this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
83 points (90.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

42462 readers
931 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Things like large 1” camera sensors, SiC batteries that offer 6-8k mAh, and other cool tech that would improve phones a lot. It’s not just Chinese brands either (e.g. Sony has an optical zoom camera on their flagship, Nothing has some excellent budget to midrange offerings).

It seems really weird, Apple/Samsung/Google are massive companies with so much money, yet they don’t try to offer this kind of tech on even their most expensive phones. In contrast, other phone makers have budget to midrange phones with insane battery capacities, Ultra models with innovative cameras, etc.

To me, it makes sense that Apple isn’t offering these kinds of things. They’re already extremely profitable and have the whole walled garden ecosystem that draws people in. Google focuses more on software rather than hardware, and their cameras are helped by software magic.

What surprises me is that Samsung isn’t trying to get better hardware to get more market share. If they had huge SiC batteries, large camera sensors, or other cool tech, it would definitely help sway buyers from Apple and other brands.

Especially since Samsung is struggling against both Chinese competition and, to a lesser extent, Indian competition. And in the U.S., they certainly want to steal market share from Apple.

What is with the reluctance of these massive tech companies from using the latest tech in their phones?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 60 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

There was a video by PolyMatter recently on the economics of why Apple cannot yet move the bulk of iPhone manufacturing away from China (available on Nebula and on YouTube). This is perhaps the singular quote which helps answer your question, around the 02:35 mark:

Any country can assemble the iPhone. But Apple doesn't need to make an iPhone, it needs to make 590 every minute, it needs 35,000 per hour, 849,000 per day, 5.9 million per week. That's the challenge facing Apple.

The sheer scale of Apple's manufacturing -- setting aside Samsung's also humongous scale -- means that there might not be a supplier for that quantity of large image sensor or new-tech batteries. Now, Apple could drive that sort of market, and they probably are working on it. But as the video explains, Apple's style is more about finding an edge which they can exclusively hone, up to and including the outright buying out of the supplier. This keeps them ahead of the competition, at least for long enough until it doesn't matter anymore.

In some ways, this might sound like Apple has a touch of Not Invented Here Syndrome, but realistically, consumers expect that Apple is going to do something so outlandish and non-standard that to simply be jumping onto a bandwagon of "already researched" technology would be considered a failure. They are, after all, a market leader, irrespective of what one might think about the product itself.

Historical example of heavy R&D paying dividends until it stopped being relevant: Sony's Trinitron CRT patent expired just around the time that LCDs started showing up in the consumer space. Any competitor could finally start producing CRT TVs with the same qualities as a Sony Trinitron TV, but why would they? The world had moved on, and so had Sony.

In brief, Apple probably can't deliver to the world a new iPhone with massive image sensors right now. But that certainly doesn't mean they wouldn't have their camera team looking into it and working with partners to scale up the manufacturing, such as by increasing yield or being very clever, probably both. Ever since that one time an iPhone prototype was found in a Bay Area bar, their opsec for new prototypes has been top notch. So we'll only know when we know.

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh, that makes sense. Apple/Samsung manufactures way too many phones for the new and upcoming tech like SiC batteries and super large image sensors. Hopefully Apple (eventually) innovates again instead of adding yet another button.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Turning the question around, too, it is clear why small manufacturers MUST use all the top spec parts: they don’t have Apple or Google’s brand and ecosystem of services to fall back on. Who’s going to buy a phone from a nobody brand with no services or ecosystem that also has crappy specs? Apple and Google can get away with it, and cheaper parts are cheaper which helps their profit margins. Small brands have to try hard to wow the world and get noticed. One way to do that is to compete on specs. In my opinion it’s a crappy way. But it’s a way.

[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

If the tech proves out and scales, Apple and Samsung will eventually incorporate it but by that time the smaller players will have moved on to newer tech.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tyler@programming.dev 32 points 1 week ago

The latest tech isn’t proven to last, might be harder to integrate, might require making design choices that affect the production line, the reliability of the phone, the battery longevity, the supply chain, the operating system, etc. Using the newest tech is a surefire way to make sure you have to do a recall, if you’re the biggest companies on the planet.

[–] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 32 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Most people don't really care about cool tech, they want a phone that just works

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would argue that everyone wants more battery life and most people would appreciate better cameras too. Cool tech is useful tech. There’s a reason why other companies are adopting it

[–] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I really don't think the average person cares at all about improving the current picture quality of phone cameras. The pictures get posted on instagram or sent on a messaging app, and looked at once on a 6 inch screen. They are not getting printed. Most people wouldn't even notice.

Battery life is a thing people would maybe appreciate, but then again, people seem to be fine with charging their phones overnight, and current phones seem to last one day on one charge.

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago (4 children)

But for instance, let’s say Samsung adopts SiC batteries. Battery life would be much better, so more people would buy Samsung phones over Apple and it would be one less advantage for going for the smaller brands vs Samsung. Plus, if you had two-day battery life, when the battery inevitably degrades, you’ll still have solid battery life.

[–] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

when the battery inevitably degrades, you’ll still have solid battery life.

We used to have user replaceable batteries. The companies stopped making them and few people cared

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Plus, if you had two-day battery life, when the battery inevitably degrades, you’ll still have solid battery life.

But the companies want you to buy a new phone when the battery degrades.

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

fair enough. It's not very nice big tech, but they were never that nice to begin with

[–] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 3 points 1 week ago

Battery life would be much better, so more people would buy Samsung phones over Apple

I do think there is a segment that would want that increased battery capacity but this claim ignores both human apathy and inertia.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

We picking favourite features? Let's talk about headphone jacks. Make it .3mm thicker if all that volume can be consolidated on the header jack they ditched because apparently it can't fit and wasn't feeding their radio earbud business enough.

[–] csolisr@hub.azkware.net 4 points 1 week ago

Even better: add a second USB-C port, so we can use a wired headphone and a charger at the same time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 28 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Ask any apple fanboy/fanatic and they will tell you, and they will be correct: Apple rarely leads the charge. They wait and they bide their time, and they watch how a technology is applied and how it works well and how it fails, and then they engineer a solution that they believe to be a smoother user experience to everyone else, and only then do they drop a new tech.

Budget phone makers are trying to stand out and captivate a much smaller market segment, so they have to go big or go home, or else no one will care.

The big guys are so big that they can actually use the market itself as market research, and the big guys are so big they can hold out until they know they have a stable, proven solution.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

that would be more believable if they didn't release the apple vision pro.

Or the years they took biding their time before they finally implemented battery charge time estimation on ios.

Or the time biding their time refining, erm, copy and paste?

Come on!

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 days ago

Why does every rebuttal have to strawman me saying “Apple is perfect and get it right every time”?

I’m offering nothing more than an explanation of how they try to operate. I’m not defending them, or saying they never miss.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Cherry-picked examples are cherry-picked examples.

The trend still sticks

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago

what trend? they made thi ipod, they made the iphone, they've been late, really really late, for very basic features on either. And a bunch of just plain bad stuff.

Butterfly keyboards, magic mouse, touch bar on macs, not cherry picked at all. There are tons of examples

[–] jellygoose@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Copy paste has been available since iOS 3.0, launching alongside the iPhone 3GS.

I don’t know what you’re trying to say with the other two statements

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

three, point, oh

for copy and paste.

Not one, but three point oh!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Didn't they just kill that big 3d glasses after like 5 years everyone else and their dog did 3d glasses and gave up?

In Jobs time there was this perception that Apple does everything perfect. Then he dies and the perception stayed. It was never true, but now it's so much further from truth. Charging mouse from the underside is plain stupid.

[–] serenissi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 days ago

Yeah Apple really dropped the ball in AI. I heard an interesting take that it’s because Apple collected way less used info o er time compared to like Google (which has all the writings of man both pre and post internet, every video ever uploaded, the habits of every human user, and most of the messaging/calendars/contacts for a significant portion of the planet) va Apple who has like, App Store usage for iPhone users, photo libraries since 2009-ish, that kinda thing.

It just wasn’t enough to paint a holistic picture to train a useful model on, and this is why Apple Intelligence was a bigger flop than the Vision Pro.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Apple rarely leads the charge.

Absolutely that is how it is now, but they did coin the format every modern smartphone uses today. And originally they were way ahead of the competition in almost every aspect. They were so dominant, that for years there was a shortage for every other manufacturer of components to build smartphones that could compete!
But a lot has happened since the still pretty recent emergence of the first iPhone, that absolutely revolutionized the concept of smartphones.
And the competition is absolutely cutthroat, so even major renowned labels couldn't keep up.
Like Nokia, HTC, Ericsson that were all major brands, are now almost completely gone. Obviously the Blackberry RIM is almost gone too, and I think Microsoft is out completely now, despite they were a significant factor before iPhone, and investing billions in an attempt at a come back!

So it is quite amazing that a statement like Apple rarely takes a lead is so easily taken as a true statement, considering how different it was just a few years ago. A testament to the absolutely crazy development cycle smartphones still have.
Apple does however still lead on the SOC by a good margin.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’ve been using Apple products since 1979. I’d definitely say that the statement is true; Apple rarely leads the charge. That doesn’t mean they never do, but they tend to, in most cases, wait for a trustworthy tech to come along, and then push forward with it, dragging the rest of the market along behind them. There’s always innovations and synergies, many of which wouldn’t happen naturally in the market, but the stuff they integrate is generally already well tested and proved.

Counter examples include the original Macintosh, the Newton MessagePad and kinda-sorta the iPhone. More common behavior is related to things like PowerPC/ARM, USB, Firewire/Thunderbolt, nVME, trackpads, wireless peripherals, and the like.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (7 children)

A marketing prof once told me that a lot of phone companies, Apple in specific, split their projects up into several releases as a form of planned obsolescence. You're more likely to find this in matured and established brand names because they have the power of goodwill to retain their market share whereas an up and coming company relies on being innovative in the sense of being early adopters of new, sometimes not fully tested, technology.

So for example, you see 3 iPhones being released in the span of 2 years. Those were likely 1 project released in a deliberately staggered manner so that "fanboys" "early movers" "brand loyal" (basically materialistic people who either don't understand or love being manipulated by corps) will pay for 1 project that a team worked on, 3 separate times.

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 19 points 1 week ago

I bought the first iPhone when it was released. It didn't have stereo bluetooth support, that was on the newer iPhone 3G.

However, except for the network adapter, both were hardware-wise exactly the same.

I found a kext file in my phone, that had disabled the function, as in:

"Bluetooth_stereo = false"

After enabling that, it worked like a charm.

That was the last iPhone I ever bought.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Apple was never leading edge - their goal is to incorporate when it works well

But you’re both cherry picking and wrong. There’s huge lists of features on every new phone, you’re picking two and deciding that means no innovation. Take a look at the dozens of other features on models from each manufacturer.

SiC batteries that offer 6-8k mAh

You’re complaining about battery chemistry that you believe is innovation, yet current batteries are much larger. Why switch if the technology is not as good yet?

[–] csolisr@hub.azkware.net 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Samsung, being the largest manufacturer of South Korea, has an incentive to keep their production as in-house as possible. Which is why they're reluctant to license technology that they can build themselves, such as cameras.

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That makes a lot of sense. Samsung’s displays are also quite good too.

I still find it strange that they’re not trying to develop SiC batteries though, esp. for their foldables and thin “Edge” puone

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

They probably are. But, this problem is also much larger for them than for other players. Oneplus is estimated to have sold 10 million phones over a one year. Samsung sold 4 times that number of s24 alone. If the suppliers can't provide that level of manufacturing then they have to build the supply chain themselves, and that takes a lot of time, R&D and money.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 10 points 1 week ago

What surprises me is that Samsung isn’t trying to get better hardware to get more market share.

You say this about the company that invented folding screen phones? lol

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Apple is pioneering better SOC than anybody else.
But apart from that you are perfectly right, none of the big 3 companies are actually pioneering anything anymore.
Google never was, but leaned on 3rd parties that made some very good Nexus phones, ending with the Huawei made P6.
Now Google is only pioneering making a cheap camera look good heavily retouched with AI.
Now the pioneers are mostly Chinese, while Samsung seems to be falling behind.
Google Pixel was never a front runner, iPhone was traditionally in some areas mostly software, while Samsung was in both software and hardware.
If you want the coolest newest stuff, it seems China is ahead with Xiaomi, Honor, Vivo etc.
The Samsung S25 Ultra is still absolutely a great phone, and I think recognized as the leader to beat, as a well rounded high end package.

Regarding camera I think it's getting damned hard to say which is best, comparison tests with many photo's seems to swing between one phone maker to another, and movie stabilization also vary, even with good camera.

I think Samsung is still clearly ahead of Google and Apple, and the Chinese phones too have strengths and weaknesses. I like Xiaomi a lot in their flagship killer range, but on the top tier, they still have problems with camera stabilization Samsung handles better IMO.

The thing that impresses me most, is how much phones still improve in a single generation.
Maybe not enough to ditch the old one, but definitely enough to make the new model worth considering even when you can get last years model at a pretty hefty discount.

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

SiC batteries would also help a lot for thinner phones like foldables (see Find N5 and XFold 5 from Oppo and Vivo compared to Samsung’s Z Fold 7) as well “thin phones” (see Samsung’s S25 Edge and Apple’s rumoured 17 Air)

[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

How do you know SiC batteries last and don’t have any long term issues that aren’t expected?

[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What is with the reluctance of these massive tech companies from using the latest tech in their phones?

Money. They can sell 2018s latest and greatest and uninformed consumers will love it because it has a premium feel and aesthetic and price tag

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Another thing, Qi2! Only Apple and the HMD Skyline support it. Why is that?

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Leaks show that the upcoming pixels will have it. Also because Apple opened up the (magsafe) standard only in 2023, and it takes time to implement things.

E: first link that came up https://www.androidpolice.com/pixel-10-finally-qi2-pixelsnap-addons/

[–] sbeak@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

I find it interesting that, of all companies, HMD was the first to adopt it (aside from Apple)

[–] Outwit1294@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You are not well informed.

Apple has pushed chip tech so much with in house chip designs.

Samsung made folding phones.

Sony supplies cameras for a lot of other brands.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›