Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Aug 2017 20:29 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

The Verge does this thing where they list what they consider to be the best laptop or phone or whatever, and they state the Samsung Galaxy S8 is the best phone for most people.

Samsung's Galaxy S8/S8 Plus is the best phone for most people. It's available across all four US carriers and unlocked. It has the best display on any smartphone right now, a head-turning, premium design, a top-of-the-line camera, reliable battery life, and fast performance. Thanks to Samsung's popularity and the support of all four carriers, the S8 also has plenty of accessories, from cases to battery packs to wireless chargers, available to it.

You can definitely make a case for the S8 being the best phone for most people, but personally, I still consider the iPhone to be the best, safest choice for most non-geeky people. Personally, I prefer Android, and for my personal use, iOS on the iPhone is an exercise in frustration - but iOS provides a more consistent, all-around phone experience that remains fairly static from phone to phone, it's a little simpler to grasp than Android, and Apple has an excellent support system in many countries that's far better than Samsung's hands-off let-the-reseller-handle-it approach.

I wonder - what do any of you consider the best phone for most people? If one of your non-geeky family members seeks your advice, which phone do you suggest they get?

The Verge named the Surface Laptop the best laptop, which I find a baffling choice. It's new and unproven, so we have no idea how it'll hold up over the next few years. An odd choice for sure.

Thread beginning with comment 647838
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Apple == expensive
by daveak on Thu 10th Aug 2017 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Apple == expensive"
daveak
Member since:
2008-12-29

That's a big advantage Android has over iOS that folks like Thom don't understand. When I as a developer package an Android I can target way back to at least API 15 (Android 4.0.3) and still use the latest APIs. The SDK just bundles all the new goodies with the app, so it'll run on those old OS versions.


Android: 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
iOS: 8, 9, 10, 11

What is your point? As far as I can tell you don't have one.

Edit: Thinking about it you mean the new APIs from 8 would be included and work with 4? That sounds horrific in terms of what would need to be included for some things.

Edited 2017-08-10 20:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Apple == expensive
by CaptainN- on Thu 10th Aug 2017 20:30 in reply to "RE[8]: Apple == expensive"
CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07

Yes, if I compile my app with support for API 15 (which is Android 4.03) and target API 21, then it includes all the necessary APIs for the target API. It does bloat the .apk a bit, but Google solved that a couple of ways. First, the support lib is a shared lib, so the user only needs it once (and third parties like Adobe with AIR, or Xamarin can leverage the same thing btw - unlike on iOS). The Play store also only sends you the specific binaries you need (re ARM or x86), something Apple also started to do after a while (though they don't have nearly the same back compat story).

It was a problem for a while that Android doesn't update, particularly for security, but Google solved the app compat problem ages ago (in Android 2.x if I remember correctly), and has been solving the security problem over time as well.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Apple == expensive
by CaptainN- on Thu 10th Aug 2017 20:35 in reply to "RE[8]: Apple == expensive"
CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07