The iPhone 5

This is not really a review - reads more like a lover on his last moments of love, desperately rationalizing things. Personally I think smartphones have almost commoditized. Apple has added ZERO product innovation this time in software or hardware. No - making a thinner, taller phone is not innovation.<p>To summarize the 'review'<p>0. Glass was the best material for the phone till last week. Now it's aluminium. Plastic sucks because it scuffs instead of breaking but feels cheap so I hate it. Why doesn't everyone else use an inferior material that Apple just stopped using?<p>1. The bigger screen sucks. But after using it for a week, the old screen is too small. 3.5" was <i>perfect</i> till now. 4" is <i>perfect</i> hereon. Anything bigger is only for stupid people who have and use two hands. And if they have two sizes, stupid people will always choose the bigger one - it's better that apple decides the right size for me.<p>2. The display is brighter and more saturated than the 4S. But not AS bright or saturated as the S3. It's <i>just</i> perfect, because its from Apple. Oh wait - the display is from LG. It's got a lower resolution than the S3? Crispness is what matters.<p>3. The Camera is good.<p>4. AT&#38;T sucks. Verizon rocks. Oh you can't do data+voice simultaneously on Verizon. But who needs that?<p>5. Battery life is same as on 4S. Who needs more than that?<p>6. The benchmark score of the processor is the highest Apple has so far. The S3 beats the pants off the iPhone 5? That's not a phone is it?<p>7. iOS6? There's nothing to talk about. I mean they screwed up the Maps. They copied notifications last time so there's nothing left to copy.

Funny, I've bought every iPhone to date except this one. In fact, I went out and bought a Galaxy Nexus instead. I did it because Apple's fascination with perfecting form and design has somehow morphed into this inability to innovate.<p>The primary reason I switched was that one day, I opened up my home screen and realized it hasn't changed in 5 years. We still open apps one at a time, each app allotted a sort of pseudo background API that allows minimal functionality. And God those apps are pretty. And the FPS is amazing. And the fluidity of the experience is breathtaking... but at the end of the day, my device is about acquiring information. I want to know when my train is coming, I want to save map info when I don't have a connection, I want to know that when I leave for work and hit the subway, Pocket auto downloaded all those articles I saved for later.<p>Apple still maintains the best hardware, hands down. It's not even comparable. But it's irrelevant if the apps that reside on that phone are completely crippled by a draconian sense of design and control. If the phone has a "workstation tower processor" inside it, why the hell can't they let up and let the thing actually PROCESS more information?<p>I'll miss the beauty of it, that's for sure, but unless Apple gets its act together with background processing and figuring out how to actually do cloud anything right, I'm moving to Google.

Disclaimer: Android user.<p>Every time I'm up to get a new phone I come <i>this</i> close to switching to iPhone. My wife has one, and I've switched to Macs. But there are certain utilitarian functions that keep me on Android.<p>As of the last two design revs, though, I also have an aesthetic aversion to the iPhone. Gruber describes the jewelry or fine watch-like quality very well. But I don't wear jewelry or fine watches. (Ok, I wear a wedding ring, but it's a plain band.)<p>Maybe I'm just a philistine, but there's something about old original Motorola Droids that are at this point beaten up and worn that have a really nice aged, aesthetic weight to them.<p>It's a sentiment similar to the one Khoi Vinh lays out here: <a href="http://www.subtraction.com/2007/07/16/designed-det" rel="nofollow">http://www.subtraction.com/2007/07/16/designed-det</a> but not quite, because I think smart phones become obsolete too quickly for 'designed deterioration' to be realistic.<p>Maybe it's more that I don't want to feel that precious about these objects. I like to be able to not have to worry that much about taking care of my phone, to be able to toss it around without worrying about damage.<p>Or maybe it's just an emotional, class-based aversion to luxury goods because I grew up in working class conditions.

I'm glad he spent a long time on the feel. My primary criticism of my 4S echoed Edward Tufte's words here:<p><i>Last year in Cupertino, I yelled at some people about touchscreens that paid precise attention to finger touches from the user but not to how the device in turn touches the hands of the user (and produces divot edge-lines in the flesh).</i><p>Those creases between the antenna bands and the glass back combined with the 4S's weight were very noticeable the first time I held the 4S for more than 5 minutes and through the first week I had it. It faded completely fairly quickly and I laugh about it now but I have to think one of their major goals with this iteration was to erase that defect.<p>People seem disappointed every time Apple doesn't come out with a total redesign but total redesigns are basically admissions that what you were shipping last week was totally wrong. I have to think that a unibody metal frame is what they've been shooting for all along. They couldn't work the antennae properly so they settled on a lot of plastic and then glass and finally they got their unibody aluminum chassis. I wouldn't be surprised if by next year they completely remove the glass inlays on the back and move to liquidmetal alloys.

Great review. I'm disappointed that the screen size change is noticably awkward -- I was hoping it would be something that you'd get used to in a matter of minutes. I currently have a Galaxy Nexus and hitting the top left is impossible without two hands or hand contortion that leaves the device in serious risk of being dropped.<p>Also, why on earth would Apple choose to have apps letterboxed in portrait mode? Wouldn't it make WAY more sense to align them on the bottom of the display, so that the keyboard would at least be in the same place across all applications? Here's hoping developers don't lag on updating their apps.

Gruber says that <i>"none of the competing phones on the market are made of metal"</i>.<p>So what about the Lumia 800 (1)? Or the One S (2)?<p>1) <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/3/2534861/nokia-lumia-800-review" rel="nofollow">http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/3/2534861/nokia-lumia-800-re...</a><p>2) <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/2/2916098/htc-one-s-review" rel="nofollow">http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/2/2916098/htc-one-s-review</a>

For being a review of the iPhone 5, notice that it is only focused on the hardware. There is no talk of iOS 6 at all.<p>And personally, I think that iOS 6 is a disappointment and no one wants to admit it. The hardware is eclipsing the software.

Gruber is right to spend the first 750 words talking about something that most people won't care about, the fit and finish. Smartphones are pretty much all the same, despite parties from both camps rearing up and claiming their phone of choice is The One True Phone, so companies need to find ways to set them apart. Apple's devotion to realising their designs is what sets them apart. Whilst Joe Public won't care about precision manufacture and such he will notice how <i>good</i> the phone feels. There's a reason Rolex, Omega and so on still make very expensive, high quality watches, and a reason why people still buy them.<p>Unfortunately there's a vocal group on here who are willing to just sit and go "Gruber is an Apple shill, there's nothing in here, he makes weird justifications", and he does in places, but he's also given Apple a hard time over changing display size so it's slightly hard to cover the screen but he knows they've had to do that in response to the market.<p>There's plenty to like in the iPhone 5, and I'll be upgrading my 4 to one when I can because for me Apple is still producing the nicest hardware for a smartphone and that trumps anything else <i>for me</i>. Stop assuming your personal feelings about it are real world facts, because you love the iPhone doesn't make it the best, and because you love the Galaxy doesn't make it the best.

&#62; But navigating the full screen while holding the iPhone [5] in one hand is worse ... Consider the windshield wipers on a car, and how, because they swing in a radial arc, they can’t reach the passenger-side top corner.<p>Gruber brought up a very good point about the somewhat less than perfect screen size which shows a UI weakness of iOS: the back button—one of the most used UI elements—is always at the top left. Try it yourself, go to versus io to see the iPhone 5 in its orignal size, calibrate your screen (click at the top-right corner on versus io) and place your hand next to the iPhone and see if your thumb would be able to reach the top-left corner: <a href="http://versusio.com/en/apple-iphone-5-64gb-vs-samsung-galaxy-s3" rel="nofollow">http://versusio.com/en/apple-iphone-5-64gb-vs-samsung-galaxy...</a> In contrast, Android has hardware back keys always at the bottom, so even 4,8" phones could be used for a short while with one hand (just try the same experiment with the S3). Moreover, there's a huge target not bothering about bigger phones because they have space in their bag and don't put them into their pockets (women). So, I agree with Gruber to start offering two size: 3.5 and something about 4.5 or even larger (and changing the back button UI in the long run).

Interesting to see both Gruber and Dalrymple find the taller screen and letter boxing to be troublesome. Though it will take some getting used to, the main stream press will certainly clamor over this being a largely negative move by Apple.<p>Gotta love Gruber's continued adherence to succinct style and message. Makes for a great, consumable read.

Personally, I'm disappointed. The thing is, I know I'm totally wrong because the iphone 5 is such a beautiful beast and probably the best smartphone out there.<p>Still, what I liked the most about the iphone, and the ipad, and the macbook, was how innovative it was. Everything was new. New concepts, new icon, new look and feel.. a whole refreshing new feeling.<p>I feel like the iphone5 is mostly a simple hardware update. I.e every now and then, I'll switch my old memory for a new one 2x faster. It's not innovative or original.. it's just faster memory.<p>So, this is why I'm disappointed. Not because the iphone5 is not good (it's great!). It just didn't satisfied my <i>WOW</i> factor.

If the only nice thing you can say about a phone is the camera and how it feels, not to mention devote at least 2 paragraphs to how pedantic Apple is about design and it paints a familiar picture. Apple are losing at their own game, the game they started and now a game that others are finishing for them.<p>The only great thing about the new iPhone is the fact that the iOS 6 operating system is comes with has an awesome vector maps feature that blows Google Maps out of the water. I'm not prepared to spend $1000 AUD on buying an iPhone 5 when it doesn't offer anything significantly new, where's the NFC chip?

It's interesting to note how, unless I've missed it, the verge has been left out of the party. I enjoy reading Joshua's reviews, which are critical when appropriate, although somewhat verbose. I'm sure the iPhone 5 is solid, I'll probably be ordering it, but it seems like the product is intentionally kept away from more critical reviewers.

Can we stop pretending that Bruner has anything interesting to say about Apple products? You know what he's going to say before you click the link. It's just self-congratulation for apple fans.<p>Now, I don't hate Apple, behaviour aside. They make great products. But Gruber has nothing new or interesting to say about them. It's just the same old, and is uninteresting. Anyone who feels the need to read what he thinks about Apple can just go to daringfireball; nobody's discovering any great insights here.

<p><pre><code> In an ideal world, perhaps Apple would offer two iPhone sizes — like they do with products such as MacBook Pros, MacBook Airs, and iMacs. A smaller one with the classic 3.5-inch display, and a larger (say, 4.5-inch?) one for people who want that. </code></pre> Isn't this exactly what Apple's doing? The iPhone 4 and 4S aren't going away, people now have a choice which size they want.

Gruber really doesn't write reviews. He writes Fifty shades of grey for Apple fanboys.<p>His writing serves little purpose sans as a base for analysis of how the Apple RDF affects basic reasoning.

Why are HNers totally incapable of evaluating high quality products? This situation is even more egregious since the high quality product costs the same as the low quality product.

I think if you read in between the lines you can understand the generally underwhelmed reaction to the iPhone 5. There isn't anything on the iPhone 5 that feels like a step forward for mobile computing. The biggest change is the change in screen size, which is awkward and driven by keeping up with consumer expectation.

This review could be the poster boy for the more and more idiotic consumerism that is the plague of our age.

Gruber is an amazing writer. Blows away the other reviews.

As an aside, has anyone a clue how iTunes is going to represent the new Retina 4 capable apps in the App Store? They now require screenshots of apps for iPhone (4), iPad and Retina 4 displays. Where are those going to appear, and how will people access them?

The iphone 5 will sell like crazy given the large number of people approaching their contract expiration with an earlier version of the device. It only makes sense for most to continue to invest in the ecosystem they have already invested. The average joe is not going to take the jump,in my opinion that is.Ideally the phone I really want to upgrade to should have the Android Jelly Bean's UI with iOS' ecosystem (read apps) combined in a Nokia Lumia phone. I would pay a LOT of money for that !!!

I kept reading waiting to find the section on what he DIDN'T like about the phone. I prefer reviews that address both the good and the bad about a product.<p>For example, the article about the inconsistencies in Android 4.x was pretty well done and definitely points out issues I've had with Android.<p>I've never owned an iOS device so I want to hear all the pros and cons. Raving reviews like this one do nothing to persuade me to buy it.

The part that I like about this review is the refrain — "It's nice". It's both a positive comment about the phone and also a deliberately non-quantitative, colloquial statement, recognizing it's only an incremental improvement. It's joining the chorus but also dismissing it. The argument being that yeah it's just nice, but that's the point. Stylistically, that's a neat little sentence.

About the just right screensize bullshit: it may be just right - for exactly one use case, which is typing with your thumb. There are dozens of other use cases for a mobile internet client. I like to surf and read, in both cases I cherish the big display of my Galaxy Nexus (which still fits nicely into my trouser pockets, thank you very much).<p>Personally I have never typed with a thumb, and I was surprised to discover that some people actually do that.<p>Even if you are convinced typing with your thumb is your main desire in life, there are people with thumbs of different sizes. What if my thumb is 3.7 inches, not 3.5 inches. Apple would be stealing 0.2 inches from my optimal screen estate then, just to please the masses. Or what if my thumb is only 3.0 inches? No thumb typing for me :-(<p>What I am saying: yes, the 3.5 iPhone screen size may by just right - for a selected group of users with specific use cases and specific thumb sizes. Thank god there is Android with a little variation in devices.

&#62; So the question is, if a 4-inch 16:9 display is better than a 3.5-inch 3:2 display, why hasn’t the iPhone been using 4-inch 16:9 displays from the start?<p>How about: Apple got this wrong?<p>To be fair to Apple, if they came out with a 4" or 4.5" back in 2007 it would have strangely large compared to everything else on the market (not to mention having the properties Gruber also mentions). The 3.5" screen made perfect sense then. However, what Apple didn't do was foresee that most consumers would prefer larger screens, and this doesn't fit with the Apple ideal of One True Resolution. (Yes, now there are two resolutions for iPhones, but only the vertical resolution has changed.)

What's this. Gruber complaining that he can't reach the edges of an iPhone display? I never thought I'd see the day.<p>He even admits there were some people who couldn't even use 3.5" displays one handed. Is the Apple kool-aid wearing off?

In Germany there is a saying that "nice is the little sister of crap". Just saying that the review felt lukewarm to me, even by Apple's greatest fan. But maybe it was just that the first line ("it is nice") set the tone for me.

I think the new screen resolution is a terrible terrible decision, I like a phone/tablet that has about the same aspect ratio as a piece of paper. For me, 4:3 and 3:2 are ideal. I have no use for widescreen, especially when I am normally viewing the screen in portrait.<p>I won't be installing iOS 6, I don't think it's finished and shouldn't be released in its current state. Too much functionality is lost with new maps.<p>I get the feeling that it's all downhill from here...

"And compared to the 4/4S’s glass back, it should prove far more durable...this is a phone that was meant to be used without a case."<p>I won't be holding my breath on that one. iPhones have always been more fragile than most comparable high end phones.<p>Anecdotally, I rarely see uncased iPhones in the wild - and I don't expect this to change anytime soon.

More features != better: <a href="http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2010/02/if-your-product-is-great-it-doesnt-need.html" rel="nofollow">http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2010/02/if-your-product-is-...</a><p>That being said, I'm content with my 4s, although I will probably buy my wife a Nokia 920 so I can get a taste of the other side.

Gee, I wonder why he didn't mention the maps? Apple's devices are still more compelling for me personally, but less so than they used to me. Hopefully Google builds and maintains its own iOS maps application.

If it's precision-milled to the micron, why do they need "725 unique inlays"?<p>Serious question - I think there's something I don't understand here.

tl;dr<p>"hi, I'm Gruber and I love everything Apple does. Well, surprise: I love the iPhone 5 too!"