iPhone vs Android: 5 reasons to pick the iPhone (and iOS)
Which is the best
smartphone platform: the iPhone's iOS, or Google Android? In Macworld's
(scrupulously fair) head-to-head article we list the pros and cons of buying an
iPhone or an Android handset
by David Price | 13 Mar 17
iPhone vs Android:
which is the better smartphone platform? And what are the differences between
iOS- and Android-based devices?
iPhone vs Android (or
iOS vs Android, to be more precise) has been the biggest rivalry in tech for
the best part of a decade, long ago eclipsing the desktop wars between Apple
and Microsoft, and Apple and IBM. Both sides record some amazing
sales numbers. Samsung, the leading manufacturer of Android
handsets, sold a whopping 308.5 million units in 2016, while Huawei,
Xiaomi and others will add many more to the pile; but Apple, in a comfortable
second place at 215.5 million iPhones, made the lion's share of the
profits: something close to 80 percent of worldwide smartphone profits.
But which of those two
clans should you join? Is an iPhone or an Android smartphone your best bet for
value for money, features, security, ease of use, app selection and more?
We'll be honest: here
at Macworld we sit unashamedly in the iOS camp, and reckon iOS 10 is the
best mobile operating system currently available. But we acknowledge that
Android has many advantages of its own, and that for plenty of smartphone
buyers, it will be the better choice.
In the following
article we list the pros and cons of going for an iPhone or Android phone, as
well as the significant differences between the two platforms, to help you pick
a team. For an alternative view, take a look at PC Advisor's Android vs iPhone vs Windows Phone 8: what phone should I
buy? And we'd love to hear your thoughts, too, so have your say
in the comments.
iPhones are more secure
iOS is a more secure
platform than Android. iOS isn't impregnable, and it's very dangerous for
iPhone users to assume that it is (see how to remove
iPhone viruses and iPhone security tips),
but far more malware is written for Android - Pulse Secure's 2015
Mobile Threat Report put the figure at 97 percent of all mobile
malware, while the US Department of Homeland Security estimated in 2013 [pdf]
that just 0.7 percent of malware threats were aimed at iOS - and while this is
partly because Android has more users, it's mainly because it's simply an
easier target.
The 'closed' platforms
- iOS, Windows Mobile and, if anyone out there is still using it, BlackBerry -
have very little malware written for them. It's easier to break into
Android, and malware writers will almost always go for the low-hanging fruit.
Part of the problem
for Android is that so many of its users don't bother to update to the latest
version: the DoHS report above found that 44 percent were still on
'Gingerbread', a version of Android which had been released two years earlier.
(By contrast, after four months of availability iOS 9 was on 75 percent of
active iPhones and iPads.) A family of trojan malware named Ghost Push is still
infecting Android phones two years after first emerging because
57 percent of users are running the old version 5 of Android (Lollipop) that is
vulnerable to it, even though versions 6 and 7 have come out since.
There are also small
differences between the flavours of Android used by the different handset
makers. This fragmentation makes it harder to push out adequate security
patches on a timely basis.
As we said, there are
still dangers out there for iPhone users. In its 2015
Threat Report, F-Secure Labs reports on several instances of malware
penetrating Apple's 'walled garden' App Store. Instead of using social
engineering to persuade users to download malware directly, hackers have
learned to target the app developers, who then use "compromised tools to
unwittingly create apps with secretly malicious behaviour".
Multiple apps -
anywhere from 30 to 300, and many of them from reputable companies - were
removed from the App Store in September 2015 because they contained the
XCodeGhost malware. Later that year similar situations arose with apps based on
UnityGhost, a cloned and compromised version of the Unity development
framework, and on the Youmi SDK.
Don't make the
mistake, then, of assuming that the iOS platform and Apple's App Store are
invulnerable to attack. They're not. But they are more secure
than the Android equivalents. Despite its findings, F-Secure insists that
Apple's App Store "remains a tougher nut to crack than the Android
ecosystem".
You quite often hear
the logically flaky reasoning that, because Apple's OS software products aren't
perfectly secure, they're no better than rival products which also
aren't perfectly secure. It's easy to explain why this is
wrong. iOS (like macOS) is very secure indeed, albeit not completely
secure. Android is pretty secure - it's not like Android users are getting
their bank accounts emptied and their motherboards fried by Hollywood-style
hacking attacks morning, noon and night - but quantifiably less secure than iOS.
By picking iPhone you
give yourself a
large security advantage.
iPhones are more private
There's two main
strands backing up the above statement: the privacy measures built into Apple's
smartphones (and particularly the most recent generations of iPhone), and the
statements and actions that Apple has made in support of user privacy.
iPhone privacy measures
We're not just talking
about passcodes and fingerprints, although these things can help to protect
your data (one element being the way that the iPhone locks up for successively
longer and longer periods the more times you get the passcode wrong, in order
to prevent would-be hackers from 'brute-forcing' the passcode; get it wrong 10
times and the phone locks down forever). Nor are we talking about the
end-to-end encryption Apple has added to iMessage. There's something better
than all this, in the more recent generations of the iPhone.
As well as introducing
Touch ID, the iPhone 5s was the first iPhone to feature a security measure that
Apple calls the Secure Enclave, a sub-section of the processor chip that stores
the fingerprints and other security-critical data. It is also a crucial part of
the encryption setup.
The Secure Enclave
uses a secure boot system to ensure that the code it runs can't be
modified," explains Mike Ash,
an expert who has done his best to piece together the principles behind the
closely guarded technology, "and uses encrypted memory to ensure that the
rest of the system can't read or tamper with its data. This effectively forms a
little computer within the computer that's difficult to attack."
The Secure Enclave
means, in effect, that Apple itself cannot break into an iPhone if it's a 5s or
later and has been protected with a passcode. This fact came to light near the
end of 2015 when the FBI asked Apple to open up the iPhone 5c that belonged to
one of the shooters in the San Bernardino attacks in America. If this had been
one generation later, it simply wouldn't have been possible, Apple said - but
because it was 'only' a 5c, the firm's engineers could in theory have created
and installed a custom build of iOS without the security measures that
ordinarily prevent brute-force bypassing of the passcode.
(Bear in mind,
however, that very little is known about the Secure Enclave by anyone outside
Apple, and some have argued that it isn't as secure as Apple makes out. It was claimed,
early in 2016, that a police-contracted hacker had successfully broken into an
iPhone 5s, Secure Enclave and all, in order to obtain information for a murder
case. Although it is significant that the device in question was running iOS 7,
an outdated OS with less comprehensive security measures.)
Apple refused the
FBI's demand to open up the iPhone 5c, however. Which leads us to our next
section.
Apple's pro-privacy
behaviour
As previously
outlined, Apple got itself into a standoff with US law enforcement in the first
months of 2016, because it refused to create a back door into a phone involved
in a high-profile shooting attack (the company felt that
this would both leave millions of iPhone users around the world vulnerable to
attacks if and when the custom build was leaked or replicated, and set a legal
precedent for less publicised cases in the future).
Six months on it's
easy to forget quite how unpopular this stance was at the time, or how
aggressively it was attacked by politicians keen to look 'tough on crime'. But
this was a brave and principled stand to make: the company seemingly
outmanoeuvred into defending its pro-privacy policy in the most unpopular of
circumstances, and willing to do so anyway.
"We did not
expect to be in this position, at odds with our own government," Tim Cook
said at the iPhone SE launch
event a month later. "But we have a responsibility to help you protect
your data and protect your privacy. We owe it to our customers and we owe it to
our country. We will not shrink from this responsibility."
Apple hasn't just
talked a good game on protecting privacy. When the chips were down, it
demonstrated a real commitment to the principle.
Read more on this: How private is your iPhone data, and how to protect your
privacy
Android is more customisable
We often call Apple's
software ecosystem a 'walled garden', and this is because Apple fiercely
controls what can come in… or leave, for that matter. The company is less
controlling than it used to be (they even let you install a third-party
system-wide keyboard these days) but it's still much harder to customise the
user experience in iOS than in Android.
There are lots of
handset manufacturers working with Android, and each of these has their own
slightly different take on the operating system, and this allows you to pick
the software flavour you prefer. But Android is also far more accommodating
when it comes to changing the look of the interface, installing widgets in the
middle of the home screen (iOS does allow widgets these days, but they're kept
in the lock screen and today view), change default apps, delete things you
don't like and so on.
Apple doesn't exert
iron control over its software interfaces because Tim Cook is a control freak
(on the contrary, by all accounts the man is a superb delegator!). Rather, the
company's motivation comes from a desire to deliver the best possible user
experience, and it thinks that a consistent and curated platform is the best
way to do that. Often that will be true, but if you're confident, tech-savvy
and opinionated about the way you want software to work - and who wouldn't put
themselves in that category? - then Android allow you more scope to mould the
experience to your tastes.
You get more choice with Android phones
This applies to both
hardware and software.
In terms of the
handsets, in one case you're choosing between the phones made by one
manufacturer, albeit the most successful mobile manufacturer in the world. And
in the other you're choosing between the phones made by dozens - maybe hundreds
- of companies. Samsung, LG, Motorola, Huawei, Sony, HTC, Google itself (sort
of)… the list goes on and on. Microsoft and BlackBerry each have their own
mobile OS but they, too, make Android handsets as well.
Most of these
manufacturers will make more Android handset models than Apple makes iPhones,
too. Three iPhones a year? Pah! Samsung designs that many Android phones in a
week. Possibly.
Whatever kind of phone
you're looking for, in other words, there'll be an Android phone that fits the
bill. As long as you're not looking for an Android phone that runs iOS.
iOS is more user-friendly
Personally I think iOS
is easier and more convenient and enjoyable to use than Android; and it would
appear that a lot of my fellow smartphone users agree, since iOS users are on
average more loyal to the
platform than their Android counterparts. Once people have
tried the iPhone they tend to stick with it.
But quality of user
experience is hard to quantify. A better way of approaching the idea might be
to think about the respective design processes and philosophies behind iOS and
Android.
Apple famously builds
both software and hardware, enabling it to create a seamless whole. These days
the design teams even overlap for greater collaboration, with Apple design
guru Sir Jony Ive bringing his minimalist
hardware design aesthetic to the software from iOS 7 onwards.
Every aspect of the iPhone, then, has been designed with iOS in mind - not only
the current build of iOS but future iterations. In some cases the same people
are involved in the design of hardware and software.
Android handsets, on
the other hand, are built reactively: hardware and software are designed by
separate teams in separate companies (in separate continents, quite often).
Expecting the same level of polish would be unrealistic.
A note on the Pixel
phones
There is an exception
to this. Google, which makes the Android operating system, has announced
two smartphones of its own: the Pixel and Pixel XL, which look like really nice
phones except for their disappointing water-resistance ratings.
Google doesn't do
everything itself - it apparently partners with HTC for manufacturing and some
of the design work on the handsets - but the Pixel phones should
nevertheless offer superior integration between hardware and software than any
previous Android devices. They will feature Google's new Assistant before any other phone, for one
thing, and Google is likely to have the Pixel hardware in mind whenever
it brings new features to Android.
Read more: iPhone 7
Plus vs Google Pixel XL | iPhone 7 vs Google
Pixel
iPhones get better apps, earlier
The mighty Infinity Blade 3,
which is not available on
Google Play because of piracy concerns. Infinity Blade II isn't available on Android
either - in fact, there are no genuine Infinity Blade games on there at all,
despite the presence of a
few knock-offs
Google Play has
more apps than the App Store, but both passed the million mark some time
back, so sheer numbers aren't really relevant. What is relevant
is quality, and the ability to find high-quality apps among the dross.
Neither company does this particularly well, but it's clear which is doing
better.
Apple 'curates' its
store in the sense that developers are obliged to follow stringent rules before
getting their software approved for release. (Sometimes, indeed, Apple takes
this too far, with its generally admirable stance against distasteful content
sometimes leading it into areas that seem politically
partisan - or creating a climate in which publishers censor themselves.) This means that everything
you'll find on the store has been subject to some degree of quality control. At
the start of September 2016, indeed, Apple emailed
developers to let them know about an imminent clean-up, in
which apps that don't work properly with current versions of
iOS or haven't been updated in a long time will be given 30
days' notice and then removed if they don't shape up.
Now, we're not saying
that making it into the App Store is like Nintendo's
Seal of Quality; there are still bad apps, and boring apps, and ethically iffy apps, and plagiarised apps (and
even a few that tick all four boxes)
that make it through the net. But the proportions of these are vastly lower
than on Google Play.
It's easier to find
good apps as an iOS user. And discoverability is no small issue in a store with
well over a million apps. Apps are cheap and numerous, and individual
buying decisions are much easier than simply finding the stuff worth
considering in the first place.
What's more, quality
apps are more likely to appear on iOS that on Android, and if they appear on
both they tend to appear first on
the Apple App Store. Why? Because on average, Android users are less inclined
to pay for apps, which means developers have less incentive to put the effort
in. It might seem unfair, but by joining the platform with the more spend-happy consumers,
you're earning yourself preferential treatment from software developers.
One example back when
we first put this article together illustrates both the extra wait
Android fans are subjected to, and the dangers they face of downloading
something dodgy. As of 29 August 2013, Plants vs Zombies 2 - a very high-demand
game - had been available for iOS for a fortnight, but Google Play still hadn't
got it. But more worryingly, a dodgy game had appeared on the
Google Play store claiming to be Plants vs Zombies 2. It was actually a hoax designed
to get you to download more apps.
PvZ 2 did eventually appear on Google Play. Sometimes you just have
to wait a bit longer than people on iOS. Sometimes, like the Infinity Blade
games, it never arrives at all.
Read more: Best free iPhone apps | Best free iPad apps | Best iPad
& iPhone games
Android phones are cheaper
…or at least they
start at lower prices. Take a look at our colleagues' chart of the best
Android phones and you'll see a fair few flagship Androids at
similar prices to the iPhone 7 - but plenty of cheaper options, too. The
OnePlus 3 is just £329. The Xiaomi Mi 5 is £263. The Elephone P9000 is £194.
The Motorola Moto G4 is £169!
This is another aspect
of the choice argument, really. Apple has a small number of very good phones,
and they cost appropriate amounts. The Android world lets you pay pretty much
what you like, which is great news for mobile buyers on a budget. However…
Higher iPhone prices are usually worth it
A common refrain of
Android fans centres on the price differential between Android and iOS
handsets, and it's true that iPhones are near the top of the smartphone
budgetary scale. It's also true that today's Android handsets are both cheap
and beautifully made: sadly, though, to paraphrase an old gag, the
handsets that are cheap are not beautifully made and the handsets that are
beautifully made are not cheap.
Two of the best
Android smartphones are by Samsung: the Galaxy S7 and the
S7 edge. They're great, and well worth a recommendation. But to call them a
budget alternative is misleading: they cost £569 and £639 respectively,
compared with £539 and £619 for the entry-level iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus.
Equally, it's possible
to find an Android phone for less than the equivalent iPhone - the Google
Nexus 6P is just £449 - but don't expect the same quality
or attractiveness of design.
Android phones tend to have better specs for the money
It's usually the
screen resolution where Apple really suffers, but you'll tend to find that a
given iPhone will have equal or weaker specs in most areas than an Android
phone of equivalent price, and that you'd be able fairly easily to match that
iPhone's specs with a substantially cheaper Android.
Apple would probably
say that it doesn't care about chasing the best specs, and it's true that the real-world
effect produced by a product is more important than the numbers on the specs
sheet - the general feeling of an interface's speed, its smoothness and
slickness and so on, matters more than the number of gigs of RAM that
contributed to it - but it's still easy for Apple fans to feel rather
shortchanged at times.
We compared the Samsung
Note 7 with the iPhone 7 Plus recently and, leaving aside the
unfortunate (and now terminal) issue with the overheating
batteries, the Note 7 has a 5.7-inch (2560 x 1440) screen with a pixel density
of 515ppi, compared to the iPhone's 5.5-inch (1920 x 1080) screen at 401ppi. It
also has more RAM and a larger-capacity battery (although the companies'
respective battery life estimates - which in Apple's case have historically
been very fair - suggest that the iPhone and its lower-powered screen will last
longer between charges).
iPhone vs Android: Conclusion
Ultimately the iPhone
vs Android debate comes down to a choice: between Android's flawed, fragmented
openness, and Apple's quality experience in a closed environment.
Openness sounds brilliant,
and if we were talking about a lifestyle or a political philosophy then Android
would be hard to beat. But this is about a phone. And if you just want a
smartphone that's safe, easy and enjoyable to use, and connected to the
best-quality app store around - not to mention sumptuously designed and
reliable - then iPhone is the only answer.
And if you feel the same
way, then our iPhone buying guide should
probably be your next stop.
Poll: iPhone or Android?
So: which side of the
fence do you sit on? Have your say in our poll.
Your views
Send the writer your
point of view, whether pro-Apple or pro-Android, on Twitter or
in the comments at the bottom of this piece.
Here are some of your
thoughts so far on the iOS vs Android debate:
Well I have to say you
are risking a backlash from the Android Fanboys. Luckily for you I'm not one of
them… We have plenty of Apple products in our family, a MacBook, an iPad 2
& mini, an iPhone 3GS, 4 & 4S, an Apple TV, numerous iPods, and
everything works so well together. marclewis4
Personally I have a
Mac Pro, a retina iPad, and an iPhone 5 - the total experience between them is
amazing. JimGr
Androids openess is
it's flaw, as it is becuase of fragmented hardware all the extra stuff that
comes with the open access hardly ever works. [Android fans] bang on about all
these features when most of them don't even have the latest Android OS. DaveTheRave137
Problem is, if your
comments were true, you wouldn't see iPhone defectors. Several I know are
extremely happy S4 owners. @rmagruder
Agree with [the article],
and on top of that I also believe Android’s supposed “openness” is misleading. @_mattbrock
Everything.me and
SwiftKey blow away iOS. It isn't even a fair fight. Apple's closed ness is
dooming it. @Scobleizer
See also:
Comments
Post a Comment