Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

iPhone has the build quality though. This is rubber and glass, not metal.

There's also a degree of app quality that iOS still has over Android - I'm an Android user: 'Secret', for example, only just came out, and it's very unstable.

This is a mid-range smartphone at a premium price.



I could argue in the same manner about things that Amazon's phone has but the iPhone doesn't --- I just think that the people that are considering an iPhone vs. something else will consider Amazon's phone (along with the high-end expensive android phones). The price differential is a huge factor in determining what products actually compete with one another. Along the same lines, I think this also competes with the expensive android phones --- but (smart) people on the cheaper prepaid plans aren't going to consider the Amazon phone very heavily with the Nexus and Moto phones available. It's clearly not worth it for the huge markup.


Having a grippy back is a big win for many.


iPhone has the build quality though. This is rubber and glass, not metal.

"Build quality" is such a meaningless term in common usage of smartphones, and speaks to personal subjective aesthetics, not some utility of purpose.

And this is all particularly interesting given that there's a good chance a significant part of the new iPhones will be made with plastic. But I'm sure it'll be a "better" plastic.


Rubber objectively ages worse than metal. Glass is objectively more fragile.


I don't think you are using "objectively" right here. It could very well be my opinion that rubber actually ages better, because it scratches far less than metal does. Subjective though.

...so build quality is hard to quantify, and in most practical cases is subjective.


Objectively means facts, eg:

- Rubber breaks down faster than metal

- Rubber stains more than the metals you'd use in a phone

- Rubber can be torn, metal can't

So yes, objectively.

If you drop your phone a lot, rubber might help, but you'd need more than what the Fire phone provides.


So yes, objectively.

No, it isn't objectively. You are subjectively choosing the criteria that makes one purportedly better than the other, yet they have zero applicability to the use or operation of a smartphone.

Grip matters very much with a smartphone. Rubber breaking down? Has anyone ever actually seen this happen? Is this actually a problem? Torn or stained? Again, is this actually a problem in the context of a smartphone? I would say no, it isn't at all.

A soft, comfortable, lightweight device that you don't have to immediately shroud in a protective case is, by actual use-based criteria, arguably the better "build quality". Build quality is suitability to purpose, not aesthetics or cult of material.


Within the criteria of robustness, robustness can be measured objectively.

You have different criteria than robustness - understood, grip is important to you. Grip has its own objective measurements.

Christ.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: