Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | manuelabeledo's commentslogin

> Try to set up a hotspot, there is no button to turn the hotspot on/off.

I’m confused, which button? Do Android phones come with a physical button to enable hotspot?


Just a quick shortcut

How are they on par SoC-wise? Last time I checked, Qualcomm was still trying to catch up to Apple.

Well, recheck.

Both Qualcomm and Mediatek have caught up on the phone SoC market.

The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has a slightly better CPU than the A19 Pro but a slightly worse GPU. Apple has a very slight advantage in watt usage but that's more than offset by the battery gap. Same thing with the Dimensity 9500.

The SoC market is now extremely competitive.


Beats A19 Pro in Geekbench, at 65% higher power consumption.

How is that a win?


One, you are entirely moving the goal post. Nothing was said of winning. The discussion was about catching up and catching up they did. As I said, the market is competitive.

Two, because the actual power consumption is not 65% higher - that's peak - and high end Chinese phones have batteries significantly bigger than the iPhone so you still get better screen time between charges in the end.


I think it’s fair to say that a SoC should perform better at higher wattages, so my comment is definitely relevant.

Regardless, I don’t understand how you can say that I’m moving goalposts when I mention performance per watt, which is absolutely relevant when talking about smartphone SoC performance, and then you bring up battery capacity, which is not.


Your initial question was "How are they on par SoC-wise?"

They are on par because they now sometimes beat Apple top of the line A-chips on performance be it single core, multicores or GPU and do so within a power budget which allows the phone they ship in to be competitive screen-on time wise.

Apple doesn't have a one generation lead anymore which is a huge change compared to only three years ago.

You are moving the goalposts because the discussion was always about the gap between Apple and its competitors and you have entirely shifted to peak consumption when it was clear the conclusion would not be the one you want/expect.


The whole claim that Qualcomm is on par with Apple predicates upon results from benchmarking tools, which stress CPU and GPU and thus induce peak power consumption.

If we were to look at more thorough reviews, e.g. Geekerwan, they always include TDP and power consumption, because that gives the necessary context to understand the results.

And obviously I’m not denying that Mediatek and Qualcomm have massively improved their designs, but they aren’t on par when we account all the things that matter.

Your argument is that, since manufacturers are putting larger batteries in phones, SoC power consumption shouldn’t matter. That is moving the goalpost, because you introduce a variable that should be irrelevant to SoC performance testing to dismiss my observation.


While not as popular as Android, last time I checked iOS was at 28% market share. That’s hardly “almost nobody”.

The iOS YouTube app is not worse than the one in Android. Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least, there is one more app to choose (Messages). And I’m curious to know what makes Antenna Pod so much better than the thousands of other podcast apps out there.

Social media apps have historically been worse in Android, because of lax app and privacy controls.

> What else is there, where is the advantage?

Personally, I’d rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone.


>at the very least, there is one more app to choose (Messages).

How's that different than Google Messages being exclusive to Android?


RCS is not exclusive to Android, the point is moot.

Everyone I know on iOS just uses Messages, they don’t feel a need for other apps.

People on Android I’ve run into seem to have a half dozen apps and use anything but the built in messaging.

A few months ago while on a trip I ran into an older couple that wanted some picture I took in a place they weren’t physically up to going. They were not tech savvy at all. Had they been on iOS, they would have just been using Messages and it would have been easy. They had Android, and the guy opened about 5 or 6 different messaging apps, not really knowing what any of them were, it seemed like a real mess. I sent them using Messages over RCS, assuming they’d go to Google Messages, or whatever the default equivalent standard app is for Google (they seem to have changed it a dozen times). It could be that the pictures were taking a while to send, my phone showed they sent, but he had no idea where to look or where they might have went, despite having so many messaging apps. I hope he is able to find them or they came through with a notification once he had a better single.

Having one good app that everyone uses is better than the default app being sub-par, or so constantly in flux that the users and smattered about to dozens of different apps that can’t talk to each other.


> Texting in iOS is arguably better or, at the very least

Since some updates ago, my keyboard is still broken if I type too fast, and autocorrect been essentially broken for the same amount of time. Must be happening for ~years now, still waiting for a new update to finally fix it.

At least on Android you can change the keyboard to something else if you'd like, instead of being stuck with what your OS developer forces on you. Wish I had that option now.


I have been using SwiftKey keyboard on iOS exclusively since 2018 and have had very few issues compared to Android where it regularly crashed

A lot of the apps, not just the banking apps, but food delivery etc, restrict using alternative keyboards, leaving you with a default one, which is especially jarring for a multi-lingual countries where you typically need keyboards for English + language 2 and 3.

I had to give ap on a swiftkey iOS for that reason


iOS keyboards are hardly different from one another

Hasn’t happened to me, but I guess that you could always install a third party keyboard. Both Microsoft and Google have offerings in the App Store.

If you turn off swipe or swift or whatever they call it the iOS default keyboard is much better

The keyboard can be changed in iOS.

> Personally, I’d rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone.

I mean, one could say the exact same thing but swapping Google with Apple.


Google core business is ads. It is not the same.

Apple's core business is trapping users into their walled garden so they can rent seek.

Whichever one you think is worse is really just a reflection of your own personal values. I value computing freedom above all.


> Apple's core business is trapping users into their walled garden so they can rent seek.

Apple’s core business is selling hardware. Their services revenue is not even close to their hardware revenue.


Yes, trapping users into their walled hardware garden so they can rent seek.

You buy a phone, and you're forever forced into buying only their peripherals.


That’s demonstrably untrue.

You could say that there are Apple devices that do not work well or don’t work at all without another Apple device, and off the top of my head I would say the only ones are the Watch and the HomePod, but most alternative devices work fine with Apple ones, e.g Chromecast, Garmin watches, Google Home hubs, etc.

And even so, the same could be said about Android only features and devices, e.g. Samsung Watch doesn’t work without an Android phone, Google Earbuds are feature capped on iPhone, etc.

IMO, if we are looking at rent seeking behaviors, Google shoving Gemini down the throats of Google Home users, with no chance of rolling back if they don’t like it, is way worse.


Demonstrably not true? What did you do with the 200+ Apple-only charging cables?

What are you even talking about? The only Apple exclusive connector in recent memory was Lightning, and it’s been phased out.

Did you get rid of all your micro USB cables and devices once the transition to USB-C began for Android?


> I value computing freedom above all.

So perhaps you should consider switching to GNU/Linux phones.


One should read, carefully, the Apple EULA and TOS.

Is it worse than Google?

The difference between Apple vs Google is that with Apple you ARE the ad. They don't need advertising when they know people will adopt them and then be forced into their ecosystem.

I’m not sure what you are trying to say here. Even if that was true, my point was that an ad driven business like Google, would be incentivized to monetize all the aspects of my life they could have access to. If that’s not what Apple is doing, compared to Google, then that’s a win I guess?

> would be incentivized to monetize all the aspects of my life they could have access to

You're literally describing Apple's business model.


That’s false.

Google most profitable business line is ads. They profit from literally knowing everything about you, then selling access to that to ad bidders. Apple makes the most money from devices. It is not the same.


> They don't need advertising

Then why is it that they advertise? We just last week had a thread about how the Apple app store is making ads blend in more with organic results. So not only are they advertising to users (which admittedly was news to me), they are engaging in dark patterns to make those ads more enticing. It doesn't seem like being locked into the Apple ecosystem (and paying their tax on hardware) is actually benefiting the users.


That's where GrapheneOS comes in. You can go fully Google-free or use their "sandboxed Google libraries" to run the Google apps as a normal user.

I may be missing something, but from the article it seems that the lawsuit alleges that Apple a) does not allow third party NFC payments, and b) they charge banks a fee for using Apple Pay, which could result in these fees being passed to consumers.

While the first point has not been true since 2024, the second is a bit odd to me, since banks and credit card issuers have been collecting a percentage of sales from merchants since forever. My question is, why wouldn't this lawsuit apply to the oligopoly banks and credit providers hold on the traditional point of sale?


Because they aren't a monopoly.

Card networks and banks are definitely oligopolies. 90% of the card market is in the hands of two companies, MasterCard and Visa, and three banks effectively own the consumer banking market, Lloyds, HSBC and Barclays.

Again, it’s odd to me that this organization is going after Apple when they themselves are saying that these supposed hidden fees are being passed from banks to consumers. Shouldn’t they go after these banks, then? Why aren’t they suing Visa and MasterCard, when their business model is supposedly the same?


> Why aren’t they suing Visa and MasterCard, when their business model is supposedly the same?

Because, again, they are not a monopoly.

"The lawsuit takes aim at Apple Pay, which they say has been the only contactless payment service available for iPhone users in Britain over the past decade."


But that’s not true. As I said, it was made available to third parties in 2024.

Again, it’s disingenuous to claim that Apple is a monopoly, while ignoring the fact that two companies have dominated the entire card network market for decades. Also, there’s no such thing as a “monopoly” on payments in their own platform. If that were true, anyone could sue American Express, the payment network, for not offering Visa cards. Completely absurd.


The clue is in "mono".

“Monopoly” is a legal term, not something anyone can make up on the go.

Anyway, it’s quite clear to me that this lawsuit, if it was truthfully about damages to consumers, should have been directed towards banks and credit card issuers.


This assumes a perfect justice system, and that’s not the case.

Regardless, the judicial branch is a perfect example of the limits of freedom in practice, and the legislative does, in fact, decide who one can and cannot sue.


Don’t all of these run in the browser nowadays?


While office can run in the browser, the browser version sucks and I commonly need to open the files in the desktop version. This often happens when there's a browser version or a mobile version or an app version. There's a lack of feature parity.


The browser versions aren't as good as the desktop versions. And Googles alternatives aren't as good as Microsofts. Both do 60% of the job, which is probably enough for 80% of the people.


The browser versions (and the mobile versions) are nowhere near parity with the desktop Windows version, even in quite basic matters of styling. To be honest this annoyed me enough in the end that I just moved to a PandaDoc/CSS/PDF workflow and honestly I now have both a simpler editing process, and a more powerful engine for customisation.


I don't think you'll ever see a web version of Visual Studio.


Is Visual Studio still relevant if you're not developing native Windows software?


I'm currently developing ASP.Net Core services and modern .Net is quite nice. Everyone around me uses absolutely free Visual Studio Community edition, so it would be weird to not use it.


Only limited versions, and the usability downgrade is severe.


This looks like the complete opposite, though? It’s easy and provides a convenient way to integrate SSH and TouchID.


The examples you mentioned would not fall into ICE scope of action, but CBP.

> Yet we are supposed to let people in without documentation? Without background checks? What kind of insanity is that.

Let me tell you that, in my experience, the US very much enforces all these requirements, to the point where foreigners have to pay the US government hundreds of dollars for the _chance_ of getting a temporary visa. And again, ICE has nothing to do with the process.


I have. Skype was very popular in many places around the world.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: