I don’t believe in ethical for-profit companies either.

The open nature of Android was the single biggest reason I used it for the decade that I did. If I were to switch back, I’d buy a pixel.

But android isn’t as open as it used to be. Yes, you can still unlock your bootloader, root, and install custom roms, but Google is now actively fighting against users who want to do so. On my pixel 3, it became a never-ending battle to keep apps like my banking portal working while rooted, and to keep rooting working through updates. At least once a month, I’d be out of the house and have my phone fundamentally break in some way.

Eventually, I reached the point where I needed a smartphone as a tool more than I needed one as a toy to tinker with, so I left it stock. But stock android sucks from a privacy perspective. I realized that I wasn’t using 3rd party App Stores and I wasn’t rooting my phone, so the largest benefits of avoiding an iPhone weren’t really a factor to me anymore.

I was also extremely disappointed in the hardware, quality control and longevity of new android phones, especially compared to the iPhones being released. So I switched. And was amazed at how glad I was.

No police showed up to my door to force me to trade my Sony headphones in for AirPods or my Dell laptop for a MacBook. I already had an iPad because at the time, it was the only serious tablet of you care about using a stylus, but that had been working beautifully for me without any other apple products.

I think it’s silly to list the fact that an OEM has a ton of products that work well together as a reason not to buy any of that company’s products. If you don’t want to get locked in, don’t buy an Apple Watch. As far as I know, nothing else requires an iPad. And anyway, the resale value on apple products is so solid that if you did totally buy in, selling all your apple hardware would get you more than enough to buy matching hardware of a similar age from other manufacturers. Sell your two year old iPad and you can probably get 3 two year old Samsung tablets, assuming you can find any that still work.

The web browser thing also hardly locks you in. If you really don’t want to use safari, that’s a decent reason not to want to use iOS. For me at least, safari is the browser I would choose to use, so I don’t really care that I can’t use Firefox.

Probably my fault you didn’t see this because it was buried deep in the wall of text, but I clarified that I’m definitely not trying to morally exculpate Apple.

In the context of which of two companies you choose to do business with, you shouldn’t criticize one while ignoring the immoral actions of the other. If we’re just talking about the things apple does wrong, I’m right there with you. But if we’re talking about which mobile phone ecosystem is less predatory than the other… at least my relationship with apple is a voluntary business arrangement with exactly two parties. That’s actually the reason I moved all of my stuff out of the android ecosystem in ‘21 after >10 years. Seeing ads across a dozen websites related to a private medical diagnosis made me realize Google just knows too much about me, and I do care about my privacy after all.

That’s obviously just my personal opinion but my point is that if you’re looking for an ethical tech company, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

That’s interesting, but it’s hardly what I was imagining based on what the user I replied to was saying.

The source linked quoted an Apple exec explaining that the cost/benefit analysis of building a piece of free software on a platform that generates them no revenue doesn’t justify them spending the resources to build the software.

I get it, we all want corporations to be benevolent entities that give us free software out of the kindness of their hearts, but if we’re going to criticize one of them for not doing so, I think it’s more clear-minded to criticize the system as a whole.

Why in the world would anyone expect Apple to spend development resources building iMessage for Android (for free), especially if they’ve determined that it will hurt user retention? Because we want them to? It sucks, but not like “evil mega-corp manipulating users” sucks, more like “corporation making decision that literally every other for-profit corporation would make in that situation” sucks.

I’m not trying to morally justify it, I’m strictly speaking in the context of “use products from x instead of y because y did bad thing”. In that context, that’s a bad argument if it’s true that x is just as anti-user as y is.

And if we’re specifically talking about using Apple products vs using Google products here, you’d have to be taking crazy pills to think that Apple is more anti-user than a company who’s entire business model is the commoditization of vast amounts of personal data gathered for the purpose of more effectively manipulating literally everyone, including non-users of their products, into increasing their consumption.

That’s some real salt there buddy.

You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but ‘apple hardware and software is objectively inferior’ isn’t much of one.

It’s especially disingenuous to present those opinions like they’re established fact, when they definitely aren’t. You may not think that Apple is particularly innovative or that their UX is particularly good, but I think you’d definitely be in the minority there, especially outside of niche online communities filled with people with an axe to grind.

I’m pretty close to being as much of a power user as someone can be within the use case that I have for general purpose computing. I also feel like I probably know the mobile/desktop software space better than the average person on the street, I’m a SWE by trade.

I honestly think that the gap between the UI/UX design on Apple software and the UI/UX design on windows in particular, but android to a lesser extent, is the most compelling reason to use apple. And I also think it’s ridiculously out of touch to claim that Apple’s innovation’s (especially in hardware) aren’t significantly better executed and consistent than the competition. Sure, they don’t throw every half-baked idea into every new product they release, only to abandon that idea in 18 months for a new batch of experiments. I think that’s one of the reasons Apple users like Apple products. Personally, I’m not buying a phone because I want to spend two weeks trying out a bunch of gimmicks and then never using them again unless I’m showing my friends the cool thing my phone can do.

But, of course those are my subjective opinions and I’m not faulting you for disagreeing. There are people out there who thing Outlook is good UX, and they’re entitled to that opinion lol. But I do think it’s a little silly to disagree in a way that makes it obvious that you think that anyone who disagrees with you has no idea what they’re talking about.

Source?

Consumers used to expect their phones to be attached to the wall with a wire, the market innovated, now their expectations are different.

… which is exactly what I just said, but you’re apparently dead set on interpreting every bit of information you run into in a way that supports your worldview, which honestly is consistent with your whole argument here.

You presumably have access to the internet, you’re capable of doing 10 minutes of research for yourself to find the numerous phones released in the past 5 years that have easily serviceable batteries. I could not care less if you do so or not. I’ve had this exact conversation half a dozen times, I already know what that list will look like. If you want to know what the list looks like, you can do the work yourself, I don’t care either way.

The s21 ultra has more mAh per cubic mm of phone, which is a more explicit way to say more battery in a smaller size. Regardless of that, the fact that you’re resorting to pedantry shows me that you know that you can’t respond to my point in a meaningful way. I claimed that sealing smartphone internals allows manufacturers to fit larger batteries in smaller form factors, the fact that a phone with a 30% larger battery is 5% bigger than another phone isn’t a refutation if that.

There’s plenty of competition globally, but less so in the US. Regardless, there was a ton of competition when smartphones first started having sealed internals. Interestingly, the two manufacturers that leaned the hardest into sealing the biggest possible battery in the smallest possible footprint are the two manufacturers that currently dominate the market, which is another point against you.

5 years was an arbitrary number highlighting the fact that manufactures are trying to make phones more repairable within the same dimensional constraints, which would not be the case if they had an agenda to force people to upgrade by making phones less repairable. Again, your only response to my argument is pedantry.

And finally, thanks for yet another wildly off-base assumption. I’m a 32 year old SWE who works in mobile app development. I’ve had probably a dozen android phones over the past 15 years. I could enthrall you with anecdotes about how much more durable a modern iPhone is than any flagship android phone that’s been made, but I don’t have to. There are plenty of reasonably high quality drop tests that paint an objective picture.

Smartphones are immeasurably better than they were in the past. They’re faster, have multiple days of battery life, have incredible displays, and vastly better software.

I am certain that you don’t use smartphones in any way that’s more demanding than the way I use smartphones, so you can take that whole condescending monologue and shove it right back where it came from.

Except it’s not, you just live in an echo chamber where people endlessly repeat the misconception that the average consumer as any interest in replacing their own battery. They don’t. Marketers aren’t manipulating millions of people into thinking they don’t, either.

If companies like Apple wanted to force people to upgrade, all they would have to do is stoop to the level of the competition by not offering 6 years of OS upgrades on new phones. Or they could not offer first-party, warrantied battery replacements for ~90 dollars. Honestly, apple constantly goes out of their way to make their devices last longer than the competition, and still the bigbrains on Internet forums walk around with their heads in the sand.

You go ahead and do you homie, nobody is going to be able to change your mind from something you’re so desperate to believe.

Of course they don’t, I’m not saying anything about what phone companies communicate, I’m talking about what they do.

The smartphone market is extremely competitive, they are very highly motivated to find the most efficient way to engineer a device that maximizes consumers’ purchasing preferences.

A world class product team produces a design that matches customers’ preferences according to world class market research. World class engineers figure out how to maximize features that satisfy those preferences. That virtually always involves trade-offs.

When one company does a better job of maximizing features that match consumer demands, their market share goes up.

When a company focuses on maximizing features that a vocal minority of users want, they struggle to move units.

It’s not some conspiracy to provide inferior products, it’s just capitalism being capitalism. Companies make what people will buy.

My guy, you’ve got absolutely no idea what you’re talking about and it’s embarrassing.

Manufacturers used to sell phones that you had to have plugged into the wall at your house, and consumers gobbled them up. The market has innovated, and now consumers expect something different. How is “consumers used to buy x when it was all that was available so obviously they must prefer it over y” anywhere close to a rational argument?

My claim was that phones are thinner with bigger batteries. Your s21 ultra has a 5000 mAh battery, the note 4 had 3200 mAh battery. The s21 ultra has a much bigger battery in a smaller footprint.

The smartphone market is insanely competitive, if any manufacturer were deliberately making their phones worse, other manufacturers would be capitalizing on that and taking their market share. Phones are easier to repair today than they were 3-5 years ago, you can check out the ifixit repairability scores if you want. Phone firmware is no more locked down now than it has been in the past, unless you’re specifically talking about how much worst modern pixels are than they and nexus’s were in the past. I don’t know about Androids since 2020, since that’s when I switched, but the steel bezels and flat glass on iPhones since the 12 pro make them FAR more durable than any phone I’ve used. Haven’t had my phone in a case for 3 years, and there have been a handful of times it’s fallen out of my pocket while getting into my truck. The stainless bezel doesn’t deform like aluminum, so side impacts aren’t transferred to the glass. Countless drop tests corroborate this.

You think phones are getting worse because you want to think that, despite the objective reality. You personally want a feature set that’s not widely popular, and you’re mad about it. Which I actually totally get.

That’s not what I’m implying at all.

Manufacturers want to give consumers a device that meets consumers’ purchasing requirements better than their competitors’ products do.

They only want us to be able to repair our phones inasmuch as consumers will buy more easily repairable phones instead of more tightly sealed phones, which is absolutely not the case. Sealed phones consistently sell waaay more than non-sealed phones, likely because they can be slightly thinner with marginally larger batteries. Every once in a while an OEM will release a phone that has a hot-swappable battery, but nobody outside of niche online electronics communities cares.

What I’m debating is the idea that there’s some nefarious conspiracy to withhold hot-swappable batteries from consumers to force them to upgrade their phones. That’s ridiculous. OEMs make sealed phones instead of easily disassemblable phones because consumers buy sealed phones instead of disassemblable ones when given the choice.

And it’s not that hard to figure out why, honestly. Personally, I would rather take my phone to an Apple Store and have them swap the battery for what I can be certain is an OEM replacement for $90 than spend $50 on eBay on a probably fake battery, take time out of my day to swap it myself, and assume the liability in the event of an improper seal. And consumer purchasing patterns show that I’m in the company of the majority of phone buyers in the US.

The literal second sentence of my comment clearly demonstrates that I understand the point that the other commenter was making, that I’m aware that they’re being hyperbolic, and gives a direct response to the point being made.

If you can’t manage reading past the first dozen words of a comment, maybe you’d be better served by keeping your reply to yourself.

Gosh, that narrative is one of the most pea-brained things that I’ve seen circulating on the internet in my lifetime.

As the link you provided clearly states, apple was fined for not disclosing to users that iOS was underclicking the CPUs on phones that had batteries that were too degraded to provide the required power consistently under heavy load.

Anyone who used an Android phone from that era can tell you about how a >12 month old phone would start randomly powering off between 10% and 30% remaining charge. When a lithium ion battery degrades, it’s no longer able to output its original nominal voltage in a sustained way. Instead, I’ll output the requested voltage, then suddenly the voltage will drop. When the CPU in an older phone was under heavy load, it would put heavy load on the battery, and the battery would fail to provide consistent voltage, which would cause the phone to power off.

On the Android side of things, we could try to replace the battery if we knew that was the issue, but most people would just feel pressured to buy a new phone.

The obvious solution to that problem is just to undervolt the phone’s CPU if the battery isn’t capable of providing consistent peak voltage. Doing this is objectively the opposite of planned obsolescence, it lets people use older phones reliably for longer.

Ironically, a small minority of weirdos are so desperate to hate Apple that they spun a feature that’s obviously intended to increase the longevity of an iPhone into an entire narrative about apple slowing your phone down to get you to buy another one. Which doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, because not undervolting the CPU in a phone where the battery can’t provide consistent peak voltage is way more likely to push people to want to replace it.

I hate consumerism and mega corporations way more than most, and I’m definitely not suggesting that Apple is any kind of moral or ethical company. They’re a company that exists to maximize profits at the expense of anything else, on the backs of exploited workers.

But when the most widespread complaints about a company are things that make the complainers look like idiots who are desperately searching for something to complain about regardless of how disconnected from reality it is, it makes it seem like there aren’t any legitimate complaints about the company. If I were wearing my tinfoil hat, I’d be inclined to speculate about whether that’s actually intentional. The ‘Apple is slowing down my phone to make me buy a new battery’ narrative is so ridiculous that I can almost believe that Apple’s behind it to draw attention away from valid criticisms.

Yeah, of course they did it to sell more phones. Phone OEMs sell more units when the units are as compact and water/dust proof as possible. Sealing phones with adhesive maximizes both of those metrics, with virtually no (non-hypothetical) trade-off to the vast majority of users.

Maximizing profits by maximizing the characteristics of smartphones that customers care about is not only a perfect explanation for sealed internals, but it’s the only explanation that stands up to any amount of critical thinking.

The “they want to force you to upgrade” narrative is popular because people want to believe it. I mean, obviously they want you to upgrade, but they also know that consumers are more likely to buy their products over competitors’ if the product has a reputation for longevity. Which is why OEMs like Apple support their devices for as long as they do, and even tailor software to provide a consistent experience with a degraded battery. If they wanted to plan for there devices to become unusable after a certain time, it would be a lot more straightforward for them to just stop doing the things they’re doing to make sure devices are usable for 5+ years.

Yeah I’m sure you’re more informed of the engineering trade-offs with regard to smartphone manufacturing than literally every major smartphone manufacturer.

The person you’re replying to is trying to push the narrative that modern smartphones (iPhones in particular) have bodies that are sealed with adhesive in order to force people to upgrade sooner, instead of to provide waterproofing/dustproofing.

That claim makes no sense in light of how Apple meaningfully supports phones for significantly longer than any other major OEM and goes to great lengths to preserve the usability of older devices. That doesn’t deter people from making that claim because they’d much rather believe apple bad, and other phone manufacturers bad because they’re trying to copy apple.

Inb4 but x phone from 2016 had a removable backplate and was “waterproof,” or but y phone with 0.01% market share is serviceable with a spudger and is “waterproof”.

I don’t think a phone where the battery is welded to the body exists.

I know you’re probably being hyperbolic, but sealing a phone’s body construction to make it waterproof is very different from ‘welding’ the battery in.

Love opening a thread all excited for some answers only to get 100 repeats of the same unfunny joke.

Here are some answers I’ve found by looking around:

basil, catnip, citronella, lavender, mint, etc. Most bugs don’t like fragrant plants because they can’t smell their prey or predators accurately anymore

If you can find where they’re breeding, establishing some frogs would make a buff difference. Tadpoles gobble the larva up from what I understand. I’ve also read that bats are way helpful, and you can apparently establish a small bar colony in a bat house.

Best of luck, mosquitos are evil.