Lee K wrote:
Did you read ANYTHING else I wrote?

I don't think he bothers to even read what he writes:

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I have never had to download the update.  I have dowloaded all updates offered.

Which is it?  Do you or don't you download updates and what does that have to do with what I wrote?

After we get him to pay attention to what he says, then maybe we can get him to pay attention to the rest of us:

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
You talk the usual Apple speak.

What part of "I own an Android phone" do you not understand?

Robert Lynch wrote:

Lee K wrote:
Did you read ANYTHING else I wrote?

I don't think he bothers to even read what he writes:

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I have never had to download the update.  I have dowloaded all updates offered.

Which is it?  Do you or don't you download updates and what does that have to do with what I wrote?

After we get him to pay attention to what he says, then maybe we can get him to pay attention to the rest of us:

What part of "I own an Android phone" do you not understand?

I said that I have downloaded all the updates offered but I didn't have to.
He said that Verizon forced him to download an update.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I said that I have downloaded all the updates offered but I didn't have to.
He said that Verizon forced him to download an update.

This is why people need to stop going on about Android as if it is a uniform experience for all users.  Verizon forced an update to my HTC Rezound several months ago, with no option to decline and totally inadequate documentation, even after the fact, as to what changes were being made.  Before the update my phone was rock solid, except for some flakey, poor quality third party apps.  After the update, my phone has developed the annoying habit of often freezing up the UI during phone calls, making it impossible to end a phone call.  I have to wait for the other party to hang up.  Earlier today I had to take the battery out of the phone to disconnect the call after leaving a message on someone's voice mail.

I am not the only person that i know who has serious problems with an Android phone.  People who think that Android phones are just so !$);//$@@$?@#%%}^! wonderful are both lucky and clueless about what is really going on out in the real world for many users.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
I keep saying that Apple's business has shifted focus.  A decade ago, it was selling smart phones to folks who have never had a smart phone.  Today, they are selling smart phones to people who already have a smart phone.  Today is less risky than a decade ago, but they cannot sustain growth:
...  Their competition has caught up or has surpassed them (depending on whom
     you ask),
...  They are clearly investing less & less in R&D or in producing significant new
     features,
...  They are risk adverse,
...  etc.

For many pundits, Apple can do no wrong.  For others, this set of announcements were a big ho-hum.  In any case, Apple is the first answer when it comes to smart phones & tablets.

I can't but help to think a little about all the Windows 8 haters out there -- at least Microsoft is taking chances & changing (and hopefully improving) their user interface -- today's Apple interfaces are little changed from 10+ years ago.

I don't think that Apple is spending less on R&D. Do you have a source for that?

And you think Microsoft is "taking chances?" That makes me smile.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
Most tech people I know (in the IT industry) use Android because they also feel it's a better platform. We can play this game all day long.

Yup. Most developers I know who went with iOS instead of.Android did so because they developed for both.

Half full, half empty.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
But one of the reasons I can't stand Apple, aside from the company's general smugness and holier-than-thou attitude, is their userbase. If you like your limited iPhones, then great. If they work for you, then great. You can slam Android all day long, but at the end of the day, it's the Android manufacturers and developers that are expanding the limits of what smartphones can do, not Apple anymore.

half full, half empty.

Great features that aren't easy enough to use won't be used by everyone. A lot of companies make a lot of very useful things, or find/develop cool algorithms, and use cutting edge technologies to do so, often not worrying how those features are perceived on the outside. And a lot of companies "don't innovate", but merely make some of those features into things people use every day. Some even do both, just as some do neither.

I shouldn't be surprised about it after so many years, but it still a source of constant wonder to me how some people can be so obnoxious about how some other people are obnoxious, without ever noticing that the behavior they're objecting to is exactly what they're engaging in themselves.

I personally find the 5S to be a ho-hum release. If my current phone dies, I might get one. Otherwise, I'll wait until there's something useful TO ME in some new device, whether that's next week, next year, or next decade. But I'm not going to call anyone who wants one, needs one, or even hates it wrong.

ASYLUM - Photo wrote:

So it's a "cult" when people upgrade their two year old Apple devices, yet when people buy a new Android phone every 6 months (most of my friends), because the newest thing is out, it's an informed decision?

i trust they are buying them from more than one source. all of your friends update to the same manufacturer's phones? i doubt it.

Robb Mann wrote:
New 5s is definately evolutionary. I like how apple held at 8mp, but webt with a larger sensor and bigger lens. Fingerprint reader is cool, especially if it works.

Fingerprint scanners have been with us for a while.

rmsoansphotography wrote:

Fingerprint scanners have been with us for a while.

And nobody used them.

Until now. If it works, and it's quick, 10 million iPhones will be using it this year.
It will also be on the 15million new iPads and iPad Minis sold this year.

Welcome to a new future of biometric security.

I have a good bit of faith that Apple doesn't release anything unless it works. And please don't put up the kinks in their Maps launch. Yes, there were some bugs, but is that completely unexpected from building their own Google Maps?

And for me, maps has worked flawlessly since day one.

What Fun Productions wrote:
I don't think that Apple is spending less on R&D. Do you have a source for that?

And you think Microsoft is "taking chances?" That makes me smile.

My sources are unofficial (e.g. past & current Apple employees).  I mostly judge Apple's R&D spending by its announcements -- no major product splash since the iPad with minor tweaks & packaging since.

You don't think changing its Windows user interface in Windows 8 was not "taking a chance"?  What chances have Apple taken since the iPad?

What Fun Productions wrote:
iTunes Radio is coming in iOS7.... Free service, no listening cap.

http://technologyadvice.com/why-itunes- … n-pandora/

Apple is going after Pandora... Competition is good.

Yup -- nothing we music publishers like more than people giving away our products (music) free of charge.  Even Pandora pays royalties, and there are pending legal battles.  You might think Apple is taking on Pandora, but that's not really the case.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

My sources are unofficial (e.g. past & current Apple employees).  I mostly judge Apple's R&D spending by its announcements -- no major product splash since the iPad with minor tweaks & packaging since.

You don't think changing its Windows user interface in Windows 8 was not "taking a chance"?  What chances have Apple taken since the iPad?

iOS7.

It's all of a sudden completely changed after 6 years of exactly the same look and feel.

People fear change. And the new Mac Pro is a radical shift in workstation design.

Apple is taking risks. You just won't agree that they are risks.

Good Egg Productions wrote:
I agree with you on the expanding the limits part. 

But I can't really think of something a phone COULD do that it's not already doing in some capacity.  Then, there in lies the concept of innovation.  The S4 did some cool things with the ability to take photos in new ways.  Now, the iPhone5S also has some neat new things that it can do with imaging.  But they're just gimmicks.

The S4 and some other Android phones does the "bump" thing to share files.  The 5S (the 5 will also do this) with iOS7 can share files easily without bumping.  The easy sharing of files is nice, since sharing pictures and stuff is something a lot of people do.

All phones have navigation.  SIRI is useful, but not as useful as it could be.  Android has a similar speech helper with debatable usability.

So what's left to put into these phones that will make them better?  How about acting as a terminal to your computer at home, with all the functionality?  Apple would likely do it first, but only for Apple computers.  Android would eventually make it work for any computer.

While Android has a wide fan base and lots and LOTS of people developing for it, Apple has a disciplined team under a watchful eye of the mothership.  So the products that Apple puts out are polished and work.  Android might put out more and innovative concepts, the implementation of those ideas can often fall flat and no one will use them, let alone know that they exist.

Yes, if you're a programmer and you know enough, having the latest, fastest, best Android phone is what you want.  Because you can literally make it exactly what you want and bow to your every whim... as long as you write your own stuff, or have access to the right networks who do.  And you'd HATE Apple, because Apple only allows you to use their products like THEY think you should use them.

The fun part is that for the majority of people, this is perfectly fine.  And they're content with only having access to the new technologies and innovative ideas that Apple releases.  On the schedule that Apple sees fit.

I'm in that camp.  Everything in my house works.  I like that.

I agree in a lot of the gimmicks the phones have. The S4 has some fun camera functions (like the 'picture-in-picture' or drama action shot in one....but the improved camera is one of the reasons I upgraded to it early. I don't use the air gestures or the face unlock, or the All Share, or as a remote control for my TV..... Cool and all, but a lot of it is just bloat.

Incorporating HD video projectors might be the next big step (even though I think there's an older phone that tried that)....or some kind of revolutionary battery (solar or kinetic energy)...who know what the next big thing is. I give Apple credit for getting this started, as before the iPhone came out, I always wondered why I couldn't combine my Palm PDA with my cell phone, and they did it. Maybe the "innovations" anymore are too small to get excited about until the next BIG one comes along (not sure Google Glass is going to be very mainstream - but it's a very cool idea).

I wish Google was a little tighter with their app developers, but I take the good with the bad, as I think it spurns creativity by letting a wider base of people come up with concepts instead of just within a company.

BTW - I don't know what Siri is up to, but Google Now is fantastic and very useful (it goes beyond just voice control).

rmsoansphotography wrote:

Fingerprint scanners have been with us for a while.

But not like Apple's implementation.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
I think the argument is whether or not Apple is pushing anything innovative anymore with each new release. I don't mean innovative for THEIR phones--but in the cell phone industry.

What can they or anyone really do?  the market has matured to a point where I'm not sure what anyone can do that won't have already been thought of by the millions of app developers out there on the market.  They can buy them up and refine them, but that's not innovation, is it?

it's most the hardware I think that people will find innovative.  And that will come down to design and other feature specs.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

What can they or anyone really do?  the market has matured to a point where I'm not sure what anyone can do that won't have already been thought of by the millions of app developers out there on the market.  They can buy them up and refine them, but that's not innovation, is it?

it's most the hardware I think that people will find innovative.  And that will come down to design and other feature specs.

Other phones have come up with things....like using NFC for payments, air gestures, projectors, waterproof/durable casings, and previously (as has been pointed out) fingerprint scanners.

Developers are doing all kinds of things with Android to expand its use and functionality - people can't do that with iOS because Apple locks it down. I think that's the point about why they aren't "innovating" as much as other open source platforms.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Yup -- nothing we music publishers like more than people giving away our products (music) free of charge.  Even Pandora pays royalties, and there are pending legal battles.  You might think Apple is taking on Pandora, but that's not really the case.

The music industry have been greedy for decades. It's helped push the demise of the entire industry. Thank you Apple!

Looknsee Photography wrote:
My sources are unofficial (e.g. past & current Apple employees).  I mostly judge Apple's R&D spending by its announcements -- no major product splash since the iPad with minor tweaks & packaging since.

You don't think changing its Windows user interface in Windows 8 was not "taking a chance"?  What chances have Apple taken since the iPad?

You make me smile.

Here is a source that might be better:

"Specifically, Apple spent $1.12 billion on R&D for the three months ended March 30, up from $841 million the year before. For the six months ending March 30, Apple's R&D spending is up 33 percent from a year ago."

http://www.zdnet.com/apple-boosts-r-and … 000014515/

Apple spends $$$ 4-5 billion dollars per year on R&D.

rmsoansphotography wrote:
Fingerprint scanners have been with us for a while.

Let There Be Light wrote:
But not like Apple's implementation.

Mmm, I must find out why the one on my old XP OS laptop seems to offer the same functionality.

What Fun Productions wrote:
Apple spends $$$ 4-5 billion dollars per year on R&D.

And the visible and actual result has been ?

Whatever you think it is, compare that to what the result would be if it was put into medical research or even public medical care, for example.

What Fun Productions wrote:
Apple spends $$$ 4-5 billion dollars per year on R&D.

photoimager wrote:

And the visible and actual result has been ?

That they are the largest, most valuable company in the world?

What Fun Productions wrote:

What Fun Productions wrote:
Apple spends $$$ 4-5 billion dollars per year on R&D.

photoimager wrote:
And the visible and actual result has been ?

That they are the largest, most valuable company in the world?

Yes, but they're going to die. Honest. Any second now. They can't be saved, even if they take this miraculous advice, which is what a dozen other companies--now bankrupt--followed. It's hopeless. You might as well give up now; it's all over but the singing.

You have to throw away any product they've ever made or been associated with, or you'll be doomed too. No exceptions.

What Fun Productions wrote:
That they are the largest, most valuable company in the world?

Dinosaurs were the largest living organisms on this planet. Where are they now ?

Being a 'valuable company' is irrelevant when trying to explain what benefit has been derived from your declared investment that they have made in R & D. Lets have some actual concrete examples of real advancements that have been made and not just tweaks or re-inventing old technology and claiming it as their own.

What Fun Productions wrote:
That they are the largest, most valuable company in the world?

photoimager wrote:
Dinosaurs were the largest living organisms on this planet. Where are they now ?

Being a 'valuable company' is irrelevant when trying to explain what benefit has been derived from your declared investment that they have made in R & D. Lets have some actual concrete examples of real advancements that have been made and not just tweaks or re-inventing old technology and claiming it as their own.

C'mon -- they did come out with some new colors.  At $750,000,000 per color, that's R&D money well spent.

photoimager wrote:
Dinosaurs were the largest living organisms on this planet. Where are they now ?

Being a 'valuable company' is irrelevant when trying to explain what benefit has been derived from your declared investment that they have made in R & D. Lets have some actual concrete examples of real advancements that have been made and not just tweaks or re-inventing old technology and claiming it as their own.

Another jealous Apple hater.

I will let the management of Apple decide on how to spend their money and how to invest in the future. They have been doing a pretty good job of it.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

What Fun Productions wrote:
That they are the largest, most valuable company in the world?

C'mon -- they did come out with some new colors.  At $750,000,000 per color, that's R&D money well spent.

You never answered this:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … st18490723

Check with your sources and get back with us.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

C'mon -- they did come out with some new colors.  At $750,000,000 per color, that's R&D money well spent.

One reason Apple is so successful is that they look long term.

But you already know this...

photoimager wrote:

Dinosaurs were the largest living organisms on this planet. Where are they now ?

Being a 'valuable company' is irrelevant when trying to explain what benefit has been derived from your declared investment that they have made in R & D. Lets have some actual concrete examples of real advancements that have been made and not just tweaks or re-inventing old technology and claiming it as their own.

Wow.

Wisdom like this makes MM a very special place.

lol

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
But one of the reasons I can't stand Apple, aside from the company's general smugness and holier-than-thou attitude, is their userbase. If you like your limited iPhones, then great. If they work for you, then great. You can slam Android all day long, but at the end of the day, it's the Android manufacturers and developers that are expanding the limits of what smartphones can do, not Apple anymore.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
But one of the reasons I can't stand Apple, aside from the company's general smugness and holier-than-thou attitude, is their userbase.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
If you like your limited iPhones, then great.

You really don't see the irony and hypocrisy of these two statements do you?

Wye wrote:

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
But one of the reasons I can't stand Apple, aside from the company's general smugness and holier-than-thou attitude, is their userbase.

You really don't see the irony and hypocrisy of these two statements do you?

quite being smug Wye!! We all can see right through your Apple religion!!

photoimager wrote:

Dinosaurs were the largest living organisms on this planet. Where are they now ?

Being a 'valuable company' is irrelevant when trying to explain what benefit has been derived from your declared investment that they have made in R & D. Lets have some actual concrete examples of real advancements that have been made and not just tweaks or re-inventing old technology and claiming it as their own.

Does Apple have an obligation to forward the human race? 

The only obligation Apple has is to its board and to its shareholders.  If they spend 4 billion dollars a year in R&D developing a fingerprint sensor that is invisible to the user, is extremely accurate and uses very little power, that's their business.  Sure, they could have slapped an ugly bar-type scanner that has been available for years on devices.  But they didn't.

Let's discuss why they didn't.

Is a fingerprint bar scanner useful?  Only if people use it.  Only if it's accurate.  Only if it works.  And if those things worked... REALLY worked, why don't all new phones have them?  I guess people just don't care about phone security.  Except they do.

So, if their 4 billion dollars in R&D results in a new print scanner that works and nearly everyone uses because it's accurate, fast and invisible to the end user AND is a really good way to keep your stuff safe, then that's a good thing, right?

People use their phones more to take photos and video than they do to make phone calls.  So Apple took some of that 4 billion and refined their camera system and camera software to make it easier and better for photos and video.

It's ALMOST like they're paying attention to what people want in a phone and they're developing it.  Almost.

GK photo wrote:

i trust they are buying them from more than one source. all of your friends update to the same manufacturer's phones? i doubt it.

Some do, some don't. I don't see what the big deal is about upgrading your technological preference every couple of years. Why is it only an issue when iPhone users do it?

Anand wrote:
The iPhone 5s is quite possibly the biggest S-update we've ever seen from Apple. I remember walking out of the venue during Apple's iPhone 5 launch and being blown away by the level of innovation, at the platform/silicon level, that Apple crammed into the iPhone 5. What got me last time was that Apple built their own ARM based CPU architecture from the ground up, while I understand that doesn't matter for the majority of consumers - it's no less of an achievement in my eyes. At the same time I remember reading through a sea of disappointment on Twitter - users hoping for more from Apple with the iPhone 5. If you fell into that group last time, there's no way you're going to be impressed by the iPhone 5s. For me however, there's quite a bit to be excited about.

The A7 SoC is seriously impressive. Apple calls it a desktop-class SoC, but I'd rather refer to it as something capable of competing with the best Intel has to offer in this market. In many cases the A7's dual cores were competitive with Intel's recently announced Bay Trail SoC. Web browsing is ultimately where I noticed the A7's performance the most. As long as I was on a good internet connection, web pages just appeared after resolving DNS. The A7's GPU performance is also insanely good - more than enough for anything you could possibly throw at the iPhone 5s today, and fast enough to help keep this device feeling quick for a while.

photoimager wrote:

rmsoansphotography wrote:
Fingerprint scanners have been with us for a while.

Mmm, I must find out why the one on my old XP OS laptop seems to offer the same functionality.

It doesn't offer the same functionality. Here's a good explanation of why Apple's Touch ID is different that any fingerprint scanner that's come before.

"In the torrent of the billions of words already written about Touch ID very, very few people have really understood just how revolutionary this really is.  Apple not only has developed one of the most accurate mass produced biometric security devices, they have also solved critical problems with how the data from this device will be encrypted, stored and secured."

http://9to5mac.com/2013/09/17/why-touch … preciated/

Good Egg Productions wrote:
If they spend 4 billion dollars a year in R&D developing a fingerprint sensor that is invisible to the user, is extremely accurate and uses very little power, that's their business.  Sure, they could have slapped an ugly bar-type scanner that has been available for years on devices.  But they didn't.

Let's discuss why they didn't.

Is a fingerprint bar scanner useful?  Only if people use it.  Only if it's accurate.  Only if it works.  And if those things worked... REALLY worked, why don't all new phones have them?  I guess people just don't care about phone security.  Except they do.

Apple didn't spend $4 billion to develop the Touch ID technology. It only cost Apple $356 million to acquire AuthenTec -- the source of Touch ID -- last year.

Let There Be Light wrote:

Apple didn't spend $4 billion to develop the Touch ID technology. It only cost Apple $356 million to acquire AuthenTec -- the source of Touch ID -- last year.

I didn't mean to insinuate that they spent $4 billion on ONLY the TouchID. They spent about $4 billion on R&D. Part of that is the sensor.

Let There Be Light wrote:
It doesn't offer the same functionality. Here's a good explanation of why Apple's Touch ID is different that any fingerprint scanner that's come before.

"In the torrent of the billions of words already written about Touch ID very, very few people have really understood just how revolutionary this really is.  Apple not only has developed one of the most accurate mass produced biometric security devices, they have also solved critical problems with how the data from this device will be encrypted, stored and secured."

http://9to5mac.com/2013/09/17/why-touch … preciated/

I recently threw out my old Pocket PC because it was probably 10+ years old. It had a hardware based fingerprint scanner built into it which worked quite well.

Apple does have a good marketing department though.

Lightcraft Studio wrote:

I recently threw out my old Pocket PC because it was probably 10+ years old. It had a hardware based fingerprint scanner built into it which worked quite well.

Apple does have a good marketing department though.

I had a good phone 10 years ago too.  Doesn't mean the tech is anything near the same as what Apple is offering now.

I don't even have to know the model to know that the 10 year old fingerprint scanner in your old pocket pc is inferior to the Apple one. You can call it marketing.. I call it a decade of technological advancement.