> Also, annoyingly, Apple hasn't reintroduced fingerprint scanners (TouchID) to their phones like some others have, while at the same time FaceID continues not to work with face masks on.

It seems that manufacturers are hesitant to include both for some reason, and in this (false?) dichotomy I would still prefer IR-based face unlock over fingerprint-based unlock. Facial recognition is admittedly inconvenient in a period of mask-wearing while in public (precisely when phone locks and efficient unlocking seem most beneficial IMO), but for all of the times when I'm not wearing a mask, I definitely much prefer it over fingerprint scanners for the invariance to hand position and environmental elements. Fingers that are either wet or overly dry seem to trip up scanners in my experience, and needing to touch the phone can be inconvenient in and of itself while cooking, wearing gloves, etc.

Except when I can unlock my iPhone 7 when it's lying down on the table away from me, by touching the home button, without the need to be facing it head-on, to be in the FaceID sensor's field of view.

I know the advantages of Faceid, but for me it's more of a step back in many ways and it's not like Apple couldn't have put the touchId sensor behind the screen like every Android phone has been doing it for the last 4 years or so.

It's absurd that the devices they make you have to sit in front of to use, the laptops and iMac have TouchID yet the devices you can use laying beside you in bed, on a table or rotated have FaceID.

Sure, I definitely agree that these situations can be problems. As a counterpoint, as in my GP comment, the devices with FaceID are also the ones at which I'm least likely to have clean and available hands. For instance, I might be cooking with hands covered in wet dough, I might be wearing gloves due to the cold, my hands might be wet from rain, or my hands might be dry due in part to winter.

How good are those under-the-display sensors from a security standpoint? If Apple had a blunder like that Samsung fingerprint reader that was fooled by a gel phone case they'd never live it down, meanwhile nobody really cares about the security level of Android phones (IIRC there are no Android phones with an actually secure face unlock, the random spot IR blaster is one reason that Apple can't get rid of the notch like Android phones can)

This is fair. I doubt most Android phone's fingerprint sensor isn't secure as iPhone. Still Apple sell iPad and MacBook with TouchID so they can implement them for iPhone without degrading security.

The current iPhone SE (2nd generation, 2020) has TouchID, so there doesn't seem to be a higher threshold of biometric security required by Apple as compared to similar Android brands. There are also Android phones that still offer standard (not in-display) fingerprint sensors.

Yeah there should be nothing (but cost/supply) prohibiting them from implementing the power button touch sensor that the iPads have.

The Pixel 4 has actual IR-based facial recognition, which is why it has a top bezel. I’m indifferent between that and the notch chosen by Apple, having owned both.

It makes sense that Google would bother to do it right! Thanks for the correction.

Certainly. As I said, it seems like a false dichotomy perhaps dictated by cost, and Android manufacturers are also guilty of this in transitioning to fingerprints only (in-display or otherwise) on many newer models.

Both is hit and miss, but in current pandemic situation, lack of auth method without unwearing mask in new 2021 phone is a serious defeat. (Technically buying Apple Watch is an option, but wear and charge everyday for just auth?) As a asian, I argue that Apple is now enemy for publich health. It's good to have both.

It's that but it's also that their phones are only seeing incremental updates. I bought a iPhone 11 Pro Max almost 2 years ago, when the 12 came out I looked at it and decided to skip the upgrade, my 11 was almost identical. Now that the 13 is out I'm saying the same thing, skip to the next one because there aren't enough changes.

I think the "keep your phone for 2 years" is a thing of the past now. Back in the late 2000's and 2010's I remember when phones made massive leaps every year. The iPhone 3G was awesome until the 3GS came along and blew it out of the water, when the iPhone 4 came out it blew the 3GS out of the water. Back then upgrading to new devices carried some major benefits. The 3GS wasn't just "faster" than the "3G", it was very noticeably faster.

Nowdays thought, I can pick up a iPhone 13 and compare it to my iPhone 11. The 13 has better cameras, better battery life, and is more powerful. But it's not 3G -> 3GS powerful, when I picked up a 3GS for the first time I was blown away how much better it was than my 3G. When I looked at the iPhone 13 the other day I was hard pressed to find areas where it was better than my iPhone 11.

That's exactly the boat I'm in now. I really, really want an iPhone 13 mini because I'm tired of the big ass XS. But other than a more reasonably-sized phone, what do I get? Better cameras? Is that worth the $800? Is that worth giving up the nice, pricey Official Apple Leather Wallet Case(tm) for the XS that's just now getting a little worn in? I don't need a faster processor. More battery life would be nice, but not critical. As much as I try to talk myself into it, I just can't tell myself that the iPhone 13 will do $SOMETHING so much better than my current phone that it is worth upgrading.

A lot of it has to do with the points _fat_santa brings up, and the points I laid out above, but a lot of it also probably has to do with the fact that I'm kinda over phones, too.

I'm still on a Nokia 6.1, it still does everything I want in a phone and still gets security updates.

£160 for 3 years is a good deal.

Most phone companies take care cameras too much but not for other specs. That's why I jumped to Galaxy Z Fold3. Big screen on my pocket is drastic improvement in a decade.

And iPhones get software updates for a really long time. The original SE can upgrade to iOS 15 for example.

I suspect that Broadcom is the issue and people are just covering their ass by mentioning TI.

TI owns fabs. They can prioritize Apple if they want and Apple would be throwing money at them to do so.

Broadcom doesn't own fabs and the AFEM is very unique in packaging as well as fabrication. That's likely to be the bottleneck.

However, here is the list of chips in the iPhone 13: https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+13+Pro+Full+Chip+ID/1449...

The chips that are most likely to snag would be anything from a fabless company on an advanced node.

For Broadcom/LSI raid controllers, we were told 52 week lead time. Broadcom is definitely having issues

> (especially at current iPhone 13 price points)?

iPhone prices have been fairly steady for the "regular" models:

* https://www.gsmarena.com/price_history_of_apples_iphones-new...

Apple did introduce 'flagship' models with the iPhone X, but the same year they also had the iPhone 8 which was on the same trend line as the iPhones 4S to 7.

And to speak of the "iPhone 13" is kind of vague: you have the 13 mini 128GB at US$ 700, and the 13 Pro Max 1TB at $1600. On introduction, the 3G 16GB was $700 and the 4S 64GB was $850:

* http://www.asymco.com/2021/09/21/the-most-important-iphone-e...

Also worth remembering that depending on how you value inflation, $700 in 2008 when the iPhone 3G launched is somewhat over $800 now.

A more interesting question to me would be how the average buyer's cellular plan has shifted over that time — people tend to focus on the phone prices but not the greater monthly service charges.

Countered with the deflation of getting more capabilities for the dollar. Even a current lower-tier iPhone is much more capable than many flagships from a few years ago—never mind things that weren't even dreamt of, like 1TB of storage.

What enterprises order the latest flagship day and date of release in bulk without even going through IT department evaluation and test? My company, blue chip finance, currently issues the SE which does have a fingerprint scanner, so they do still offer that option.

> day and date of release

Doesn't have to be day and date of release for apple to learn that they don't want to upgrade.

Most enterprise customers have customer management teams at apple and like, so they can easily learn that company [x,y,z] may not buy full fleet upgrades (or even partial fleet) and downscale manufacturing.

I bet that chip fab costs are high right now. If apple knows they can slow production down until next spring, they may chose to do that to save money.

Most of them?

Without any lag at all for IT department test and certification? No, and generally if you want a flagship you get it on BYOD terms because at that level people have different preferences for form factor and features.

Anyway the long wait times for devices make it pretty obvious this is a supply issue, not a demand issue.

What value is "certification" from random IT of apple or samsung devices? Pure CYA.

Totally, it certainly wouldn't have anything to do with verifying all the apps required by the business still work correctly and updating helpdesk documentation for tech illiterate user support.

All the companies I have been at allowed their employees to get the latest iPhone as a work phone when they were released. The IT department had no say in that.

At senior level you can sometimes buy it BYOD and expense it, but the market dynamics of that are the same as personal purchases and people will get whatever specific model they prefer. That's very different from enterprise IT department and fleet phone ordering, which is where the real numbers are.

Real numbers…of iPhones? No, the real numbers are what people buy for themselves.

I don't have numbers but while maybe in the SV bubble iPhones are given to employees en masse, the more typical pattern is people just buy their own phones and the company may reimburse some amount of monthly mobile fees.

I worked for a company that had management performance bonuses linked to moving 90%+ of users from firm supplied handset and plans onto byod.

I work at an MSP that acts "IT department" for the SME segment. We also sell phones, laptops, desktops and peripherals. Our customers always get iPhones, the seniors always gets the latest and greatest iPhone.

This is in Sweden where we're taxed about 50% (I make 50% of what my employer pays for me), this might make us give away iPhones to employees like it's nothing.

Think of this: Employment tax, 30%, income tax 30%, value added tax for goods, 25%.

My employer doesn't have to pay either of these, but if I were to buy an iPhone I'd have to pay all of it. I imagine this affects how generous our employers are giving us "tax free perks".

I had to argue the case with my boss(CEO) to get a cheaper phone since I break them quite often and felt shameful bringing the bills in for repairs.

Now that I'm changing jobs my new employer asked "what gear do you want", I could get essentially whatever I wanted. Seems like a kitted System76 laptop and a Fairphone 4, is what I'll stick with.

TL;DR: Tax affects who gets what in what way.

Similar in Australia with salary sacrifice tax breaks for buying mobile phones and laptops 'primarily for work purposes'

That doesn’t seem to match up with this:

https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-iphone-wait-times-mul...

The reports right before the 13 was announced was that Apple had significantly increased manufacturing orders anticipating strong lost-pandemic iPhone demand. But we’re still in a pandemic. I barely need a phone given how little I leave my own house.

I’d love to think the CSAM topic is relevant to this — as I’ve paused my own Apple upgrades (had intended on getting new phones, new iPads, and new MacBooks for the whole family), but there’s been radio silence on the topic since they announced their delay on that.

That seems like it would be difficult data to gather. Reduced availability certainly can reduce demand by itself, somebody might give up if the thing isn't available after a while. I, for instance, would love to upgrade if I could get ahold of one of the things. If I still can't walk into a store and get one two months from now then I'll just wait it out another generation.

> FaceID continues not to work with face masks on

Well.... it does if you have an apple watch. I would still rather have a touch id option though.

Given the long wait times for these things I think it's pretty clear this is a supply issue, not a demand issue.

As for touch authentication, there's still the SE so at least they still have that as an option in the lineup. The thing is they begin the design outline for new iPhones from 24 to 18 months in advance of launch. Even a 2 year pandemic is a temporary issue relative to the iPhone design cycle, and any design response they might make to it would only show up towards the end of the crisis anyway.

Given the long wait times for these things I think it's pretty clear this is a supply issue, not a demand issue.

As for touch authentication, there's still the SE so at least they still have that as an option in the lineup. The thing is they begin the design outline for new iPhones from 24 to 18 months in advance of launch. Even a 2 year pandemic is a temporary issue relative to the iPhone design cycle, and any design response they might make to it would only show up towards the end of the crisis anyway.

Even if they had brought out a pandemic influenced flagship design now, which is probably the earliest point possible, for how much of that device's lifetime would mask mandates be relevant? Here in the UK mask mandates are already on the way out thanks to high vaccine uptake.

And/or maybe the word of Apple forcibly scanning your photos and lodging a complaint against yourself at the police*, did really spread through the would-be buyers. Who know what pulls demand and offer, but Apple has always aimed to have select customers among the mass market.

* Yes, I know, only with iCloud enabled, and it nags you until you enable it.

And they did not launch that program only proposed it.