think Gnome 3 is a better UI with more efficient ways of doing things. If you don't like it go fork Gnome 2 and stop bothering us with your complaints about how unfair it is that things change. That's how the open source world works.

Re: Android today is like GNOME 3.

[BlueTrin]

I personally dislike OS or software which forces you to do thing in a different way than you used to, although it is a matter of being lazy for myself.

Very low trade in values

[beltsbear]

Most people will be attempting to trade in phones with almost no value. The people who buy high end Android phones are Android fans and are going to be unlikely to trade for an iPhone. The vast majority of the Android phones sold are low priced and drop to less then $50 trade in value within two years, the time that they would be traded in. An iPhone that is bought new is typically worth 3-5x that at the two year point. The 2.5 year old iPhone 5 still sells for $200 on eBay in good condition.

Re:Very low trade in values

[gnasher719]

Most people will be attempting to trade in phones with almost no value. The people who buy high end Android phones are Android fans and are going to be unlikely to trade for an iPhone. The vast majority of the Android phones sold are low priced and drop to less then $50 trade in value within two years, the time that they would be traded in. An iPhone that is bought new is typically worth 3-5x that at the two year point. The 2.5 year old iPhone 5 still sells for $200 on eBay in good condition.

If Apple sells you an iPhone 6, they can easily afford to give you $50 for an Android phone that cost $50 when you bought it and that you used for three years. They probably lose $60 (because they have to pay for recycling), but if that makes you buy the iPhone when otherwise you wouldn't have bought it, the deal is really profitable for Apple. Of course they have to calculate carefully: How many people trade in a phone who would have bought an iPhone anyway, and how many trade in a phone who wouldn't have bought the iPhone otherwise?

There's also the art of selling a product at two different prices; conveniently for a higher price and less convenient for a lower price. Apple can basically sell you an iPhone with $50 rebate if you go through the hassle of finding an old iPhone, or without the rebate without the hassle. But importantly, the official retail price is unchanged.

Re:Very low trade in values

[bobbied]

The vast majority of people that bought android phones bought them by mistake.

No no.. You mean "Windows phone".....

Re:Very low trade in values

[Citizen of Earth]

Reminds me of the following passage in the Commodore-64 Wikipedia page:

In January 1983, Commodore offered a $100 rebate in the United States on the purchase of a C64 to anyone trading in another video game console or computer.[27] To take advantage of this rebate, some mail-order dealers and retailers offered a Timex Sinclair 1000 for as little as $10 with purchase of a C64, so the consumer could send the TS1000 to Commodore, collect the rebate, and pocket the difference; Timex Corporation departed the computer market within a year.

Good luck

[kuzb]

Apple is trying everything except the one thing that would actually work - stop price gouging their customers.

Re:Good luck

[Anonymous Coward]

Offering more reasonable prices is something a hardware company might do. Apple isn't a hardware company. They're a marketing company/religious sect that also happens to make hardware.

Re:Good luck

[beltsbear]

How would that work for Apple? They are pretty good at figuring out how to make the most profit on their phones. Gaining more market share at the expense of profit makes no sense.

Re:Good luck

[iluvcapra]

Apple is trying everything except the one thing that would actually work - stop price gouging their customers.

It seems to me like everything they do works great. This story kinda sounds like BS, very un-Apple, they've never cared about market share, except in the depths of the Gil Amelio/Mac Clone days, and anyways their actual unit share of sales in the US and other developed markets is increasing.

Everybody just wants mobile to play out like the PC/Mac wars, and for network effects to award the whole pie to the dominant player, but it's just not working out that way. Network effects don't count for much anymore, "ecosystems" aren't as closed as they were, even the Apple one, and the most important applications, the drivers of growth in the IT space, of our era are cross-platform, usually web-centered. Android has a majority of the mobile installed base, but it's a worthless hill to hold. Things have reverted to a mean and traditional branding and product positioning are more important now, you buy from a company you had a good experience with, not the company that's logo-compliant with your box at work.

Re:Good luck

[MachineShedFred]

More than that, I want there to be at least two viable platforms out there. A healthy Android stack puts pressure on Apple to make iOS better. A healthy iOS stack puts pressure on Google to make Android better.

Who wins? We all do. I'd even like to see a better offering from Microsoft just to keep the other two honest. In a 3-way fight for my money, I'm the ultimate winner.

Re:Good luck

[kuzb]

When you talk about "works great" you have to consider the present goal. If their plan is to grow market share it's not working great. They're losing market share because people are realizing you don't have to spent $800 to have a decent quality smartphone. The same thing is happening to Samsung - cheaper mid-range smartphones are starting to eat both their lunches.

Re:Good luck

[kuzb]

It works for them for the same reason micro-transactions work. The more customers you have the less you need to charge to reach a given profit.

Re: Good luck

[iluvcapra]

Yeah I don't think market share is a goal. I think they just want to make money. What good is market share if you have to sell at or below cost to get it, and the share doesn't actually give you a competitive advantage?

Re: Good luck

[kuzb]

Then you didn't actually read the post which starts with:

"Apple plans to start accepting non-Apple devices as trade-ins as the company seeks to extend market-share gains against Android smartphones"

Re: Good luck

[iluvcapra]

Yeah that's why I said I thought the articles sounded like BS. I could see it maybe being part of some kind of watch or tie-in strategy, maybe "we'll take your phone if you want to get an Apple-watch" or something like that.

Also they might just be offering it just for the recycling value, it's not clear they're going to offer over and above the market value of the phone (i.e. "buy marketshare"), they might just be trying to front-run Gazelle's business. There are people in the article speculating that they may be paying a premium for old Android phones but nobody knows what their business model for the service is actually going to be (assuming it's not BS in the first instance).

Samsung

[Ark42]

I've really been a fan of many things Samsung in the past (TVs, LCDs, even my Blu-ray player is Samsung) and at some point I'm going to replace my Galaxy S3. The S6 is now NOT an option because of things I really care about: user replaceable battery - I use the 4x sized ZeroLemon battery from Amazon), removable SD Card, and the ability to easily root (Not sure what Knox and stuff has done to the newer models).
Is this going to make me trade in my S3 for an Apple phone? No way. Absolutely not. Apple is even worse with all these important features. It doesn't matter how much they give me in "trade in" it's still probably less than I could get just selling the phone myself anyway.

Re:Samsung

[MachineShedFred]

Apple clearly doesn't make a product that satisfies your requirements.

And you know what? That's perfectly fine. They don't need to. And you don't need them to. But the overwhelming vast majority of the market doesn't have the same requirements you do, and the products that Apple makes does meet their requirements.

I don't understand why Apple's products have to be everything to everyone - no other company is thought of this way. Do people get up in arms because BMW doesn't make heavy duty work trucks? Should people not buy Ford because they don't make motorcycles?

Re:Samsung

[Stormwatch]

You prefer things that less than 1% of the population even know about, and a hundredth of a percent of those people care about those features.

And yet, Android's global market share is over 80%.

Re:Samsung

[Ark42]

Is there a way to unlock bootloaders on the newer Samsung AT&T phones, or was the S3 pretty much the last usable phone in that line?

People sell their new phones

[BarbaraHudson]

Too many people sell their old phones for decent money. Others (like my sister) like their two-year-old models with all their data on them and see no real reason to upgrade, so when they're offered an upgrade, they sell the new phone.

Re:People sell their new phones

[AmiMoJo]

Wouldn't it make more sense to cut the price of their contracts? Maybe it's different where you are (Canada? I have your address somewhere...) but in the UK you typically pay £40/month with a phone or £15/month for just the SIM, same talk time and data etc. When you contract ends they offer you a new phone, but you can simply switch to a cheaper contract if you like your current one and it's always cheaper even if you sell the new handset.

Re:People sell their new phones

[BarbaraHudson]

You'd think so, wouldn't you? Most of the carriers here don't offer a discount if you own your phone outright, because it's a way to lock you in for another 2-3 years. After all, if you're not getting a discount anyway, might as well take the "free" phone ... but that's starting to change. People are not used to paying for their phone - it's "free".

I bought my last two phones outright, and it costs a lot less per month because I shopped around for a carrier that does that. Most people are lazy, or they figure "free phone every 2 years", when they're paying more at the end of those 2 years, and can't just switch at any time if there's a better deal in town.

Re:People sell their new phones

[cdrudge]

TMobile here is like that here in the US. Cheaper plan and if you want to finance your phone, you can split your phone up over up to 24 payments interest free with the option of early payoff.

Re:People sell their new phones

[mrchaotica]

Most of the carriers here don't offer a discount if you own your phone outright, because it's a way to lock you in for another 2-3 years.

That's true only if by "most" you mean "only the three largest, whose business model is 'fuck over the customers as much and as often as possible,' as opposed to the dozens of MVNOs (and T-Mobile) that are better in every conceivable way."

Re:People sell their new phones

[BarbaraHudson]

The three largest have most of the market, both in the USA and Kanuckistan. The smaller ones aren't even available everywhere.

Re:People sell their new phones

[mrchaotica]

Do you know what an MVNO is? Carriers #4 through infinity all piggyback on one (or more) of the big four networks; they are available wherever the corresponding big four network is available.

For example, Page Plus Cellular uses Verizon's network, PureTalk USA uses AT&T's network, Ting uses Sprint's network (and according to the page I linked, apparently also T-Mobile's), and Straight Talk runs on all four (but not necessarily using the same phone).

Re:People sell their new phones

[mrchaotica]

Correction: I meant "#5 through infinity" -- apparently, I've been doing too much programming and I'm now applying zero-based indexing to real life...

Re:"Ewwwh"....said some Apple Store cult hipster

[itzly]

"I could never get a Samsung, I'm creative"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[enjar]

I got sick and tired of dealing with iTunes and its many failures and switched to Android. My wife still has an iDevice and regularly gripes when they change the interface, move stuff around for no reason and otherwise make the design "better".

My Android phone has no idea about my home PC because it doesn't have to. I don't see iTunes going anywhere, no way in hell I'm going back to the iOS ecosystem. I'm not likely to get another Samsung phone, which is what I have now -- I'll likely just go for the Nexus so I can skip the bloatware.

Re:iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[Higaran]

Getting the nexus is the best upgrade you'll ever make, I have a nexus 5 and it's the best phone I've ever had, especially for the price.

Re:iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[MachineShedFred]

I haven't plugged my iPhone into anything iTunes since the iOS 5 release that allowed over-the-air updates and iCloud backup.

iTunes is a complete non-factor, and has been for years.

Re:iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[enjar]

Good to know that dependency has been jettisoned!

Re:iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[MachineShedFred]

Isn't it though? I remember when iTunes actually wasn't a completely fucked up pile of shit. It's been a long time.

Re:iTunes drove me to Android in the first place

[antdude]

For me, I hate cloud stuff. I don't want my personal on someone else's servers.

hopefully...

[buddyglass]

...they accept older phones and this works to mitigate Android's OS fragmentation problem.

Hackers vs Everyone Else

[BoRegardless]

Until bricking ransomware hits the Android market, people who like to program and play with hacks will mostly stick with Android.

People who just want it to work and play well with their other devices in an organized way will likely use iPhone.

Re:Hackers vs Everyone Else

[rivaldufus]

It's all about comfort, I think. People often say "it just works" because they've been trained to use the Apple UI. The same thing could be said for people who argue that the Droid (or Windows phone) interface just works like it because they know that UI.

I'm sorry, I don't think any particular interface is going to be intuitive to someone who's not already somewhat familiar with a smart phone ui. Apple interfaces are intuitive to people who already use an Apple device.

I'd certainly agree that apple tends to be more consistent with the way they change their GUI over time, but I don't believe it's inherently more intuitive.

Re:Hackers vs Everyone Else

[HornWumpus]

People were saying 'it just works' about MacOS when it was, by far, the worst POS on the market (Basically anytime prior to X).

It didn't have pre-emtive multitasking or protected memory. Any app failure required a reboot, but 'it just works'.

It makes sense, when you realize they are just repeating what they were told.

Re:Hackers vs Everyone Else

[macs4all]

People were saying 'it just works' about MacOS when it was, by far, the worst POS on the market (Basically anytime prior to X).

It didn't have pre-emtive multitasking or protected memory. Any app failure required a reboot, but 'it just works'.

It makes sense, when you realize they are just repeating what they were told.

Actually, the "It Just Works" (which was never official Apple marketing-speak) sort of just appeared sometime after OS X was released; but the concept was around back in the MacOS "Classic" days. But in that time period, the concept mainly referred to the ease with which things like Applications, Networking, Printing and Driver installation and configuration was possible with the Mac, relative to DOS and Windows environments at the time.

riiiight

[slashmydots]

Because once someone can drag and drop photos off their device, add a micro-SD card, use standard chargers, and have almost full control over the phone, they'll definitely want to go to Apple.
I just learned yesterday that there are two ways to get photos off an ipad air. One, download dropbox and upload them at about 1Mb/s (that's a lower case b). Two, buy a real tablet.

Re:riiiight

[pauljlucas]

Three: Photostream uploads them to iCloud automatically. Of, if you just really need them as fast as possible: Four: plug the iPad into your Mac via USB and upload them using either iPhoto or Image Capture.

Re:riiiight

[zelda64]

I just learned yesterday that there are two ways to get photos off an ipad air. One, download dropbox and upload them at about 1Mb/s (that's a lower case b). Two, buy a real tablet.

Thank you for providing your expert opinion on a device that you 1) Clearly don't use or 2) You're too stupid to use effectively. You can attach an iPad to any computer via USB and transfer photos after "trusting" the device. You can also download one of many apps (I use iTransfer) and transfer photos via SFTP or to a network drive. But don't let facts or reason stop you. Please continue to flame a device that you don't understand.

Re:riiiight

[MachineShedFred]

Wait, are you saying that if you buy two devices from the same manufacturer, that they might work better together than two devices from wildly different vendors?

CRAZY TALK.

Re:riiiight

[slashmydots]

Yeah, wildly different...all two of them. 3 if you count Linux.

Windows Phone

[KlomDark]

Strangely, in my little world, I'm seeing a surprising uptake in WIndows Phones lately. Never thought I'd see it coming. It seems people who have been happy with Android are wanting a little more, and are horribly confused by the iPhone's single button interface, and see that Windows Phone 8.1 is easier to figure out than the latest/greatest version of Android.

Just my little ecosystem, correlation does not equal causation, but I'm finding it fascinating. Microsoft might still have some life in it. (Helps that Cricket is now giving away a couple different free Windows phones)

Re:User replaceable battery is pointless

[Ark42]

You realize how stupid it sounds to charge a battery with a battery that needs charging itself? Not to mention most of those basically hang from your phone by the USB cable, with no way to actually attach it to the phone?
The battery I have basically replaces the back panel of the S3 with a larger back panel that doubles as a pretty good phone protector case too. Realistically, the whole combined size of the S3+big battery is no thicker than my wallet too.

Re:User replaceable battery is pointless

[Citizen of Earth]

An important reason to want a user-replaceable battery is that rechargeable batteries wear out after two or three years. If you can replace it yourself, you can just get a compatible one from Amazon for $15. If not, then you have an expensive "repair".

Re:User replaceable battery is pointless

[SuperKendall]

iPhones have batteries that last long enough there are only a handful of times I've needed an external charger anyway.

But when I did, I didn't have to power off my phone as you do with a replacement battery. Since a phone is mostly sitting in my pocket it's hardly an issue that it sits in a pocket charging.

Unlike you I can choose an external battery source that makes sense for what I am doing, a replacement battery can only be one large flat form factor.

You carry an external device, I carry a smaller external device

Wrong. IF I carry an external device, it can be smaller than yours because if anything all I need is a top-up. A replacement battery MUST be, well, battery sized...

you have to hang a cable off your phone for who knows how long.

Which again is irrelevant because it's in my pocket. Since attaching the external source does not require powering down my phone I can disconnect and reconnect as I please.

Also you must remember to charge your external battery which usually has no means of checking to see current power status unlike most external battery packs.

*ALSO* with an external battery pack *I* can share power with anyone. You selfishly hog your backup to yourself, with no easy means of sharing it except a handful of people with the exact same model phone.

And to top it all off, having an external battery means your device has less battery than it could. All around an insanely stupid trade-off given how little most people need more power.

Re: User replaceable battery is pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

You chose to ignore many factors already mentioned. Having a second battery is a huge benefit. Repeat. It is a huge benefit. Because YOUR usage determined 1.3x of your battery life is enough does not mean it is for someone else. My second battery is always fully charged and i know when it is and is not. The charge light changes. I have the choice of and extra battery or plugging in a generic charger to top off. I more often then not choose to take me second battery. Not because I am stupid and never thought there was no such thing as a portable charger. Apparently you never travel or actually USE your phone for any length of time or never spend time in an area with a low signal. Without making up facts or figures, tell me how much space or how much larger my battery could be if it was not removeable. How much more time would that get me before it went dead? I'd give up space to have the ability to swap. I will NEVER be that person hugging the limited outlets on the floor at the airport gate or the one fumbling with my phone on a conversation with a usb cable hanging off it while pulling my suit case. You've obviously never had to do that though but only out of luck.

OS

[johnsmith2708]

Mostly, I like WP, because it is the most simple in use. Iphone always was expenisive and I think, that they it will never be the best smartphone!

Re:User replaceable battery is pointless

[Ark42]

I think you completely misunderstand the point of the replaceable battery I use. I don't ever switch back to the original battery. The after-market battery I put in my S3 has something like 4x the capacity of the stock battery. It takes up more space and sticks out of the back of the phone. Because of this, it includes a case back that makes the phone a bit thicker than stock, while doubling as a protective case similar to an otter-box. I no more want to swap batteries in and out day to day that I want a second phone-sized object dangling from my phone by a tiny cord.