I hate comparing prices; because truth hurts!

[G+_Ty N. (CoffeeTyTech)]

I hate comparing prices; because truth hurts!

 

Originally shared by Corbin Doak

[G+_Renny Itwaru]

Junk?? The Nexus 4 and Nexus 7 are from it. Can't speak about the chrome book as I do not own one.

[G+_Dale Dubnyk]

The nexus devices are anything but junk Damian Rau If you think they are junk, think again!  The Chromebook featured here may not be of high quality.  But can still do everything the high end ones can for the most part.  Thats about the only item in the picture that isn't of premium quality.

[G+_Frank Pigeon]

nice comparison

[G+_George Kozi]

I'd take that pile of "junk" anyday, anyplace,

[G+_Mark Scholes]

It's so sad that apple has to pay $100 for 16 GB of flash, you'd think they could get a better deal

[G+_Michael Bowen]

Mark Scholes But they don't pay $100, only the people who buy the device have to.

[G+_Gary Reynolds]

You get what you pay for. Android devices are great when they're working. I'll be happy when android devices can work as well as ios devices.

[G+_Jeroen]

Damian Rau Disgruntled Apple fanboy got lost?

[G+_Brian Joyce]

Two out of three. I saved a ton ;)

[G+_Bryan Lucas]

This is a stupid comparison based on flawed assumptions. Most people won't buy an iPhone without a subsidy, making it similar in price to ANY other smart phone.

 

Personally, I would like a Nexus 4/7 combo since the new LTE 7 came out.

 

As for the Chrome Book is really not very useful. It's not a computer, it's a browser. It's fine if you only need a web browser, but otherwise it's a waste. I'd much rather spend the money on a MacBook.

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Bryan Lucas You're right, most people won't buy an iPhone without a subsidy.

 

But you're wrong that makes its prices the same as ANY other smart phone.

 

Pay, what, $249 for the 16 GB Nexus 4, a phone that's really as good as the iPhone 5, excepting the camera which is only "good enough."  Sign up for a T-Mobile $30 a month plan.  $249 + $720 for 2 years, $949

 

vs.

 

The iPhone for, what, $200 upfront and $100 a month = $2,400 for 2 years.

 

---------------------------

 

I'd like to give the Chromebook some love.  I first read this post on my 2013 Nexus 7.  Then I decided to weigh in, and jump in the midst of what Leo calls the religious war between platforms.

 

Which is why I turned to my Samsung Arm Chromebook and its excellent keyboard.  Mine has 3g, and cost me about $330.  It runs all day on a charge, handles my Gmail, Google Calendar, and Google Chat/Hangouts/Voice to my satisfiation.

 

It weighs less than my iPad (I no longer own) and has a useful keyboard.  Plus something the iPad doesn't: the ability to directly plug in camera cards, USB 2.0 & 3.0 sticks and drives, mice, and external keyboards.

 

From pretty much anywhere, I can use Chrome Remote Desktop to log into my Mac desktops at home or work.

 

The CB is lighter than my Air, cost WAY less, so much less that I'm not afraid of the consequences of dropping it, losing it, or having it stolen.

 

It's very secure, because there's nothing on it.  If it is lost or stolen, all I have to do is change my Gmail passwords, and it's disconnected.  Combined with two factor authentication, what's important in my digital life is pretty safe.

 

Is the CB perfect?  Nope.  But it is a lot better for doing things, like work, than the iPad was.  And cheaper than the iPad, by far.

[G+_Bryan Lucas]

Again, with assumptions. Not everyone is on T-Mobile, in fact most aren't. The biggest problem with these "religious wars" is assuming everyone is like you.

 

I can do the same thing you did with my Atrix and MacBook. But, you're comparing a ChromeBook to a tablet, which its not. It can't run Steam, Visual Studio, or any of the other things my son's $200 Windows 7 laptop can.

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Bryan Lucas of course everyone is not on T-Mobile. But I dumped ATT several years ago, bought my own phone "off contract" and haven't paid anything like the $100 a month which was the going rate on Sprint, ATT, and Verizon for iPhones and top line Androids. I'm still using the Galaxy Note I bought from Europe when they first released, so in about 8 months my savings paid for the phone putting me roughly $70 a month ahead x 14 months. Not insignificant. If I can resist the siren call of the Note 3 ...

 

Yes, I'm comparing a Chromebook to a tablet. Priced less, similar limitations, but still more capable.

 

I also have a Windows 7 laptop. Mine cost $294, new. 15" Actually not terrible, but even with 6GB Win64 will recognize, it's no speed demon. The 11 Sam ARM isn't either. But it connects me remotely to Google services, on which I and my employer rely. Our staff has all been issued Chromebooks to use for communication when away from our secured networks.

 

I'm not running Steam or Visual Studio or ripping CDs or DVDs on the CB. But I am securely communicating with co-workers, customers, and financial institutions. That's why "da' boss" passed 'em out. No need for IE, or Windows update, anti-virus, or costly ME Office "business?-class" licenses ---?

[G+_Mark Scholes]

I bet that $200 windows laptop plays steam games really well

[G+_Vincent Mohr]

Great info graphic!

[G+_Matt Lyons]

Unlike Google, Apple has to make money on their hardware so of course it's more expensive. I love and use Android but I swear it's users are the most annoying in the world. ?

[G+_Mark Scholes]

More annoying than apple users?

[G+_Bryan Lucas]

Android fanboys are horrible. They think only morons use Apple and can't accept that some people use it because it's better for them. They are so dogmatic but typically can't support their hatred with facts or reasons.

 

I've tried many things and use what works for me.

 

I use WinXP at work all day, but I much prefer OS X and Apple hardware to any of the Windows crap out there. It's more expensive, but it's for a reason. The build quality is better and the OS just works so much better. The ChromeBooks are not real computers, just glorified web browsers that don't do what a tablet or phone can do as well.

 

I had an iPhone, but switched to Android because the 5 wasn't going to meet my needs, and I didn't expect the 5s to be any better.

[G+_Matt Lyons]

Bryan Lucas High-fucking-five. 

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Oh boy. Bryan calls Android fanboys horrible and says "we" can't support hatred with fact or reason. Matt just goes vernacular, perhaps thinking a prudish Android fanboi will complain his post is inappropriate, get it removed, and think it's because of the attitude he expressed, not his "Catcher in the Rye" language moment.

 

Disregarding that I'm a Mac fanboi (junking Win and persuading my employer to go all in on OS X for desktop, graphic arts, database, web development), to the tune of 20+ Macs, I don't exactly hate iOS, but don't like it, and here's why:

 

1. Only sealed batteries. Bad for the owner, bad for the environment.

 

2. Closed system. For gawds sake, let me transfer files over USB without the Goodreader type kludge, or iTunes. Let me buy a Kindle book FROM Amazon on my iPad, without Apple extorting Amazon for 30%, which is more than all the profit from selling an eBook.

 

3. Forced obsolescence. My iPad 1 cost $900.65 in summer 2010. Apple orphaned it on iOS 5 less than two years after my purchase. Security gurus warn to keep your systems up to date. Hard to do when the vendor doesn't supply them and has the attitude: buy again. FYI the iPhone 3gs that has lesser specs than my orphaned iPad was still supported and upped to iOS 6.

 

To its comparative credit, Google continues to provide security updates for the now venerable Gingerbread.

 

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Damian Rau You're going to be disappointed. 32 bit ios can handle far more memory than Apple puts in iPhones. It can directly address 4GB of ram and take advantage of much more. The theoretical advantage of 64 bit ios doesn't even begin until ram exceeds 4GB, and even then the advantage is theoretical.

 

Your shiny new 5s won't have 4GB ram. Remember Apple doesn't want it's customers thinking about specs, except specs Apple chooses to call out, like a 64 bit processor no other seller offers, and which won't do current customers any good. Apple MAY someday offer a phone with more than 4 GB. Not now, not soon, AND for sure there's no way your new 5s is upgradeable.

 

In the meantime, the huge number of 32 bit apps (all apps!) are likely to run slower on 64.

 

Enjoy!

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/12/apple_64_bit_iphone_pros_and_cons/

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Damian Rau Showing my age here, I've been micro-computing since the Z80 was state of the art. 8, 16, 32 , now 64. Each "advance" was promoted by the company that was first out of the gate as revolutionary . . .

 

The ability to usefully address more memory is valuable. But there are always teething pains, and sometimes serious fails.

 

Apple is positioning ios for the future. Not a bad thing, if you're a user or not. If ios goes 64, so will Android and Chrome OS. Maybe even Win phone will keep up.

 

But the speed improvements in the iMore article? First, iMore admits they can't KNOW until the 5s is benchmarked and torn down. Second, the speed boosts aren't from 64 bit, but from clock speed increases and different GPU implementation.

 

An iPhone user isn't going to benefit from that combo twofer unless Apps take advantage of them. And that's going to take longer across the Appiverse than the 5s will be Apple's signature phone.

 

64 bit. No current advantage.

 

Theoretically faster 5s? Same schtick with ever generation of iPhone. Is the iPhone 5 slow?

 

In Android, the new Note 3 is theoretically much faster than my now venerable Exynos dual core Note 1. Yet the old one in hand is plenty fast. If I can turn my feet away from the Samsung Best Buy pop up store, maybe I can get by with good enough another year or two . . .

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Damian Rau To crunchmore it is necessary to bitemore. And that's only possible if you can can catchmore. In computer, not canine, no modern high end processor is stretched to keep up with data, and most off load graphics, and humans cannot feed in data fast enough to strain personal tech.

 

Apple may want to converge iOS and OS X, scary thought, which can't happen until both are 64.

 

But buyers of the iPhone 5s aren't going to see much, if any, benefits of 64 bit, or the "faster" chip set during the two year life of their phone/contract.

 

Well, unless they like watching the iOS wallpaper kool-aide kaleidescope effect. . .

[G+_George Fromtulsa]

Damian Rau Read your Apple dictation EULA. I read mine, and turned it off. To paraphrase, "we're sending everything in hearing range of your microphone to our servers, where we'll analyze it to make links so when you say "Dad," we can know who in your address book you mean. We'll keep the recordings as long as we want, and have the capacity to keep 'em forever and use them any way we can think to sell you something, or persuade advertisers to market to you through Apple iAds or other means."

 

That's why IBM banned Siri.

 

Try to open an Apple App Store Account without giving Apple every detail of your identity.

 

And that fingerprint reader offers no better security than a decent password, and won't even work if you're finger is sweaty. Like at the gym. Or an outside summer job.

 

The Android Atrix by Motorola had the same tech first, and dropped it.

 

A lot of this is hyperbolic marketing, product differentiation. And it was Apple, not Google, tracking users through their phones, and leaving the info collected so wide open and easy to crack how to do it became a PowerPoint slide at the NSA.. It's entirely an Apple propagated myth that Apple better protects your privacy than Google.

 

Read this: https://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/apples-persistent-device-id-threat-privacy