iOS Devices Failed More Often Than Android Units During Q3, Says Report (phonearena.com) 95
A report from Blannco Technology Group has revealed that iOS devices failed more often than Android devices in the third quarter. Specifically, 62% of Apple iPhone and Apple iPad units suffered failures, compared to the 47% failure rate tallied by Android devices. Phone Arena reports: Apps crashed on 65% of iOS powered devices compared to just 25% of Android models. The breakdown for the iOS devices shows the Apple iPhone 6 with a leading 13% failure rate, followed by the Apple iPhone 6s (9%), Apple iPhone 5s (9%) and the Apple iPad Air 2 (2%). In the report, some of the blame for the high iOS failure rate is placed on the iOS 10 update. Among Android devices, the LeEco Le 2 had a 13% failure rate to lead the way. Two Xiaomi devices were next, both with a 9% rate. Those models were the Redmi 3S and the Redmi Note 3. Rounding out the top five are the Samsung Galaxy S7 edge (5%) and the Lenovo Vibe K5 Note (4%). Android flavored models faced problems with the battery (seen on 7% of devices) and issues with the screen (6%). Samsung branded phones and tablets had the most Android failures among manufacturers at 11%. That was followed by the 4% registered by Xiaomi built products. Crashed apps by far was the leading problem for iOS users in North America during the quarter. Worldwide, the rising temperature of an iDevice was the biggest issue. Android users in North America had to deal with crashed apps (21%) more than other problems. Worldwide, those using an Android phone or tablet were most likely to face an issue with the USB port. Last quarter, iOS devices had a 58% failure rate, which marked the first time that Apple's devices had a lower performance rate compared to Android.
Dumb Story (Score:5, Informative)
Given that we spent the majority of the previous version of this story [slashdot.org] bitching about how the math is rubbish and that the story is clickbait, why the hell would you bring it back?
Nothing's changed. The math is still rubbish, and trying to claim that 62% of iOS devices failed is dumb enough that it makes one's head want to implode. Please go look up the definition of insanity [brainyquote.com] and then go sit in a corner and think about how many man hours of time across the globe has just been wasted by posting this dumb story on Slashdot.
Re:Dumb Story (Score:4, Interesting)
bias just a little? you can always spot the religious maniacs.
How ironic that you want to bring up religion when the only bias the parent has is one towards facts instead of "statistics" mired in bullshit.
And while it would appear that the "failure" rate on iOS is high, Android suffers from considerably different issues. I'll take a crashing legitimate app over perfectly functioning malware any day.
Re: (Score:1)
I'll take a crashing legitimate app over perfectly functioning malware any day.
Do you have malware on your Android device? Oh let me guess. You don't have an Android device, but you did read another bullshit story making claims about Android malware. That kettle is a real dark color.
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, there have been plenty of stories about malware on both sides, and the response is pretty much the same on both sides as well. The app is removed when someone sees that it is malware. It isn't like Apple's vetting process is bulletproof, so I don't know why AC seems to think that their iPhone is any better.
Religious maniacs (Score:1)
What would be more interesting here would be a way to differentiate religios maniacs from paid shills. I'm sure we've got quite a few in each class.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's stupid wording to refer to app crashes as "failures", and it's pretty dumb to compare app crashes with battery and screen problems (by which I assume they're talking about hardware failures); pokemon go crashing is a pretty minor inconvenience, compared to a dead battery or screen. It's a shame, because there's probably actually some interesting stats in there somewhere, but it's difficult to get at them past the bullshit.
Re: Dumb Story (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: Dumb Story (Score:1)
BeauHD, please don't use slashdot as your blog (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole point of having reader submissions which are first vetted by other readers, and the cream of the crop elevated by editors to the front page, is to filter out crap articles like this one. It keeps the signal to noise ratio up. You (and the other "editors" doing the same) are short-circuiting that process by posting stories you find interesting straight to the front page. Please stop.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me if you know a way to ignore all stories sent by specific person? I would use it immediately.
Judging by the front page of late, you would have dry spells where there were no stories all day (or for a couple days) because the only person even posting them is BeauHD or msmash. Pardon the buzzword, but you fuckers need to bring back the old ecosystem. /. has become homogenized.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Please don't repeat the insanity misquote. It's garbage.
Re:You can thank Swift for that decline... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm just glad that this "study" treats a crash of a YouBook app as a "failure" the same as if the phone explodes and embeds shards of glass in your eyes.
Seems like a pretty fucking stupid way to cook the numbers to tell a narrative you're trying to sell. And Slashdot Media is buying, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just glad that this "study" treats a crash of a YouBook app as a "failure" the same as if the phone explodes and embeds shards of glass in your eyes.
Right, or electrocutes you while it's charging. [mirror.co.uk]
Apple should not be worried (Score:3, Funny)
Re: Apple should not be worried (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that many failed.. Samsung recalled them early enough. Whereas with Apple devices, they simply pretended issues like antenna gate never existed
Re: Apple should not be worried (Score:4, Insightful)
Not that many failed.. Samsung recalled them early enough. Whereas with Apple devices, they simply pretended issues like antenna gate never existed
They had to, your phone blowing up is a bit more hazardous to your health and less suited to being ignored than 'antenna-gate'. Samsung seemed to be perfectly happy to ignore less explosive FUBARs surrounding their products such as complaints from their customers when they orphaned the early Galaxy Tab line. Samsung is not exactly the angel of innocence when it comes to stiffing their customers over the flawed products they sold them.
Re: Apple should not be worried; BUT... (Score:1)
From this it appears Samsung are the more honourable in dealings with customers. Point noted.
Re: (Score:1)
And yet "you're holding it wrong" and "courage" somehow aren't worn out and lame to you?
Your bias is showing.
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung Galaxy 7 line of products will soon rebalance the percentage.
Depends on how you look at it. Something like... 20 of them failed, right? And millions were sold. That makes a really, really low failure rate.
And this is how statistics are twisted.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, but I'm sure that Samsung may have looked at the problem and decided that scrapping untold amounts of R&D and product design and manufacturing may have been worth it because they knew what the actual problem was, and what the real failure rate would be in time.
Do you think they would just shitcan their flagship product and have nothing to sell in that space for months if it wasn't an actual problem?
20 were confirmed to fail within weeks of launch. What would the numbers be at 6 months? A year?
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung is the only entity that knows how bad it could have gotten...
That's sad, kind of erodes one's faith in the super competent geek mythos hollywood has built up around us. I thought that, given a mere hint of what might be wrong, some genius with a multimeter out there would be able to tell us in detail exactly what went wrong. Failing that, some mole in digital city. Anyway, pulling the product is the honorable (and costly) thing to do, well beyond any remedial action we have seen Apple or Microsoft undertake. Makes me more likely to look seriously at Samsung handsets
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think they would just shitcan their flagship product and have nothing to sell in that space for months if it wasn't an actual problem?
The OP didn't say it wasn't a problem. He said the actual failure rates were low. When "failure" means burning people alive you don't have to have a high failure rate to initiate a product recall.
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung Galaxy 7 line of products will soon rebalance the percentage.
Depends on how you look at it. Something like... 20 of them failed, right? And millions were sold. That makes a really, really low failure rate. And this is how statistics are twisted.
20 failed? That must be the number for those "we found the problem, this phone will not explode , we promise" version of the Note 7.
Heck, even Samsung claimed 35 confirmed cases when they started the exchange program to that version. And that's how statistics are twisted
Re: (Score:2)
20 failed? That must be the number for those "we found the problem, this phone will not explode , we promise" version of the Note 7.
Heck, even Samsung claimed 35 confirmed cases when they started the exchange program to that version. And that's how statistics are twisted
20. 35. Out of millions. The point I was making was that what actually failed was a tiny portion of the whole. That doesn't speak to how many would have failed given a few more months or years of being used. It just addresses actually
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not defending Samsung, nor the Note 7 product. Just pointing out that if you're counting failures, including Note 7 won't get you a percentage increase.
How would we know? Blannco Technology doesn't say a thing about how they get to there numbers. All we know is that they do it in a way so that the total failure rate for iOS devices is much higher than that for the iOS device model with the highest failure rate. So or all we know the Note 7 may raise the Android failure rate to 114%.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not defending Samsung, nor the Note 7 product. Just pointing out that if you're counting failures, including Note 7 won't get you a percentage increase.
How would we know? Blannco Technology doesn't say a thing about how they get to there numbers. All we know is that they do it in a way so that the total failure rate for iOS devices is much higher than that for the iOS device model with the highest failure rate. So or all we know the Note 7 may raise the Android failure rate to 114%.
Because a failure rate of a few dozens of phones out of several millions shipped isn't a number that raises anything that isn't already effectively zero.
Re: (Score:2)
Because a failure rate of a few dozens of phones out of several millions shipped isn't a number that raises anything that isn't already effectively zero.
Again, we don't know how they calculate "failure" - and you keep ignoring that in fact every single Note 7 made is no longer working after just a few weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
It was 35 when first reported in the news. When the recall finally started, it was up over 100 known/verified cases.
And the replacement phones was starting to edge up into 10 or so before Samsung completely scrapped it.
Yes, of millions, because the first cases started
Re: (Score:2)
The point I was making was that what actually failed was a tiny portion of the whole.
But proportionately more than other products and sufficient to indicate an endemic design issue. Even a single battery explosion is enough to make the news, just like a single airplane crash. Well, maybe it even makes more news than a cessna crash these days. I don't think that Samsung's remedy was excessive at all, given that there is no doubt that these events took place and the reason is faulty engineering of the handset, not the battery (otherwise the phones would have been refurbished instead of the en
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they recalled the millions of them, then technically they all failed. Otherwise, they'd still be in use.
So, that's a really, really high failure rate.
All depends on how you look at it.
The numbers are not believable (Score:1)
I would consider these numbers rubbish. What exactly is a failure? Not sticking up for IOS or Apple here, but if these numbers were actually true. I don't see many users of IOS or Android still buying either platform. The last real comparisons I have read that make sense still show IOS being more stable that Android devices overall. Apps crash less on IOS, hardware is better matched to the OS and while Android in my opinion is gaining in stability and performance. I think the edge still goes to Apple and IO
Re: (Score:2)
ikr? it conflates hardware failures and when a buggy app crashes. Not impressed...
Also, no solar-powered iOS devices (Score:5, Insightful)
Failure of an app is not a failure of the device, or of the operating system.
Re: (Score:3)
Rubbish. Except in low level embedded applications, all computer programs use existing libraries in the OS.
Re: (Score:1)
No no no, that's not a failure in iPhones, it's a feature.
Re: (Score:2)
By this logic, every single security exploit that ever happened in Adobe Flash or Adobe Acrobat is all of a sudden a failure of Windows / MacOS / Linux?
What about Java - is Sun / Oracle completely without blame all of a sudden, because they "used existing libraries in the OS" ?
You sound like a fucking idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Failure of an app is not a failure of the device, or of the operating system.
TFA article is just making claims about users' perception of stability. You you think a user cares that their Facebook app crashes because of a flaw in the app, a flaw in the iOS SDK, a flaw in the underlying system libraries used to implement the SDK, a flaw in the kernel, or a flaw in the hardware? They don't.
Re: (Score:2)
No, what the article is attempting to spread is clickbait FUD.
Re: (Score:2)
Worked on you I guess.
iToy colors (Score:1)
Phone Prices are outrageous (Score:1)
The amounts that they charge for these phones is outrageous. They should be selling for less than $500. When I can keep my iphone 6 in perfect condition in an otterbox case, yet is gets screen damage from a swollen battery, then there is something wrong with the industry. They are able to have bad parts and design flaws just like the computer industry, but people's desperation for this device allows them to take advantage of the public with very high prices.
Now they price gouge further by only giving dea
shield your phone (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why spend the resources and energy on trying to make the customer *want* to stay forever, when they already have to stay forever. It's not like there's a big range of choice out there - get fucked by Verizon or AT&T for the best coverage, or get fucked slightly less by Sprint for coverage that isn't as good.
It's not like you're going to stop having a mobile phone.
Re: (Score:2)
The amounts that they charge for these phones is outrageous. They should be selling for less than $500.
No, they should be selling for twice as much, because being separated from their cash is a liberating experience for an ifan.
Pokemon Go? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently, the reliability of mobile phones is now measured by how often Pokemon Go Android crashes vs Pokemon Go iOS.
Braindead.
Re: (Score:3)
Apparently, the reliability of mobile phones is now measured by how often Pokemon Go Android crashes vs Pokemon Go iOS.
Braindead.
Gotta crash them all... Seriously, this study has a number of flaws that make it useless; from calling any app crash a failure, to merely running slowly, to presenting the data in a way that makes comparisons impossible. In addition, there is no mention of sample sizes. I'm surprised they didn't include a "the phone failed to turn on after we left it running for a couple f days..." as a failure to get 100% failure rtes for all phones.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really the fault of the device manufacturer, but it sure detracts from the user experience of of the device. I'd sure love to have a mobile device where the apps crash less often. It seems like for some reason we are repeating all the same mistakes we made on desktop operating systems years ago. Maybe in another 20 years we'll be at the point where the mobile platforms are mature enough to not crash all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right - it's not the fault of Apple / Google / Samsung / HTC / Etc. that bad apps are bad. And users are smart enough to know this - they have the ability to know that if the shitty app they just downloaded crashes, it's a problem with the app, not the phone.
Now, if the whole phone reboots - that's a problem with the phone. But I'm guessing from this "study" that we're not talking about a whole kernel panic and reboot situation. We're talking about some piece of shit FaceTube app that shits the be
Re: (Score:2)
At the same time though, a generic consumer doesn't really care whose fault it is they just care which one is more reliable.
If all you do is facebook and twitter, then if facebook and twitter crashes markedly less on platform A then on platform B, then you'll probably be happier with A. It doesn't matter whehter the issue is flaws of platform B, or if actual fault lies with facebook and twitter writing shitty code for platform B. Makes no difference.
The end result is the user of platform B puts up with more
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They most likely share data from 3rd party ad network crash handlers which are rife with bugs themselves and often used by developers to generate ad revenue. The story makes it look like more than half of the devices structurally fail (e.g. Need replacement) while it's 60% of the apps they track generate a crash handler which doesn't say much for either platform.
Re: (Score:2)
How would any company possibly know all that information?
Telemetry....
It isn't failure. (Score:1)
Trash article (Score:4, Insightful)
How many of them caught fire? (Score:5, Interesting)
Were any models banned from aircraft?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: How many of them caught fire? (Score:2)
How many of them have caught fire and how many models have been banned from aircraft?
Suspicious (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Make no mistake - there is absolutely no "meaningful data" presented in this piece of trash article. Anyone that equates an app crash with total hardware failure is selling a story.
As someone who tests phone apps for a living... (Score:1)