It was interesting to hear apple state that one of their goals for building products was to make them last longer in order to minimize waste. People often accuse hardware manufacturers, including apple, of intentional obsolescence. I am interested to see if they actually change anything about their process, software and hardware, to put any weight behind this claim, or if it is just marketing doublespeak.
Apple are already pretty good in this regard - their devices are expensive but made to last, and they directly support them for 4 or 5 years. The upcoming iOS release is supposed to be focused on getting better performance on old devices as well.
I don't agree with your comment. The updates Apple has released have made iPhone 6 and 6S unusable. Everyone is complaining about them, they transformed a perfect phone into something that makes you want to upgrade to a new phone.
They admitted to making a trade-off that would throttle performance with older batteries so that the phone wouldn't shut down when the CPU did not receive enough power. Turns out that trade-off was interpreted quite badly by some consumers who apparently would have preferred a phone that stayed as fast as the day they bought it, but instead crashed without warning with poor battery health.
Apple's iPhone 5s is getting it's sixth year of support starting with the next release of iOS.
If you splurge on Google's own flagship device with a similar pricing model, you only get two years of OS updates with an additional year of security updates.
I think it's significantly better than most non-Apple phones. But I think too that the there is significant invisible engineering required to make the device well recyclable after whatever the lifetime period is, and that's harder to judge. The only visible aspect of that is perhaps Apples acceptance of older units in trade, but it's indefinite, as one would really need a third-party assessment to know how well that was doing.
Imagine you tried to subject your computer to extreme physical conditions - every combination of humidity, heat, cold, pressure, submergence in liquid, dropped, bent, etc, for 18 hours a day for years. How long do you think it would last? Not very long, I’d suspect. I’m amazed phones last as long as they do for as hard as they’re used - harder and for longer hours than almost any consumer-level computers.
My wife's iPhone 6 (4 year old phone) is still snappy and will get iOS 12 in a few weeks. My Pixel XL (2 year old phone), to be fair, it's snappy but it's EOL in OS updates this fall. All while the iPhone 6 will most possibly get iOS 13. Maybe I am a sucker for Apple keynotes, but this emphasis on long term use makes me seriously consider to upgrade my XL to an Xr especially seeing how the 5S will get iOS 12.
I used my iphone 5 until last year and it was still in perfect working condition after replacing a new battery and I sold it for $120 and used that money to buy iphone 8 which i will hold on to as long as it is supported by apple.
By last year my 6Plus got really slow and sluggish with the release of iOS11 to the point it was barely usable for me. Switching between apps took ages and somestimes i waited seconds for the Keyboard top pop up. Hopefully iOS12 will be better for old devices. In the end I got a good deal on a used 7Plus and am happy with that.
It's partly the hardware manufacturers /processor makers fault as they stop providing drivers for older devices۔ The latest Android verions though google has made it that the Android can be updated without needing driver updates for the different chips so I expect google to update devices for longer in the future۔
Apple makes it own drivers though for iOS so it's still possible for them to update where as the drivers for Android come from the manufacturers. That's the reason google has moved to break Android in parts so that they can update the os without needing new drivers from the manufacturers. Will probably still take 2-3 years before Android devices at least google sold Android devices are updated for longer other manufacturers probably still won't. Samsung comes to mind they produce most internals themselves but still don't update where as Nvidia has been updating its shield tv for 4+ years because they control hardware so its possible.
I know it’s a few years ago now, but when my youngest started secondary school in 2016 I gave her my old iPhone 3GS which I’d found in a drawer. It worked fine, just about held a charge ok for a day of light use, and to my amazement even 7 years later the App Store still worked. I was able to download a few apps I’d bought back then that haven’t been updated or visible to me in the AppStore in years. I got her a new phone for Christmas, but it was great to see my old friend being so useful and loved for a few months after all that time.
From my experience, "intentional obsolescence" is myth. I got my iPhones since iPhone 3Gs in perfect working condition. My mom used iPhone 4 until I gave her 6 last month. Oh, by the way, iOS12beta is working quite well on (almost) 5 year old iPhone 5S.
A remark on a mid-2009 mbp I have at home. Bought it in 2009 (thanks, Captian Obvious) for GBP2200. It came with 8GB RAM, which got upgraded to 16GB about a year later, that was about GBP70. I replaced the HDD with an SSD two years ago for EUR99. Finally, a new battery 2 weeks ago, EUR56. It is chucking along happily, if it wasn’t for lack of the retina screen, it would still be my main device. Wife uses it for work and I hear no complaints. I also have a 2nd gen ipad with new battery and I’m happy with it.
Given that the iPhone 5s is about to start getting it's sixth year of OS and security updates, and improved performance for older devices was the headline feature for this year's iOS update,I'd say that the assertion is already proven.
Especially if you contrast with the "maybe you'll get two years of updates" experience provided by the majority of Android device vendors.
You say this as their oldest supported phone is entering 5 years since release.
Instead of accusing them of designing for planned obsolescence, maybe consider the gigantic performance gains between each model for the first 5 years.
Let’s not pretend like yearly release cycles are still necessary. And 5 years is only commendable on mobile, but is becoming less so as many of the software changes that impact performance are superfluous “improvements” like Animoji and live backgrounds.
Imagine if Windows only supported up to 5 year old hardware.
The 5S is getting iOS12, and according to people running the beta it runs better on iOS12 than 11.
The phone was released in September 2013.
How many Android devices from 2013 are getting Pie, and running well under it? I'm guessing it's about "none whatsoever": Google can't be arsed to support its own device for more than 3 years (the 2 years old Pixel is the oldest Google-branded device getting Pie), and other manufacturers are way worse.
What version of Android is it running? You probably mean the apps from the Play Store keep getting upgrades. I know for a fact that Samsung tablets from 2013 are not getting new Android updates — haven’t got them in a long time. I know this because I have one in my family. IIRC, the last time it was upgraded was back in 2015 (or maybe 2014, not sure).
This is cherry picking the most long-lasting supported iPhone and comparing it against the least supported Android phone. Google has guaranteed a minimum of 3 years support now.
Plenty of iPhones had only 3 years of support, and same with Android phones. At least do an apples to apples comparison (pun intended).
According to this, from the 3GS to the 5C, most had 4 years (or very close) of support. Two models approached 5 years (4y, 10m and 4y, 11m).
Everything from the 5S forward is still supported, and the 5S has 4 years and 11 months of support now.
If you failed math, you might include the iPhone X in your numbers and its 10 months of support would bring the average down. However, that's 10 months of support so far, it's not end-of-lifed yet.
The 5C is an outlier amongst the earlier models, but it makes sense. It was the same hardware as 5 but a different case, and released a year later. So the 1 less year of support is reasonable (if it were supported another year, the 5 would have been as well).
For grins:
The first 7 iPhone models had an average support period of 47 months.
If you include the next 7 models (all still supported) it brings the average down to just shy of 39 months.
If you consider that each of those 7 will get another 12 months of support from today, minimum: This time next year (excluding this year's models) they will have received almost 45 months of support, on average.
iOS 10 and 11 were definitely guilty of making older devices slower, but Apple effectively admitted that was a mistake since one of iOS 12's big selling points is that it improves performance for older devices. iOS 12 supports all the same devices as iOS 11, nothing was left behind.
Even if they do it probably does not matter much. They are able to convince most of their customers to buy new every 1-2 years so marketing will simply state: "Well we did what we could but people want the newest shit, not our fault".
As long as the old devices remain functional and available and properly utilized as hand-me-downs or resold into the market used, then having some subset of the market wanting to be on the "newest shit" isn't necessarily at odds with being environmentally friendly.
If a device is built to last and that means it spends 1 year in the hands of an early adopter and then 5+ years in the hands of someone more price conscious, then that's still better than being disposable.
I do question whether Apple is serious about this aspect though if for no other reason than how hostile they are to the non-Apple-first-party device repair market for their devices.
> I do question whether Apple is serious about this aspect though if for no other reason than how hostile they are to the non-Apple-first-party device repair market for their devices.
Well they're at least serious about supporting devices for a long time: even if it's dropped from iOS 13, the 5S will have been supported for 6 years. Although the devices getting less and less repairable is a significant issue.
I wonder if Apple/ARM has now peaked in performance too (same as what happened with intel 4-5 years ago). "Up to 15% faster" is not noticeable outside the realm of benchmarks.
Apple/ARM is developing their processors for a very narrow power budget (mobile). While they have shown promise in benchmarks designed to compare their peek performance while mitigating thermal issues [1]. The long term consistent heat mitigation, and power draw limits consistent behavior.
Secondary performance gains from multi-tier caching (Apple does 2, Intel does 3, IBM does 4) and multiple channels of ddr which can greatly accelerate application throughput.
In short. Apple's processors are designed for mobile first, and ARM can still gain _a lot_ in terms of performance. While it is approaching compute/cycle of Intel's processors it isn't there yet.
[1] What I'm trying to say is don't link GeekBenchmark that what ever mobile process has >= the same number of BogoMIPS as a server class CPU. Geek Benchmark throttles hard on mobile doing burst testing to avoid thermal throttling, this effects the benchmark results negatively on server class computers (as the test doesn't generate enough load to kick up the core clock) and positively effects mobile (by avoiding dropping the core clock).
Seems like you've cherry picked a low number. They claim 50% graphics improvement and the neural net cores' instructions/sec went up by a factor of 8 (600B -> 5T)
It's called the Xr now. Given the niceness of the phone with that small of a price tag (relatively small, of course), Apple's gonna leave the Xr alone for 3 years before they replace it with the next "flagship downgrade."
This looks like an interesting processor and 7nm sounds great, however since the process size became mostly a marketing term, is there a comparison of Apple’s process sizes to that of GlobalFoundries and Intel?
Remember a year ago when the notch was going to be Apple's downfall? I don't think I've seen a single person mention it being on the phones announced today.
It doesn't hurt that many flagship Android phones have similar notches now. The new phones have similar sizes to the prior years models, but larger displays overall. Consequently, the notches don't have much impact. The notches (in practice) are less annoying than most detractors had anticipated.
All Android phones (with notches) have notches in addition to an ugly chin. The lack of other bezels is what made the notch on iPhone X acceptable (to me, at least). The thought of a notch with a chin (or worse, a forehead, or both) is frankly irritating. Xiaomi probably did the best job building a near bezel less phone with their Mix lineup — except for the front camera. If Android phone vendors can’t work an iPhone X like display (no chin), why not just build phones with a narrow forehead and no chin? The forehead could be used for display connections and camera, sensors, speaker etc. Even a Galaxy Note 8 like design (narrow chin and forehead) would be preferable to this madness. Alternatively, they could do what Xiaomi did with Mix lineup.
Some have notches and a chin some do not, just as some are completely edge to edge with no chin with a pop out camera and in screen fingerprint sensors.
It really is not. The XR is quite a bit bigger (150.9x75.7x8.3mm versus 143.6x70.9x7.7mm) and with a bigger (6.1" versus 5.8") but lower-quality screen (326 DPI LED w/o 3D touch versus 458 DPI OLED w/ 3D touch).
as designs shrink to 7/5nm and beyond, quantum effects are emerging as a more widespread and significant problem, and one that ultimately will affect everyone working at those nodes. https://semiengineering.com/quantum-effects-at-7-5nm/
