iPhone X: Apple's 'future of the smartphone' is a blast from the past

Though Apple is a technological force, the company rarely revolutionizes tech. There's certain to be backlash to that claim, considering the global impact of virtually everything Apple does.

The iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and iPhone camera mainstreamed various technologies after all. The App Store established the modern consumer-developer-app infrastructure, and ARKit is poised to mainstream augmented reality. Additionally, in an apparent defiance of logic, millions of people will spend $1,000 for an iPhone that was defined as "the future of the smartphone" but described with flagship features standard on smartphones of the past.

See more

That's not necessarily an insult; it's an acknowledgment of how Apple's evolving of technology has made the company great.

Apple: No, we insist, after you

Apple is great at allowing other companies to make the initial investments and to take the initial risks with new technologies.

Companies incur huge research and development costs when implementing new technology. Those costs are augmented by the burden of introducing and educating the market about its benefits. Initial adoption is met with expected bugs and sometimes unexpected user experience challenges that become a barrier to mass adoption.

Apple rarely fumbles through that process with an untried product or feature. It diligently watches the market as new technologies are introduced and tried. Apple then reaps the benefits of not having to make the initial development investments or taking the risks of testing a feature on an untried market.

Apple: We can do anything better than you

Armed with the knowledge of what does and doesn't work, Apple iterates on products or features others introduced or struggled to mainstream.

The company's aptitude for closely developing the software and hardware aspects of an experience are its strength. It endows its implementation of an "old" idea with a degree of synergy its competitors may not. Though it's safe to assume that whenever Apple introduces something "new," you'll see something "old," it will likely be implemented in a way that "just works" in a manner other implementations may not.

It just works.

Apple marketing positions its new implementation of old tech to be lauded by the market and mainstream media as new. That's frustrating for Windows phone fans (and others) who've been using "Apple's new features" for years on older devices.

When Apple executives define the future of the smartphone by rattling off features standard on the market-rejected Windows phone (and Android phones), fan feathers get ruffled. And not just at Apple for not acknowledging that "Microsoft did it first," but at Microsoft for not doing more in mobile.

Live photos, 3D Touch, universal apps: Apple hijaks Microsoft's lingo

Tap to awake

This year Cook described the iPhone X as "the biggest leap forward since the original iPhone." Apple's Phil Schiller followed and said of the iPhone X's new display, "the point of it is to enable an entirely new experience that's more fluid, more intuitive." Then as an example of that more fluid and intuitive experience, he introduced tap-to-awake. Windows phone fans have been tapping to wake their devices since at least 2013.

So what makes Apple's implementation better? Schiller's introduction of tap-to-awake was the beginning of a broader introduction of the iPhone X's new gesture-focused UI. With a near "edge-to-edge" display (there are still bezels) and no home button, navigation is a collection swipes from various areas of the display.

iPhone X has a button-less gesture-focused UI.

Apple's tap-to-awake is part of that forward-looking, gesture-focused, UI designed for a button-less interface. Windows phones, by contrast, have always retained capacitive or on-screen buttons. Tap-to-awake in that context is intuitive, yes, but part of a broader, more archaic way of interacting with a button-dependent digital interface. Apple evolved the experience, while Microsoft slept on its lead.

Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) to Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED)

Apple has always used LCD rather than OLED displays on the iPhone (including iPhone 8). This is despite LCD's shortcomings which include greater power demands and more space requirements due to a display-sized backlight inherent to the technology.

OLED displays omit that backlight and use tech where each pixel can light up. This conserves power and space (allowing for thinner devices) and adds benefits such as richer colors, deeper blacks, and whiter whites.

The Lumia 1020, a Windows phone fan favorite, has an AMOLED (Active Matrix Organic Light Emitting Diode) display and launched in 2013. Schiller said that only now, in 2017, is there an OLED display great enough to use on iPhone. Apple claims to have solved common OLED shortcomings such as color inaccuracy.

Here again, it's not the use of OLED displays alone that makes Apple's implementation superior to Microsoft's (and potentially others). It's the synergy with other technologies that make the difference. Apple's True Tone display that provides true to life color accuracy, high resolution HDR, 3D Touch, gesture interaction and more make the synergy of features on the display, this all-important interface to a user's digital content, a step beyond Microsoft's implementation on Windows phones.

Windows Hello and Face ID

Schiller said this year, "Your iPhone is locked until you look at it and it recognizes you. Nothing has ever been simpler, more natural and effortless. We call this Face ID." Microsoft calls similar and older technology Windows Hello. Microsoft made Windows Hello part of Windows 10 and Windows 10 Mobile in 2015.

Windows Hello is an enterprise-grade biometric authentication solution whereas Apple's is consumer-grade. Both technologies use infrared and are capable of recognizing users in the dark. Both accommodate for subtle changes in a user's appearance such as glasses or facial hair. Windows Hello provides access to enterprise-focused scenarios such as network resources, websites and payment instruments. Face ID provides access to Apple Pay and authenticates third-party apps.

Windows Hello can be utilized with millions of PCs with the appropriate integrated or added hardware. Sadly, with a diminishing smartphone presence, Windows Hello is barely represented in the mobile space. Apple's smartphone-based Face ID will likely mainstream facial recognition biometrics in a way Microsoft has not.

Furthermore, Animoji's (animated emoticons), which utilize Apple's facial recognition tech, represent what may be the beginning of what will evolve into responsive digital avatars that will represent users in more complex AR and VR interactions and games in the future.

Qi: Who's in charge?

In 2012 the Lumia 920 was capable of wireless charging. Apple finally brought wireless charging to the iPhone this year. With its market influence and Air Power, a pad that charges several Apple products simultaneously, Apple hopes to advance Qi adoption. Sadly, with its dwindling smartphone presence, Microsoft has little relevance in the wireless charging space.

Windows phone fans shouldn't expect Apple to credit Microsoft (or others) for introducing certain technology first. Apple's improving and mainstreaming tech Microsoft introduced years ago, but failed to improve upon, is Microsoft's fault.

Still, the iPhone X is a mere iterative advance, or evolution, to the rectangular slab smartphone of the past.

Smartphones are dead

Do you think Microsoft's potential Andromeda OS-based mobile device will better represent the future of the smartphone? Let us know in the comments.

Jason Ward

Jason L Ward is a columnist at Windows Central. He provides unique big picture analysis of the complex world of Microsoft. Jason takes the small clues and gives you an insightful big picture perspective through storytelling that you won't find *anywhere* else. Seriously, this dude thinks outside the box. Follow him on Twitter at @JLTechWord. He's doing the "write" thing!

  • The iPhone X isn't the industries idea of what an $1k Ultramoble device for the future should be. Apple is trying to position it as such, but it's really nothing more than a very very nice smartphone that's innovative of nothing, because it's "new" features have been around on several devices for awhile now. Moreover, what is Apple going to do when real Ultramoble devices from others hit the streets? They've already positioned their $1k phone as a smartphone, and fans are not gonna accept an even higher price point for what needs to be Apples real entry into the $1k price range....
    One day Apples exploitation (and frankly taking advantage) of it's fans will come back to bite them in their ass. Apple fans deserve better. IMO.
    Apple makes highly appealing products, but their conceit is off putting. I'm sorry, but the iPX is the biggest rip off of the decade. 😲
  • You could be right... I know quite some people who switched from macOS to Windows 10 due to better hardware and the improvements windows 10 has made since its release. Not sure though wether this will happen to their number 1 game which is still iPhone...
  • Oh, there will be some who will still buy IPX because 'they must have the latest and greatest', they also belong to a group of people that only wear clothes once and throw them away despite spending more $50 dollars per item of clothing. Which is why many games now have micro transactions as there people who spend more on microtransactions then the average joe could make in a year. In regards to Apps, it was only logical Apple will slowly go towards the universal app model because it reduces coding hours therefore increasing profit margins. Apple is all about the profits, which is why they engage in exclusivity contracts with manufactures that make parts for the iphone. Once they have developed a understanding of a phone part and can create their own, they terminate that contract and develop their own part. Thus increasing profits as now all they have to worry about is an ODM making the part they want at a cost price suiting their bottom line. As opposed to buying the parts off a manufacturer exclusively at a relatively higher price. Their entire current business model revolves around exclusivity part contracts and stealing ideas. Microsoft will soon become irrelevant if they ignoring the consumer space, Apple is going to devour the mind share that they (Microsoft) have left for them on a silver platter.
  • All of your points are valid. In spite of that, iSheep will kill their firstborn to get in line for one of these devices. That's the sad truth.
  • Oh, we all know they will sell millions, and it's MS's fault for not showing the world what they can do... SMDH
  • Indeed.😞
  • No it's not, it's a nice machine that ppl are willing to buy
  • It's no doubt a nice phone. It's more than just a nice phone, it's litteraly one of the best Smartphones the industry has produced in the history of the world... Nobody is stupid enough to argue that.
    But, for a $1k we are expecting a device in the Ultramoble category, showing of new form factors at least.
  • I just feel like the Iphone X is a rip-off at $1000. As the article said, we (android AND windowsphone) have had these features and more, at a significantly lower price. And unless they have figured out how to halt screen burn-in, I have a feeling there are going to be quite a few burned in Spotify and YouTube elements in the next year or two, unknown to most consumers. I would have understood if apple retailed it for normal price, but this is a ripoff. You still don't get a headphone jack, you still need a dongle for connecting to a laptop or desktop, etc. It's slow motion camera is good, but the lightning connector isn't going to be an open standard. I really thought apple would have migrated to USB type C to be universal with their laptop and desktop counterparts. Hopefully most people hold on to older iphones or buy phones that make sense for the features, with the lower price. Don't reward apple with bad behavior like this. It isn't the norm.
  • Apple doesn't exploit. It says here's our product and this is how much. Buy it or don't. Most people here complain about Apple because they can't afford Apple products, its just that simple. I traded in my Surface RT (Ya I'm still made at MS for what they did to that), Nokia 920/1020 and my PC for Apple products. I knew I wasn't going to worry about build quality, support or wonder if my favorite app was going to leave the app store. They see tech that isn't quite working right or not at all and they make it work and implement it. Apple has been charging a premium price from day 1 and it still amazes me that people still want to complain about it. BTW the Pixel 2 is $50 shy of $1000 and the Note 8 which was out before the iPhone X is $1000 where the contempt and outrage over that.
  • My desktop is around $2k, Alienware NB's around $2.5k, I have Surface Pro, xb1, ordering xb1x and looking forwards to win10.arm. xb1 Bluetooth gamepad always in my bag, I utilize XPA. I also own a Nexus.
    I too, not worry about the quality of Apple's hardware however, software... lacking too many features.
    Mac: No menu key, keyboard-user-unfriendly, inconsistent UI/UX.
    iOS: No common-share-api, requires more steps to complete a task, piles of icons on the desktop, etc. * I'm a main programmer in a major game studio, and I like to hack applications, websites and work tools, injecting my code to do my automation (Eventually I can operate Windows, office, chrome, edge, visual studio, etc without a pointing device.). Most of my colleagues... wish Apple can just stop producing Macs.
  • We can afford a $1k phone. That doesn't mean we're gonna spend that much on one when our Lumias do practically the same ****, for half the price, and three years ago.. Lol please.
    And, Apple knowing how loyal their fan base is, and not providing value, is taking advantage of consumers, IMO. Take it, or leave it.
  • I agree with a lot of stuff you mention in the article yet these will sell like hot buns because of Apple marketing... I actually watched their keynote and was thinking how they are catching up to a lot of different phones with the tech they put in the new iPhone. Their strength imho lies within keeping people locked in the Apple ecosystem (which works pretty well). Although I'm using an S8 now, I still like windows 10 better as an OS. Can't wait to see what the future (Andromeda) brings that will make me switch again...
  • That being said... MS should've already learned a lot from Apple's marketing chops.
  • It seems like for some reason MS doesn't care about making phones, or doesn't want to step on other OEM toes
  • I don't know about that. MS was one of the first in Smartphones, and has only briefly stopped making them. What is most likely a relatively short hiatus shouldn't be considered non interest, IMO.
  • That's possible as well, but I think MS has burned too many bridges with consumers regarding mobile. Lots of people including myself have moved on to iOS and or Droid. It's possible that they might get 5-10% share but most of it will be Enterprise I believe.
  • Understandable.... But, do you know what I think when I read "MS has burned too many bridges with consumers"??... I don't think the consumers they burned bridges with even matter.... If you're stuck in the tech world, and read about MS's failures, you may think this is the world's point of view about MS, and mobile.. The reality is that there's over 6 billion people on this planet, 99% of who have no idea what WP is... That's the "luck" reality MS is fortunate to have. Retrenchment is only making a bad name for MS amongst a relatively very few people. If MS makes a terrific product in the future the average consumer will see it just as that, and will not think twice of MS's mobile efforts of the past, because they have not lived through that like we have... Retrenchment also is another separator from MS's failure of the past... WP never made a big enough impact on society for the average consumer to know about it's failure in the first place. That's the failure right there! Lol. Think about it; if Android all of a sudden failed, or if iOS all of the sudden became unpopular, that would be a bigger blow to those companies reputation than WP could ever be to MS.. MS reputation with the average consumer is in a way inadvertently protected by it's gross mismanagement of WP. 😂😂😂. And, intentional protected, in the long run, by retrenchment. May sound kinda funny, but I'm quite sure there's some truth to it. Lol
    In 2017, nobody is concerned about consumers MS burned bridges with who bought late WinMo 6.5 devices. There were so few the news quickly dissipated into thin air, which is exactly what MS is wanting to happen with WP, and it will, especially if MS comes with a new product that's great...
    Jason W. Do you think there's some truth to my theory here??
  • Hey, Rodney. Yes, you make some very valid points. 👍🏿 By the way keep an eye out for my next piece. 😉
  • 😄😄😄
  • If you are talking about WinPhone + uwp.phone SKU. Yes, I agree, it should just go away. Because everyone's busy QA Android and iOS.
    If you are talking about win10.arm, there's a fundamental difference. It runs uwp.pc SKU. If you are a startup or a freshman, would you want to code your mechanism to install, update, crack-proof, advertise, etc, the traditional way?
    Accidently found your product through search engine, can I trust your product? What if it's a virus / malware? Would you clean up the registry during uninstallation?
    Unless you are giving up on whole win10.pc (including win10s and win10.arm), what's your alternative?
    What about uwp.iot, uwp.ar/mr, uwp.xbox, what's your alternative? You might say "hey, win10.arm is not a phone!"
    ... What's stopping you to make a 5" / 6" portable win10 running on arm and slap a microphone on it?
    It's a win10.pc on your palm, it runs PC/XPA games, I can dock it onto my gamepad and continue my xbox gaming.
    * xbox live cloud sync is free, no data limit, cross-platform enabled.
    * store-region-hot-swap is a cool feature.
  • They will sell a lot. But I don't think they will sell like they have in the past. With every version Timmy can't wait to run to the nearest microphone to tell everyone how it was the fastest pre-selling device ever. That the demand was beyond their projections, that there will be months between the time an order is placed to when the device will ship. Last night when I went to the Apple web site most of the models were still available for preorder, arriving Friday. Some has a 1 week delay. With previous models a couple hours after the phone went on pre-sale it would not be available for a month. Now, you can get it within a week, and mostly that is because pre-orders have already shipped, so it will take a little while for the device to get from China to your doorstep.
  • Well, sales will inevitably slow down with any successful new product. As major improvements become minor, and peoples personal saturation with new devices become evident, the need, and frequency for new device purchases decrese drastically.
  • As Bill Buxton did mention many times, every thing is invented many years ago. Acceptence of the technics takes a decade. Design is, taking that old acceptes technics at the point people accept them and create a device implementing all this technics when its ready to go to market. Since people have accept it in older devices the combination of all these things together make it a Good Design. Thats what Aplle does and does it very well. Microsoft is failing in continues approve their design's. They did manage with the brand Surface, a jewel of a product and the 5th in a row. They finally did endure with a product and make it a succes. This is a rare situation at Microsoft, its almost an excident. Still loving my HP Elite X3. Almost did buy the Note 8. To justify replacing my HP to an Android or IOS machine I made a reference matrix in Excel of all software I use with my Hardware. The outcome is a win for W10, almost every app I use is a UWP and can be used either on me HP Elite X3 and identical on me Samsung Book, MSI game machine and iMac 5k ( Bootcamp Windows 10). I have faith that W10 UWP Apps will come my devices. Mobile will benefit of that.
  • windows hello on 950XL never worked. More things on windows device nevere worked, this whole UWP is nice theory, without real benefit. I would be really care of such talks, that MS already had somethink. Yes, but not working. will se how iphone X will work.
  • Actually Windows Hello worked very well on my 950xl... Admitted that I refined it a couple of times though.
  • my friend i can just share my experience. And fact is. 950XL is my worst experience with mobile devices ever. and UWP? even windows central UWP does not work as it should. 
  • So can I mate 😊 I still use some very nice UWP apps on my surface pro 3 so for me UWP isn't a failure at all. The only reason that got me to switch to android was apps. I still like w10m better as an OS.
  • I can add to Hans's testimony that the Iris Scanner in my Lumia 950 works great. It's no bother for me to look down at my palm and angle the phone to catch my eyes.
  • It worked for everyone else... It even got faster with updates..
    Fact is that Apple should in no way claim to innovative... Ever.
  • It rarely worked for me and was too slow. Maybe it got better further on down the line but I found it to be more frustrating than useful.
  • Innovation is not the same as invention.
  • It never worked for me in sunlight, but was fine indoors, that is until an update killed my FFC which, in turn, killed Windows Hello.
  • Dude... why say something that is just not true? Go away with that trash. 
  • it is no worse than the samsung S8, but both lag behind in speed, frequency of failure and comfiness compared to the surface book's face recognition, also a 2 year old tech, and more comparable to the iphone x than the iris scanners on the other two phones.
  • Windows Hello(just an iris scanner) on the 950XL is a farcry from the full facial scanner that's Face ID in the iPhone X. That said, the iris scanner on the 950 works very well for me, though sometimes typing in my pin is faster.
  • Iris scanner is also just different from a face scanner too
  • This. And much more secure.
  • Iris scanner is also just different from a face scanner in general
  • Same for me, iris scanner on 950 works fine and fast. But when my 950 is magnet to my car's dashboard, a thumb scanner would be more effective…  
  • Nope, then you should focus on actually driving your car 😊
  • At least they have an offering, where is the Microsoft competitor? Its not as though Microsoft didnt copy hamburger menus and Apple's reachability for W10M not to mention they copied the whole ios closed ecosystem model from the start so really, apple catching up to competitors is not as big a deal as MS fanboys would like to make it out to be.
  • That's besides the point, and a sad defense for lying about innovation. Lol
  • Do you have any clue, or idea about the "hamburger menu" and it's actual origins? 
  • McDonald's?
  • Yes. It was available on my Samsung BlackJacks WinMo 5.0 device back in 2006..............................................
  • Except that it is trivial for someone to load from another store on W10M just like on W10 desktop and Android. On iOS not so much. Also UWP means that you can have the same app run on W10 (desktop/laptop/tablet/mobile), Xbox, Hololens etc.. Apple don't have anything whatsoever like that.
  • But, they do have customers willing to buy their mobile devices. Lol.
    We want to see the same from MS.
  • You got a point :) App gap and markething are the reason Windows Mobile did not work. 
  • Those are just symptoms of a bigger issue. Windows Phone wasn't a good fit for the market at the time. It couldn't successfully compete with Android. Google had a superior strategy of getting manufacturers involved in the development of Android. Google put all the power in the hands of the manufacturers and carriers. Manufacturers and especially carriers are the ones who drive sales and Google's strategy guaranteed they would be interested in Android. Microsoft's strategy was directly hostile to manufacturers and carriers when compared to Google's (allowing all apps to be removed, backdooring updates, charging for licenses, etc). Microsoft spent a ton on marketing, but it doesn't matter if the carriers and manufacturers are behind you. Apps come with sales. Android also had an app gap, but they turned it around through sales.
  • "Bill is basically unimaginative and has never invented anything, which is why I think he's more comfortable now in philanthropy than technology. He just shamelessly ripped off other people's ideas." - Steve Jobs And yet, Apple is the one that uses ideas pioneered by other companies. None of the "innovations" are new in iPhone 8 nor iPhone X. Apple even used the jump over version 9 and moved directly to 10, just like Microsoft did with Win 8 -> Win 10, but there the media mocked Microsoft for it. A few months ago Samsung released a phone that was black. The media was shocked with the blatant copying of something that Apple so caringly designed. But with iPhone 8, from unlocking with your face which I did with Windows Hello, to AR was using it on my Lumia 920 (and no, these were not the first to do them, either), not one word is said. In fact, the media is treating this as if Apple invented these technologies. Apple is the one with no class. (BTW, the new layout is horrible)
  • 😲😲😲😲😲😲😲😲😲
  • Tap to awake and the whole touch based fluid phone interaction reminds me of Nokia N9 (or WebOS). Windows Hello is not applicable in phones, so we should really compare the iris scan, which is a great idea, but I gave up using it after the first three months. It's too slow and cumbersome to lift the phone in front of your eyes at about 20cm distance - and it doesn't work with dark sunglasses. That wireless Qi charging is getting a strong supporter albeit very late, is just good for everyone. The thing that most upsets me is how Lumia under Microsoft quickly forgot all strides Nokia had made in AR. Anyone remember the city view with points of interest overlayed on real live image from the camera of the phone and immediately usable for navigation when the phone was turned horizontal in users hand. Or job search app with open job applications of businesses located on screen when scanning the surroundings? These disappeared and nothing new came out. Now I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Apple implement something similar. And finally: where did the 3D-scanner app disappear once it was presented in one of MSFT events where the 3D-paint was introduced? It was then running on HP, so it should not be too difficult to get it out. So many lost opportunities. So many things that someone else will show and people will genuinely be at awe.
  • yea  a lot oft hese gestures started off in windows phone 7.  then everything literally started looking like a godamn android
  • Windows Hello is not applicable in phones, so we should really compare the iris scan...
    Windows Hello is an all-encompassing term for unlocking a device with biometric input (face, fingerprint, iris scan). While the iris scan on my Lumia 950 rarely unlocked my phone before I could enter my PIN (if I wasn't awkwardly holding the phone up in front of my face), The article correctly compares Windows Hello to Face ID. Windows Hello theoretically should have the advantage with more technical options to accomplish the same user identification task. I will grant you that, based on the presentation, it does appear that iPhone X's Face ID has improved upon this task as far as mobile phones are concerned.
  • Just because it has the same name it is not the same thing. Windows Hello is based on Intel tech mostly not Microsoft. There is no windows phone with face recognition. Period. There are reasons for MS deciding not to implement face recognition on phones. It was difficult and costly.
  • It doesn't matter who does it first. The only thing that matters who does it right. In that way Apple has always been on the ball. Competitors introduce technology to consumers before its ready for mainstream use and it ends up looking like a gimmick rather than anything useful.
  • So... are you implying that something isn't "rght" until apple does it? If so, you are in fact part of the problem.  How can somethin be a gimmick from one company, but "right" when appl does it, if it's damn near the exact same?? 
  • Just because you did it first doesn't mean you did it right. Iris scanning and facial recognition sucks on current and previous devices. If the iPhone doesn't require you to hold the device up at a certain angle to work, it will be done right and be useful. Iris scanning on the Samsung and Microsoft phones is just about useless.
  • AMOLED displays have been just fine for 6 years. 2.5 D curved displays too. Touch-to-wake was fine on the old N9 7 years ago. Gesture based UI as well. QI charging worked as it should 5 years ago.
  • Is Qi still painfully slow? I stopped using it because quick charger was worth the extra second to plug in. People have complained about AMOLED for years. Burn-in, pentile and oversaturatesd colors have been regular complaints over the years. I am not sure Apple said those other technologies weren't ready. Either way, they weren't ready for Apple and that is part of their marketing. A great product along with great marketing had made Apple a juggernaut.
  • Exactly. Android loves to throw every 70% complete idea against the wall and see what sticks. Sometimes it then sits there for a few years at 70% complete, especially if it isn't getting a lot of traction. iOS polishes something for years before "inventing" the thing that Android did 3 years earlier. Less makes it onto an Apple device, but once it does, it will probably work very well. I only say probably because there are some exceptions like Maps and Antennagate, but not that many. We can debate which strategy is better depending on your needs, but for most of my non-technical friends and family, I would probably recommend iOS because that reliability is more useful to them than experimental features. *I'm using Android as an example, but we could substitute others, e.g. BlackBerry 10 had a fantastic gesture-based interface.
  • I am happy with your comment! Apple brought the AR to the masses first, hence it can fail too;")
  • yp
  • MS did the same thing with "Surface Studio".  And no new device is being launched after that. Hope every new device comes out to be like that;")
  • Someone mentioned to me that apple likes to watch the industry now and see which features are becomign a hit from samsung, lg, sony, and others then swoop right in to add it to their iphones.  And then claim it as ''first'' on their iphone.  such a disgusting move.  apple no longer innovates, it copies and build on it.  by the way,  wireless charging started with Palm Pre.
  • Apple have never once claimed they were first with anything that they weren't actually first with, ever.
  • They claim "Revolutionary" all the time, which is very similar in context.
    They claim to reinvent things, when all they're doing is iterating on a concept. I dont even agree that they do it better much of the time. iCloud doesn't work nearly as well as people would like.
    Almost everyone in my family with an iPhone has issues with storage because they can't seem to keep photos off their device.
  • Wow a lot a bitter people here. Bottom line is, Apple has a phone, Microsoft does not. It doesn't matter who did it first. It only matters who did it right. Microsoft has always had good ideas, but their execution is just terrible. Their software is buggy as hell. You know a company is in trouble when the only solution to fix a problem is to reset your device and hope that worked. That is just sad.
  • So you're saying the iPX is innovative, and a good value?
  • No rodneyj, he didn't say anything remotely close to that.
  • Of course he didn't. But, he is defying the main point of this article by diverting away from the issue it address, and by him not agreeing It's valid for me to ask the question "why?" After all, his comment was besides the point, and I'm sure he has a reason for posting it... He just doesn't explain his argument. Simple!
  • iphone X is a peace of junk
  • No, I doubt that. Apple doesn't make junk, they make seriously nice devices..
    But, to say that they always innovate, and are of justifiable value, is not objectively true, and is subjectively nonsense.
  • "Apple doesn't make junk" LOL I went through 4 iPhones within 2 years. You can't tell me they don't make junk. All 4 of them had hardware failure. I never dropped them or submerged them.
  • I went through 4 Lumia 1520's in two years. Each one broke without my help. No device is perfect. The 1520 has been the most enjoyable device I ever had, but it's not perfect either. No, Apple doesn't make junk. iPhones are overpriced, but they are high quality, no doubt. And, that's an UNBIASED opinion.
  • Ipx is fine.
  • Exactly what I had been saying (without mentioning Apple) and with less salty language lol. Shame on Microsoft, shame on them for destroying the path Ballmer set for them all for short term profits. SMDH. Ballmer created an amazing Consumer path way and then in comes Satya Nadella then it's all cloud + enterprise. Which is profitable yes, but the consumer path way Ballmer paved was even more profitable.
  • Balmer's path was a total failure. There was no future for it. None. It was going nowhere. He was fired because of it.
  • Eh no, if you cannot see beyond your bubble then nothing else will make sense to you bleached lol. There were many, many, many, many, many, many growth avenues with Ballmers consumer pathway. I won't list all of them otherwise I will end typing a novel. 1) Third party merchandising licensing 2) Movie licensing to studios for game franchises for indepth story telling and a feedback loop into point 1 3) Mobile accessories and productivity accessories created for first party hardware again through licensing for this to succeed you need to create user base for your product and soon you will have a product ecosystem. For example the certified for Lumia was a good idea and would have helped create an accessory ecosystem that Apple enjoys for iphones. The surface studio albeit niche has the ability to spur an productivity accessory ecosystem. 4) With a growing consumer space you gain mind share in turn you gain developers who see a large number of users that can be potentially monetised. In turn you see more investment from larger corporations in trying drive more growth and so on. As I said there is a ridiculous number of growth avenues.
  • Could Microsoft not see outside my bubble? Maybe we were in the same bubble? Maybe you just know more than them.
  • Lol, they are in an engineers bubble i.e zune limited availability = dead product, Cortana still in limited number of countries = lower user endpoints. Bing rewards in limited markets and enhanced functionality isolated to the US  = lower bing usage. Microsoft band = couldn't get it run a flavour of Windows 10 as opposed to firmware = Team disbanded.. Microsoft pay = isolated to the US = zero to no adoption. Key point = Lower sample size = easier diagonsis and troubleshooting. Inverse reaction = reduced mind share = reduced investment from developers and companies. Ergo Engineers bubble.    
  • Thank you for making my point. Balmer did not create an atmosphere where his vision could be successfully implemented. His vision had no future in today's Microsoft.
  • Eh, no. You're not seeing the bigger picture. Sure, stack ranking has played an elemental role in the current situation. But the major decisions that took Microsoft out of that pathway was made under Satya Nadella. So it is not Ballmer's fault but Satya Nadella and his teams failing to realise a narrow focus on their strengths only in the enterprise sector does not play well into any strategy going forward. There is not many growth points in the enterprise sector at all. Where as the consumer space? That's where it's at. Today people do not need a PC in every home, they are carrying it in their pockets. The xbox division has been nothing but a breath of fresh air. Do you know why the youth of today don't see Microsoft's products on the same level as Apple's? Mindshare. From reading your comments it's apparent that you wish to take, read, listen to whatever conforms to your point of view. Which is fine but in this day and age, you're going to have to widen your scope and see from everyone elses point of view not just your own :).
  • Why am I not surprised... Well what Microsoft should realize is that berry have tech that's ages ahead of the curve so I expect the surface phone to have them..i have no certain expectation of the surface phone (if it exist) but i look to Microsoft to bring something we've never seen before
  • So glad MS had an alternative in place for when folks wanted something else. Oh yea.
  • Sour grapes are sour. If you are jealous of Apple's technologies, then use them. There is no reason to continue with Microsoft's poor products and services. Other than desktop Windows and XBox, they are almost all garbage. Microsoft seems to be incapable of creating a coherent technology and implementing it properly. It isn't rational to expect them to suddenly learn how to do that.
  • 2017 phone, 2015 specs
  • But with almost half the iSheeps buying the new iPhone every year, they are bound to give Apple money to roll in it despite the 2-3 year old tech and overpriced devices
  • And 2017 revenue.  And 2018.  And 2019.......
  • The iPhone X specs are on par with the S8, minuses the fingerprint scanner. So I guess all phones have 2015 specs?
  • I also wouln't be surprised if the A11 is more powerful than the 835.
  • Although its hard to compare different hardware/OS, even the A9 is roughly on par with the 835. The A11 is FAR ahead.
  • Swipe gestures, Nokia N9, all sound very familiar. Been swiping to dismiss apps for ever. But, you gotta give Kudos to Apples marketing strategy.
  • Marketing geniuses.. MS needs to find out who's in charge of marketing at Apple, and offer to pay them 30% more if they come to MS..
  • Marketing is futile if your product is garbage. You cannot put lipstick on a pig. Surface did well because it is a good product. It made sales and marketing easy. When you have a bad product, marketing is much harder or even impossible. Marketing is just a scapegoat, your easy excuse so you don't have to face the fact that Microsoft has released some really crappy products in the last decade.
  • Why are you telling me? You know that I disagree that WP was a terrible product. How many times are you gonna keep saying the same thing? I know you think that marketing isn't the problem, and I don't care. That's why you don't see me comment on your post about it. You're not gonna change your mind, and I'm not gonna change mine. So, it's settled; no sense in trying to communicate it to me specifically anymore.. Try to convince someone else because I'm done talking about it to you for good. How hard headed are you? Chat with someone else about your opinions because I don't care, and it's not gonna get you anywhere with me at all. Now, have some self dignity, and go DFaq away.
  • You can disagree all day long, but a good product doesn't fail so miserably, especially with the heavy marketing campaign that Microsoft payed billions of dollars for. You keep making these claims that marketing was the issue, but it just isn't true. Microsoft spent tons on marketing Windows Phones and Nokia contributed heavily as well. If Windows Phone was a good product, it would have caught on. Just because you like it, doesn't make it a good product. By every objective measure, WP was a poor product and it wasn't due to a lack of marketing. If you want to make false public statements, then don't be surprised when someone corrects you.
  • No, you don't get it.. I don't like you. Don't care if you're wrong, or right. Not even reading your last comment. Quit wasting your time. Seek conversation elsewhere, and get emotional help for your rejection issues. But, I don't care about anything you have to say, so be a man, and leave me alone. Bye
  • You would not be so upset if I was wrong.
  • Bleached, the Surface did well because it was a good product AND it was available outside the US shortly after launch. Which was not the case for many of their other good products. Microsoft needs to think globally not locally to succeed. Marketing dollars will come once people can actually buy their products.
  • How many do they sell outside the US? If a product isn't popular in the US, why would it be different anywhere else? What Microsoft products have failed due to limited release? Their mobile devices were certainly available everywhere.
  • I don't have figures. And maybe I am wrong on this point. But, living in Canada and being a Microsoft fan is a very difficult thing. The Zune, the Band, Cortana, Windows Phone...all either delayed by a year or more or simply never got released at all.
    And you say that there can't be immense interest for certain products just because they aren't popular in the US. Thats a very Microsoft mindset. Had these products been released early and with a little marketing I am sure there are markets in the world where they would have sold.
    Still, it's impossible to know with such limited releases and no support behind them.
  • Just ignore this guy. He has no end point here. Don't even waste your time reading his comments.
  • I want to see Microsoft stop releasing mediocre devices and services. Acting like there is nothing wrong but "marketing" isn't helpful. I am sorry you are ok with Microsoft's poor consumer performance, but I would like to see them rise up and start putting out great devices and services. Surface isn't it. Sure, the hardware is nice, but it isn't as nice as Apple's hardware and the software has been poor. Just look at Consumer Reports recent findings. We cannot continue propping up Microsoft's unsatisfactory efforts. They need a change, a big change and we have to push them in that direction, not make excuses.
  • Unfortunately no one bought the Nokia N9, and do you know why? Because Mr Microsoft himself Stephen Elop killed it before it even released. Every single review gave it immense praise, even moreso than the iPhone 4 (in polls it was also more highly anticipated and got more web searches than the iPhone at the time) at the time but every single one also said, "don't bother buying it because it's the last meego device you'll get from Nokia". And they were right. Still one of the greatest phones ever made, and the fact that it did something different that WORKED, was pure genius.
  • No one bought the Nokia N9. Incorrect, I of know many people that bought it, including myself. The phone was epic, I bought 2. But, being the last Meego phone it lacked the appeal that would make a larger number of people buy it. There was even a special Nokia N9 forum that was created and a lot of people owned that phone, it had lot of potential, but sadly that was it. I enjoyed using it, the swipe gestures was pure pleasure to use.
  • I think I still have mine in a drawer somewhere. I was obviously being overly dramatic by saying no one, but the numbers certainly weren't where they should have been for such a forward thinking device.
  • I don't believe Microsoft will be bringing ANYTHING to the table that in any way competes with the iPhone or Android.  We don't have anything but conjecture on whatever Andromeda is.  And, like SO many other "great ideas" Microsoft has had, it will take too long to market, if it comes at all, and it will be half-baked and not really supported.  Few, if any, people will be drawn to even try whatever it is, much less switch from their iPhone or Android.  And handful may give it a whirl, but it will go the way Zune, Band and Windows phones....because Microsoft does it wrong almost without variation.  Apple will again pick from the bones, find pieces it likes, put new shine on them and the Apple logo and iSheep will pee themselves with joy.
  • But, MS actually came to the market last with their "tablet".. Surface was done right, and had more success than little if any... It's not smart to say that MS can't do that again... Second, nobody ever said that MS was developing a Windows product to compete with iOS, or Android, and nobody expects sales of a potential "Surface Phone" to outpace anything. Competition with iDroid is besides the point. Creating a new device category should be the point.
  • What is this new device category? Phone that docks and turns into a PC? Motorola, Samsung, Ubuntu and Microsoft themselves already did that. It is pointless. Phone that unfolds into a small table? Nope. Kyocera did that years ago and ZTE is going to have one next month. Microsoft hasn't created any new device categories. The 2 in 1 was around before the Surface and so were all in one PCs. They no longer have the chops to innovate.
  • So now, it is Microsoft's turn to check out apple's iPhone 10 new technologies (Microsofts' old!) such as Qi wireless charging, tap to wake, face ID and OLED screen and evolve them to the next level for the future Surface Fold...I dare microsoft do this!
  • Which Microsoft phone had technology like Face ID?
  • From 2000 (pocket PC) to date, R&Ds by MS has given other tech companies ideas...only to see MS collapse their own innovations n start afresh...n consistently start over n over again each time they spent time n resource on R&Ds...just to witness others perfect what they(MS) abandoned n keep advancing their(MS) ideas. MS should learn never to start something appreciative by the masses n then ignore or reject it at some point in time...that has been the major letdown of MS in the world of the smartphone market. MS has been in bed for way too long a time that majority of the smartphone market might take some time to fall in love with something different n pleasing than current UIs...but with such a reputation of "start n end" abruptly anytime MS wishes, other tech giants would 've advance years ahead. MS should...pls...never ditch Andromeda OS lk they've done to W10M...they should build on several iterations of the OS like what others 've done a lifetime...n refine the OS(like wine, the older the better). All of these techs r old patents of MS but never advanced further...I really would love MS to switch some of their attention (~20%) to the mobile platform n make a stand with their "Ultramobile device" or "Surface Mobile"...this piece of hardware has taken MS long enough to release than any other masterpiece from the company. Surely tables should turn in MS's favour...but sitting back to see others reap the benefits of ur life's work is not something exciting...MS should b smartest than others who just play smart by laying in wait n advancing later when everything settles. MS...is now or never with all the tech available n even much better to be implemented in yrs ahead (((((Finest Most Appealing n Refreshing UI Ever)))))...get to work!!!!!
  • I don't think people know what innovate means: make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products. That is exactly what Apple have done, innovate doesn't mean invent.
  • +1
  • Every product that comes out is an incremental improvement over the last.. So, Apples claim to innovate holds no more water than anyone else's.... Sounds like irresponsible claims to innovate by technical definition of innovation, which is nothing to boast about, which is also kinda sad..... And, if you yourself fall for Apples claim that their products are innovative, then that's your fault. Lol.
  • I would say that for the iPhone 8, but not for the X, it has brought together all of the key features of all phones into one product, other phones can tout one, two, maybe three of them, Apple decided to throw it all together into one device. Will I buy one? Nope, because the OS bores me on Apple devices and I feel like I would need to get a case around it which I hate cases on phones. Plus I am anxiously hoping that Nokia is going to announce a larger screen flagship. But to say the iPhone X isn't innovative is like saying a spork isn't innovative because you already have forks and spoons.
  • Looks like the 950XL has all of these features except the OLED screen...
  • It has OLED
  • They just happened to know how to market terms despite them mostly being inconsequential. Marketing their products nearly supercedes their focus on producing the product itself.
    Of course every company innovates, otherwise phones would stagnate completely.
  • That's exactly what Apple have done? Please explain. Just how is Apple's AMOLED displays different? Or their gestures? Or their QI charging? Or their face recognition? Or their tap-to-wake?
  • Because they are all combined in a single device (well, the screen is quite obviously different as it is a true edge to edge display, or at least, as true as it could be), I thought that was obvious from my second comment. The description of the word doesn't actually say that changes need to be new, just that new changes are more likely to be associated with innovation. In this case, the innovation is from the fact that a vast array of features that haven't yet been all brought together in one device, finally have. That's innovative. It may not be your expectation of the word, but it's what the word means.
  • Great quality device again from Apple. 
  • How do you know that? Is it just expectation?
  • You can take a ****, put an apple logo on it and people will buy it like crazy. They don't make things work better, they only know how to sell it, and sell it good.
  • You can say that about any product with rabid fans, whether it be Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Sony, etc.
  • Nope. I think windows phone fans don't indulge MSF whenever they produce something below expectation. I know I don't. WP fans call MSFT out and rightly criticize or praise them as required. Apple fans don't do that and will definitely buy a ****load crested with the apple logo for $2,000 and still call it an innovation over everyone else's **** not minding the fact that people and even animals have been ****ing for million years.
  • The iPhone X is ugly as 💩
  • Only now there's an OLED good enough for the iPhone? Apple is so full os s***. The display on the 2 years old Lumia 950XL is so color accurate out of the factory, that I'm willing to beg it will mop the floor with the iPhone. Everything from greyscale tracking to primary and secondary saturation is under dE 3 when tested with a colorimeter against sRGB. With some quick calibration it can be taken to under dE = 1. 
  • @bleached, just so you know, 'apococrux' wasn't wrong. It was and is near impossible to get a MS phone outside the US. Heineken is available in 192 countries. Cortana is available in 13. THIRTEEN! As far back as 2 years ago, I went into Vodafone (a carrier with a presence in over 76 countries) and there were no Windows phones out. None behind the counter either. All the Samsungs and iPhones I could carry. I had to order my new Lumia 950 and wait a week. With marketing like that, you're not going to make many spur of the moment sales. Only people in the know are even going to bother making inquiries.