1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. COMP.SYS.MAC.ADVOCACY

  • 7 rumored iPhone 17 features Android already has

    From Marion@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 24 19:32:27 2025
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    *7 rumored iPhone 17 features Android already has*
    <https://mashable.com/article/seven-rumored-iphone-features-android-already-has*

    It's clickbait but pertinent in terms of helping people understand why the iPhone will always substantially lack the functionality of normal systems.

    Notice that two of the hardware features that they laud are the fact that
    Apple is forced to finally add modern amounts of RAM & battery capacity.

    Unfortunately for iPhone owners, a $45 Android still has more software functionality than any iPhone ever sold in addition to basic hardware such
    as the industry-standard sd slot & aux port found on most Android phones.

    That Apple owners pay so much for so little shows the power of marketing.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Marion on Sun Aug 24 14:43:05 2025
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2025-08-24 12:32, Marion wrote:
    *7 rumored iPhone 17 features Android already has*
    <https://mashable.com/article/seven-rumored-iphone-features-android-already-has*

    'We couldn't find the page you're looking for

    Mashable Potato

    Ooops! - 404'


    It's clickbait but pertinent in terms of helping people understand why the iPhone will always substantially lack the functionality of normal systems.

    It's nothing because the self-proclaimed "expert" couldn't post the URL properly.


    Notice that two of the hardware features that they laud are the fact that Apple is forced to finally add modern amounts of RAM & battery capacity.

    Unfortunately for iPhone owners, a $45 Android still has more software functionality than any iPhone ever sold in addition to basic hardware such
    as the industry-standard sd slot & aux port found on most Android phones.

    That Apple owners pay so much for so little shows the power of marketing.

    And they're comparing one manufacturer in Apple against:

    1. Samsung (Galaxy S25) for the "slimmer iPhone", and not actually a
    feature of ANDROID.

    2. Google (Pixel 9) for "A wider camera bump" (as if that's actually a "feature" of either device), and again: not actually a feature of ANDROID.

    3. "Vapor chamber cooling": not a feature of Android.

    4. "120 Hz displays on every model": you're not seriously suggesting
    that every model of Android phone sold today has a 120 Hz display, are
    you? And say it with me:

    NOT A FEATURE OF ANDROID

    5. "12GB of RAM": exactly the same comments as 4.

    6. "A larger battery capacity":

    6.a. not all Android phones have it

    6.b of those that do have it, most have less run time that iPhones
    already have.

    6.c (Say it with me):

    NOT A FEATURE OF ANDROID

    7. "A fully refreshed design with iOS 26": finally, one thing that is
    actually different about Android...

    ...but I wouldn't call change after change for the sake of it a "feature".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Tom Elam on Mon Aug 25 04:57:17 2025
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:00:52 -0700, Tom Elam wrote :


    LOL. An under $50 Android has tiny storage capacity, cannot run the
    latest OS, has an outdated processor, and cannot multitask worth a damn.
    I know. I bought one like that as a burner phone on a New Zealand
    vacation. Piece of shit if there ever was one.

    BUT, if it is all you can afford then I glad you have that option.

    Heh heh heh... again, your argument is absurd since you think paying $1000
    for a phone in and of itself makes it more functional than not paying that.

    A diamond-encrusted RED!!!!! Rolex doesn't tell time better than a Timex.
    Most of the cost is in bullshit marketing meaningless differentiation.

    What matters. Is FUNCTIONALITY.

    Compare my three 2021 Samsung Galaxy A32-5G Androids (SM-A326U) which cost
    me (& anyone else on T-Mo postpaid) about $28.20 to any iPhones ever made.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg>

    You paid about $1000 for your iPhone (including tax), right?
    I paid about $30 for my Android phone(s).

    How is it a $30 Android has more functionality than any iPhone ever made?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Marion on Mon Aug 25 07:04:07 2025
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2025-08-24 21:57, Marion wrote:
    On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:00:52 -0700, Tom Elam wrote :


    LOL. An under $50 Android has tiny storage capacity, cannot run the
    latest OS, has an outdated processor, and cannot multitask worth a damn.
    I know. I bought one like that as a burner phone on a New Zealand
    vacation. Piece of shit if there ever was one.

    BUT, if it is all you can afford then I glad you have that option.

    Heh heh heh... again, your argument is absurd since you think paying $1000 for a phone in and of itself makes it more functional than not paying that.

    A diamond-encrusted RED!!!!! Rolex doesn't tell time better than a Timex. Most of the cost is in bullshit marketing meaningless differentiation.

    What matters. Is FUNCTIONALITY.

    Compare my three 2021 Samsung Galaxy A32-5G Androids (SM-A326U) which cost
    me (& anyone else on T-Mo postpaid) about $28.20 to any iPhones ever made.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg>

    That you THINK it only cost you $28.20 shows just how ignorant you are.


    You paid about $1000 for your iPhone (including tax), right?
    I paid about $30 for my Android phone(s).

    No... ...you really didn't.


    How is it a $30 Android has more functionality than any iPhone ever made?

    It doesn't.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)