If you took price out of the equation and just looked at the two products, the comparison may be apt, but Josh is staring the price matter in the face and calling foul. I can't say I blame him. I drive a luxury brand car, but I cringe a little bit when people ask me what I drive because I'm concious of the fact that people associate brand, value, and quality.
A better analogy might have been artwork. Some people will look at the Mona Lisa and see a painting of a plain woman. Others look at it and see one of the greatest paintings ever created. But like Josh points out, the world is not black & white. Some will see the quality of the Mona Lisa, but will not care. They may like other styles better. They may prefer work from an entirely generation.
Josh is opposed creating class warfare out of device functionality. In my view, MG's assessment of iOS as "more polished" is true, and I happen to place a high value on that polish, but I understand that I trade other aspects of the device in order to obtain that polish. Others won't make that same choice. Others won't see the polish at all. That doesn't make those people better or worse than me. It only makes them different.
Except that you can get a cheap used Mercedes for less than a new Honda, if you can't afford a new Benz and value the workmanship (or brand) enough to take the risk. And Honda made the NSX. There are Acura models priced in the same ballpark as lower-end new Mercedes.
Honda had a Formula 1 racing team until 2008. It was sold off, and was eventually bought by Mercedes Benz.
So the 'class' question is muddled, to say the least. Unless you think the NSX is the car of the proletariat and a 1990 Mercedes with 100,000 miles is the vehicle of the 1%.
For all intents and purposes Mercedes=quality+luxury while Honda=cheapy+functional and this was the primary meaning behind the analogy utilized in Siegler's article.
I'd think Kia or Hyundai would would be seen as the "cheap" brand.
And the Honda company certainly doesn't shy away from serving the luxury market with their Acura brand.
In any case, the comparison of Mercedes vs. Honda was about fit and finish and creature comforts, not price. It works just as well when comparing a loaded, well-kept $9000 used Mercedes to a brand-new $15,000 Civic.
Never use a car analogy. Never.
Cars are too intimate. This is especially endemic to American culture. Too many people identify with their car. You may intend to contrast the horsepower of one car to another, but the reader will inevitable contrast the values most dear to them. "A coupe versus a saloon! HOW DARE YOU!?!?!"
As far as the Mercedes-Honda analogy I think it is very appropriate. It's not that Mercedes are more expensive, it's that they are made with much more attention to detail, and higher quality fit and finish.
Besides, isn't the Galaxy Nexus more expensive?? I don't get the class warfare accusation.
MG's post has nothing to do with "device functionality". Your last paragraph basically summarises MG's argument, so I guess you agree with him, and just don't like the analogy. I think Josh is making a mountain out of a mole-hill.
"The world is divided into two groups, those that think little details like enterprise integration are supremely import and those who don't notice or don't care so much"
The argument holds no water. I can draw a line in the sand however I'd like to make any product seem better, and anyone who disagrees is just in that other group.
This whole "argument" is inane. People have preferences, and the rational ones will act in accordance to those preferences if they have the means. Getting huffy because someone dares to disagree with your preferences is asinine.
For people who prefer the iPhone the UI-responsiveness isn't some arbitrary line in the sand, it is what they judge to be important (one of the things). And MG's whole point is that some people don't find this important and will probably love the Galaxy Nexus, and that is fine. Josh is the one getting huffy.
The same is true for your views on iOS and Android. Here, let me throw it back at you.
"iOS users just don't notice the small details. Things like built im turn by turn navigation. Being able to fully dictate all text throughout all applications. The ability to return purchases on the market place. Full disk level encryption.
You either see it or you don't. For a lot of users, details and features like these don't matter. You might be happy with your Toyota, but I prefer the full featured BMW."
See how easy it is? Perhaps you'll also see how obnoxious these types of posts are when it's turned around.
The first two points are true - if people didn't disagree on the importance of freedom then much of 20th century history would be very different.
Decisions as simple as "What phone will I buy" are an insanely complicated calculus of thousands of micro-decisions and trade offs.
People like MG like to pretend that they have themselves all figured out, and THE reason that the iPhone is superior for him is "the little things," or they buy Android because "its an open platform."
Its all bunk, they bought it because, hey the phone does what they need it to, and for some damn reason that particular configuration of options happened to strike a chord with them.
So isn't that a defence of MG's article? It was even titled "An iPhone Lover's Take on the Galaxy Nexus". The point was describing his impressions of the nexus from the perspective of someone who does* care about the things that the iphone does well.
Of course its a combination of lots of things. And for people who like the iphone, they are happy with the combination of tradeoffs that it makes. UI responsiveness and battery life being two of the important ones for the iphone.
This is not a comparison of equals, but a comparison of Luxury vs. Standard. That's no longer about preferences, that's about one being better.
he's right that some people notice the little things in their UIs and some don't. he's wrong in implying that the apple users are the ones who notice. I'd argue that apple fanboys like MG Seigler and John Gruber, who never seem to have any complaints about iOS, must fall squarely into the group of people who aren't able to notice the little details.
And if you read either of those authors regularly, you'd know that they often do criticise things in iOS and Apple in general.
I read Daring Fireball fairly regularly, his criticisms are in different areas to the topic of this discussion. I don't read MG Seigler, i can't comment there.
I think as it currently stands, it IS interesting and competitve. I don't want to begin a flame war. Merely saying the Galaxy Nexus vs. iPhone 4S matchup is pretty damn close. It really boils down to which philosophy you agree with. But don't call them "second-rate", because they are not.
I agree that the Galaxy Nexus is a very good phone. But there are a LOT of completely rubbish phones that also get too much attention.
That isn't what he said. The general angle of MG and Gruber is that iOS is universally superior to Android.
I remember trying out the iPhone and being shocked at how terrible -- almost childish -- the notification system was. On Android it was graceful and well thought out. The same goes for application integration, where on Android it was well thought out from day one, while on iOS you have silos of applications.
There are a thousand and one ways that Android is more refined and has the "little details" that are superior to iOS. None of these ever matter to Gruber or MG. But where iOS has a nicer bounce after a scroll, well that's critically important.
If we want to go with car analogies, iOS would more correctly be a pimped up Honda Civic. The owner is sure it's a refined, idealized car, but they are the ones who don't realize what they're missing.
And it's not just the "nicer bounce after a scroll", its the whole UI interaction. The thing that iPhone fans like about their products is how the interface disappears and you don't need to think about it. The touch interaction model makes the user think that they are directly interacting with the content itself, rather than through the intermediate of a controller, and that this content is actually physical, rather than a representation on the screen. It's an illusion, but it is a compelling one. Examples: * The right bounce after a scroll, and the right inertia when you flick to scroll through a list; * Dragging your finger to pan around a map or large web page; * Icons and buttons changing their appearance instantly to show that they've been pressed.
It's little things that give immediate feedback to the user that create this illusion, and it doesn't take much to break it and remind you that you're using a device. What MG and Gruber keep pointing out is that Android keeps breaking this illusion, for example with stuttery scrolling or laggy/inappropriate feedback when you push buttons.
I've experienced plenty of lag on iOS devices. I've had buttons not respond, apps crash, and behaviours that left you wondering what you're supposed to do. As has everyone else who lacks the delusion spell. iOS is just an imperfect OS like every other, and adding hysterical narrative gushing about its profound perfection is, honestly, embarrassing for everyone.
For example, take a look at cross-application cooperation and integration. It is good that iOS 5 added Twitter integration, but to an Android user the Twitter-specific integration makes iOS devices look crippled (in this area). With appropriate applications installed, even the more than three-year-old G1 is integrated with Twitter, Facebook, Picasa and whatever else you want. And these integration details matter because they are what allow Android users to create sophisticated, dynamic cross-application workflows.
Claiming that one side has a subtle superiority that only the right people can appreciate when the reality is more balanced is what is offensive.
I'd also note that gadget sites like The Verge are incentivised to make Android seem interesting and competitive, even when it doesn't live up, because their business model is based on churning out large numbers of announcements and reviews. If they acknowledge that the devices are second-rate then why would their readers care to click their pages?