In <news:oecrla$mif$
1...@dont-email.me>, sms suggested:
> Android is an OS. Apple iOS mobile device cameras are hardware. That
> statement makes no sense.
You have to realize that both nospam and Savagecuck will argue semantics as
if they paid for an argument and they are going to get that argument, even
where no disagreement exists.
So, for example, it's already verified that nospam argues over the
semantics of "static" versus "dynamic" when everyone knows what we're
talking about.
Likewise, it is well known already that Savageduck brought up a corner case
of external hardware for iOS that "is" a camera.
Just as nospam purposefully convolutes "automatic call recording" to merely
"audio recording", and where Jolly Roger purposefully convolutes "sans
jailbreaking" to "with jailbreaking", and just as both nospam and Jolly
Roger repeatedly posted screenshots of software that obtained a cell tower
unique ID but that software was deprecated *years* ago by Apple (and
therefore no longer exists in a practical sense) ....
The whole reason for that ios camera stilted language is to prevent
Savageduck from bringing up the meaningless corner case, which even he
knows to be a red herring.
> Some Android phones had a dual lens camera setup, and Apple also
> recognized the advantages of such a setup and included it.
You and I speak facts, I agree.
The question is valid.
The question was whether there was anything useful that Apple iOS phones
have in terms of camera capability that Android doesn't already have.
I think the answer is obvious to all by now.
> Nearly all new features of smart phones first appear on Android devices
> because the market for Android devices is so competitive, and Android
> users don't have the loyalty to one company that Apple users have.
You speak logic, as I do.
Apple, in the end, can never compete with the functionality of Android for
a variety of reasons, some of which you noted, and which might include:
a. The Apple customer base is less likely to switch to better equipment
b. The Apple customer base believes in the Marketing Machine message.
c. The Apple customer base here seems to easily accept baseless claims.
d. The Android competition is fierce
etc.
For which the logical conclusion is that...
Nothing useful has been proposed that Apple iOS cameras have that isn't
already on Android.
In fact, a detailed assessment of the quality of results shows that there
are 9 Android mobile devices with better camera quality of results
(pictures and video) than the best that Apple has to offer consumers.
And a dozen that are better or equal in camera QOR to what Apple currently
offers.
I only state verifiable fact.
> Clearly being first with some new feature is not necessarily an
> advantage in terms of maximizing profits.
The only one who claims that "being first" is a big deal seems to be
nospam. I'm just saying there's no evidence that iOS is any better, and, in
fact, Android already has all that nospam claims iOS has that Android
doesn't have.
> Apple is able to roll out new
> features in a way that encourages iPhone owners to upgrade.
Yes. The typical iOS buyer is just a sheep in the herd.
> While I
> occasionally see someone with a two generation old iPhone, it's not that
> common since they really want the new features in the newer models.
You will never hear me deprecate the power that the Apple Marketing Machine
has over its user base.
It's almost as if they implanted an Apple Marketing Machine Interpreter in
their frontal cortex.
> For
> Android, it's common to see three and four year old phones still being
> used because they had the features that the buyer wanted so much sooner.
Indeed. My circa 2012 Android phone (top of the line at that time), has
more app functionality than the top of the line iOS phones have today.
But it's not because of the hardware that Android phones have so much more
functionality than iOS phones; it's Apple who cripples what iOS phone apps
can do.
Those are verifiable facts.
And I only speak verifiable facts.