iPhone 5 versus Android

[Damenc]

Iphone 5 is not that tough as we are starting to see the "flaws" coming out, now is a good time to do some reading as ppl have had the Iphone 5 in their hands and have started using them. Yes, the Iphone 5 is "cooler", it has too, it's Apple, always has been their motto. I'm not bias but I've had more cell phones then I want to remember. My household currently has 2 Iphone 3GS's, 1 Iphone 4 and a Galaxy S3. It really comes down to what you want to do with your phone and what suits your needs on a daily basis, once you get over the "show my friends how cool my phone is" you'll be in a better mindset to make a logical decision.

Hey, I would buy an Iphone 5 if I had the money just because well, it's and "Iphone 5" but I have 3 kids to put in university, i don't have that luxury. I just invested my money on a S3 and have been very happy with it. Of course they are always "cons", any phone does, doesn't matter how cool it is or who makes it, there really is no perfect phone.

The internet is a wonderful thing, you can pretty much research anything at your finger tips these days, take advantage of it. The main reasons why I got the S3 was from research, it took me a good 3 months to make a decision and I believe I've made the right one. Here are 2 main reasons our of many why I went with the S3, maybe you can benefit from my experience...

1. Battery, really, how hard is it to put a back panel on the phone for a removable battery, there's been countless times where I've run out of batteries on my Iphone and I had to put on battery case pack or put it on the charger before I can use it again, that's down time I can't afford. Majority of phones out there have removable batteries, so Apple, there's no excuse.

2. Memory expansion, again, no excuse, most phones have them, why not Iphones. ie. I have 2100 songs on my phone, this equals to 5 gig, that's now taken up my precious internal phone memory, no more room for apps, I'm constantly deleting apps to make room for new. I do not have this problem anymore with my S3.

* These were 2 of the big deal breakers for me and if you research, it's been 2 ongoing complaints about the Iphones since the 3GS, 3 generations later and obviously Apple hasn't been "hearing" their users, that's not cool. I think I speak for most, that I would sacrifice a bit bigger Iphone for the removable battery and memory expansion.

That said, the Iphones are still good devices no doubt, but not for users like me. Who knows, maybe the Iphone 6 will change all this, wouldn't it be nice, Iphone 6 with bigger screen, memory expansion, removeable battery, Apple dock AND standard usb connector and a more customizable IOS..... ahhh... we can only dream.

Good luck to you all looking for the device that's right for YOU.

Damen

2.

 

[Damenc]

In my opinion, the iPhone 5 is perfect. It's fast and has great build quality. I think it's just the fact that the OS is basically the same. Funny how a phone can be pretty much perfect, but that's not always good enough lol.

People who like technology want new stuff, and currently, android is giving them that experience. Really creates quite a rift in the market lol.

I'm a little disappointed at the 5 honestly, I don't think from reading and seeing some user reviews that the quality is better, the design is better but the aluminum backing is somewhat of an issue for scratching easily. Yes, it is faster hands down but don't forget, it's running an OS that's designed specifically for that hardware so technically it should run faster. But also don't forget that Apple Iphones have much more potential then what Apple is letting you do with it's locked OS. I've been jailbreaking Iphones for 4 years now, and honestly, and Apple IOS jailbroken with tweaks and customized features is what the Android is today.

Trust me, take an Iphone 4/4s, jailbreak it, add tweaks and full customization, it won't run as fast as out of the box, I guarantee you that, same I suspect with the Iphone 5. Of course, if Android limits their OS to certain "practical" functions and lock their OS, it would be lightning fast also.

But you're correct in the sense that it is good to have the IOS and AndroidOS competing against each, gives the companies incentive to always improve which the end-user will benefit from the most

 

[mynamestiki1]

Im posting this without even bothering to read anything other than the Original Post.

**** the IPhone. Its an expensive peice of garbage. The only thing that makes the Iphone worth having is the fact you can jailbreak it. And the only thing that makes jailbreaking the IPhone worth the enormous hassle is so it can do the things Android can do before you even root it.

IPhone sucks. Light shines on Android and angels sing.

 

[Damenc]

Im posting this without even bothering to read anything other than the Original Post.

**** the IPhone. Its an expensive peice of garbage. The only thing that makes the Iphone worth having is the fact you can jailbreak it. And the only thing that makes jailbreaking the IPhone worth the enormous hassle is so it can do the things Android can do before you even root it.

IPhone sucks. Light shines on Android and angels sing.

Read the post before yours, LOL, it's basically what you just said.

 

[folkieboater]

I mean you're comparing an outdated android device to an iPhone 5. Of course i5 gets the win. How about I compare the galaxy s3 to first generation iPhone? Lol

I never said I was comparing it to any other phone....I said it was only 2 months old to me (released in March in this country....is that outdated in android world??? poor show if it is, the average contract would be 18-24 months) and had never been fit for purpose.

 

[chanchan05]

I never said I was comparing it to any other phone....I said it was only 2 months old to me (released in March in this country....is that outdated in android world??? poor show if it is, the average contract would be 18-24 months) and had never been fit for purpose.

You don't count by how much old the phone was released in your country, you count it hy how old it was since it was announced. For example, what if Samsung never bothered to release the Galaxy SII in Somalia last year, and only did so now? Somalians will see it as the latest and newest Android they got, but its still using last year's hardware.

Furthermore even if the L3 was just announced last January, you are falling into the 'cheap android vs iPhone' trap. A cheap Android will always lose against a current gen iPhone because the cheaper an Android is, the weaker and more outdated its hardware is. There is a reason for it to be cheap. Honestly, how can you expect an entry level Android device to compete with an iPhone? You actually were comparing an LG L3 against an iPhone 5, something that costs 5x more? There is a reason why the L3 is dirt cheap. Such comparisons, forgive the term, only shows consumer ignorance. Its obvious that an entry level device is worse than the latest and greatest of the competitor.

First off, an LG L3 runs an 800mhz ARM11 processor and an Adreno 200GPU, and 384mb RAM. In contrast an iPhone3gs runs a 680Mhz CPU, a PowerVR530GPU and 512mb RAM. All things considered, both of these phones won't be able to stand up against the current generation phones and both are outdated hardware. In essence, the L3 vs iPhone5 is equivalent to an iPhone3GS vs a Galaxy S3. The 3GS being a piece of garbage compared to theS3 in performance, power and capability.

I honestly really don't what to say to someone who thinks that a smartphone that costs 5x less than an iPhone 5 can even compete. Again I repeat, there is a reason why its cheap. Its like having getting a new Sentra and expecting it to run as fast as a 2005 Porsche GT Carrera, then bashing Nissan for having slow cars, without having tried the GTR36 Turbo. You were comparing the L3 to something out of its league.

The cheap phones are being released by the Android makers to cater to people who can't afford to buy phones with the latest and greatest hardware (iPhone 5, Galaxy S3, HTC OneX, LG 4x). If you went for something cheaper, theb don't expect it to have the same performance.


For the record, an S2 with 16GB onboard memory has 2GB set for app installation, and another 11GB for storage of photos and other data. You can install over 200apps on an S2 without getting a memory full error. Again your complaint is simply due to the fact that you are using a cheap phone with outdated hardware.

 

[AF87]

How can anyone not like Apple unless they can't afford it? It's glass and aluminum. It's a beautiful thing and is revolutionary.

That's right, but don't you ever want your phone to be individual? fitted to your needs?

 

[folkieboater]

You don't count by how much old the phone was released in your country, you count it hy how old it was since it was announced. For example, what if Samsung never bothered to release the Galaxy SII in Somalia last year, and only did so now? Somalians will see it as the latest and newest Android they got, but its still using last year's hardware.

So what you are saying is that android manufacturers are announcing up front to look good then, by the time the product is released it is already out of date. Great marketing!!!!

Furthermore even if the L3 was just announced last January, you are falling into the 'cheap android vs iPhone' trap. A cheap Android will always lose against a current gen iPhone because the cheaper an Android is, the weaker and more outdated its hardware is. There is a reason for it to be cheap. Honestly, how can you expect an entry level Android device to compete with an iPhone? You actually were comparing an LG L3 against an iPhone 5, something that costs 5x more? There is a reason why the L3 is dirt cheap. Such comparisons, forgive the term, only shows consumer ignorance. Its obvious that an entry level device is worse than the latest and greatest of the competitor.

First off, an LG L3 runs an 800mhz ARM11 processor and an Adreno 200GPU, and 384mb RAM. In contrast an iPhone3gs runs a 680Mhz CPU, a PowerVR530GPU and 512mb RAM. All things considered, both of these phones won't be able to stand up against the current generation phones and both are outdated hardware. In essence, the L3 vs iPhone5 is equivalent to an iPhone3GS vs a Galaxy S3. The 3GS being a piece of garbage compared to theS3 in performance, power and capability.

My OH has a iPhone 3GS, which is over 2 years old.....still fit for purpose, unlike my L3.

I honestly really don't what to say to someone who thinks that a smartphone that costs 5x less than an iPhone 5 can even compete. Again I repeat, there is a reason why its cheap. Its like having getting a new Sentra and expecting it to run as fast as a 2005 Porsche GT Carrera, then bashing Nissan for having slow cars, without having tried the GTR36 Turbo. You were comparing the L3 to something out of its league.

But the cheaper car would still do what it was designed for i.e. get you from A to B.

The cheap phones are being released by the Android makers to cater to people who can't afford to buy phones with the latest and greatest hardware (iPhone 5, Galaxy S3, HTC OneX, LG 4x). If you went for something cheaper, theb don't expect it to have the same performance.

Thereby devaluing the brand....it would be like Porsche re-badging a Skoda to get a mass market vehicle

For the record, an S2 with 16GB onboard memory has 2GB set for app installation, and another 11GB for storage of photos and other data. You can install over 200apps on an S2 without getting a memory full error. Again your complaint is simply due to the fact that you are using a cheap phone with outdated hardware.

My point exactly - the manufacturer has decided what you can do with the storage....If the user doesn't want 11Gb of photos/music the majority of the storage is useless. Why can't the user decide how they want to use their phone.

Having said all that, my final comment on this matter is that the way I have been treated on this forum has convinced me, against my better judgement, to go to Apple.

When I posted 2 months ago asking if the problems I was experiencing were due to the phone or the OS nobody could be bothered to even answer, yet now I'm an idiot who can't afford to buy a decent phone.

Thanks people and goodbye.

 

[chanchan05]

The person may not see this but I will answer for the benefit of others

So what you are saying is that android manufacturers are announcing up front to look good then, by the time the product is released it is already out of date. Great marketing!!!!

No. THe SIII and OneX for example, when announced, and when released, and even now 4mos after release are still the best and greatest of the Android.

My OH has a iPhone 3GS, which is over 2 years old.....still fit for purpose, unlike my L3.

The 3GS is a former flagship. The L3 never was. Which means it will have the specs flagships always have, extended storage. In comparison, a 2 year old Galaxy S has 2GB internal storage able to handle more than 200 apps and an additional 25GB storage for media.

But the cheaper car would still do what it was designed for i.e. get you from A to B.

Argument invalid. The L3 is still able to do what it was designed for, make an Android smartphone available to the masses. It can call text, add some apps and games and other stuff. In the end, a phone is designed to make calls and send SMS.

Thereby devaluing the brand....it would be like Porsche re-badging a Skoda to get a mass market vehicle

And the problem here exactly is? Toyota is doing fine selling mass market vehicles. Porshe is doing fine doing luxury sports cars. They both sell to different markets. I see no problem in Android manufacturers catering to the mass market.

My point exactly - the manufacturer has decided what you can do with the storage....If the user doesn't want 11Gb of photos/music the majority of the storage is useless. Why can't the user decide how they want to use their phone.

Not true the only things that need to reside in the 2GB app storage section are the apps themselves. Several apps, mostly games, have additional data that are in the size of from 100MB to even a couple of GB. These can be put on the SD card. Also, as of Android 4.0 and beyond, the internal storage can entirely be used for apps. Which means as in the case of my Tab running 4.0.4, there is no more internal partition, the entire 14GB useable space is app installable.

Having said all that, my final comment on this matter is that the way I have been treated on this forum has convinced me, against my better judgement, to go to Apple.

When I posted 2 months ago asking if the problems I was experiencing were due to the phone or the OS nobody could be bothered to even answer, yet now I'm an idiot who can't afford to buy a decent phone.

Thanks people and goodbye.

If its against your better judgement, why go Apple? It seems to me you are just throwing that around as an excuse to go Apple. You don't have to use the reasons you have in leaving Android. If you feel you want an iPhone go for one. For the record, you could have always bumped your post if it got buried and no one saw it. Or post in a more active section of the forum.

No one called you an idiot. The term "consumer ignorance" does not signify that. It just means you bought things without knowing what you spent for. I never said you couldn't buy a decent phone. But you did buy what can be said as rock bottom cheapest and worst spec'd Android phone of the year, then you will compare it to the greatest phone of the competing brand. Unfair comparison.

 

[kevincott]

* These were 2 of the big deal breakers for me and if you research, it's been 2 ongoing complaints about the Iphones since the 3GS, 3 generations later and obviously Apple hasn't been "hearing" their users, that's not cool. I think I speak for most, that I would sacrifice a bit bigger Iphone for the removable battery and memory expansion.

To be fair, I think Apple's reasoning for no SD or removable back-plate is obvious: they want total control over the device.

Apple's control is one of the things many people find desirable. Fewer malware/viruses, ease of use, and timely updates are the result.


It is unfair for the general public to applaud Apple's success from having total control yet complain about SDcard/back-plate.

 

[Damenc]

To be fair, I think Apple's reasoning for no SD or removable back-plate is obvious: they want total control over the device.

Apple's control is one of the things many people find desirable. Fewer malware/viruses, ease of use, and timely updates are the result.


It is unfair for the general public to applaud Apple's success from having total control yet complain about SDcard/back-plate.

Control of device? really? It's a phone and "media" device, a 16GB Iphone does not go a long way, trust me, I've had two Iphones and please don't say Cloud. And if you want to go to 32GB it's $100 more same for 64GB, you and I both know solid state memory is cheap, it's a complete cash grab on Apple's part, there's your success story.

Malware/Viruses, I've been using Android OS for 3 yrs, never had a virus or malware. I'm not applauding Apple's success.. sick of their greed more like it.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm not putting down Apple, I'm merely giving reasons why I made the jump to Android. I was a long time Blackberry user, then went to Apple because they had a product that met my needs at that time, this time around, Android won the battle for me.

Don't forget, Apple almost went out of business, if it weren't for "other" big financial backing and their flagship Ipod device, they would of never got to were they were today.

 

[OfTheDamned]

Apple's control is one of the things many people find desirable. Fewer malware/viruses, ease of use, and timely updates are the result.

FWIW, malware and viruses are written for the most popular platform at the time. The reason PCs get more viruses than Macs has to do with the overall popularity and market saturation of Windows and nothing to do with anything Apple has actually done. Why write a virus for something that isn't going to hit as many people? The claims made by Apple about viruses may end up blowing up their face though. When you have a portion of the market that is not using any sort of anti-virus because "Macs don't get viruses" they are bound to get hit with some sort of malware, trojan or virus to steal information. Who would you target? The guy buying the $500 PC or the guy buying the $1200 Mac?

With the iPhone's popularity it may end up being the one with the big target on it. When you have one straight forward OS vs a dozen customized OSs which one would you go after? Things like the SMS virus in 2008 or 2009 will probably become a greater problem down the road when more people are using smartphones than computers.

The more people that think their device is invincible the more risk their is.

 

[chanchan05]

FWIW, malware and viruses are written for the most popular platform at the time. The reason PCs get more viruses than Macs has to do with the overall popularity and market saturation of Windows and nothing to do with anything Apple has actually done. Why write a virus for something that isn't going to hit as many people? The claims made by Apple about viruses may end up blowing up their face though. When you have a portion of the market that is not using any sort of anti-virus because "Macs don't get viruses" they are bound to get hit with some sort of malware, trojan or virus to steal information. Who would you target? The guy buying the $500 PC or the guy buying the $1200 Mac?

With the iPhone's popularity it may end up being the one with the big target on it. When you have one straight forward OS vs a dozen customized OSs which one would you go after? Things like the SMS virus in 2008 or 2009 will probably become a greater problem down the road when more people are using smartphones than computers.

The more people that think their device is invincible the more risk their is.

Actually, Apple already removed the 'no viruses' claim on their website after about 1million mac users were hit by a virus last April. The legal team probably pulled it down in fear since everybody was being litigation-happy lately.

 

[OfTheDamned]

Actually, Apple already removed the 'no viruses' claim on their website after about 1million mac users were hit by a virus last April. The legal team probably pulled it down in fear since everybody was being litigation-happy lately.

I heard about that, but there are still a ton of people that think they are immune.

 

[aysiu]

I see very little reasonable discussion about malware online. Oftentimes tech "news" sites or blogs will make it sound as if there's malware everywhere and absolutely no way to escape being infected. And then there are bloggers and forum posters who think their operating system is invincible.

Can't we just be reasonable?

Malware's mere existence doesn't mean you'll automatically get infected. Most of the time infection requires user action. For example, all the Android malware that's often "on the rise" or "up 400%" is in trojan form. Every single Android malware in existence from 2008 is a .apk you have to choose to install yourself, whether it's from the Android Market/Google Play (not likely) or some third-party store (more likely). Doesn't mean Android is invincible. Also doesn't mean the sky is falling.

 

[bigdrew]

FWIW, malware and viruses are written for the most popular platform at the time. The reason PCs get more viruses than Macs has to do with the overall popularity and market saturation of Windows and nothing to do with anything Apple has actually done. Why write a virus for something that isn't going to hit as many people? The claims made by Apple about viruses may end up blowing up their face though. When you have a portion of the market that is not using any sort of anti-virus because "Macs don't get viruses" they are bound to get hit with some sort of malware, trojan or virus to steal information. Who would you target? The guy buying the $500 PC or the guy buying the $1200 Mac?

With the iPhone's popularity it may end up being the one with the big target on it. When you have one straight forward OS vs a dozen customized OSs which one would you go after? Things like the SMS virus in 2008 or 2009 will probably become a greater problem down the road when more people are using smartphones than computers.

The more people that think their device is invincible the more risk their is.

This is true, but there's another reason too--sideloading. Android has that little checkbox to allow software from other sources, and it's not hard for people to find. My recollection is that there has been very few cases of trojan horse or virus type malware on the official Android market. The large majority of reported malware ends up being traced to random .apk's downloaded from shady websites, usually originating from China (no offense to any Chinese members).

There's still a risk, Google wouldn't have deployed App Bouncer if there wasn't. But I think that risk is falsely aggrandized because it exploits people's fears and experiences with Windows malware. I'd still welcome a more manual vetting process for apps if Google decided to take that direction--not because Apple does it but because it's worked for Debian for almost 20 years now.

 

[jova33]

FWIW, malware and viruses are written for the most popular platform at the time. The reason PCs get more viruses than Macs has to do with the overall popularity and market saturation of Windows and nothing to do with anything Apple has actually done. Why write a virus for something that isn't going to hit as many people? The claims made by Apple about viruses may end up blowing up their face though. When you have a portion of the market that is not using any sort of anti-virus because "Macs don't get viruses" they are bound to get hit with some sort of malware, trojan or virus to steal information. Who would you target? The guy buying the $500 PC or the guy buying the $1200 Mac?

With the iPhone's popularity it may end up being the one with the big target on it. When you have one straight forward OS vs a dozen customized OSs which one would you go after? Things like the SMS virus in 2008 or 2009 will probably become a greater problem down the road when more people are using smartphones than computers.

The more people that think their device is invincible the more risk their is.

I honestly believe that alot viruses and malware are created by these antivirus companies. Like paying thugs for "protection" or they'll come tear apart your store.
I only use Windows for things I just can't figure out how to do in Linux and I get some free Windows programs licensed through work.

 

[Digital Controller]

God people writing books lol.

Anyhow wanted to offer my 2 cents, i heard it on this forum a couple days ago, saw the post, can't really remember where but i know someone said it.

The comparing benchmarks of the two phones is really secondary, since an iPhone's hardware is meant to run on iOS, without any customization, making it run flawlessly, however with an Android there is so much customization and different hardware to make up for, that is does run slower, just because of that, but i am willing to give up some speed to have a phone that I want, that is mine, and shaped for my needs.

I found the post

Remember that IOS is catered to Iphone hardware that's why it runs so fast and efficient out of the box. Jailbreak your Iphone and start pumping in tweaks, useful utils etc. it won't run as fast as it did out of the box Trust me, as an Iphone user for 3 years and heavy in the JB community, it's really not accurate to put a Iphone and an Android phone side by side and compare speed. There is so much customization that goes on with an android phone IMO that speed isn't always the decision maker. I prefer it to work the way "I" want it to then worry about the split second speed sacrifice... again, this is my preference.

 

[tvick]

My husband has had the iphones for quite a while, I on the other hand have always had the motorola droids. We constantly play a game of "my phone is better than your phone," so we see side by side the pros and cons. While the iphone has ease of use, the droids can do so much more. The iphones can not be customized like the droids can and with iphones you are always stuck with their apps. There are pros and cons to both, but I think the main one is durability. He has broken 2 iphones. Now he MUST use an Otterbox to keep his phone safe, but I and my kids have dropped my droid phones a lot without any harm. I use only a hard shell case and holster. I personally like the droid the best. It is much tougher and customizable and as far as service, we have Verizon and the service has been the same with both phones. So really it just depends on what you like the best and how rough you tend to be with your phone.

 

[Bolling]

Who cares about the hardware, it's the operating system that matters the most, and Android wins easily.

 

[ben7337]

I'll admit that android is the better OS for options, customization, and general compatiblity. However is anyone here worried about the iPhone 5 having a gpu that kills all competition? Someone brought it up earlier and the idea was struck down because the US version of the GS3 was benchmarked with the iPhone 5, but if you look at international GS3 benchmarks and even Qualcomm s4 pro benchmarks with the adreno 320 gpu, the iphone 5 smokes them all. In every test except ones where vsync limits fps to 60, and in one test with 1080p video offscreen, the iphone 5 gets at least 2x the performance of either one of the gs3 phones. Only in egypt classic 1080 offscreen does the galaxy s3 international get 57 fps, while the iphone 5 gets 91fps. Even then that's 1.59x the power.

Now looking at the adreno 320 gpu in upcoming phones, we see the iphone 5 beats the adreno 320 in nearly every test, and in ones where it doesn't win, it is barely edged out by a gpu only found in phones in south korea that were just released.

So does anyone feel like android is getting gpu's that are way too weak? Will the iphone start always having a stronger gpu than the competition when it comes out? I remember when apple used to use the powervr sgx 535 when other flagships had the 540, but now apple is clearly putting some gpu heft in their phones.

Granted I'm getting the feeling even the adreno 225 can play 1080p video, I am not sure on this, and it depends greatly on the video. Handling youtube is nothing like handling a decent 1080p encde with DD5.1. Either way I'd like to see android phones taking back the power claim because apple is seriously making me jealous.

 

[jova33]

Who cares about the hardware, it's the operating system that matters the most, and Android wins easily.

+1

 

[chanchan05]

I'll admit that android is the better OS for options, customization, and general compatiblity. However is anyone here worried about the iPhone 5 having a gpu that kills all competition? Someone brought it up earlier and the idea was struck down because the US version of the GS3 was benchmarked with the iPhone 5, but if you look at international GS3 benchmarks and even Qualcomm s4 pro benchmarks with the adreno 320 gpu, the iphone 5 smokes them all. In every test except ones where vsync limits fps to 60, and in one test with 1080p video offscreen, the iphone 5 gets at least 2x the performance of either one of the gs3 phones. Only in egypt classic 1080 offscreen does the galaxy s3 international get 57 fps, while the iphone 5 gets 91fps. Even then that's 1.59x the power.

Now looking at the adreno 320 gpu in upcoming phones, we see the iphone 5 beats the adreno 320 in nearly every test, and in ones where it doesn't win, it is barely edged out by a gpu only found in phones in south korea that were just released.

So does anyone feel like android is getting gpu's that are way too weak? Will the iphone start always having a stronger gpu than the competition when it comes out? I remember when apple used to use the powervr sgx 535 when other flagships had the 540, but now apple is clearly putting some gpu heft in their phones.

Granted I'm getting the feeling even the adreno 225 can play 1080p video, I am not sure on this, and it depends greatly on the video. Handling youtube is nothing like handling a decent 1080p encde with DD5.1. Either way I'd like to see android phones taking back the power claim because apple is seriously making me jealous.

The iPhone managed to get the next generation GPU because it came in later than the other devices. The next generation GPU used by Samsung is in the Galaxy Note 10.1, which uses the Mali T604. Samsung is also currently developing the Exynos 5, which is a dual core A15 with this GPU.