rocketpig said:
People were expecting too much from the iPhone 5. When you make the best-selling phone on the market, you don't reinvent the wheel with new versions. You tweak things here and there and keep doing what made you successful in the first place. I'd love to see a dynamic interface on the iPhone (and I think Apple will get there someday) but I completely understand why they're sticking to the grid format that made iOS successful in the first place. Stuff like wireless charging and NFC are fluff. Kinda neat features but not useful on a large enough scale (in the case of NFC, "not large enough yet", it will get there in time) to sway peoples' purchasing decisions in large enough numbers to matter. I don't entirely agree with the decision but I see why Apple went with weight and thinness optimization in the new iPhone. Personally, I thought the iPhone 4S was plenty thin enough and I would have preferred a thicker, longer-lasting battery in the iPhone 5 over making the thing even thinner than its predecessor. And with the new Lightning port, I don't see much to be gained by wireless charging. You still have to plug something into the wall. Whether it's a wire leading into the phone or a wireless charger, I don't much care. Somebody let me know when wireless charging works over short distances. That's when the tech will truly matter to customers. Being able to set your phone on a desk and automatically charge it without setting it on a receiver is tech I'd fully support and want in my phone. Setting it on a "wireless" cradle isn't different enough from a traditional cradle to matter. |
If Apple had introduced wireless charging and NFC, would they still be fluff?
Firstly, Apple has a lot of sway and influence in the smartphone and general tech market. If they introduced NFC and Wireless charging, they'd likely take off. Retailers would be happy to put more NFC payment options and you'd get a small explosion in rival NFC devices. We'd likely also see more apps that make use of NFC; the fragmentation of Android means that it's not necessarily in developers best interest as only a small percentage of devices actually use it.
The same with wireless charging. If Apple had actually decided to put it in their phone you'd likely see a lot of wireless charging docks everywhere (you table in coffee shops, resturants, airports etc.)... and Apple would get heaped with praise for this. I'm not sure why you think the wireless charger is useless thanks to the Lightning connector, you could say the same about micro usb. The point is you should have these hubs everywhere and you'll be able to charge it without having to carry a charger around or without necessarily having to go to a locker/charging unit. Whether that actually happens considering Nokia are the ones introducing the tech is anybody's guess.
Secondly, Apple have introduced tech that could be considered fluff before anyway. Siri for instance (especially in the UK) is little more than a gimmick, yet spawned numerous alternative iterations from rival app makers (on Android at least... more of that Apple influence). Siri is now considered are fairly useful feature and is being improved upon. Had another company introduced Siri, would it have taken off in the same way? I doubt it.
Basically, Apple in many ways can decide how popular a piece of tech becomes. I personally think wireless charging and NFC will gradually grow, yet when/if Apple decide to jump in, it'll take off in a huge way. You'll probably also get a whole load of people praising Apple for popularising them too.
