Sorry for the late reply.

I understand now why the decision not to include hi-res audio support out of the box is baffling. However, in your second comment you present customisability as a negative when in reality, it’s more of a trade-off. The more options you present to a user the more complex the system you have to deal with.

Sure, I respect and agree with your opinion regarding openness, and agree with the fact that Apple’s ecosystem is closed af. However, the point about customisability is a trade-off and imho a preference.

I’ve worked as a back-end developer (C++), so it’s not that I don’t know how to use technology or am afraid of learning or something along those lines. That said, there is a certain amount of elegance to simplicity and consistency, which I value.

And yes, I do currently use an Android device, which does have some custom gestures setup, custom icon packs, some applications which are not available via the Google Play Store. However, I really do believe that the point about customisation is a trade-off, and in my view “more customisation better” does not scale well; allow me to provide you with a simple example.

Suppose we could control every little detail regarding our device’s software (non-malicious), almost as if we had the source code, I believe people would struggle to access generally easily-accessible settings (such as accessibility settings). Furthermore, these settings likely (but not necessarily) would not apply consistently, and the lack of implication from settings (but greater control), might mean that someone might need to reconfigure each application for accessibility features, or have to accept the idea that they cannot fine-tune different applications for their accessibility requirements.

Lastly, to your point about marketing, you have presented a very logical and reasonable point, yet one I consider almost invalid, since we should be observing this through the lens of a consumer. They could choose to sell their phones at a loss despite spending a lot on marketing. I’m not saying it’s viable, but I’m saying it’s possible. However, the point I’m trying to make is that this isn’t relevant. We observe through the lens of a consumer. And so we look at the price we have to pay and judge the device’s “features” or whatever you’d like to call them, objectively or relatively, based on this price.

In summary:

• Agreed with hi-res point
• Agreed with openness point
• Disagreed with customisability point
• Disagreed upon the $$$ on marketing, not my job to judge what they’re spending on, I’m judging the end-product as a consumer

By the way, thought I’d clarify my stance on this, since I’m not an Apple fanboy, is that I prefer Apple to other tech giants (Google is an obvious choice for an example).

I’m about to drop a really dumb question in here:

Why do so many people dislike Apple? I have listed some of my problems with Apple (listed in no particular order):

1. Keyboard layout
2. I fundamentally disagree with FaceID and would prefer a fingerprint sensor
3. Lack of customisation (you can’t even hide the finder on MacOS)
4. Apple makes it really difficult for people to leave their ecosystem

However, I really don’t understand why people, ordinary people, dislike Apple, other than due to being overpriced. I mean I really think physical SIM cards are a thing of the past and less secure than eSIMs since you can’t just take a physical SIM out using a pin. Although I heavily dislike the provisioning of USB 2.0 in 2024, the reality is that most of my files, even on my Android device, are transferred via networks. And yes, for the point about battery, I don’t particularly care about the battery size as much as I do the battery life. Even then, I always have a charger in my bag. It also helps that I barely use my phone.

Once again, keep in mind this is from someone whose only Apple product is a Macbook.

I can understand hating on Apple as a company, I was furious at how long they took to throw USB-C on things, however, often times people provide arguments that are baseless, as are several “points” listed in this image.

Who cares about a physical capture button? Any professional required to use a camera for a living will not be using an iPhone. Who cares about physical SIM vs eSIM. Hell, I’m an advocate for eSIMs. Who cares about the unlockable bootloader? And really, with modern consumerism, who on earth is listening to hi-res wireless audio and not a song off of Spotify, YouTube, etc?

I agree with the 120 Hz point, there is no reason a flagship phone at a a flagship price should not provide a smooth refresh rate. I partially agree with the storage point, however, the vast majority of people do not take advantage of their phone’s storage, so why would Apple be competitive here? They try to optimise for profit. I definitely agree with the point about the lack of modern USB. The lack of the 3.5mm headphone jack kinda sucks for everyone who owns devices that cannot be used with phones without this jack.

I’m opening to listening to other people’s takes and discussing this with them.

Could someone explain why there is no mention of Element?

Having skimmed through this article, the article actually sucks. Like, actually.

Why would game demos set unrealistic expectations? That’s only the case if they spent 90% of dev time in the first 10% of the game and use that as the demo. This happens, but this is bad design, this is not a case of a demo hurting a game.

I remember playing the Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker demo a long time ago and it did not spoil the story (which is a big aspect for MGS), it did not take away from the experience, and it introduced me to some of the fundamental mechanics of the game.

A more recent example is perhaps the demo of Enotria: Last Song. Do you think I know the lore and story just by playing the demo? No. Did it introduce me to the core mechanics of masks and a few other things? Yes. Was it good to get player feedback and fix bugs? Hell yeah. Sure, you might not like the game, but that doesn’t change the fact that the demo had a successful impact i.e. it gave both parties (us and the studio) a significantly better understanding.

Don’t put peak content in the demo and it will result in it actually playing like a demo.

Design the game with the demo in mind, don’t make it an afterthought. Demos are very valuable and I’m sure lots of gamers pirate games before buying them, instead of actually buying them, because 2 hours for a Steam refund just isn’t enough! I spent around 6 hours playing the Enotria demo (just for 1 complete playthrough). Why so many? I had to familiarise myself with the mechanics, switched between keyboard and mouse multiple times, tried to see why I was getting frame rate drops despite my RTX 4070 renderring at 1080p 120 fps.

**Game demos do not hurt a game! ** Abusing game demos as purely a form of marketing by making false promises or setting false expectations hurt the game.

This is not exclusive to a game either. Consider a recent release like Elden Ring, absolutely massive map, they did not try to over-sell it. They said it’s around 30 hours of content iirc. You can hurt this game with social media, with interviews, with false trailers, with many things.

TLDR; Angry old man starts raging about “back in my day we had game demoz”.

Sorry for the noob question, but are you able to access your banking apps with GrapheneOS? If so, how?

Please stop doxxing me. JK but I use 01/01/1980 for some reason.

That’s some mad dedication