www. O S N E W S .com
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
"The best phone you can buy right now"
By Thom Holwerda on 2017-08-07 20:29:35

The Verge does this thing where they list what they consider to be the best laptop or phone or whatever, and they state the Samsung Galaxy S8 is the best phone for most people.

Samsung's Galaxy S8/S8 Plus is the best phone for most people. It's available across all four US carriers and unlocked. It has the best display on any smartphone right now, a head-turning, premium design, a top-of-the-line camera, reliable battery life, and fast performance. Thanks to Samsung's popularity and the support of all four carriers, the S8 also has plenty of accessories, from cases to battery packs to wireless chargers, available to it.

You can definitely make a case for the S8 being the best phone for most people, but personally, I still consider the iPhone to be the best, safest choice for most non-geeky people. Personally, I prefer Android, and for my personal use, iOS on the iPhone is an exercise in frustration - but iOS provides a more consistent, all-around phone experience that remains fairly static from phone to phone, it's a little simpler to grasp than Android, and Apple has an excellent support system in many countries that's far better than Samsung's hands-off let-the-reseller-handle-it approach.

I wonder - what do any of you consider the best phone for most people? If one of your non-geeky family members seeks your advice, which phone do you suggest they get?

The Verge named the Surface Laptop the best laptop, which I find a baffling choice. It's new and unproven, so we have no idea how it'll hold up over the next few years. An odd choice for sure.

 Email a friend - Printer friendly - Related stories
.
Read Comments: 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-60 -- 61-70 -- 71-80 -- 81-90 -- 91-100 -- 101-110 -- 111-120 -- 121-130 -- 131-131
.
RE[10]: iPhone
By Alfman on 2017-08-10 14:49:29
CATs,

> (snip)

Gosh, I agreed with you that woegjiub was being too presumptuous about the needs of desktop users, but I really find this ad hominem attack offensive. If you can help it for the sake of civility, please don't resort to this kind of post.

Edit: I see you've edited your post, so I'll remove the quotation from mine :)

Edited 2017-08-10 14:52 UTC
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[11]: iPhone
By CATs on 2017-08-10 14:59:58
> CATs,
Gosh, I agreed with you that woegjiub was being too presumptuous about the needs of desktop users, but I really find this ad hominem attack offensive. If you can help it for the sake of civility, please don't resort to this kind of post.

Edit: I see you've edited your post, so I'll remove the quotation from mine :)

Well, I mean, I assumed he was just trolling posting such absurd things, thus I responded appropriately. But after your comment I realized he might actually be just a very basic PC user and has no idea about complex ways other people use computers. So I edited my response.
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE[8]: Apple == expensive
By Kochise on 2017-08-10 16:33:44
I cannot force Google or HTC to support an old device, even tough it is a dual core 1.2GHz with 768MB of memory.

The 'chances' I get hacked are slim, I don't have data plan anyway and keep my phone with me all the time.

F*** off planned obsolescence, security is a fallacy just like terrorism is. It's not for the greater good.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[7]: Apple == expensive
By CaptainN- on 2017-08-10 19:05:37
That's a big advantage Android has over iOS that folks like Thom don't understand. When I as a developer package an Android I can target way back to at least API 15 (Android 4.0.3) and still use the latest APIs. The SDK just bundles all the new goodies with the app, so it'll run on those old OS versions.

This has another side benefit - while continuous iOS updates render old phones useless after a while by over taxing the aging hardware, since Android phones usually don't get updated, the Android version running on the old hardware matches, and doesn't slow down over time. Your older phone runs at pretty much the same speed after 3 or 4 years as when you got it.

Can't say that for iOS, and it's a big reason I switched to Android.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE: iPhone is the best phone for me
By CaptainN- on 2017-08-10 19:08:26
Nontechnical users don't understand filesystems anyway...
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[9]: iPhone
By torp on 2017-08-10 20:05:49
> That was a typo, my bad.

Webapps can do everything desktop apps can do; apart from a terminal and a browser, you don't need native GUI apps.


Please google, for example, "slack cpu usage".
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[8]: Apple == expensive
By daveak on 2017-08-10 20:08:33
> That's a big advantage Android has over iOS that folks like Thom don't understand. When I as a developer package an Android I can target way back to at least API 15 (Android 4.0.3) and still use the latest APIs. The SDK just bundles all the new goodies with the app, so it'll run on those old OS versions.

Android: 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
iOS: 8, 9, 10, 11

What is your point? As far as I can tell you don't have one.

Edit: Thinking about it you mean the new APIs from 8 would be included and work with 4? That sounds horrific in terms of what would need to be included for some things.

Edited 2017-08-10 20:10 UTC
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[9]: Apple == expensive
By CaptainN- on 2017-08-10 20:30:27
Yes, if I compile my app with support for API 15 (which is Android 4.03) and target API 21, then it includes all the necessary APIs for the target API. It does bloat the .apk a bit, but Google solved that a couple of ways. First, the support lib is a shared lib, so the user only needs it once (and third parties like Adobe with AIR, or Xamarin can leverage the same thing btw - unlike on iOS). The Play store also only sends you the specific binaries you need (re ARM or x86), something Apple also started to do after a while (though they don't have nearly the same back compat story).

It was a problem for a while that Android doesn't update, particularly for security, but Google solved the app compat problem ages ago (in Android 2.x if I remember correctly), and has been solving the security problem over time as well.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[9]: Apple == expensive
By CaptainN- on 2017-08-10 20:35:41
For reference:
https://developer.android.com/top...
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[9]: Apple == expensive
By Bill Shooter of Bul on 2017-08-10 22:12:04
Security is not a fallacy. I don't mean to speak ill of you or anyone else, but hacking is not a pretend threat. Pretending it is, is not wise.
Permalink - Score: 2

Read Comments 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-60 -- 61-70 -- 71-80 -- 81-90 -- 91-100 -- 101-110 -- 111-120 -- 121-130 -- 131-131

No new comments are allowed for stories older than 10 days.
This story is now archived.

.
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
WAP site - RSS feed
© OSNews LLC 1997-2007. All Rights Reserved.
The readers' comments are owned and a responsibility of whoever posted them.
Prefer the desktop version of OSNews?