Apple users bash new iPhone 15: ‘Innovation died with Steve Jobs’
nypost.com
Apple users bash new iPhone 15: ‘Innovation died with Steve Jobs’::Smart phone fans are griping about Apple's new devices since the arguably anti-climactic announcement of the forthcoming iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus on Tuesday.
You are viewing a single comment
Steve Jobs didn't innovate a thing in his life. Apple has always been stealing tech and pretending that they created it.
Now with this new version, they don't even have much anything to steal. At best, they pretended that the EU didn't force them to adopt USB 3 and boast how much faster it is than Lightning port.
Actually the EU only forced them to adopt USB C. Only their 'Pro' model actually has USB 3. Imagine having to pay a premium for the luxury of a 15 year old technology
And they still don't have PD on the pro.
My guess is that they'll be going portless soon, and don't want users freaking out that they can't change their phones as quickly, so they're intentionally nerfing the charge speeds on USB C.
They have to have USB power delivery by the EU law but only as fast as the device supports at all. So if they only have 20W charging at all that's legal.
With how much they’re investing in video and how large their camera/film user base is, they will not go portless.
USB C without PD ain't compliant with the EU regulation, so I hope for them, and their users, that PD is onboard.
A 15 year old technology pretty much every other phone uses now. A technology used in pretty much every modern laptop - especially Apple's own - and many desktops.
15 years ago was Micro-USB, which was awful.
Apple just wants to get rid of low income people having an iphone.
Iphones whole thing has always been to be a luxury brand, that only rich people can afford.
Did Jobs build teams that invented the GUI, the cellphone, multitouch gestures, or mobile web browsing? No, he didn’t. But he built teams that productized those things better than anyone else before them, and that team forever changed our expectations for computing.
To be an innovative composer you don’t have to invent new instruments, scales, time signatures, etc. You have to know how to arrange existing stuff in new ways.
Yep, I am not a Jobs fan boy at all but he definitely had a clear goal and required people to get the product right before shipping it, to the extent to which that was possible for the tech at the time.
Yeah. The man was a piece of shit in several ways, but he was also good at what he did.
Yeah because the first iPhone wasn’t a Revolution,
It was not revolutionary in the sense of technology, it was revolutionary in the sense of getting the general public to understand and accept the idea of a smartphone.
EDIT: Not to say it's still necessary. I mostly stick to the iPhone because I don't want to repurchase all the apps I already purchased, some for a significant amount, if I have to replace my phone. If that becomes moot one day, like if iPhones get to the point that they're unusable or somehow Apple goes under, I'll switch.
So they had "innovative marketing", ok.
People always down vote when I point that out as well lol. Windows mobile was already moving towards icon based UIs pre iPhone, so while the UI was a definite improvement it wasn't the revolution it's made out to be. The iPhone 1 had no app store or 3g so was not good for emails and, back in 2007 when flash still mattered, couldn't access most of the Internet where windows phone could. I'm pretty sure it was successful purely based on the iPods popularity, at least until the iPhone 3gs and app store came out and the iPhone became arguably a better smartphone than those that came before.
Translation: "I blindly hate Apple and I have no idea what I'm talking about."
Um... I'm on a Macbook right now and I have an iPhone.
Not for anyone that knew about mobiles...
Yeah bruh, you could have had a super fucking revolutionary sidekick, Windows PDA missing capacitive touch, of if you were really special a blackberry!
The mental gymnastics of you people.
No dude, there were already symbian touchscreen devices on the market
Doesn’t mean the iPhone wasn’t revolutionary.
I was (and still am) a mobile app developer at the time. We had every major phone on the market in our office for testing purposes. Literally hundreds of different phones. You name any popular (and less popular) phone on the market at that time and I can guarantee you I’ve used it extensively.
The iPhone was absolutely revolutionary. However, it wasn’t because of a specific piece of technology, it was execution.
Symbian touch-screen phones existed, they were slow and laggy. The UI was nothing like the iPhone, which is built around directly manipulating UI elements with your finger. It seems obvious now, but back then it wasn’t. You could use the touch screen to manipulate a tiny scrollbar.
The closest thing to the iPhone was the LG Prada (KE850), which had a capacitive touch screen and the same scrolling mechanism as iPhone. However, it was small, had a tiny screen and was relatively slow. The software was also very limited, it was basically a feature phone, not a smartphone.
The iPhone was basically the first phone that got all of it right.
So what you're saying is that it was an evolution of stuff already on the market. I mean the iPhone didn't even have apps when it came out
Apple coined the term App with the introduction of the App Store. They weren't called that before the iPhone. That's how influential the iPhone and its ecosystem were.
I can't stand Apple's ecosystem, but pretending like it wasn't a major shift is just weird.
They were called applications or programs.... the big innovation was the walled garden store only from which you can install programs. Before that you went to the software developer 's website and downloaded the package
Apple did not invent the term "app", "app store", or the concept of an app store. There was an app store called App Store for NeXT in 1991 that Jobs knew about, and many similar systems in the intervening years.
The only thing different about Apple's app store was the restriction on users' ability to install apps from other sources.
Jobs was great at business, not at tech.
NeXt was founded by jobs when he got kicked out of apple. Then, apple acquired NeXT, and jobs once again became CEO. So NeXT was basically jobs throwing a fit. I’d consider them basically apple.
I'm aware of the history, but I don't think you understood what I wrote. An app store was written for NeXT by an independent company, without Jobs' involvement.
Would you give credit to Bill Gates for all windows software written while he was CEO?
Sorry the “that jobs knew about” made it seem like apple stole it from NeXT. I was just saying that of course he knew about. It was a company he started and ran because he was mad at Pepsi.
My point was just that NeXT having something is just like apple having something in my opinion.
It was absolutely a revolution.
The relevant definition of revolution: “a dramatic and wide-reaching change in conditions, attitudes, or operation.”
It didn’t matter if the technology already existed, hardly anyone was using it. Capacitive touchscreens existed, but there was no dramatic change, they were just used in the same way as resistive touchscreens. It was a different way of building a touchscreen, but very much an evolutionary change.
The iPhone was a revolution because it caused a dramatic and almost overnight change in the industry. What techies usually fail to see it that technology doesn’t matter. What matters is how it is used and what it allows people to do.
The iPhone was an incredibly obvious idea to follow up the iPod.
LOL no it wasn’t.
Sure, the idea of an apple phone had been out there for a while, but the actual device wasn’t obvious at all. Just look at all the speculation before the event, people making mockups of what they thought the iPhone would look like. Just look at the industry reactions afterwards.
For example, the reaction of blackberry founder Mike Lazaridis
Or the reaction from the people at Google working on Android
It was absolutely revolutionary at the time. The fact that the way it works seems obvious after the fact is testament to how good and revolutionary it actually was. We can’t even imagine things working differently anymore, but it was only obvious after it was revealed.
Wow bro you think I'm going to read all that bullshit? Lol. I'm not some genius and even I saw the iPhone coming back then. It was totally obvious if you spent any time thinking about the iPod at all.
Yeah no. The iPhone looks nothing like an iPod, and no one else predicted anything like the iPhone. But hey, you obviously thought of it.
Even the people working on Android at that time had nothing like it. Initially Android was going to be a lot like a Blackberry. They had to go back to the drawing board after the iPhone announcement. What a shame that Google didn't have a brilliant mind like you working for them, they could have saved all that time and money and worked on the 'obvious' design from day one.
What symbian device had a capacitive multi touch display in 2007?
I love how you apple cultists just move the goal posts whenever you get proven wrong about something
The only revolution was getting dumbass Americans to buy something
So since you cannot answer a simple question you attack me with a VERY imaginative story about cultest 🤣.
Whatever you need to do to make your head cannon work.
i was working in mobile at the time, and it was my job to keep up with the leading tech. i was using a Palm Treo when the iPhone was released, which was arguably the most advanced PDA phone at the time with blackberry being the primary competitor.
i vividly remember watching the announcement from the iphone and being shaken with how the device worked. the fact that you interact with it without a stylus, the highest resolution screen available on a PDA phone, combining the functionality of an ipod, phone, and rich HTML internet browsing device, and the fucking triple layered capacitive multi-touch touch screen were absolutely revolutionary. to say anything else is revisionist history. no one else had anything remotely like it.
and anyone who knew anything about mobiles at the time knew it was revolutionary and that the world was changing that day.
Their Laptop Chips are in fact leading technology. Intel and AMD are far behind in Performance/Power used
You're correct, but it's important to note that the M chips are very expensive to produce, and abandoning x86 means literally all the software iOS and OSX uses needs to be rewritten (or translated via Rosetta). It's a huge project with tons of risks and massive costs. Apple can do this because they're pretty much completely vertically integrated at this point, and control their ecosystem completely. If amd independently released some new non compatible architecture that was dramatically faster, it'd likely be dead in the water.
Intel learned this lesson the hard way during the Itanic days. AMD took the relatively safer approach when they released amd64.
Correct. I wish there were open source chips in this category. Not that anyone could afford to produce it, but I believe Software for a chip with a new instruction set would be more adapted if you could look everything up
RISC-V is open source. Lots of boards are moving to RISC-V.
Well it seems I am not up to day on the topic. This is great
There are, Risc-V has been hard at work with several partners (including Bosch and Qualcomm) to bring comparable RISC SoCs to consumer markets (there are already industrial offerings). But it's not fast nor cheap to do it. It also has a major drawback that's never talked about that, unlike x86, SoCs become obsolete way sooner for a much higher upfront cost. So, an upgradeable Risc-V option is kind of an elusive idea, for most of the computing power and energy consumption advantages come from the System on a chip design. Today people expect more storage space than ever, and to play with the newer and most powerful graphics options. Something that SoCs cannot change fast or easily.
Software support is also the worst point right now, a problem that Apple addressed by bearing the brunt of the port and compatibility work. But it's not so simple for other vendors who have to rely on third parties to make their software available in their platform.
Why spend more in a new laptop that is barely just as powerful and runs none of the software you want? Apple cult clout is the only thing leading the sales of the Apple Silicon. And software developers are not interested on porting their software to a platform with no users.
On the other hand Risc-V has only existed since 2015, so it's massive strides and advances are actually quite impressive. And with more governments looking to become independent from Chinese transistors we might be looking at a new processor arch era, though only after a short growing pains period that we are in right now.
Except that their implementation of USB-C will be way slower than the lightning port.Edit: I've been schooled.
The lightning port is USB 2. The 15 is USB 2, powered by the same USB 2 chipset as the 14 pro. The only difference is the connector not the cables or encoding.
The 15 pro has USB 3, which is faster than the lighting port ever was.
Oh, I've been schooled. Thanks.
lmao what?
Yeah wtf is apple innovating?
Coincidentally, USB C. Just not on their mobile devices.
They were some of the first to ship a laptop with USB C, and they went balls out.
Not coincidentally. Ironically.
No coincidence, Apple helped design USB-C. They have been slowly transitioning for years but everyone thinks the EU “made” them switch.
USBC has been around for years now, so why not make the switch before they're legally required to, if not to keep users on proprietary cables for just a little longer?
USC-C spec was finalized about two years after they made the switch to Lightning. The first smartphone with USB-C came 6 months after that finalization. Apple wanted to get rid the 30 pin and felt the uncertainty around USB-C timeline was too high, so they rolled their own.
If they switched to USB-C for phones just 2-3 years after Lightning it would’ve been a terrible experience for iPhone users.
I remember the outrage around moving to lightning. Doing it again so soon after for a connector that’s (slightly) more fragile and provided no real benefit would have seriously hurt sales.
i just had a memory show up in my facebook timeline with a comparison of the number of ports Apple had used on the iPhone and how many Samsung had used. samsung had used something like a dozen in the same timeframe of about 5 years but everyone was pissed that the 30 pin was going away. and on top of that, lightning was introduced as 'a port for a decade' which, incidentally, it's been in use for... 10 years.
Are you serious with that comment? EU definitely made them switch.
Did they make them switch the MacBook to USB-C? Did they make them switch the iPad to USB-C?
No. What's your point?
The EU probably made them switch.
That is absolute bullshit. Sure he was an asshole to his co-workers and even his family, but I'm so tired of this false narrative that acts like Jobs is completely overrated.
Yeah remember when they stole the click wheel concept from...oh wait they didn't steal that. Remember when they stole MacOS from....oh wait...they didn't do that either.
Stop being an armchair expert on something you have zero clue about. JFC.
'Good artists copy; great artists steal' -Steve Jobs, proudly bragging about stealing ideas.
Such as the mouse which they stole from Xerox. There are many examples of this for people who don't have apple dick in their mouths
XWindows? Was that what you were going to say?
Wow, you are really digging the bottom of the barrel...
They can’t. It’s clearly stated that the USB connector is still limited to the lightning speed.
Apparently the Pro version has USB 3.0. Still mediocre compared to new Android phones (not just the flagships) that are pushing Thunderbolt.
Hooking up your android phone to an ultrawide with built-in dock is still funny, but not very useful.
I did it once with a Windows Phone. Bar the novelty thing, it is not something I found useful
What android phone supports thunderbolt?
I got USB 3.2+ confused with Thunderbolt, since the terms are used intermixed. I mean USB alt-mode (display and peripherals)
There is no such thing as ‘lightning speed’. It’s just a connector, not a data communication standard. The non-pro iPhone 15 uses the same SoC as last year’s pro models, which happens to have an USB 2.0 controller. The new SoC used in the 15 Pro models have a 10 gbit USB 3.0 controller on board.
“Still limited to the same speed of the model using the lightning connector” did not have the same ring to it.
Did not know they finally moved to a usb3 chipset on the pro when I commented, good to hear.
I bet you also think it's the year of the Linux desktop 🙄