Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Money in my bank account? (Score 1) 174

Given that I said it's also a gaming device for me, that's one way where 'more' is roughly equivalent to 'better'. And actually, per clock, we're using less power. The new Apple processors are a lot more efficient than the old ones.

The camera in this phone isn't just 'marginally' better, it's a lot better. Better optics, faster focusing.

Browsing the web is faster, which is meaningful because of how bloated and bad the web has gotten.

I can use TouchID, which doesn't sound like a big advance, but it really saves me a lot of time and gives me a measurable amount of additional security. I've upgraded from a 4 or 6 digit passcode to something that's more than 15 characters long, and I don't have to type it in every single time I want to do something on the phone. My thumbprint is theoretically something someone could duplicate, but when you look at the people that have 'hacked' the phone that way, it's incredibly time and resource intensive. If someone wants my phone that bad, there's nothing I could've done to stop them anyway. They certainly would've cracked any passcode I had.

But basically, arguing against the progress in phones as good or useful or noteworthy is just shouting at clouds. The phones are better the way our PCs are better. Does that mean we should upgrade every year? Or even every two? Probably not--this world has enough waste as it is. But I do do 'more' on my phone than I ever have before. It's the central piece of technology in my life, and I perform more tasks on it than I used to. I don't use my desktop computer as much because I can lean on my phone more heavily. How is that not 'more'?

Comment Re:Bloatware? (Score 1) 213

Then you hide the app in a folder like everyone else. The app itself literally only takes up less than 1MB, I think. I'm looking on my phone and it reads 4.7MB, but that's all 'Documents and Data', which is probably a cached old podcast that I used to test it out.

But there's a reason why the overwhelming majority of podcast listeners are on iPhones--not only does the iTunes store make podcast discovery really easy, but having a default app on the phone really simplifies the matter.

Comment Re:Eh (Score 1) 213

Actually, according to Anandtech, there seems to be a significant upgrade to Apple's IO on the 6s and 6s+--it looks like they took the SSD controller from a laptop and crammed it in there: http://anandtech.com/show/9662...

"Previous writers on the site have often spoken of Apple’s custom NAND controllers for storage in the iPhone, but I didn’t really understand what this really meant. In the case of the iPhone 6s, it seems that this means Apple has effectively taken their Macbook SSD controller and adapted it for use in a smartphone."

Sequential reads and writes are crazy fast on those two devices; they far outclass even the iPad Air 2, and certainly any Android devices. (Things fall back into line with the random read/writes, though.)

Comment Re:Two major problem with phone benchmarks (Score 5, Informative) 213

1. Javascript benchmarks are a real-world test, since these phones are constantly executing javascript when you use the browser. What you say is true, though--Apple has an advantage because it has both the best processor and best engine for executing javascript, so it's not showing exactly how powerful the CPU is. But that's what the synthetic benchmark is for.

2. The display on the iPhone isn't 'low res', it's just a lower resolution than the one on other phones. But that's a relevant trade-off, because it means that Apple can push those pixels faster, for less battery cost than other phones. It's a calculated trade-off, because nearly nobody can tell the difference. The games on the iPhone will look just as good or better. Don't blame Apple for not throwing pixels at a problem that doesn't exist.

Comment Re:Bloatware? (Score 2) 213

Apple's 'bloatware' is most irritating for the screen space that it takes up more than anything else. It's otherwise generally useful software if you don't already have a favourite app to do that thing. The Podcasts app on the iPhone is, apparently, basically the most used podcast listening app there is. The power of defaults is really strong, and a lot of those applications get used more than you'd expect. In terms of space, it takes up around 100MB, last I checked, which is a pretty trivial amount, even on a 16GB unit.

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 3, Informative) 213

The single-core figure is listed in first place because it's the most relevant predictor of phone performance. Very few applications are written to be parallel--they're mostly games with physics simulations and the like. Even then, you have to remember that Samsung packs 8 cores into those phones and the A9 only has two and is clocked lower. That means that not only is the A9 more efficient per tick, it's also significantly more efficient per core. That means better output for less power draw.

So yes, the multi-core scores are lower, there's no doubt. The only thing that means is that in that one artificial benchmark, the bar is shorter for the A9 than for the other phones. In nearly every other benchmark--and most importantly, in benchmarks meant to simulate real-world situations--it outperforms the other CPUs by a wide margin.

Comment Re:Meaningless (Score 1) 255

This is useful information the next time someone talks about 'following the money' because scientists are just trying to get rich off of sweet, sweet grant money. (These are people that have never met a scientist and don't know how grants work.)

Anyway, even such a direct and obvious link will probably still change very few minds, but it's nice to have as an additional thing to bring out.

Comment Re:Money in my bank account? (Score 1) 174

My phone is also my in-car GPS, my primary camera, my facebook/twitter/tumblr/rss machine, the device I do my home budgets on and the device I'm most likely to turn to for entertainment, since I don't really have enough time to sit at a computer to play games.

Most of that was possible on my iPhone 4, but my iPhone 6 does all of it a lot better.

And when I say my iPhone 4 'lasted' 4 years, what I mean is that I gave it to my Mom after 4 years. It's still in use, and because what she needs is just a phone and SMS and a few small apps, it still works fine. I think the iPhone 4 will be remembered as Apple's most iconic phone, honestly. It was great in so many ways.

Comment Re: Apple is not a monopoly (Score 1) 324

They were never a monopoly because you didn't have to buy music from them--not only were there other digital stores, physical sales were still a thing. The iPod was the most popular digital music player, sure, but that itself isn't a monopoly; there were lots of other players to buy. If you had an iPod and wanted to buy music online and sync it easily, you would probably get that music from iTunes, but you didn't have to. You were always allowed to add mp3s to your library and sync them to the iPod. If you didn't have an iPod and wanted to get music from iTunes, too bad--but that's not a monopoly either. They're not obligated to make their service work with arbitrary hardware.

At any point in the chain, you could decide to avoid Apple. They had no monopoly in any sense.

Comment Re:I am fine with 16gb. (Score 1) 324

I can't find a link to substantiate my claim, unfortunately, but I'm pretty sure that I read that Apple's best selling model is still the 16GB version.

We're probably a bit guilty of power-user bias here on /. I won't ever buy another 16GB device, but my Mom is getting by just fine on the smallest storage size iDevices. And when you look at the general population, more people are like her than like us.

It used to be that you could only get their lowest tier model as an 8GB phone. Now the 5s at the bottom of the scale comes with 16 or 32GB. I'm not sure what their motivation is, but I don't think it's a matter of lifting the average selling price--they make a profit at all tiers, and it's not like Apple is shy about prices. If they wanted to charge more, they would.

Or if it's about price, it's only about price in the sense that people buying 64GB phones would have bought them even if they had a 32GB version, but the perceived value in their own heads wouldn't be as great. That is, it may be a sort of ego-stroking for people that pony up an extra $100.

Comment Re:Money in my bank account? (Score 4, Interesting) 174

The phone is expensive, no question, but my last iPhone lasted me 4 years and I expect this new one to do the same. I get support during those 4 years and I don't have to wait for updates. The resale value is really good, too. The cost of an iPhone is a lot less if you consider how much you can sell a phone that's still in good shape.

But these are all trade-offs, and I won't pretend they're not. I get a lot of things that are important to me by buying an iPhone, but I trade off being able to buy a new, cutting edge phone every year because it costs way too much. If I want to sell it, I can, but I have to go through the ordeal of selling it.

I *do* regret buying a 16GB phone (I thought I would be okay because 16GB was always plenty on my iPhone 4, even with a healthy music playlist), but streaming music and some smart cloud offloading definitely make this phone liveable, even with games and apps and podcasts. If there's one complaint I have--and that the Apple community and pundits have--it's that stupid 16GB tier.

A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from you. -- Ramsey Clark