Emails, Calendars - they use standard protocols. You can use any email client to get the data off
Photos - you just plug your phone into your computer and copy the files.
Disposable electronics - seeing that Apple is releasing iOS 12 for the iPhone 5s released in 2012, how do you figure? How many Android phones from 2015 let alone 2012 are still getting updates? Sure the phone is easy to repair - I just take it to the Apple Store.
That's a false comparison.
A disposable device is one where the preferred method of service is replacement rather than repair. And probably where replaced parts are discarded or recycled rather than refurbished.
It has nothing to do with support of the hardware or software.
It's evident that the new versions of iOS are not optimized or very well supported on older hardware. You could argue that Apple's support of OS upgrades on older devices is primarily to avoid having to support old versions of the OS.
The disposable / non disposable distinction doesn’t really make sense. On a long enough time horizon, everything is disposable. And it’s not like you can’t replace anything on an iPhone or Mac - you can replace things like screens, storage, memory, keyboards and so on.
Apple and others have convinced people that they need to upgrade to the latest and greatest device each year. Because if they don't then it negatively impacts Apple's revenue and stock price.
> Almost no one actually wants a phone or computer that lasts twice as long but is bulky and requires maintenance.
That's a false dichotomy, you're assuming that in order for a computer to have a modular or maintenance friendly design, that it has to be big and bulky. Lenovo doesn't seem to have any problems producing laptops with similar dimensions to Apple's that are almost entirely modular.
> The disposable / non disposable distinction doesn’t really make sense. On a long enough time horizon, everything is disposable.
That same logic can be used to invalidate pretty much everything. The distinct makes perfect sense when framed within the usable life of the device. I have a 3rd generation iPod Touch going on a decade old that still works, are you saying I should just throw it away because it's more than a year old?
> you can replace things like screens, storage, memory, keyboards and so on.
Putting aside the fact that Apple doesn't permit most of those upgrades and that they don't actually sell most of those parts.
On which devices specifically can you upgrade storage, memory and keyboards?
On all iOS devices since ever, and on all the MacBooks since 2016 the storage and memory are soldered directly to the motherboard. They are non user serviceable parts.
The keyboards on all Macbooks with butteryfly keys are riveted to the aluminum unibody so a keyboard replacement is literally replacing half the machine.
On the Mac Pro they keyboard and mouse are the only things you can upgrade.
So Apple “convinces” people that they need the latest products because they introduce better products every year? Even though they also are releases the latest OS for all iPhones back to 2012?
I know for a fact that any device that can at least run iOS 5 - devices back to 2010 can still download older versions of apps directly from the App Store. If your device isn’t compatible with the newest version, you are given the option to download “the last compatible version”.
memory -- 27" iMacs storage -- seeing that Thunderbolt is more than fast enough to handle external memory, all Macs. keyboards -- Mac Mini, iMac, MacPro.
What laptops allow you to update keyboards?
ThinkPads, for example.
I don't know about you, but I don't feel like throwing $1000 once a year to have latest and greatest. I did went through several phones but that's only because they became unusable with time as applications required more and more resources.
We eventually got phones that are powerful enough to last for longer and even the mid range phones are no longer crappy.
This is why the revenue of companies producing phones dropped recently. Most people don't want to change their device that often.
The revenue of phone companies (except for Apple) haven't been great since Android became popular. There is no differentiation except for price and all of the other manufacturers are in a race to the bottom -- it happens in all commoditized markets -- PC's, TVs, etc.
Android phones are indeed as bad or worse than Apple with regard to lifespan, but this was a trend that Apple started. A Nokia 3310 purchased in 2000 would still work fine today. Apple would even like to see something as simple and universal as a headphone jack disappear in order to regularly sell new headphones (!)
A Nokia 3310 would be a 2G GSM phone. Both GSM carriers in the US have turned off 2G support.
If you wanted, there is nothing stopping you from using an iPhone 3G released in 2008. In fact, I have a first gen iPad. You can still download older versions of Netflix, Hulu, Spotify etc and they still work.
Seeing that you can still buy standard Bluetooth headphones from anywhere and an adapter comes in the box. There is nothing stopping you from using third party headphones.
The internal filesystem layout used by photos is not intended to be manually browsed, it is non-trivial and undocumented. I might be able to recover the original jpg files, but any metadata such as organisation structure, tags, albums is locked up in proprietary closed formats. They offer an export function which gets you the jpgs, but not much else.
> there is nothing stopping you from using an iPhone 3G released in 2008
Security for one. Apple and Google have both built an extremely complex phone OS that needs constant patching to even remain "reasonably secure".
> you can still buy standard Bluetooth headphones
My concern is longevity, simplicity and sound quality. I would not want to use bluetooth.
What “tags”? The photos app doesn’t support tagging.
Exactly what exploits do you expect to have on an iPhone 3G? Keyloggers? Viruses? Data exfiltration apps?
An exploit means that someone can remotely gain permanent control over your iPhone, including the ability to record conversations and/or initiate activity on your behalf. iOS exploits have been possible via SMS/MMS and WiFi, so even turning off Web and Email won't make it secure.
This is a major inconvenience for me since my photo library is spread around multiple SSDs and NAS. In Lightroom, I just tell it where different photos are.
In Photos App, if you want your photos to sync to iCloud, you need to copy them. This increases size of your Photos Library file. You can choose to Optimize storage but then you have one point of failure (iCloud).
Right now, I use rsync to backup my photos to onsite NAS. And then I use Google Drive and iCloud for offsite backup. Google Drive works with photos where ever they are, SSD, NAS, etc. But iDrive needs all photos in Photos app to sync.
BTW iDrive and Google Drive are not true backup solutions, so be careful if that is your only “backup” solution.
Last time I checked, it was a bundle, which is just a folder, and you can browse it easily by right clicking and picking Show Package Contents. Both originals and modified images are readily available, and Photos stores some metadata (even tags) straight in the EXIF part.
I was talking about the OSX "photos app" - an iPhone typically won't have enough storage to hold all photos at once, so doesn't seem like the best way to transfer photos away from iCloud.
What does the iPhone not having space to store all of your photos have to do with using iCloud?
Because iCloud is a big part of their lock-in strategy. The issue is not about transferring a few photos adhoc from a phone. It is about having potentially terabytes of family movies and photos stored and organised on iCloud. Like I said, there is a financial incentive for them to make it difficult for people to move away. There is no easy way to transfer everything off, including all metadata.
It's pretty well supported?
Ive personally used the export / archive features of iCloud when i went from iOS to android. the longest part was waiting for the pics / vids to download from icloud and upload to google drive.
I even exported stuff out of google's ecosystem and back into iCloud when I moved back. This was a month or two ago.
I know many many years ago I had issues with iCloud, but that was before they fixed / improved their web interface (and everything else).
I don't have a problem with any of this stuff, but Apple is hardly a just a scaled up lemonade stand. They are just Google and Facebook but better at brand image.
The content producers have choices.
- they can force you to pay for content outside of the App Store (Spotify, Amazon)
- they can allow you to pay for content either in the App Store at a higher price or outside of the App Store at s lower price (CBS All Access)
- they can allow you to buy content in or out of the App Store for the same price (Udemy, Hulu, Netflix).
As far as “intercepting your text messages”, they are end to end encrypted where neither Apple nor your carriers can see the messages. Unlike Google’s latest text messaging app.
But as a user, I know my transaction cost - the price I pay to Apple. With Google and Facebook, the price is tracking, embedded ads, crapware (in the case of Android phones), etc.
How many people knew that third parties can get information about you if your friends sign up to something?
Granted, there are some aspects of Apple hardware that can still be repaired/replaced by third-parties, but their trend is away from this.
not quite 15 years though, so I guess OP is right...
Apple's competitive edge isn't just its hardware, just as Google's competitive edge isn't just its software. Apple has decades of user research, hoards of talent, piles and piles of IP (patents etc.), mountains of cash and, yep, you bet they have data, huge warehouses of it. We haven't even mentioned the app-store ecosystem.
You are about as able to compete with Apple as you are with Google et al. It's a different kind game, but make no mistake, taking on Apple isn't as simple as cloning their hardware.
Even with the growth in services (this doesn't reflect the recent quarters numbers), the hardware sales just dominate their numbers by so much.
That giant slice of blue is composed of people who say, "But Android phones are for poor people! Of course I'll spend $1000 on a phone I'll use 1-2 years!"
I'm sure "I'm a fool" for using the vendor-supplied crapware and not doing a fresh reinstall and rebuild with this one custom kernel XXX_sw33tH4x_69 put on that forum that uses gcc -03 optimizations, but no, I don't think Androids are for poor people per se, they're just for the same people who thought buying a Wintel laptop in '08 was a good decision. Yeah, it might work out of the box, and you might get "support" from your vendor for the next 6 months, but only if you're lucky. You also might get spyware, adware, and shitware that crashes and makes your CPU's heat up your living room 24/7/365. You never know.
Androids are either for people who don't care, or for people who really really know what they're doing and can wipe/clean the OS - same people who bother with Linux at home because they like to tinker. I'm a tinkerer, so I get it, and it's why I have Androids - I'd just never depend on one.
Otherwise - I have no idea why anyone would bother. I'll take that new IPhone for $1000 now, thanks.
I'm on my 5th Android, and I've had awful, mediocre and very good experiences.
I currently own a Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 and it's a fantastic device and will continue buying Xiaomi in the future.
I also have a company-issued Samsung Galaxy S8 for work and it's also pretty good (though I don't use it nearly as much as the Xiaomi). I was burned by the Samsung Galaxy Ace though (very crappy).
If you have enough money and like the best out of the box experience and don't like tweaking, iPhones are probably your best bet.
But, loading crapware will go on, and nice phones will always be expensive so I think Apple is in great shape long term.
I don’t fear Google one bit. I fear the out-of-control US military which has access, at will, to all of Google’s data, with or without a court order, should they ever desire it strongly enough.
They cause enough damage to the industry by being crazy bent on lock-in. They are even worse than MS in this. And with more money, that damage will be only worse.
The damage will be simply passed to other users in the form of lock-in tax that developers will need to compensate. It's all interdependent.
But Apple is making enough user hostiles moves (raising prices, suppressing features, nagging for paid services, etc) that I beliebe in the long term their margin and market share will erode.
But by then I guess they just sell it to Google or Facebook.
So nope. No way that they go away...
1) Apple tries a lot harder to not collect data at all, and when they have to, they try to aggressively anonymise it.
2) Apple doesn't leverage your data as a product. The furthest you could go would be to say that they leverage your data to make more of their products seem attractive to you.
It's Facebook, Google and all the others sitting on mounds of personal and extremely detailed data (including geopositioning) that scare me.
Edit, to expand on the above:
If you could copy Apple's tech, you could (theoretically) make an iPhone-clone.
Copying Facebook's or Google's technology won't get you much because to be truly effective, it needs a lot of data. Which is why you can find some of their prime technology on GitHub, I guess (eg: TensorFlow).
And they are so far ahead of the pack with regards to collected data, I don't see how they could ever be caught up with.