The new iPhones may not be revolutionary, but they are refining the experience

There’s not much worth reading in this piece, is there?

Especially as it was clearly written before the announcement

Nevermind, I don’t know what I was saying. KUDOS JASON.

They should have had more photos of the guy.

I only clicked the link to see his photo. What a cutie. Wonder if he is taken.

Screen size isn’t an ‘artificially created metric’. It’s a market demand. People want larger screens on their phones. Jobs got it wrong. This is like claiming the TV industry has created an ‘arbitrary metric for measuring what is good’ by producing larger screens. But people just like bigger TV screens. My new 70” is much better than the old 45er, even if it’s the same HD model.

Jason, do you have any support you could share with us that shows the demand for larger screens is all marketing?

An “opinion” piece written by an obvious Apple fan-boy.

For those who couldn’t bear reading through the bias, tldr; Apple catches up on what competitors have been doing for years and do it “better”.

Apple did humanity the favour of introducing technology to people who don’t (need to) understand technology.

For that privilege they pay and pay and pay, getting ripped off at every corner.

It’s a service, I guess, but it’s an awful one and you can be way cooler and way better off in the hip pocket by avoiding Apple all together.

This line confused me:

“the mobile phone industry created an arbitrary metric for measuring what is perceived as good”

You work in marketing. How could you ignore the fact that phablets (read: larger phones) are absolutely booming across Asia and North America? This is an extremely easy fact to find.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec.....-Asia.html

http://www.informationweek.com.....id/1252800

http://www.pocket-lint.com/new.....3-says-idc

To dismiss this is an ‘arbitrary’ metric is really odd, and I think does a disservice to logic in general. People clearly want bigger screens. Apple is late to the game. No big deal.

But let’s be honest. In more ways than one (NFC, screen size, side lock button) could it simply have been called the iPhone S5.

In this regard, Apple is asking us to choose what phone to buy based on specs alone – and this is a fight Apple can’t win. They should have kept fighting on the basis of design and iOS features (which only just now match S-Health and Google Play). They’re trying to beat Samsung and HTC at the game those guys invented.

Apple was clearly more spooked by Samsung than we thought.

http://mashable.com/2014/04/05.....th-google/

Lot of juvenile support here. ‘We need more photos of the guy?’ ‘Wonder if he’s taken?’

It’s like the 15 year olds have jumped on, and they’re full of beans.

Everyone else cringing?

I’m not sure if it’s a credibility issue or a lack of experience one, but the journalist here writes, as an authority, an (overly positive) analysis of the product which could only come from using, testing and reviewing the product.

Here’s the thing, he hasn’t touched the thing. The journalist bases everything from Apple’s famed keynotes. Some might say his source isn’t objective.

Um – have to disagree – I am not 15 and I too think the writer is a cutie and I too would like to know if he is taken and I am a leading industry professional, if I say so myself

“When you pick up a phone in a store the first thing that grabs your attention is the display. It’s the feather fascinator on a Melbourne Cup goer. The ‘new and improved’ sticker on your washing detergent. The hundreds and thousands on white bread.”

No, it’s the first thing you look at because that’s the entire purpose of a smartphone.

It’s not the fascinator on a Melbourne Cup Goe’rs hat… it IS the hat.

Jesus.

Apple a superior choice eh?

iPhone 6 – $879
Nexus 5 – $399

800 words later I’m none the wiser as to what impact this could have on my customers my marketing spend or indeed the benefit for my brand investing in such technology

Maybe the writer doesn’t know either because the sentence about ‘NFC opportunities’ was a lost opportunity to establish a compelling reason. Not to mention identifying where potential returns are on such investments.

I come here to read insights relevant to media & marketing, if I wanted a product review, I’ll read The Verge.

OK, I think all these comments are a bit hard. This isn’t The NY Times. It’s not Tom’s Hardware. It’s not where you come for hard-hitting tech journalism.

A further thought on Apple, though. I think the fact that Apple partnered with U2 in a move that is – in no uncertain way – a direct copy of Samsung’s partnership with Jay Z is representative of the whole thing.

@AT

Mumbrella is where we come for hard-hitting media & marketing journalism. (See the fantastic coverage of the Cannes scam issue.) The bar is relatively high for an industry rag. We come here for insights, thought-provoking analysis and informed opinions.

It’s not personal, but this article is none of these things. And it seems a lot of the commentators here agree with me. And you’re correct, it’s not the NY Times, but it’s not a 6-month old goss magazine laying in the doctor’s waiting room either.

“Creative Director by day, Humper of Apple Products by night.” – https://twitter.com/jasondeacon

hot 😉

@Tom Wood L. O. L. Credibility rating?

@Credit where it’s due – Agreed. I was speaking specifically about tech journalism. I’m a UK expat, and I rely on Mum to stay up to date with the happenings of the Sydney agency scene.

@AT in that case, surely you’ll agree this piece offers little value, in the context of the standard of other mumbo pieces?

@strewth heh.

Bingo!