iPhone vs. Android
Debate Rounds (3)
This debate shall end in a result of purely phone quality. Also, this is an argument over an Android OS vs iOS at the core. Why?
To keep it fair. I can pull many different phones out from the Android smartphone marketplace, but if my opponent wishes to be at this disadvantage, I shall argue with such.
The companies have only one possible relation to the phone and their OS: maintanence. Maintenance quality is the only factor in this debate that is viable.
I gladly accept, and I wish my opponent luck.
Starting with the one topic you brought up-
Maintenance: Apple has far surpassed Google in maintaining their mobile operating system. Although the systems themselves have been updated fairly often, iOS is able to get to the iPhone much easier than Android is to an Android-based phone. The reason for this is because Google makes the software, whereas other people like Samsung make the hardware. Google creates the software to run on it's Nexus line, but everything else has to have some tailoring done before it can successfully run on that phone. Sometimes it takes months for this to happen, and whether or not it is done at all depends on the manufacturer. If they feel that it isn't a very necessary update, they don't push it to their devices. Apple has a very tight system in which, when an update is available, all phones capable of updating to it, receive a notification immediately on all devices. Because of this, Android has become extremely fragmented across many devices. On March 23rd of this year, statistics were shown from an adoption tracker showing that iOS 7, currently Apple's latest OS, had from 88 to 90% adoption rates, whereas, although it had been released only one month later than iOS 7, only 8% (8, not 80) of Android users were on the latest edition, Kit-Kat. Because of this, security is shaky. Hackers might find ways to break into one system, Google might fix the problem, but very few people, overall, will have the update. In the making of an operating system, security is one of the most important factors. Your mobile phone could hold cached credit card and bank-account information, email account access, other people's private contact information, and much more that a hacker would gleefully accept. Google does fairly well in updating their OS, but needs to figure out a way to get it to all the devices quickly and easily, otherwise it puts users at risk.
Next, as I mentioned above Apple creates their own devices, form the software to the hardware. I will talk a little bit about why this makes them better:
The software is designed to work with the hardware. This is huge. I think the best think I can do to show just how huge this is, is to point out an example of what happens when you don't do this.- The Galaxy S5, Samsung's' latest flagship smartphone, comes with a standard 16 GB of storage. Half of this is taken up right out of the box, because multiple companies want their name on it. Samsung and Google, and sometimes even the carrier the user chooses, all want to have their own special apps on there. Right out of the box, the GS5 has, on average, 60 apps. Many of them are what we call bloatware being multiple of the same kind of app. Google provides the gmail app, while Samsung provides their standard email app. Dropbox with it's free online storage app will come along-side Verizon's 'Verizon Cloud' app for the exact same purpose. The iPhone on the other hand has just enough of everything and comes with only 20 apps, a third of the GS5. You may ask, "well isn't more better?" and it is, except when you just have more of the same thing.
To continue on about Apple's ecosystem, the support is much easier to work with since you only have to contact one company for all aspects of the device. If you're having trouble with iOS, or if your phone hardware failed, you can talk to the same person about both topics. An Android user would have to contact Google, whereas if there hardware failed, they would have to contact Samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, or whichever company produced their phone to get it worked out.
To pick up the ball on support: Apple is the number-one, best rated support company in the world. They are constantly there for you 24/7, and it is a very easy process to go through. You simply enter your devices serial number and then choose whether you want a phone call or to chat with someone. Either way, it's super fast, and super easy. You can call about the tiniest things like setting up your email account in the mail app, or about getting their screen replaced. Apple support s built of people from the callers country. Oftentimes, tech companies will hire foreigners that can barely speak English (or whichever language you speak) simply because they will accept lower pay. If a company is willing to spend more on customer support, it makes sense that it would be better than a company that isn't.
I think I'll leave it at that for now. Sorry for giving you so much at once. ;)
I thank my opponent for presenting his arguments.
Before I begin, I must point out a few major differences with the companies and the different operating systems.
1. Android OS is for more active users
The Android operating system is more open for the user to change settings that are unable to even be viewable by iOS. The fact that the operating system itself is so open to the applications is what makes the Android OS far superior to the iOS. Many apps on the Play Store (the application marketplace, much like the Apple Store for iOS users) can change how your phone operates.
For example, you can put a Siri on a phone with a proper microphone. It is not called Siri, but it is much made to be like Siri from the iOS. This was before the Droid Maxx's voice control feature, and it sufficed for being an equivalent for Siri on the operating system. The fact that the operating system is so open to change is one of the many reasons as to why it is vunerable to hackers. However, there are many different free versions of security software that can help to prevent hackers from getting into your phone that are very proffessional and is something that any Android OS user should have on the device. However, the beauty of it is that they did not have to. They have choices on what they want to protect the device.
2. Google vs. Apple
The Apple more often than not is more secure for two different reasons.
a. The coding
The programming language of the devices are not often known to the open public, which is much different than the Android OS. Most people in the field for Information Technology are not familiar with Apple coding. Thus, the hacker count is very small for iOS.
b. Apple checks the apps for issues themselves.
Apple will check the software for any viruses, trojan horses, etc. You usually will never have to worry about a virus with iOS.
So, thus far, we have determined that an Apple product will normally be pretty safe, but you can also make an Android product equally safe. We have covered the security issue. Also, Google is constantly trying to make this operating system safer from the OS alone while still giving the user the freedom of having the completel OS under his/her control. They allow you to choose to be safe or not.
Next to cover: Storage
My opponent makes the claim that the Galaxy S5 has the apps take up half the 16GB of data right out of the box along with the carrier apps. I will take the time here to point out another flaw in most Apple hardware for the iPhone: Uprgradable Storage. You can easily upgrade the storage on most Android devices in which you can also possess multiple SD cards, allowing you to take the data that is in your phone, such as pictures, videos, etc to be uploaded directly to a computer so it can be stored there instead of the smartphone. Also, the Galaxy S5 has upgradable storage up to 128 GB per card.
I will not cover Graphical ability due to its irrelavancy to the OS and the Android smartphones have a vast range of graphical cability.
I will not cover proccessing due to its diversity amongst the Android marketplace.
"The iPhone on the other hand has just enough of everything and comes with only 20 apps, a third of the GS5."
1. App storage amount can be extremely diverse, and it depends on the app.
2. You can remove the apps off of the phone, but it requires a slightly different process that the device usually does not tell you.
"Google does fairly well in updating their OS, but needs to figure out a way to get it to all the devices quickly and easily, otherwise it puts users at risk."
Although this is true, it does put users at risk, most Android OS phones have many different setups and functions for multiple, different devices. It can not just release an update universally for all phones. It must go to each device and set up an update for it. And, since most devices are not on the same OS version, they must be extremely careful when applying these updates.
"In the making of an operating system, security is one of the most important factors. Your mobile phone could hold cached credit card and bank-account information, email account access, other people's private contact information, and much more that a hacker would gleefully accept."
This is not even remotely true. In the making of an operating system, security is not a priority. This is due to the fact that it is software. An operating system acts like a translator between the other software and the hardware. Yes, they will send out a security patch from time-to-time, but it is not a priority for Operating System Developers.
Also, any smartphone user puts their data at risk when they put their data on their smartphone and buy stuff with it across the network. iPhone or Android, this information is easily obtainable.
". Although the systems themselves have been updated fairly often, iOS is able to get to the iPhone much easier than Android is to an Android-based phone. The reason for this is because Google makes the software, whereas other people like Samsung make the hardware"
That is not true. As I have stated above, the security is not a priority for the OS. The software does not run through google. They do not really check the apps on the market. It is more like the internet that way. Yes, companies like Samsung make hardware, and they sign a contract with Google to make the OS for the device. It is an Android OS, but that is why they are so diverse.
Now, honestly, if Google wanted to make a better customer support for the phones, they easily could. However, they have to spend money on so many other things than just the Android OS support. A lot of the audience may be thinking, "Well, if they make so much money off of it, why are they not making it better?" They make much more money off of other things. They have one product in particular that is much bigger than Android OS. It is the name of the company: Google. Google makes more money than any other product that it possesses. Google also has many other investments it must maintain such as YouTube, the newly bought Oculus Rift, which is coming out for the general public shortly, Gmail, Satellite Investment (for Google Maps and the Navigation app), Chromebook support, and many other things.
Let me compare this list to that of Apple's : They have to support iPhone, iPad, iPod, i/tunes, any other computers, and Satellite Investment. This is quite small compared to Google. So, it is reasonable as to why the support isn't that great as the iPhone.
I am sorry that I posted rebuttals this round, but with only three, I was left with no choice.
"1. Android OS is more for active users"
You speak of active as in being actively careful. A smartphone is meant to be a help to you. You can be an active user and use it to it's full potential, but the way you speak in that paragraph makes it sound like you have to spend a fair amount of time just to make sure it's secure.
"2. Google vs. Apple"
Not much to say because it sounds like you're agreeing with me here.
I do agree that it's easier to upgrade more storage on certain Android phones. However, we're talking about phones here. Unless someone has hours and hours and hours of media on their device, Apple's 64gb option is almost always more than enough. Nowadays though, it doesn't matter quite as much though. Most media is stored online. iCloud stores users' photos and videos, while iTunes or whichever other service they bought it from stores their music and movies so it doesn't take up space on your device. So, to recap: It's sometimes easier to get more storage on certain Android devices, but in-phone storage is not as crucial as it was a couple years ago.
I agree that the topics of graphics and processing should be skipped because although some Android phones have higher specs, the iPhone is designed to work with the specs it has and is not "laggy" so it doesn't make much of a difference.
"1. App storage amount can be extremely diverse, and it depends on the app.
2. You can remove the apps off of the phone, but it requires a slightly different process that the device usually does not tell you."
1. Although app storage is diverse, when you have duplicates it's obviously just a waste of space.
2. To uninstall these stock apps on Android is, as you said, possible but requires rooting, which is not the easiest thing in the world and the average user wouldn't take the time to do it, and so would be stuck with the bloatware.
Whether or not there is reason for the devices being different and changes being necessary to the OS to make it compatible with each different phone does not change the fact that it puts users at risk. As I said, this is a problem and needs to be fixed. At the very least, they could release security patches that would cover a wider range of devices.
Whether or not security is a priority during the building of an OS doesn't matter. Eventually it will be. If it isn't considered users will be at risk. Yes, it's true any smartphone users' data is at risk, but wouldn't the least risky option, which appears to be Apple's products, be the better choice if you're going to do it anyway?
Security may not be a priority, but that only makes the situation worse.
In response to the last large paragraph: Google does make lots of money, but it's not like they have a limited number of people working for them. They can use that money to hire more people that can watch over certain aspects of the company. There is no reason Android should not have better support. If they're going to make so many products, they have to be able to back them up.
Sorry, that took a bit longer than expected. Also, I see I forgot to include my sources in my last post. Here the main ones are real quick:
So, I believe I have spoken on all of the major topics and am ready for my opponent to say whatever last things he'd like and then we're ready for voting. :)
It was a pleasure debating with you!
My opponent made a claim back in round 2 I must now address again:
"The Galaxy S5, Samsung's' latest flagship smartphone, comes with a standard 16 GB of storage. Half of this is taken up right out of the box, "
This claim is false. My first three sources are all of pages from all major wireless smartphone carriers. None of them have my opponent's claim in them. Even amongst the lowest ratings for the phone, there is no report of such a problem. This is declaritive to me that my opponent is giving the audience biased and false information about the subject.
I am afraid after doing more research into the customer support issue of this debate I have made even more discoveries about my opponent's original argument that is false:
"An Android user would have to contact Google, whereas if there hardware failed, they would have to contact Samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, or whichever company produced their phone to get it worked out."
More often than not, whenever a person has a problem with the phone, they go to their wireless carriers to solve such problems. Thus, even the burden of customer support is not applicable to the Android or the iPhone.
"1. Although app storage is diverse, when you have duplicates it's obviously just a waste of space."
I am unsure of which issue my opponent claims about the product. I am gonna assume it is about the fact that occasionaly your service provider will have apps that basically do the same function. I will also address this issue at the same time, because they both have the same solution. I will state any additional quotes from my opponent below that are simply not true about the process.
"2. To uninstall these stock apps on Android is, as you said, possible but requires rooting, which is not the easiest thing in the world and the average user wouldn't take the time to do it, and so would be stuck with the bloatware."
If you have multiple apps on your phone that you do not wish to be there, but you cannot remove them, your service provider will do one of two things:
a) Tell you why the app is neccessary on the phone or
b)Uninstall it for you
"Whether or not security is a priority during the building of an OS doesn't matter. Eventually it will be. If it isn't considered users will be at risk. Yes, it's true any smartphone users' data is at risk, but wouldn't the least risky option, which appears to be Apple's products, be the better choice if you're going to do it anyway?"
This is an interesting claim. It does not support his argument in any way, shape, or form, and I will explain why. Even among computers, Apple machines are among the safest. Yet, Windows machines are the most commonly bought among this market. Why? Because even Windows is still the better OS. This is the same situation with the Android OS. There is a reason that both of those OS are better than the Apple OS's. They are more flexible to the user's control. You can set them up almost anyway you like. They can even be more secure than an iPhone. That is why when you make an OS, you do not focus on security.
The whole purpose of the operating system is to be the interface in which you can control your apps and hardware. In terms of which one (iOS or Android OS) is more capable of doing this, the one that is most superior is the Android.
"Security may not be a priority, but that only makes the situation worse."
No, actually. It makes the situation better, as I have just demonstrated.
" They can use that money to hire more people that can watch over certain aspects of the company. There is no reason Android should not have better support. If they're going to make so many products, they have to be able to back them up."
As I originally stated above, that is normally not the responsibility of Google.
In terms of maintenance, the only thing left that Google is really supposed to maintain is the OS's capability to work with the apps on its market. This is something that was a problem for Apple. From personal experience, the iPhone 4 is not capable to install and run apps on the market, forcing most of its users to upgrade in order for their apps to work. With Google, however, I had a Droid Razr for almost 3 years before recently upgrading. I never had such an issue.
Thank you for debating with me. It was my pleasure to have debated this topic.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate