Target's Sales Floors Are Switching From Apple To Android Devices (gizmodo.com)

After three years of Apple products, Target is moving to Android devices for stocking, pulling items, and other essential sales floor duties. Target first outfitted its employees with Apple products in 2014, replacing PDAs with iPod Touches. Gizmodo reports: In Fall of 2016, Target stores began testing the Zebra TC51, which runs Android 6.0 Mashmallow and was confirmed to Gizmodo as "the new MyDevices for store team members chainwide" by a company spokesperson over email. On Reddit's r/Target page and the unofficial employee forum The Breakroom, the new devices have been met with enthusiasm -- and plenty of jabs at the old iOS scanners. "The current iOS my devices we have all sorts of issues, connection issues, scanner issues, and tons more," one Breakroom poster complained. On Reddit, a former store manager wrote that "the iPod hardware they used as on the floor scanners for employees died quickly and there was no way of swapping in new batteries. There were many hardware issues that came about with the ipods." While a Target spokesperson confirmed the company will still purchase some products from Apple -- iPads for online order pickups, iPhones for managers -- the sales floor is switching to Android, and the company is staffing up on Android developers to port over all the internal software stores use.

Comments

It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fred6666]

No business should use a single source product/solution when there is an equal alternative with multiple vendors.
In that case, if Target even runs into trouble with Samsung, they can easily switch to LG or whatever. It would be even better if they were not dependent on Google for the OS, but having multiple hardware vendors is a good start.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Confirming that hospitals love having all sorts of equipment from different vendors none of which are compatible with each other, with different training required for each unit type not to mention different maintenance, etc. It's just paradise. Oh wait, what kind of business were you referring to? Retail business? Yeah ok.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Doogie5526]

Funny, I was thinking the opposite. Apple seems to support their hardware for much longer periods of time than Android devices--both in software updates and in the ability to purchase replacement hardware. Androids aren't enough of a commodity to swap out different devices and expect software or hardware (which likely includes a form-fitting case) to work. I can see ditching iPod Touch, though. I wouldn't be surprised if Touches gets discontinued and iPhones or iPads aren't worth the cost.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[msauve]

"Apple seems to support their hardware for much longer periods of time than Android devices--both in software updates and in the ability to purchase replacement hardware."

Not sure what your point is. Are you saying Apple will be happy to sell you a replacement device, but Android manufacturers won't? And about that "hardware support." Ever heard of "Made for iPod", the formal Apple program which promised compatibility (well, for maybe 30 days after the product was discontinued)? Heck, my old Moto Droid will still charge using USB. Where's the Apple support for 30 pin dock connector charging?

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[crankyspice]

Where's the Apple support for 30 pin dock connector charging?

Right here: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MA591G/C/apple-30-pin-to-usb-cable

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Doogie5526]

Are you saying Apple will be happy to sell you a replacement device, but Android manufacturers won't?

Yes. When a company comes up with a solution, they will usually approve it for a set number of years...not changing anything (i.e. upgrading every 6mo to 1 yr) because that would mean recertifying a new model, sourcing new cases, dealing with heterogeneous inventory. Apple hardware generally has longer production/support runs than Android. Most of the iPod Touches seem to be available new from retail sources for 3-4 years[1] (I couldn't find a similar source for Android). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Which wasn't an Apple failure: it was the result of idiotic password choices on the part of the victims. Had they been using Android, or Windows Phone, or kept their photos on a CP/M machine with dial-up access only... the same thing would have happened.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fluffernutter]

You missed the point. If I buy a new phone, how do I use my 30 pin dock devices.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Unless Target is developing their in-house(or contracted; but with more say over the product than your basic shrinkwrap consumer) against Google Play Services (or, even more foolishly, some OEM's pet extensions); they aren't really all that dependent on Google.

AOSP isn't really designed to be turned into an end-user-ready phone; and lacking Play store, the various Google apps and services, etc. is typically a deal breaker unless you swap in your own (as with Amazon); but if you are treating it as a substitute for the WinCE that historically powered these sorts of fancy-inventory-scanners; or as an easier-to-go-from-BSP-to-graphics-and-a-well-known-platform alternative to rolling a custom Linux frmware; you don't really depend on Google much.

They don't develop AOSP terribly openly, it's pretty much periodic dumps of their project and their plan; but the licensing is open, so you can just keep using it until you can't get hardware for that version anymore, or doing your own security patches gets to be too much; and the AOSP base isn't missing anything particularly glaring for supporting network, barcode scanner, QR/other interpretation from the camera, some dodgy frontend application that supports talking to your inventory system and displaying bits of your web site.

Once you connect something to a network, you aren't going to get nigh-endless support without paying a vendor to care(since the cost of just ignoring security flaws is so much higher); but, especially if you are only using a subset of features, AOSP doesn't exert much control over you if you use it as a base for your firmware.

And, given the specific requirements of retail inventory(durability, battery life, high speed barcode scanning, etc.) you are probably pushing the bounds of what makes sense to try to COTS with just a custom phone case of some sort(unless you are running an operation small enough that the low prices and economies of scale persuade you to forgive a few sins in exchange for being able to buy replacements in quantity one at any cellphone pusher.

At least with POS systems, this seems to have been much what has happened: Square and their imitators blew the bottom out of the market by allowing you to turn normal phone into a cellular card processing terminal(normally a surprisingly pricey item); and there are some mostly small-business focused "iPad embedded in stand/card reader" products; but your Micros and NCR and the like seem to have substantially gone with clearly tablet inspired(and tablet component based, I'm sure they appreciated having touchscreens become cheap and ubiquitous; even if Elo almost certainly didn't) custom hardware running some generic Android based firmware that does nothing except support their application. Once you stamp out enough of them, being stuck with somebody else's product launch cycle, endless changes, and irrelevant features just doesn't make up for the low cost of small quantity orders.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[drinkypoo]

AOSP isn't really designed to be turned into an end-user-ready phone;

Who told you that? Why did you believe it? I've run AOSP on my phone before, in the form of SOKP, and it was a joy. Absolute minimum bullshit.

and lacking Play store, the various Google apps and services, etc. is typically a deal breaker unless you swap in your own (as with Amazon);

What? No. You can install gapps on AOSP.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Yes and no: the breach was down to a password, rather than an exploit; but designing with security in mind means keeping the weaknesses of your materials in mind:

Apple's enthusiasm to make iCloud the has-all-your-stuff-and-controls-all-your-devices cool convenience hub was understandable in terms of creating a feature that users who barely know about backups, much less make them, would find valuable(especially in the context of mobile devices which get replaced/lost/broken/stolen a lot and don't tend to have "insert flash drive, drag and drop 'my documents' level backup/transfer features).

From the perspective of security, though, putting all that high-value stuff behind a single password(with basic cheap 'n awful consumer password recovery options) is sort of like building a safe with no bottom; then arguing "it's up to the customer to put it on a floor at least as breach resistant as the safe!". Doesn't mean that the lock on the door is flawed; but it isn't a good design.

At any scale(even a small business IT operation); users periodically fucking up passwords/getting phished/etc. is just something you have to expect and design around. Apple's iCloud security arrangement really didn't do that.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[that this is not und]

You mean the dock in the dashboard of your car?

Apple says it's obsolete. Get a new car.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[aaarrrgggh]

The lesson is more that specialized hardware works better than commodity, mass-market hardware once the innovations from mass market can be passed down. The new device has a built-in laser scanner and presumably replaceable batteries, apparently two major limitations of using a generalist device.

When I look at the Apple Store employees with their iPhone backpacks for credit card transactions and lasers, I think they should be more like Target, sadly.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[aaarrrgggh]

The operating system is a trivial issue when you are referring to the difference between (say) software from Phillips, GE, and Siemens for a CT Scanner-- just as it is for all the other diagnostic instruments in use.

I don't think Samsung has an MRI "backpack" for the S8 yet, but maybe I just missed the press release.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[RottenJ]

I have developed apps for the TC51 and strangely there are not that many rugged android devices out there with integrated scanners, good ones anyway with well designed and documented libraries for getting scanner input (data wedge wasn't feasible). Even though the the OS is the same on different devices the libraries are proprietary, so switching between vendors is not as easy as you would think.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[AuMatar]

You can't install gapps legally on AOSP. Google requires a license for them, and only licenses them to OEMs that agree to a large number of provisions (and pays them). THey're widely available, but you are pirating them.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fred6666]

It would be much worse for the hospital if they used equipment from a single vendor. That vendor could raise prices without any limit because the cost for the hospital to switch out to something else would be too expensive.

The best is to have open standards, and many vendors.

Re:It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fred6666]

It's still much better than if every single vendor did like Apple and developed their own OS.
No matter if only 20% of the interface is the same when switching from one Android device to another. As long as it's greater than 0% it's better than Apple.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

If we're gonna do that, hell, let's take it to its logical conclusion. I don't mean "phone manufacturers", either; though that would allow one to say that, since one of them sucks, the all suck, including Apple.

No, let's think bigger. Electronics manufacturers? Nah. Businesses. All of them. There's one that sucks and, since we're lumping them together, well, they all suck.

Right?

It's rare that I'll reply to support an AC, but here I am.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I'm aware of the various unofficial options; which work alright as long as the application you are trying to use doesn't actually rely more or less heavily on Google Play Services-provided APIs, in which case things tend to go downhill; but that isn't really an option if you are large enough for legal exposure to be a problem.

As for 'isn't really designed to be turned into an end-user-ready phone"; I agree that it can be done; and the experience can actually be pleasant in a minimalist sort of way; but without at least hitting F-Droid or the like, AOSP is pretty spartan; and there is a fairly long history of feature development in AOSP freezing in time at whatever point GPS started doing that feature; so stock AOSP is about as solid as Android gets in terms of being an OS; but can be kind of a history trip if you try to use the included applications.

Unless you just have to run every random thing in the Play store; you can certainly do without; and for purpose-build business widgets like the stuff in this article it's certainly more than viable as a convenient platform to dump your application on; but I'd stand by the assessment that someone who had previously only experienced commercial Android handsets would find an AOSP build to be a bit of a surprise; and note that while some of the 3rd party additions that really save the day are perfectly legal; the various 'and this is how you bodge in the Google components' FAQs aren't really an option outside of XDA.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

Well, in this case you can stick with Android phones, and state that there is at least 1 device that is supported over the long haul. However, there's many many many that are not, so overwhelmingly many, that for purposes of statistics, there are none.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

When that one well-supported device outsells any individual model of iPhone (be fair, compare a single model to a single model) you can't really call it statistically insignificant. But, really, for the purpose I actually give a damn about (that is, my actual usage) that one device is all I care about.

It's like safety scissors vs shears, really. There are really dangerously designed shears with poor handle designs and sharper than necessary points, and there are a handful of good designs with points just sharp enough to slip between layers of fabric without snagging; overall, safety scissors are much safer than shears. But safety scissors won't do what's needed in a tailor's shop, so a good tailor does their research, finds a qualify pair of shears, winks and nods to the elevated danger, having minimized it with a little market research and by knowing how to use his tools, and buys the shears.

One thing being safer or more secure, on average, than another does not make that thing better. It doesn't necessarily make it worse, wither, but it sure doesn't make it better. If it did, everyone would have to agree that a Jeep Cherokee was better than a Ferrari, because the Jeep is one of the safest cars on the road today; you'll be hard pressed to find someone who would say it's better than a Ferrari, though, without some leading. Safety scissors are better than shears for giving to kids to cut craft paper, and iOS is better than Android for locking you into Apple's ecosystem. My wife likes both shears and iOS; you seem to like iOS and, if I had to venture a guess, prefer safety scissors. To each their own, really, and some of us think it's worth a few minutes of extra research to have a selection of vendors and a little more freedom.

Also, and I've never been able to put my finger on it, iOS just really clashes with how I use my phone; I can't stand using my wife's iPhone for any length of time, and I really didn't enjoy the 3Gs I owned before I went Android. Of course, the same can be said about Android when it comes to tablet use, which is why I have an iPad Pro and not a Galaxy Tab. But, as long as that one well-supported device exists, you'll never see me walking around with an iPhone, unless my wife asks me to hold hers.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

When that one well-supported device outsells any individual model of iPhone (be fair, compare a single model to a single model)

what model is that? Every single Samsung (who owns the Android market) is unsupported in less than 2 years, AFAIK. I have 4 of them on my desk, between 2 and 4 years old, none are officially supported. Jailbroken, sure. But official support? Not a chance. Every one with less than 1 year of official updates. We'll see about the S7.

and iOS is better than Android for locking you into Apple's ecosystem.

Capt. Obvious today? ;)

Also, and I've never been able to put my finger on it, iOS just really clashes with how I use my phone; ... Of course, the same can be said about Android when it comes to tablet use, which is why I have an iPad Pro and not a Galaxy Tab.

There's so much to talk about in those 2 sentences.

Other than phone calls and potentially cellular data app use, exactly how does your phone usage vary from tablet usage enough to make that statement? (Note, this is only relation to the functions that a phone supports that are on a tablet) I can see there are use cases and apps on the tablet that just aren't available or usuable on a phone's small screen, but anything on a phone can pretty much be done on a tablet.

With that out of the way, I actually have trouble understanding the Android use case on a phone. (Note I have a bunch of them, and probably the singular thing I hate about Android is the total lack of standardized core functionality across various revisions, each one and version having its own way of accessing files, viewing settings, and dealing with internals.

Now, I'll grant you that what I do with a phone is probably in the sub 1% grouping. If you're doing email, phone calls, messaging and web browsing, I guess the apps are pretty consistent (I wouldn't know since I might use any of those features on anything approaching even a monthly basis on any of those phones) but from an accessing systems, apps, data, media, logs, etc, Android absolutely SUCKS and is so inconsistent that I frequently have to lookup how to do a particular function on that version of Android from that particular vendor if I haven't touched that device/version/vendor in a couple of weeks. That's not a statement to the quality of my memory but rather how stupidly varied the approaches are on something I may do once every few months on a given device/version/vendor and maybe have done once or twice previously. By comparison, Apple devices have at most 2 approaches across all devices and up to 4 versions of iOS back. Although the versions back don't really matter because in what I support roughly 95% are on the latest version of iOS, meaning there's exactly 1 way I need to deal with everything. Perhaps that's another reason why developers choose to support Apple, despite everything else, and Android is a distant second.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Not a chance. Every one with less than 1 year of official updates. We'll see about the S7.

You must be referring to one year from when you bought it, in which case people get hit with that on iOS as well if they buy an older model. The S7 is already past the 1 year mark (and was when I upgraded to the S8 the day it came out) and is still receiving updates. Hyperbole only weakens your argument; did you forget that I understand this fact, because I know you do, it's one of the reasons I engage you, on average, more often than almost anyone else on this site. I appreciate that you tend to stick to facts and would prefer that you do so here, as well.

The S6, released in in April of 2015, saw an update just last week, as did the S5, released in April of 2014. The S4, released in April of 2013, saw its most recent update in February of this year, a whole whopping two months shy of 4 years.

Yes, other manufacturers get it wrong, but the one who consistently outsells Apple, the one who is most statistically significant for that reason, seems to have been getting it right for a while now. Let's confirm by looking at the S3: released May of 2012, last update April of 2014, 23 months of support; that must be where you're getting the "less than 2 years of support" meme from, but it hasn't been true for a while.

Other than phone calls and potentially cellular data app use, exactly how does your phone usage vary from tablet usage enough to make that statement?

I pull my phone out for quick access to some bit of information, or to bang out a quick reply to a message. Android allows me to customize this interaction a lot more, so I can optimize for the tasks I do most often and get them done in 2 seconds rather than 5; that time adds up a lot more than you might think. If I'm pulling out my tablet, I'm in it for the long haul and my time spent interacting with the OS will be minimal relative to my time interacting with whatever app(s) I'm pulling the tablet out to use. iOS does a much better job of getting out of the way, and I appreciate that when the reason I'm pulling out a device is for an app, rather than an OS function.

More or less, that's the difference; on my phone, I use functions provided by the Android OS more than I use apps. iOS, in its desire to stay out of the way, either lacks those functions or makes them more difficult to access. That's not a slam on iOS, either; again, I prefer iOS on a tablet precisely for that reason.

There's a progression: quick check = phone, brief interaction = tablet, really dig into it = laptop, and make it my own = workstation.

As for your frequently having to look up how to do things on various versions of Android, that speaks a lot more about you than it does about Android. Having owned phones and tablets from Motorola, HTC, LG, RCA, Samsung, and a handful of others, I've only ever had to look up how to do more esoteric things, like rooting (which, like jailbreaking, does vary wildly by device and version, if it's even possible). My wife, who is very much in the iOS camp on all fronts, has no problem just picking up my phone or one of the Android tablets we have around the house and using it without referring to Google for help, so I don't believe it's simply that I'm an Android user and you're not.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

Not a chance. Every one with less than 1 year of official updates. We'll see about the S7.

You must be referring to one year from when you bought it, in which case people get hit with that on iOS as well if they buy an older model. The S7 is already past the 1 year mark (and was when I upgraded to the S8 the day it came out) and is still receiving updates.

Depends on your vendor. I'd check the S7, but it was shipped out last week. As soon as I get it back, I'll see when the last update was. BTW, support doesn't mean some firmware gets a minor tweak, but the OS gets its version updates. So when I buy a phone, and it's OS 3.2, and 6 months down the road OS 4.0 comes out, if I can't install OS 4.0, then that phone is effectively unsupported under the OS, especially given that OS updates on a given version appear to stop within 6 months of the next full version release. (3.x -> 4.x -> 5.x ... which happens yearly)

The S6, released in in April of 2015, saw an update just last week, as did the S5, released in April of 2014. The S4, released in April of 2013, saw its most recent update in February of this year, a whole whopping two months shy of 4 years.

I do have an S4 at hand. I charged it purely for this conversation, as it's been shelved since Jan because it's stuck on 4.4.4, with ATT. So, you are partially correct, I think, in that a camera firmware update was installed on start up, without a prompt mind you. However, I'm still stuck on the "latest" 4.4.4 OS. Unless there's someplace that I haven't found, there is no official means for updating to a newer Android release. The Note 4, Note 2, and the S6 I have somewhere all are similarly unsupported, at least as of Jan. Failing to release the current OS for a 6 month old phone that is perfectly capable of running it means that the phone is unsupported. And for your info, Kies doesn't offer any updates to those phones beyond what's now installed either. In fact, I got 1 point revision on the Note 4 via Kies that wasn't available via the phone itself. To say I was disappointed would be an understatement.

Yes, other manufacturers get it wrong, but the one who consistently outsells Apple, the one who is most statistically significant for that reason, seems to have been getting it right for a while now. Let's confirm by looking at the S3: released May of 2012, last update April of 2014, 23 months of support; that must be where you're getting the "less than 2 years of support" meme from, but it hasn't been true for a while.

My S4 came with 4.2, and stopped at 4.4.4. Where's the 5.x or newer updates? (4.2->4.4.4 was about 12 months, IIRC) The Note 4, same story. Note 2 actually had more than 12 months support, came with 4.1, and stopped at 4.3, I think. I can't be bothered to see if that one will even hold a charge, it's in the to be recycled bin after all. IIRC, the S6 has 5.1, no 6.x for it, even though Samsung released a build but Kies says there's nothing available.

I pull my phone out for quick access to some bit of information, or to bang out a quick reply to a message. Android allows me to customize this interaction a lot more, so I can optimize for the tasks I do most often and get them done in 2 seconds rather than 5; that time adds up a lot more than you might think.

Interesting. A message is a message, and I see no effective difference between entering one in Android vs iOS. Ditto for browsing. As for locating info on the phone, the iOS search feature is pretty damn quick, and works within various apps (mail, contacts) as well. I'm not sure what specific thing you think takes more than twice as long on iOS.

As for your frequently having to look up how to do things on various versions of Android, that speaks a lot more about you than it does about Android. Having owned phones and tablets from Motorola, HTC, L

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

As for locating info on the phone, the iOS search feature is pretty damn quick, and works within various apps

The easiest way to locate info on a phone is to have a widget displaying it when you unlock the phone. Last I checked, iOS doesn't support home screen widgets. If I can "unlock, look, and put away" in 2 seconds with Android, or "unlock, search, look, put away" in 10-15 seconds with iOS, Android is the clear winner.

If you use your phone differently than I use mine and, as a result, iOS works better for you, that's great, use an iPhone and be happy with it. Android works better for me and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering to defend myself here. I've used an iPhone as my primary phone, I used one for an entire year, I didn't much like it and that's all there is to it.

Allrighty, let's dig into it - I wish to find where on the phone a particular app data file is.

How do you do that on iOS? I'm genuinely asking as, last time I checked, you could not.

And, in both cases above, when I say "last time I checked", I mean this morning when I was checking and replaying to my mail on my iPad.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

The easiest way to locate info on a phone is to have a widget displaying it when you unlock the phone. Last I checked, iOS doesn't support home screen widgets.

There's equivalent - I generally use notifications for that. You can configure those to show even without unlocking the phone.

Allrighty, let's dig into it - I wish to find where on the phone a particular app data file is.

How do you do that on iOS? I'm genuinely asking as, last time I checked, you could not.

In iOS, you don't, at least until iOS 11 (I heard some snippet about viewing the filesystem, maybe it's not correct) However, it's easy enough to see files via Imazing or, yick, iTunes. And those don't magically appear/disappear either, unlike Android's external viewing options.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Not everything works as a notification, my friend. RSS feeds sort-of work, but the notifications tend to disappear once you've interscted with thime, while the widgets remain there for later reference. Slicky notes and lists are other useful widgets that just don't exist on iOS. If those aren't useful to you, so be it, enjoy iOS, there's nothing wrong with that. It really isn't my fault that you can't fathom someone having different usage patterns than you, but, well, I do. iOS doesn't work for my as a phone OS and that's that.

This would be a worthy discussion had I not already tried it and if I weren't already a daily user of iOS, but I have and I am. You aren't introducing me to a better way or whatever you think it is you're doing, I'm already quite familiar with iOS, thanks. Familiar enough to know it's not what I want on my phone.

Interestingly, the LeNovo Yoga Book I picked up last week for one specific feature is seeing way more use than just that one feature would dictate; it's replaced both my iPad Pro and the living room iPad (used for controlling streaming devices) for a considerable number of tasks. Unlike iOS, which hasn't added the features I use on my Android phone, Android seems to be rapidly adopting features (e.g, the ability to be configured to stay out of the way) that I use in a tablet.

As a daily user of both systems, I can unequivocally say that Android simply works better for me. You use what works for you, really, it's no skin off my back.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

Not everything works as a notification, my friend. RSS feeds sort-of work, but the notifications tend to disappear once you've interscted with thime, while the widgets remain there for later reference. Slicky notes and lists are other useful widgets that just don't exist on iOS. If those aren't useful to you, so be it, enjoy iOS, there's nothing wrong with that. It really isn't my fault that you can't fathom someone having different usage patterns than you, but, well, I do. iOS doesn't work for my as a phone OS and that's that.

I tried sticky notes, they drove me crazy. We obviously have different usage patterns. For me, I prefer a laptop, then a tablet, then a phone, in that order. I am over-connected (is that a valid condition?) enough that I absolutely don't want RSS feeds, for example, on my phone. Disconnecting when I'm away from work is something of a goal for me, and I'd leave my phone in my drawer in a different house if I could get away with it.

This would be a worthy discussion had I not already tried it and if I weren't already a daily user of iOS, but I have and I am. You aren't introducing me to a better way or whatever you think it is you're doing, I'm already quite familiar with iOS, thanks. Familiar enough to know it's not what I want on my phone.

I'm just genuinely curious why you stated what you stated. I've tried similar things, and they at best just annoyed me, at worst made me want to throw a device in the trash. For example, virtual desktops are something people swear they'd die without. Conceptually it sounded interesting, and I've tried multiple different approaches to make them work, but what I wind up with is a huge set of common apps across all of them and then 1 or 2 specific apps in each desktop. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong? Or maybe my usage patterns just don't fit within those paradigms. I'm thinking the latter. Apparently my work habits don't seem to lead me to suffer the issues that people say virtual desktops fix for them.

I'll be 100% honest - on the surface I fully agree with Android's approach - let the user do what they want. In execution, I find it terrible. iOS, OTOH, does what I need it to 99% of the time and, as a bonus, I almost never have to futz with anything to fix it or even pay any attention to iOS at all. This suits me as I just don't have the extra time to deal with such a distraction.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

I am over-connected (is that a valid condition?) enough that I absolutely don't want RSS feeds, for example, on my phone.

I feel the same way when I have a ton of notifications. I strive to keep that notification bar as clean and clear as possible; a widget is always there, wherever I left it on whichever home screen I put it on, and I can pay as much or as little attention to it as I see fit. That's why widgets beat notifications for my use case; if you prefer notifications (or nags as I often call them), I can't really argue with that and iOS is the clear winner for you.

Disconnecting when I'm away from work is something of a goal for me, and I'd leave my phone in my drawer in a different house if I could get away with it.

Ah, what luxury, being "away from work". What I wouldn't give to know that concept. As a business owner in a 24x7 business, every waking moment is a working moment; and if I'm not awake when work needs me, well, I will be shortly. When you live that life, you minimize distractions, and persistent notifications are distractions; if my phone is notifying me of something, I need it to be something important.

That might explain our disconnect; we avoid distraction in different ways.

For example, virtual desktops

just fucking suck. But I can tell from the rest of your comment that we agree on that.

I'm either browsing the web, in which case I have a web browser open, working on a development project, in which case I have my IDE and a web browser open, working on a song or video, in which case I have my video editing suite or sequencer and a web browser open, or gaming, in which case I have nothing else open (unless I'm also streaming, in which case I have OBS and a web browser open). The browser is common among all of them except gaming (where it's best to disable virtual desktops anyway for performance reasons) and it makes little to no sense to duplicate that one application across multiple desktops just to gain the functional equivalent of minimizing unused windows. I think you get where I'm going with this because I feel, from what you just wrote, that you share much the same experience, even if with different tasks.

There was a time, when screen real-estate was hard to come by, when virtual desktop made sense; unfortunately, the computers of that time weren't powerful enough to run every application at once in order to make effective use of them. They're a concept that wasn't doable when it made sense and no longer makes sense now that it's doable.

I'll be 100% honest - on the surface I fully agree with Android's approach - let the user do what they want. In execution, I find it terrible.

It's not without its warts, of course. You'll never hear me say it's perfect. That said, with great power comes great responsibility and I'm more than happy to take that bit of responsibility in order to have info at my fingertips without unnecessary nagging notifications. On my tablet, where I'm more prone to interact rather than just look, that's less of s concern and iOS really does what I want. Of course, that was until the Yoga Book came along last week and made me look at things differently; its ability to digitize what I'm writing on paper with an actual ink pen, and with 2048 points of pressure sensitivity to boot, and to do so with the screen off, means that's the device I carry now and the iPad lives on my desk. In the past week that I've had the Yoga Book, I find myself picking up the iPad less and less.

In any case, if you're finding yourself having to keep setting Android up over and over, you're doing something unusual; every Android phone I've ever had has been a set-it-and-forget-it proposition. Just like iOS. The only difference being that Android simply gives you more to set up by way of giving you more options.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

I feel the same way when I have a ton of notifications....if you prefer notifications (or nags as I often call them), I can't really argue with that and iOS is the clear winner for you.

Actually, I turn 99+% of those off. I can glance at my calendar if I need to see what's happening, my todo list if I need to see what's due next, etc (I guess those would be widgets? :) Mail is absolutely 0 notifications, or I'd never be able to focus on anything. This goes for all my systems. Do I occasionally miss an "important" message sent via email or IM? No, because if it was truly important, there'd be a call. Does this mean you sometimes have to train a new boss? If you have one, absolutely. So far it's not actually been a problem.

Ah, what luxury, being "away from work". What I wouldn't give to know that concept. ...When you live that life, you minimize distractions, and persistent notifications are distractions; if my phone is notifying me of something, I need it to be something important.

We both wish to avoid distractions. You may have some special needs/requirements for reaching you or have chosen a method I have not. Whatever works. And yes, I know all about the always "on" situation. Work-life balance still needs to be maintained as much as possible. 3am call need to be rare.

For example, virtual desktops

just fucking suck. But I can tell from the rest of your comment that we agree on that.

In short, it's like having Tom (Office Space) with the "important" job of delivery the requirements from the business to the programmers. An unneeded useless if not detrimental extra layer.

In any case, if you're finding yourself having to keep setting Android up over and over, you're doing something unusual;

Yes, I admitted as much. But, even as a user, if you borrow or try to help someone with their phone, it's like randomly picking up a version of windows NT from 2000 through Win10 and being asked to help connect to a wireless access point. You kind of know where to go and how to do it, but it varies on just about every single version. And if a vendor chose to install their own wireless "driver" along with its not so helpful application... (if you're unlucky enough to have that situation, grab a double shot) And that's the crux of my issues with Android, just because you get something with "Android" on it doesn't mean you actually know how it works nor what's available, because it varies so much. I'm running devices from Asus, LG, and Samsung with OS versions from 4.4 through 7 and can definitely state that about the only single consistent things are the login screen and the fact that somewhere there is at least 1 "settings" app, although what you get when you open it varies.

Actually, here's something you have to look up: screen captures. There's at least 7 possible ways to accomplish a screen capture. Your guess is as good as mine which one applies to a specific device/OS version. What's even better was when I was trying to figure it out on an LG phone (which wasn't in anything I searched BTW) I came across it by accident, and it's completely different than any other phone I have. It's a pull down menu feature. Now, next fun fact, where are these screen grabs stored? That also varies by device/vendor/OS version.

By now, you should see why I think Android sucks. Android is the Windows of the phone world. There's just no consistency and you have to relearn just about everything every time you grab a new device/version. I do readily admit that if you pick up a single Android device and only work with it, then it's a wholly different experience for you and many of these issues will never crop up. I have roughly 20 different android devices on my desk. That fact alone, as compared to 3 iDevices, says everything.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

I can glance at my calendar if I need to see what's happening, my todo list if I need to see what's due next, etc (I guess those would be widgets? :)

Yes, Apple has a handful of lock screen widgets and, if they provided the functionality I needed, they would certainly be better than Android's home screen widgets, because I wouldn't have to unlock to see them. Of course, they'd also be worse because nobody I hand my phone to (or who takes it from me) would have to unlock to see them, either.

I actually made use of iOS lock screen widgets for a brief while and found them clunky; especially the ones you could interact with, like the calculator (which doesn't ship with the OS, mind you). It always seemed like the device couldn't figure out whether I was trying to scroll the screen or interact with the widget, which made it frustrating to use, even for quick reference.

I realize that's probably a me problem, but I have scrolling-related issues all the time in iOS; trying to scroll horizontally, it will latch to vertical scrolling, and vise-versa. Android's initial scroll lag exists for a reason -- it latches later, which means it gets it right more often than iOS -- and it can't scroll until it latches; I've noticed that there is no lag on screens that free-scroll, because there is no latching and, thus, no need to determine which way to latch. Likewise, the problem disappears for me on iOS on free-scrolling screens, as well.

But, even as a user, if you borrow or try to help someone with their phone, it's like randomly picking up a version of windows NT from 2000 through Win10 and being asked to help connect to a wireless access point.

That's a caveat of customization. I'll agree that manufacturers have been given too long of a leash for their own customization, but it's really a side effect of giving the user that level of control. It's one that Google should have foreseen and handled contractually, and they're taking steps to reel it in; they have to boil the frog, so to speak, making subtle changes over time so as not to run afoul of existing licensing agreements. Even if this was handled correctly from day one, there would still be nothing technically preventing a manufacturer from modifying the OS, though, as that's really one of the points of Android: to be able to be modified.

Actually, here's something you have to look up: screen captures. There's at least 7 possible ways to accomplish a screen capture.

On the vast majority of devices, it's POWER+HOME just like iOS. I'll grand you that, though, for the handful of devices (including my Yoga Book) where it is not. Screen grabs have always appeared in the photos app for me; that same Photos app (provided by Google, so it's the same on every device) has a Device Folders menu item, you can find pretty much everything there. You can also the ( i ) icon while viewing an image to get a whole slew of information about it, including its location on the device. There should never be a reason to have to look that up; even the vendor-provided and aftermarket viewers I've seen show all media by default and provide this info, because the vast majority of them use the Photos API in the first place.

By now, you should see why I think Android sucks.

Indeed. You think it sucks because all mobile operating systems suck to some degree. I just happen to think iOS sucks worse for many aspects of how I use my phone, and (with the recent purchase of a Yoga Book) an increasing number of tasks for which I use a tablet.

Perhaps I'm just past the point of caring what the default is, as long as I know I can change it if I don't like it; and on iOS, a lot of the time I can't.

I have roughly 20 different android devices on my desk. That fact alone, as compared to 3 iDevices, says everything.

Well, without knowing why you have nearly 7x as many Android devices, it sure seems like you prefer Android. Somehow, I don't think that's the case so, no, it really doesn't.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

Yes, Apple has a handful of lock screen widgets ...Of course, they'd also be worse because nobody I hand my phone to (or who takes it from me) would have to unlock to see them, either.

This is why I don't get the whole widgets thing. Usually the things I need to see are things I don't want joe random to be able to see merely by picking up my phone. Things I don't need to see don't need to be on the lock screen, qed.

But, even as a user, if you borrow or try to help someone with their phone, it's like randomly picking up a version of windows NT from 2000 through Win10 and being asked to help connect to a wireless access point.

That's a caveat of customization. I'll agree that manufacturers have been given too long of a leash for their own customization, but it's really a side effect of giving the user that level of control. It's one that Google should have foreseen and handled contractually, and they're taking steps to reel it in; they have to boil the frog, so to speak, making subtle changes over time so as not to run afoul of existing licensing agreements. Even if this was handled correctly from day one, there would still be nothing technically preventing a manufacturer from modifying the OS, though, as that's really one of the points of Android: to be able to be modified.

I know that they're trying to improve it recently by removing some customization abilities. I have yet to see the results which should be a more consistent experience.

On the vast majority of devices, it's POWER+HOME just like iOS. I'll grand you that, though, for the handful of devices (including my Yoga Book) where it is not. Screen grabs have always appeared in the photos app for me; that same Photos app (provided by Google, so it's the same on every device) has a Device Folders menu item, you can find pretty much everything there. You can also the ( i ) icon while viewing an image to get a whole slew of information about it, including its location on the device. There should never be a reason to have to look that up; even the vendor-provided and aftermarket viewers I've seen show all media by default and provide this info, because the vast majority of them use the Photos API in the first place.

On the LG K20, for example, it's in the Capture+ folder, because how you get a screen capture there is via the pull-down screen, and there's a check mark on the left, you tap the check mark and you get a screen capture. It's not in the Photos app and, in fact, I'm not even sure that particular phone has the Photos app. On older LGs, it's volume down + power, which is a royal pain as that's a single triple rocker button in the middle of the back side of the phone. A few of the Samsungs also use the volume down and power button, and you have to long press them. You know, just like you're turning off your phone? Awesome UX decision there. Other samsungs are power+home as you note. The Asus uses photos, I believe, I can't really remember.

Indeed. You think it sucks because all mobile operating systems suck to some degree.

That is truly an understatement.

Well, without knowing why you have nearly 7x as many Android devices, it sure seems like you prefer Android. Somehow, I don't think that's the case so, no, it really doesn't.

Among other things, I develop apps for mobile. That's the requirements for Android support at this time. Another reason I truly dislike Android. My view is admittedly colored by the pain of having to constantly swap phones and figure out what's going on in each version/vendor/hardware release combination. I really love it when APIs behave as consistently as the rest of the Android ecosystem. But, to be fair, iOS's APIs are sometimes just as inconsistent. CoreData, I don't think I'll ever use you again, anywhere. It's a shining example of how not to do a data store. Then again, basing CoreData on SQLite says all you need to know about that, except SQLite itself is actually far better and more reliable than CoreData.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

This is why I don't get the whole widgets thing. Usually the things I need to see are things I don't want joe random to be able to see merely by picking up my phone. Things I don't need to see don't need to be on the lock screen, qed.

And this is why Android's home screen (e.g. where your icons are, not visible while locked) widgets are better.

That is truly an understatement.

I don't think Slashdot will let me fit enough text into the 50 posts I get each day to properly elaborate.

Then again, basing CoreData on SQLite says all you need to know about that, except SQLite itself is actually far better and more reliable than CoreData.

A lot of Apple's architectural decisions leave me scratching my head. Then again, so do a lot of Google's... and Microsoft's... and don't get me started on Linux; if more VPS providers supported BSD, that's what I'd run my servers on.

At least you can get your hands on the Android devices you need for (relatively) cheap, though. Any mobile development I've done has been for specific devices, so I haven't had the same pain, but having to buy a Mac, a PC, and iPhone, an iPad, a new iPad because the viewport size changed, and an Android phone... just to test a few websites in a few browsers... well... That's $1400 in iPads alone, $2300 for the Mac because if I'm buying a Mac it's gonna be used as more than just an occasional web browser, I'm counting the iPhone because it meant my wife couldn't trade it in (the business bought it from her), so there's another $800, that's $4500 just in Apple gear to look at websites once in a blue moon. I'd be surprised to learn that you spent that on 20 non-flagship Android devices, to be honest. And yes, those are separate from my personal devices, they belong to my business. The PC and Android phone were bought for day to day use and would have been bought regardless of the need for a web browser, so I'm not counting what was paid for those; in any case, were I simply buying them for their browsers, I could have gotten away with spending less than $300.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

And this is why Android's home screen (e.g. where your icons are, not visible while locked) widgets are better.

I guess I don't get it. Generally the apps are fine for me, a widget is like Tom, in Office Space.

That is truly an understatement.

I don't think Slashdot will let me fit enough text into the 50 posts I get each day to properly elaborate.

Thanks for the laugh. I need those daily, keeps the frustration in its place.

A lot of Apple's architectural decisions leave me scratching my head. Then again, so do a lot of Google's... and Microsoft's... and don't get me started on Linux; if more VPS providers supported BSD, that's what I'd run my servers on.

NetBSD is pretty decent, but yes, mostly we're running either RedHat or CentOS for our linux deployments.

As for architectural decisions, Apple I get on the desktop, after thinking about it. I do hope they're successful with what I believe their goal is. On iOS, they just need to get it together and fix what they broke. It's the same goal, it's just worse with some of the earlier GUI architecture they have. CoreData, like EJBs, sounds great as a concept, the implementation is so poor its unusable. However, Apple did do one thing that no other vendor has yet been able to accomplish well: they created a usable user-friendly non-lagging desktop on top of BSD.

Google basically did a "how fast can we rip off and write a clone of iOS with what we have" rush job, and they've been bandaiding it ever since. Oh, and we'll take our internal team's Java VM and use that. IOW, no real decisions were made with anything other than a view to how fast they could get out the door.

As for MS.... well, think 1M monkeys in a warehouse, design by committee, and technical decisions by inept individuals, and you get all the wonders of MS APIs and designs. MS was never about creating technically superior products, it was about how do we own a market and what do we need to do it.

At least you can get your hands on the Android devices you need for (relatively) cheap, though.

My Android phones range from $130 to $800, they're not exactly cheap. The $130 units are the newer LG K-20s that we just picked up. The whole range of Galaxy Sn phones were all relatively pricey. iPhones are surprisingly competitive, I can pick up a brand spanking new 64GB iPhone 8 for $649, and an SE for $129 (IIRC - otherwise $199 at Apple), so it really depends upon what you're shooting for there, but from my experiences you can grab either side of the mobile OS coin for similar money, with the exception of the Apple side all being on the latest OS version.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

I guess I don't get it. Generally the apps are fine for me, a widget is like Tom, in Office Space.

A widget is always there displaying your information or waiting for your interaction, while an app must be located, opened, and navigated through. Opening an app can take anywhere from almost no time, up to several seconds, depending on the app, and navigation can also be nontrivial. With a widget, I unlock, look, lock, done, 2 seconds. In well over 90% of cases, I won't have an app open in that same time, let alone have found the information I'm interested in.

Google basically did a "how fast can we rip off and write a clone of iOS with what we have" rush job, and they've been bandaiding it ever since.

Do you honestly believe that? Like, really? You think they put together a full operating system and hardware to run it on, build a handful of test units, got FCC approval, got it into manufacturing, and moved it onto store shelves in a matter of weeks? If they did, they should sell logistics as a service; just getting FCC approval for a device takes longer than people making that claim seem to think the entire R&D, testing, approval, manufacture, and shipping process took Google.

My Android phones range from $130 to $800, they're not exactly cheap.

What's the average, though, and did you have to buy them all at once? That was my point. With the exception of the $600 iPad Pro, the remaining $3900 outlay in Apple gear, just for web browsers, was all bought at once. You don't know pain, as it relates to testing gear, until you spend $2300 for a copy of Safari.

I can pick up a brand spanking new 64GB iPhone 8 for $649, and an SE for $129 (IIRC - otherwise $199 at Apple), so it really depends upon what you're shooting for there, but from my experiences you can grab either side of the mobile OS coin for similar money, with the exception of the Apple side all being on the latest OS version.

I never argued otherwise; but if you're buying a device for testing, you're going to buy the one that will be supported for the longest period of time, which means you're buying the newest device in most cases, so the $129 SE isn't really relevant here.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

A widget is always there displaying your information or waiting for your interaction, while an app must be located, opened, and navigated through. Opening an app can take anywhere from almost no time, up to several seconds, depending on the app, and navigation can also be nontrivial.

I guess we really operate differently. I unlock, look at mail, done. My home screen is organized to have the apps I'm interested in 1 tap away, so generally, unlock, tap, look, done. Home, tap, look for another app. As the phone is more than capable of appearing to be running all my apps all the time, it's not an issue. Oh, and background processing is turned off pretty much across the board.

Google basically did a "how fast can we rip off and write a clone of iOS with what we have" rush job, and they've been bandaiding it ever since.

Do you honestly believe that? Like, really? You think they put together a full operating system and hardware to run it on, build a handful of test units, got FCC approval, got it into manufacturing, and moved it onto store shelves in a matter of weeks? If they did, they should sell logistics as a service; just getting FCC approval for a device takes longer than people making that claim seem to think the entire R&D, testing, approval, manufacture, and shipping process took Google.

Actually, they did. They had a phone in development for a couple of years, and when they discovered what the iPhone really was, they scrapped their design and whipped up a clone as fast as they could.

What's the average, though, and did you have to buy them all at once? That was my point. With the exception of the $600 iPad Pro, the remaining $3900 outlay in Apple gear, just for web browsers, was all bought at once. You don't know pain, as it relates to testing gear, until you spend $2300 for a copy of Safari.

I guess a $400 mini wouldn't satisfy your Safari needs?

I never argued otherwise; but if you're buying a device for testing, you're going to buy the one that will be supported for the longest period of time, which means you're buying the newest device in most cases, so the $129 SE isn't really relevant here.

Actually, I had to buy an SE, and some lower level Android devices, specifically to ensure that our apps worked properly on them. It wasn't at all about whether the phones would be supported, but that our user base was supported.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Actually, they did

Oh? From your last reference:

After working for two years on Sooner, which was supposed to ship in late 2007 ... and whose launch was pushed back to fall 2008.

Seems like more than a few weeks to me, and that's assuming they didn't change course until the official iPhone announcement on January 9, 2007. They spent over a year reworking what they reworked. Well over a year, nearly two. Again, assuming they didn't start before the public announcement.

I guess a $400 mini wouldn't satisfy your Safari needs?

Not when I need to test against the larger viewport of the larger iPad Pro. No, it would not. Before that, I bought an Air because it was the newer device and would be supported longer (a new Mini model came out some time after that purchase). The Mini (and Ari) present a 1024x768 viewport, compared to the Pro's 1366x1024. That matters.

I also misspoke, the $600 iPad Air was the earlier purchase and the iPad Pro was not $600; I'm not sure why I typed Pro, because I knew that (I bought them both).

Oh, you're referring to the $2300 price tag. No, an iPad, regardless of model, would not serve my OS X Safari testing needs. And, as I said earlier, if I'm buying a Mac, I'm gonna buy one I can use as more than a damned browser (though it rarely sees that use today).

I also undervalued, because I don't recall exactly what I paid for each device. I can dig up receipts if you want to nit-pick.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

Oh? From your last reference:

After working for two years on Sooner, which was supposed to ship in late 2007 ... and whose launch was pushed back to fall 2008.

Seems like more than a few weeks to me, and that's assuming they didn't change course until the official iPhone announcement on January 9, 2007. They spent over a year reworking what they reworked. Well over a year, nearly two. Again, assuming they didn't start before the public announcement.

Something like 1.5 years. IIRC the iPhone was in development for over 3 years. But yes, they rushed to attempt to build it out. From 0 to their first Android phone was pretty quick, far quicker than they would preferred from everything I recall reading at the time. And what they released then was truly underwhelming. It's why they relinquished as much control as they did, because they needed to gain as much market as possible or it could have been them, not MS, that buckled and disappeared.

I guess a $400 mini wouldn't satisfy your Safari needs?

Not when I need to test against the larger viewport of the larger iPad Pro. No, it would not. Before that, I bought an Air because it was the newer device and would be supported longer (a new Mini model came out some time after that purchase). The Mini (and Ari) present a 1024x768 viewport, compared to the Pro's 1366x1024. That matters.

I have no idea what you're talking about there. My mini runs just fine on my 2K monitor. It's whatever you plug it into, or what you size the display for in VMs, if you're wanting to match a specific video size, open the Displays preference pane, select scaled, and resize your VM window. It takes at most a couple of minutes to setup. I just double checked and I definitely can create a 1366x1024 window, among many other sizes. This is running OSX 10.10 in a Parallels 10 VM (yeah, haven't needed to upgrade that particular machine in a while) Need to check multiple sizes at once? I can run 5 VMs without an issue simultaneously and view them side by side.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Something like 1.5 years.

1 year 8 months if you really want to nit-pick, but they didn't throw out everything they had; they were already building on a 2.6-series Linux kernel and using their in-house Java implementation (see your first reference) for codename "Sooner" before the iPhone was announced; they simply added touch screen support to that.

I have no idea what you're talking about there.

I had no idea what you were talking about, apparently; sorry for the confusion. I thought you were talking about an iPad Mini.

That said, no, it really wouldn't have done the trick for me at the time. I was working on a laptop, and only a laptop, at the time, and had no monitor to plug it in to. Yes, adding a monitor probably would have been cheaper, until you consider adding a desk to put the monitor on (I was short on desk space) and a bigger apartment to add the desk to. I've come a long way since then; that MacBook Pro is now mounted to the wall and acting as a remote framebuffer, which is how I would have set up a Mac Mini as well, but I'd have needed the aforementioned monitor in order to do so, at which point I'd have been buying a single-use monitor unless I also bought that desk and rented that bigger apartment.

So yes, a Mini would have worked, at considerably greater expense and effort than the MacBook Pro.

When I started talking about viewport sizes, it should perhaps have been a giveaway that I wasn't talking about the desktop; for that, you just resize the window.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

1 year 8 months if you really want to nit-pick, but they didn't throw out everything they had; they were already building on a 2.6-series Linux kernel and using their in-house Java implementation (see your first reference) for codename "Sooner" before the iPhone was announced; they simply added touch screen support to that.

I think you may be right, and in that case, that fully explains why the first Android phones were so lackluster. That's even more depressing, btw, that means they took 20 months to add touch screen support.

Regarding your personal challenges to using a mac mini, you can screen share with them and run them headless. For initial setup/configuration, just about any reasonably modern TV would have functioned as the monitor.

When I started talking about viewport sizes, it should perhaps have been a giveaway that I wasn't talking about the desktop; for that, you just resize the window.

You were talking about viewport being important from the standpoint of safari running within it, or did I misunderstand? TBH, unless you're doing mobile / tablet development, I don't know why you'd need a specific set of devices.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Regarding your personal challenges to using a mac mini, you can screen share with them and run them headless. For initial setup/configuration, just about any reasonably modern TV would have functioned as the monitor.

At any rate, in 2014 when I bought the MBP, my choices for a Mini were either a used 2012 or a hobbled current model. I wanted smoetihng I wouldn't have to replace for the froeseeable future and I'm guessing your Mini is from before "the hobbling". For my use case, this MBP will die long before it will have outlived its useful life; a used 2 year old 2012 Mini would have set me back about $600 and who knows what abuse it saw that may lead to an early failure, then the prospect of replacing it with who knows what because the new Minis are junk... I'd have ended up with the $2300 machine sooner or later anyway and a client was extending an advance against the first month's billables anyway.

You were talking about viewport being important from the standpoint of safari running within it, or did I misunderstand?

Viewport as in the piel dimensions at which the page is rendered. On mobile devices, that is almost never the actual display resolution. If you're not familiar with this conept, check out viewportsizes.com; you migh be surprised by what you find out about various devices. For example, I just learned that Firefox on this 1920x1200 Yoga Book provides a 1088x507 viewport, while Chrome provides 1098x524.

TBH, unless you're doing mobile / tablet development, I don't know why you'd need a specific set of devices.

Because Safari on iOS doesn't generate click events in some cases, so one must be able to test in order to know where a tap or drag event might be needed. Literally only iOS has this problem.

And because Safari rendering engines differ between iOS and macOS which, of course, necessitates having an iOS device for each viewport you wish to target with a responsive design, as each device has a fixed (by the OS) viewport. This is less of a problem on Android, where Chrome and Firefox use their own engines and typically match what the desktop version does. Another reason I prefer Android, to be quite honest.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

At any rate, in 2014 when I bought the MBP, my choices for a Mini were either a used 2012 or a hobbled current model. I wanted smoetihng I wouldn't have to replace for the froeseeable future and I'm guessing your Mini is from before "the hobbling".

Yep, I bought 2012s when the nerfing was known. Refurbs are fine, too. I got the cheapest i7 quad configurations I could get, SSD replacements and more RAM made them quite useful, and they're quiet and pretty cool, which is important when you're sitting right next to them.

Viewport as in the piel dimensions at which the page is rendered.

Viewport, canvas, same thing. Yes, the browser's display space is always smaller than the screen resolution, on everything.

Because Safari on iOS doesn't generate click events in some cases, so one must be able to test in order to know where a tap or drag event might be needed. Literally only iOS has this problem. And because Safari rendering engines differ between iOS and macOS which, of course, necessitates having an iOS device for each viewport you wish to target with a responsive design, as each device has a fixed (by the OS) viewport. This is less of a problem on Android, where Chrome and Firefox use their own engines and typically match what the desktop version does. Another reason I prefer Android, to be quite honest.

OK, that's some new Interesting data. I have not run across the Safari click events issue in iOS. I have run into the Android GUI select control swallowing clicks, and the only way around that one is write your own or do some outright stupid hackery. Regarding the underlying engines, I was under the impression they were all different for mobile, primarily because of what you're limited to in the mobile realm. If you're referring to the ability to be "pixel perfect" I truly feel your pain. It's just not going to happen across all those browsers.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[BronsCon]

Viewport, canvas, same thing. Yes, the browser's display space is always smaller than the screen resolution, on everything.

I suggest you look at the link I posted so you can understand just what I am referring to. The canvas on an iPad Pro is way larger than the 1366x1024 viewport it provides; closer to double that, as a matter of fact. Obviously, the canvas will be the screen size minus any toolbars, window borders, and other decorations or controls; the viewport on a desktop is often identical to the canvas, while this is almost never the case on mobile.

This is what I do for a living, I'm damn good at it, but even still I have provided references and am not expecting you to simply take my word. At the very least, check the references before you discount what I'm saying, you might just learn something.

I have not run across the Safari click events issue in iOS.

Depending on the control or element being tapped on, you may get both a click and a tap event, or just a tap event; the fact that you either get tap or both (and never just click) precludes simply aliasing tap and click for every interaction, as it would trigger the ones that get both twice. That mean you have to alias where you get only the tap, but make sure not to alias where you get both, unless you only care about mobile users, in which case you can ignore clicks altogether, but I've never had a client not care about the desktop. Likewise with mousedown, mouseup, mouseenter, and mouseexit, you can count on drag events, but you may also get mouse events in iOS, so you can't just blindly alias.

Regarding the underlying engines, I was under the impression they were all different for mobile, primarily because of what you're limited to in the mobile realm.

That hasn't been the case for some time now. On every browser I've used in recent memory, except Safari, the rendering engines are the same; or at least close enough that neither I nor my clients have spotted any difference that required a tweak for mobile. The javascript engines sometimes differ; the iOS Safari javascript engine necessarily differs because iOS registers touch events instead of clicks, while macOS Safari does not. On Android browsers, tap and click are synonymous and the only time I've noticed different behavior in recent memory is when the desktop version updates and the update hasn't been approved by Google yet (e.g. different versions of the engine).

If you're referring to the ability to be "pixel perfect" I truly feel your pain.

That's often a requirement on the major browsers and yes, it's absolutely possible (and even easy if you can convince the client to limit to current versions of FF, Chrome, and Safari, IE11, and Edge). If you can't, you get the client to agree to an hourly rate for any other browsers they want to specify, or you pass up the job. I've never had to pass up a job (though I've had to start getting up from the table once) and those hourly invoices sure make a nice bonus.

Nothing erases pain like pay.

Re: It doesn't make sense to use Apple

[Gr8Apes]

At the very least, check the references before you discount what I'm saying, you might just learn something.

Oh, I don't discount what you're saying. And I see what those links say falls in line with my experiences. The "canvas" being larger is somewhat irrelevant in my experience, I'm only concerned about the viewable real estate. It's obvious you delve in areas I don't tread.

Depending on the control or element being tapped on, ...

Yes, all of that makes sense and would be what I'd expect. I understand it makes life harder for what you're doing, but I fully get why it works that way.

Regarding the underlying engines, I was under the impression they were all different for mobile, primarily because of what you're limited to in the mobile realm.

That hasn't been the case for some time now. On every browser I've used in recent memory, except Safari, the rendering engines are the same; or at least close enough that neither I nor my clients have spotted any difference that required a tweak for mobile. The javascript engines sometimes differ; the iOS Safari javascript engine necessarily differs because iOS registers touch events instead of clicks, while macOS Safari does not.

So the difference in Safari is primarily attributable to the additional interface options available, and the fact that they're not easily dropped back to desktop equivalents. You're also basing your statement on the external behavior of the engine, not the actual engine. I haven't had to dig into those, so I can't speak definitively on whether they're the same or different, but I'd hazard a guess that they are likely to be different.

If you're referring to the ability to be "pixel perfect" I truly feel your pain.

That's often a requirement on the major browsers and yes, it's absolutely possible (and even easy if you can convince the client to limit to current versions of FF, Chrome, and Safari, IE11, and Edge). If you can't, you get the client to agree to an hourly rate for any other browsers they want to specify, or you pass up the job. I've never had to pass up a job (though I've had to start getting up from the table once) and those hourly invoices sure make a nice bonus.

I can tell you I design and work to HTML standards and use Safari/Firefox/Chrome, and then throw it to the testers for MS. If it's broken in MS, well, first we decide if it is MS being broken or not. Usually, our set of standards we work to means MS is broken.

I don't do pixel perfect because usually those people that want that also want exact color matching for their images. I had one customer that was griping about how an image looked different on 1024 x 768 monitor than on a 4K monitor, because it became fuzzy, and then the color shift was a whole different topic. Led to a discussion about people viewing the world through rose tinted glasses. But they were willing to pay.

Re:iPod WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

All the touch iPods are basically iPhones without the modem.

What scanner?

[Dan East]

So they took a sleek consumer device and strapped an aftermarket 3rd party barcode scanner onto it and wondered why the hardware behaved like a big kludge?

Re:What scanner?

[jedidiah]

> So they took a sleek consumer device and strapped an aftermarket 3rd party barcode scanner onto it and wondered why the hardware behaved like a big kludge?

Suuure. A PC with a peripheral attached is a "big kludge".

Re:What scanner?

[redmid17]

An iPod is not a touch is not a PC. Kinda wondering why they didn't give it a power-supply case but I don't know if that's possible because of the barcode scanner. If an app could not have sufficed, I am guessing that inadequate testing went into entire process anyway. Android has been far more open with third party accessories and apps than Apple devices -- I say this as an owner of both but a user of primarily iPod/iPhone tech. I really really hope that Target is bothering to test. Many of my clients never bother to.

I develop develop/enable mobile barcode scanning for a few platforms as a developer, so this is not a subject I'm alien to. There is a very good chance that the app they use is less stable or more power intensive than the ones I develop for. Then again, that would just go back to shitty testing (much to my surprise).

Re:What scanner?

[93 Escort Wagon]

I have to wonder if they're also worried about the iPod touches being EOLed in the near future, given the product hasn't been updated in over two years - and the rest of the iPod line was axed two months ago.

Re: What scanner?

[zaphirplane]

The summary says they are porting their apps to android. The sequence could be develop some bad iOS apps that don't work blame iOS and move to android ;)

Re:What scanner?

[LS1 Brains]

iPod in a scanner sled actually works really well, right up to the point the battery swells or wears out. Then you yank the iPod out of the sled, and waste time sending someone to the Apple store to swap out the entire device since Apple's battery replacement program is really an $80 device replacement program. Then the devices come back to IT for provisioning and reassembly, and finally back on the warehouse floor.

This is what we're faced with today in our business as well. The iPod in a sled has worked incredibly well from a software and manageability standpoint, it's the batteries that are kicking our butts. We typically wait until a half dozen or so units are dead before we waste a half day sending someone to sit around the Apple store. The cost doesn't make me happy, it's not huge dollars but those are unnecessarily spent dollars. As such, I'm about to kick off development of our new order picking system, and I am going with generic Android devices with user replaceable batteries for this very reason.

Re:What scanner?

[Ayano]

It's also not a 3rd party scanner. They're developed by symbol technologies which was acquired by Motorola Solutions which was then acquired by Zebra Technologies hence making it 1st party.

Re: iPod WTF?

[that this is not und]

Apparently an iPod Touch.

This change must eliminate the last practical reason for the iPod Touch to exist.

Disclaimer: I used to own and really liked my iPod Touch 3rd gen.

You can see the improvement already

[SlaveToTheGrind]

"The current iOS my devices we have all sorts of issues"

Apparently the Android grammar checker ain't so hot.

Re: You can see the improvement already

[Anonymous Coward]

"my device" is internal Target jargon for the tool. The old hardware was called a PDA and to distinguish the iPods and now Androids from the old PDA hardware someone decided to call them a "my device". They also brilliantly decided to name all the apps on it with "my" as a prefix.

Also when the switch was made to the iOS devices there was no decent business grade Android or Windows equivelant. So choosing iOS wasn't such a bad idea. And, most development was done using HTML5 and phone gap. So conversion shouldn't be too hard for most apps.

Honestly...

[XSportSeeker]

It's for specific cases like these that I wanted to see Linux distros getting a true, solid working mobile commercial version with continuous support and enterprise/business adoption...
And yes, I know Android is based on a Linux kernel, but I'm talking more like Ubuntu Mobile expanding and going forward, or something else.

Because honestly, I'm not sure how much replacing iOS devices with Android devices in cases like these will help. Fanboyism aside, Android devices have as many if not more potential problems in comparison to Apple stuff, particularly in business and enterprise scenarios.

Connection issues, scanner issues? Android devices also have those. Replaceable batteries? Perhaps the company they closed a deal with (Zebra) still has devices with replaceable batteries, but this is clearly going away on Android devices in general... I think the last flagship phone that had it was the LG V20, and the update to it (V30 released recently) is sealed with no easy replacement for battery. Not even cheaper phones or phones with alternative markets (active lines, rugged lines, etc) are coming with the option anymore.

They'll eventually have to go with external battery cases and whatnot.

How would a Linux mobile help? Well, I guess it really depends how the whole implementation would work really... and it wouldn't be easy. But it'd really be best not to get tied to Google or Apple for cases like those, to have an OS that could be installed in multiple mobile configurations, to have access to code to configure it down to devices' specific functions, etc etc.

When you are on iPods, iPads, iPhones, or Android devices you are basically running a whole bunch of useless crap on top of the software you really need for sales floors and warehouse management. Not to talk about privacy and security worries, the world could really use right now an alternative to big corporation devices for tasks like these.

And I'm no Linux fanatic myself... Android phone user and Windows 10 desktop here. It's just that I think the lack of competition in this area is bringing a whole lot of problems recently.

Re:Honestly...

[chuckugly]

At least w/ Android they have a chance of getting a custom device with some or all of that built in. It's possible to get some pretty specialized Android devices as a mere consumer, for instance a rugged phone with FLIR camera is available, as are rugged phones with integrated 2-way shortwave radios.

Re: Honestly...

[that this is not und]

Whichever hardware Target standardises on, I would bet they make sure it's robust and comes with assurance of future upgrades. If necessary. Remember, these things are built into a closed retail ecosystem. I doubt that employees are allowed to install bad Candy Crush clones from the Play Store.

Re:Honestly...

[sgunhouse]

We use Zebra handhelds at Wal-mart, though not that model (ours are MC-40 and TC-70 models). They have a built-in camera-based scanner and removable batteries. We've used the MC-40 for over a year, the TC-70 for a bit less, and they seem reliable. Once in a while the scanner stops working after waking from sleep and you need to reboot to get it to work, but other than that I've had no issues with them. They are locked down to the point I can't say which version of Android they use, but I know it is Android. (Not being in an IT role I don't have Admin rights on the devices.) They do work better than our old devices which ran some version of Windows Mobile on them.

Re: Honestly...

[crankyspice]

Whichever hardware Target standardises on, I would bet they make sure it's robust and comes with assurance of future upgrades. If necessary. Remember, these things are built into a closed retail ecosystem.

Oh, okay then. What could possibly go wrong?

Re:Honestly...

[nnull]

I use Android devices to do inventory control. Honeywell just released their Android based scanner (CK75). They work great. I don't see why they would have a problem in the business or enterprise world (Considering there's a lot of enterprise inventory control software for Android already). I've had Windows CE based scanners, that were always freaking terrible. They were never good to begin with. It was so bad, I didn't even bother wanting to write software for it, just made my own telnet interface for the scanners. I'm so GLAD TO BE RID OF THEM and put an end to Telnet and all the sales guys telling me this is the industry standard for inventory control (Go fuck yourself guys, you know who you are, trying to get me to buy licenses to use fucking telnet).

I've tried inventory control with Apple tablets (To get away from those dreaded Windows CE scanners) and it was ok, but you guys have no idea how fragile those Apple devices really are and it doesn't matter what robust case you buy for them. The only big problem I had with them was managing multiple devices (I'm sure there is software for it, didn't bother to look) and also being tempted to upgrade whenever a new IOS version comes out (Then my software stops working!). Unfortunately, there are no Apple devices with long range scanners. Usually best I could do was about 6-10 feet distance with a QR Code.

Then Honeywell showed up with their Android based scanner and I loved it. I've already built my own software for android a while back (Was thinking of using Android phones before) and it worked absolutely perfect with it. Honeywell made a robust Android device for industrial use, you can literally throw that thing up against a concrete wall and it still works. Upgrading or downgrading is not a problem. Remote access to the devices is not a problem. Maintaining these devices remotely isn't a problem, as there are plenty of software for it. Connection Issues? Absolutely no connection issues here. The Wifi supports roaming with commercial/enterprise WIFI networks and zero problems scanning. The thing I love about them? VOIP support so they're basically like walkie talkies for everyone. These Android scanners are definitely light years better than what is considered "Industry Standard" and "Enterprise". Are they exactly what I wanted? No, but better than the crap that used to be before it. My guys held a party throwing away all the Motorola/Symbol/Zebra scanners into the trashcan, that's how hated they are.

Seeing Target switch to Android, doesn't surprise me at all. All their Apple tablets are probably all beat up and cracked like mine were. Target probably didn't want to move back to hell with Windows CE Devices. It's a no brainer. For Android, the software is there already if you need it and now the robust devices are too.

Now, I would really welcome a Linux based version and would back it right away, but unfortunately none of the big players bother with it. I don't particularly favor Android as I'm continuously starting to dislike Google more, but so far the devices I'm using do exactly what I need without issues.

Re:Honestly...

[thegarbz]

This!. Linux changes nothing. Android is already quite open enough when you don't need to rely on Google Play services. The whole point is that special purpose devices can be made for Android, but not for iOS. Switching to Linux changes nothing about this.

Re:Honestly...

[Pascoea]

Connection issues, scanner issues? Android devices also have those. Replaceable batteries? Perhaps the company they closed a deal with (Zebra) still has devices with replaceable batteries, but this is clearly going away on Android devices in general...

It's in the summary, Zebra TC51It's a $1,500 purpose built device with a built in barcode reader and replaceable batteries. This isn't a toy, it's a purpose built device.

Re:Honestly...

[Pascoea]

My wife has similar experience. She hated the old windows based scanners. But from what I can tell the MC-40s are slow, all the managers fight over the TC-70s. And the MC-40s don't work inside the coolers. (Or something like that. Wasn't paying super close attention)

Re: Honestly...

[Pascoea]

but it gets pricey to outfit every employee in a Big box store with one when you are looking at a quarter million dollars per store for $10/hr grunts.

A couple of points though. Not every employee gets one, usually just the department managers. You're not talking 100 devices for every store, probably closer to 20.

And with how hard they push their employees it's not just about their labor rate, but the ability to get their jobs done. Can't scan the "outs" because your consumer grade phone died/broke? Now you've missed the order deadline and your going another 4 days without all of that product. There are dozens examples where the lost opportunity cost of a down device outweighs the cost of the device. There is a lot to be said for devices that "just work", and while consumer device reliability is pretty decent these days there just isn't comparison to to commercial or industrial grade stuff.

Re:Honestly...

[sgunhouse]

We have had wifi hotspots inside the cooler and freezer for years - even before we got the MC-40s. The old Telxon didn't work in the cooler or freezer before that (and I did). Each department supervisor is allocated a TC-70, ours shares it with us if she isn't using it (as the MC-40s tend to go quick; being 2nd shift I would never get one).

There's still an iPod Touch?

[darthsilun]

It seems there is. Who knew. A phone, but without the phone. What year is this?

Re:There's still an iPod Touch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, I forgot, Apple users are accustomed to tossing their devices after a year or two.

Re: There's still an iPod Touch?

[that this is not und]

I had an iPod Touch for awhile. I did not need or want a cellphone. In this day and age, it would make more sense to buy an inexpensive no-contract Android phone at Walmart for $30-50 and just never activate it. The Touches have always featured significantly degraded components (displsy, camera, etc.) than their iPhone of the same generation , so it would be nuts to spend three figures on a Touch to hand to your kid in today.

Re: There's still an iPod Touch?

[lactose99]

Even better

https://www.motorola.com/us/pr...

No phone contract to worry about and cheaper than a iTouch

Happening this Friday ...

[CaptainDork]

... and it will be a Black day.

"Target experienced a system-wide breach of credit card numbers over the Black Friday holiday shopping season..."

Re:Happening this Friday ...

[Art Challenor]

Might want to check the permissions on the Target Android App if you're worried about breaches. Requires just about every permission on the phone (I don't remember the entire list, it was long and I think it included contacts and camera - someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

Target has a good consumer site

[chromaexcursion]

When I'm looking for something at Target, I go to their web site, and I can find the isle location where I can find it. Once I showed what I had to a Target employee helping me. They were amazed at the detail I was able to access. Along with a few other larger retailers, they've built a good site.

Re:Target has a good consumer site

[redmid17]

How many isle locations do they have? I wouldn't mind leaving on an island with a Target

Re:Target has a good consumer site

[wyHunter]

Like Hawaii?

Single source is the way to go in real life

[mveloso]

In real life companies single source, because (1) in real life they single source stuff anyway, (2) they're buying a solution not a technology, and (3) single sourcing is a guarantee that everything works together.

The fact is, the vendor is choosing the underlying hardware, which is probably white label that's factory-direct. Target chose the vendor for its end-to-end solution. Target doesn't really give a shit what hardware the vendor is using, as long as it fulfills the requirements.

Re:Single source is the way to go in real life

[Anonymous Coward]

In real life companies single source.

really? what vendor even does that any more? please name a company that makes both servers and software

IBM, HP, Oracle are all dying

Re:Single source is the way to go in real life

[fred6666]

You confuse single source and vertical integration. They are not the same.

Re:Single source is the way to go in real life

[thegarbz]

In real life companies single source, because (1) in real life they single source stuff anyway, (2) they're buying a solution not a technology, and (3) single sourcing is a guarantee that everything works together.

You missed the point. It's not about single sourcing, it's about locking yourself into whole source change and becoming dependent on a vendor. To address your points:
1. They will do this anyway, they are just switching to a platform that allows them to move if a vendor doesn't play along.
2. Depends on the company. It looks like they are developing the solution themselves, and even if they aren't they are more likely to find solution providers on an open multi-vendor platform.
3. You just made me laugh, cry, and throw up all at the same time. It's not a guarantee, it's not even a slightly higher probability. In fact, I'd wager it's probably a lower probability, because nothing screams quality and keeping your customer happy like the comfort of knowing they are locked into your ecosystem and would need to spend a lot of money to change.

I hope you realise what you said and feel shame for having said it, especially given we are talking about abandoning the single source precisely because none of point 3 happened.

Dear Store Manager:

[magusxxx]

"...a former store manager wrote that "the iPod hardware they used as on the floor scanners for employees died quickly and there was no way of swapping in new batteries"

And how many employees were reprimanded for not plugging them in to recharge? A similar situation happened at a store close to me. A friend said the morning/afternoon shifts would screw around and not recharge devices. Leaving the night crew having to wait their turn for the only remaining device working. Why was this happening?....

1) No one plugged it in to recharge.
2) The recharge cord wasn't plugged in because the employee removed it so they could recharge their own phone. (Hey, Pokemon Go takes up a lot of juice during an eight hour shift. And no, I'm not kidding. This was actually being done by the same employees who were also [see #1 & #3].
3) When they were fully charged the powerstrip would be turned off. And then forgotten to be turned on again. In order to save energy. "Also turn the lights off when you leave the room." Even though people are in and out all day. And it take more power to turn it on/off 30x then it would use if you just left it on.

Also you notice managers won't lose their iPhones.You know, the ones they probably use for Pokemon Go. ;)

Customization

[iamacat]

Android is open source, so there is an endless choice of form factors, ruggedized devices, battery sizes, hardware like built in barcode/RFID scanners... Surprises it took that long. Target probably doesn't need Google apps on their devices, so they can strip down the OS for security/abuse protection and run on really inexpensive hardware without much RAM or flash.

Apple closed ecosystems seems a weird choice

[swb]

Apple's closed ecosystem devices seem like a weird choice for this purpose. Apple are famously uncooperative about hardware and software functions they don't approve of and their support systems is highly oriented towards individual consumers.

Am I missing something about their flexibility in industrial markets? This mostly seems like the device being chosen because someone in management thinks the user interface is easy and their staff might be familiar with it, not that it's an otherwise good technical choice for its purpose.

I had exposure to a client who was using iPod touches as part of some shipping assembly line and it was nothing but problems.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Apple too expensive for masses

[Pascoea]

Too bad the devices referenced in the summary start at $1,500 a pop. The joys of commercial/industrial grade equipment. While I agree with your sentiment, schools buying iPads is football-bat level stupid, this is more of a "consumer grade equipment doesn't work well in a commercial environment, news at 11" kind of story.

Buzz driven IT

[ilsaloving]

That's what happens when you make infrastructure decisions based on shiny things and buzz, rather than evaluating actual needs.

Why the hell would you use an Apple device (or more accurately, ANY device with a non-removable battery) for tasks that routinely require constant use throughout the day, every day.

I can't speak to the rest of their problems, but if the rest of their system was as poorly thought out as the battery aspect, then I'm not surprised they're running into issues.

This isn't an Apple problem. This is a management problem that resulted in a shoddy implementation. But naturally, people are going to go Nelson HA HA cause Apple "failed to perform".