It’s decent hardware and a consistent experience- sure, there have been misses, and sometimes there are non-Apple products that are better. But there is no other single company that offers a competitive watch, tablet, laptop, and phone. Not everyone needs this, which is why basically 50% of people aren’t in the Apple ecosystem. But it’s a legitimate draw for many people. And make sure that you don’t fall in the trap of thinking “just because Apple products aren’t right for me, then everyone that uses them must be an idiot.” You pay for the convenience, but for many people that is worth it, and the fact that not every Apple product is #1 is okay. Basically every Apple product line has something in the top 3.
Apple is like the Disney of the tech world- there are other companies that make good movies, and there are other companies with cruise lines and theme parks, but nobody else that does all that. They stand alone in terms of their breadth and consistency.
I would say that most other things are on par with other devices/brands, and so you would trade on individual things that you prioritize- screen quality, battery life, compatibility with particular software, etc. And there are a couple small areas in which Apple probably doesn't make sense. For basic video editing, I might still use Apple devices. But if I was creating a rendering farm for an animation studio, I'd probably build servers with video cards and parts that weren't Apple.
Well a lot of people can very clearly tell the difference between a middle of the pack iPhone and a $150 Android device. That you experienced no such variation among the Android lineup is why people prefer Apple. It "feels like" a premium product, is priced like a premium product, and is perceived as a premium product because... you guessed it: it's a premium product!
Edit: So to clarify, you could be saying "there is something better about Apple" or "Apple people are complete suckers." Which is it?
1) Many people can't specifically identify and articulate which characteristics lead them to prefer one product over another.
2) Many people have different reasons for preferring the same product over the same alternative
3) An individual is probably preferring a set of characteristics that overdetermines their preference (i.e. if you remove one of the set, their preference still doesn't change) and the set is comprised of individually not-very-important characteristics.
Would you be confused if someone said that they prefer a Porsche Panamera over a Honda Civic? They could probably say they prefer the size of the Panamera, but that's clearly not sufficient explanation because they also would prefer it over a CR-V. Then they'd say the materials used are better. But would they now accept a CR-V with the interior redone in ultra-premium materials? Very unlikely.
The reality is that their preference is a complex mixture of things that they struggle to even detect never mind articulate. "Good product companies" get this, and bad product companies just stare in befuddlement at why their CR-V with fancy leather isn't outcompeting Porsche. Of course when you ask someone to explain their preference, they cannot. They don't have the language to describe it! It's a silly question to even ask!
I find much more value in the view that a great product is the confluence of millions of tiny, apparently inconsequential decisions. It seems completely believable that if the product developers are successful, I as the consumer would struggle to reverse engineer what all of those decisions are by looking at the finished product.
Not sure what analogy you're getting at with crack. Separate from the moral valence you're trying to ascribe to it, of course it's a great product in some respects. Though I'd suggest that explaining why a single molecule that interacts ~directly with the brain's reward system is a "good product" is much easier than something like a smartphone or car.
[0] One example I happen to know about had to do with the really complex machining that was required on one of the iPhones (forget which) to make the bevel around the screen bezel wrap around the corner in a way that felt (but was not actually) "flat" relative to the straight-line parts of the bevel. Without this multi-axis beveling, which was apparently a complete nightmare to figure out how to manufacture, the corners would've "seemed" sharper. Does that mean someone would pick up an iPhone and remark how nice it is that the corner bevel rotates another 3 degrees or whatever? Obviously not. Does that mean this was a complete waste of time? No one knows. Apple's market cap, margins, adoption, and consumer loyalty point toward them doing something uniquely right though.
The ability that you have to equate affinity/addiction to "good/quality" is downright creepy, and sadly symptomatic of literally the worst bits of all of technology.
If you're operating in real life like this, please stop.
"Good product," at least in English, generally means "a product that people successfully and happily use for its intended purpose." It doesn't usually mean "a product that does good in the world." There are plenty of very good products that don't do good things in the world. If you're operating in real life as if these are inseparable features of an object, please stop.
Well, I suppose you can carry on. Again, if it's useful for you to believe everyone else is an idiot and that, now, good product == product that does good, go ahead. I think this is a very low-resolution picture of reality though, and is probably the source of some of your confusion.
It is absolutely the case that the definition you are using can serve as a technically correct one. But that's not very important. What is important is that real people are being harmed by exploitative technology, and you handwaving that away as if it should be a dismissable part of the conversation is you doing a bad thing.
In my experience iphone users carry a powerbank with them.
2nd hand phones with non replaceable batteries are not worth paying much.
My iPhone on the other hand, I am still on my first one, and it is 4 years old and still gets updates. And judging by history, it should still get updates for at least another 2-3 years. Apps don’t crash. The battery is just starting to go on it, but a replacement isn’t very expensive. And the entire Apple “ecosystem” is optional here. Apple is just starting to spin up an ad ecosystem, but the privacy features of the device are quite unparalleled (although I wish I were able to install an on device ad blocker that actually works)
Their android flavor is nothing like stock android, buggy and gets barely updated. The phones to expensive for the actual build quality.
Samsung is just the most ugly side of Android. A pixel or even a Xiaomi that ship with stock and allow removing unwanted apps without hacks is not even compareable.
I can only recommend Xiaomi, cheap, very good build quality and you don't need to hack or root anything and still have full control over your phone. I've had a cheap Oppo before and it drowned, fell and more and still goes strong 8+ years later.
In iOS I can choose to use different providers for email, calendar, and password management or remove the apps (for the first two).
2) Long support which makes the price really reasonable. I've been using an iPhone 8 for a couple of years now, and still have the latest iOS version and the phone works good enough. If I would have bought an Android phone when I bought my iPhone I would have needed to replace it already, because of lack of updates.
My Google account for my phone is just for that nothing else. My last phone cost $120 and lasted 6 years, it still works but doesn't run my banking app anymore. my current one was $250 and last for 2 years without issues already.
And I checked on my old Android phone, an Nokia 6.1, which is supposed to have stock Android, and I can't delete these apps: calendar, drive, lens, gmail, chrome, files, photos.
[0] https://www.macworld.com/article/673831/how-to-use-an-iphone...
Every phone I owned in the last 10 years allowed full control about apps without root. That's a nexus, a cheap Oppo and now a Xiaomi.
Edit:// I thought you need an account to activate the iphone? Not sure if I am totally wrong
I write code and setup cloud infrastructure for a living.
If you have absolutely no interest in phones, the base iPhone will be a better device than any android of the same price in terms of stability (years of use) and support (you'll hit not mobile website that doesn't handle it, any major app provider will support it)
android has advantages only if you actually have specific aspects you want to optimize (price, performance, photo, obscure tools, versatility etc..)
Now with Apple you don't have a choice in hardware, you can't buy low-cost or mid range. You have to make the choice the make for you. Thiw works for me because I've never had better hardware in my life. I've had a MBP and an iPhone for 2 years and they're still as strong and efficient as the first day. The only non Apple device I still have are my Jabra earbuds, but the left one is randomly dying now. Can't to buy Airpods Pro instead :)
150. I have chosen the price point of 150. Whatever's on sale at Best Buy for that. Maybe Costco.
I am around Apple people. With the exception of that cross device thing which I concede can be a big deal for some, I have not dealt with or seen any significant differences between their experience and mine.
Apple just isn't as competitive for new devices.
Obviously, you can save some money by buying an older phone with better hardware features, but the same applies to Android -- this year's "mushy middle" of pricing is occupied with last year's flagship model.
I also have a Mac, AirPods, and an Apple Watch, though. That makes it kind of a no-brainer which phone I carry around with me.
This depends on where you’re located though — in some places it’s much easier to get quick OEM repairs for (some) Android devices than for Apple ones.
The A-series chips are also genuinely very good, but one could argue that a lot of that power is wasted on iOS.
Anecdotally, I’ve also found battery life on iPhones to be more reliable out of the box than on most Android devices, especially in standby.
Before this I had the Nexus 6P, which despite being a Google branded phone, only got updates for three years. If you amortize the cost of the phone over five years instead of three, it suddenly makes the Apple phones seem like a deal.
For me Android is like an off-brand cola. It gets the job done. It’s sugar water, just like coke. But there are a million little decisions that make Coke a better product.
The price differences between Android and Apple still strike me as absurd. On the other side, I went from "picking an Android very carefully for rooting" gradually to "what's on sale at Best Buy for about 150" with no major shift in experience or quality.