Tech

The march toward the $2000 smartphone isn't sustainable – Android Police

Published

5 years ago

February 17, 2020

Whether it folds or it’s just the size of a microhome, high-end smartphones are hitting an all-time high many of us aren’t exactly loving: price. Now, this isn’t a post about singling out Samsung in particular—they’re merely on the cutting edge of what is a larger and growing trend. When Apple launches its first 5G iPhones later this year, you can bet your AirPods they’ll come with an appropriately next-generation price hike. But at what point is enough finally enough for the mass market?

One thing I think we can all agree on is that technology, and microprocessors in particular, have resulted in a tremendous and demonstrable trickle down effect in the marketplace, driven by both commoditization and innovation. As there is more and more demand for the advanced components and processes necessary to produce smartphones, economies of scale drive the cost of those components and processes necessarily downward. And as new innovations are introduced in the marketplace, older technology becomes less competitive, and prices steadily decline and that technology radiates into a wider array of products at a wider array of price points. You can buy smartphones today for under $200 that would run circles around those that cost $700 five years ago, a result both of commoditization and innovation. We all understand these sort of things almost unthinkingly, because that’s just how technology works.

But in the past two or three years in particular, we’ve watched smartphone prices climb at a fairly unprecedented rate. Last week, Samsung announced the $1400 Galaxy S20 Ultra, and the reaction to the pricing was almost universally surprise, and even a bit of shock. We all knew 5G would come with an MSRP premium, because that’s what 4G taught us way back when, but I think this kind of pricing may even have a lot of the industry experts reeling a bit.

A $2,000 phone, even financed over 2 years, would cost more per month than typical postpaid phone service in the US.

Much of the anti-blowback on the subject of price shock focuses on the fact that the vast majority of people, especially in the US, finance their phones over around two years. That makes a $1000 phone negligibly more expensive on a monthly basis than a $700 one, and a $1400 one negligibly more expensive on a monthly basis than a $1000 one. Or so the logic goes. While I do agree with that logic, I do so only to a point, because I think there is a point at which it fails, one that is rapidly approaching. While Samsung’s $1400 S20 Ultra is a strong $600 shout away from $2000, last year’s Galaxy Fold brushed right up against it. Clearly, Samsung is flirting with the idea of a $2,000 smartphone, and I suspect the Fold’s successor will run perilously close to that mark as well. And a $2,000 phone, even financed over 2 years, would cost more per month than typical postpaid phone service in the US. You’re going to notice that on your bill.

And what of 2020’s Galaxy Note phones? I have my suspicions they won’t actually threaten to unseat the S20 Ultra as Samsung’s MSRP top dog (the Note has been of declining relevance for years), but Samsung has clearly made room for them to get serious hikes as well. Prices will doubtless be up across the board in 2020.

With all of these ever-rising costs, I do think we’re approaching a point at which consumers are more and more likely to start asking questions that phone manufacturers really would rather they didn’t. Why is this phone so much more expensive? How much better is it actually than my old one? Do I need superfluous technologies like mmWave 5G or enough RAM to run a Windows installation with 30 open Chrome tabs? Are there cheaper phones that still do what I need?

It is easy to say that in a rich, consumerist nation like the United States, people will simply buy what the corporation with the largest ad budget and most influencer marketing tells them to buy, and that they will pay the price asked. And no, no one is forcing anyone to buy the most expensive phone: Samsung still has a very “reasonable” $1000 Galaxy S20 if you don’t want the full-fat S20 Ultra. Options remain.

But as consumers choose to upgrade their phones less and less frequently (a trend for which there is ample data), manufacturers continue to raise prices in order to reap back the profits of what was once a reliable 2-year replacement cycle. And as those prices rise, consumers are becoming more and more conservative about replacing their phones, more frequently choosing to repair them when they break and generally hold on to them longer. With more reliable security updates, fewer truly experience-breaking changes in new Android releases, and the widening availability of screen repair and battery replacement services, it’s easier than ever to just choose not to upgrade.

As we begin the slow descent from peak smartphone, competition on price and features is only going to intensify.

One of the real warning signs for this trend, in my view, has become the widening gap between the most expensive phones and the traditional “mid-range” phones in markets like China and India. While the high end of the market has always significantly outpriced the entry level, the proportion by which that is true has skyrocketed. What was once a factor of maybe two or three between a respectable mid-range value phone and a “flagship” is now five or six. But I don’t think anyone could seriously and credibly argue you’re getting five or six times the phone. That, to me, is the canary in the coal mine: while affordable phones really are getting much better—and importantly, staying affordable—the most expensive phones are making what are at best marginal advancements year over year, all while becoming markedly less affordable in the process.

As a pattern, it’s hard to see how this is sustainable. And as we begin the slow descent from peak smartphone, competition on price and features is only going to intensify. While I agree that the US market has proven surprisingly resilient to the allure of smartphone affordability to date (and that there will always be a significant population who really do want premium products), I feel we’re increasingly a wrinkle in a global trend, and one that will—eventually—iron itself out.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Tech

Ottawa orders TikTok’s Canadian arm to be dissolved

Published

5 days ago

November 6, 2024

Anne Joseph

The federal government is ordering the dissolution of TikTok’s Canadian business after a national security review of the Chinese company behind the social media platform, but stopped short of ordering people to stay off the app.

Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced the government’s “wind up” demand Wednesday, saying it is meant to address “risks” related to ByteDance Ltd.’s establishment of TikTok Technology Canada Inc.

“The decision was based on the information and evidence collected over the course of the review and on the advice of Canada’s security and intelligence community and other government partners,” he said in a statement.

The announcement added that the government is not blocking Canadians’ access to the TikTok application or their ability to create content.

However, it urged people to “adopt good cybersecurity practices and assess the possible risks of using social media platforms and applications, including how their information is likely to be protected, managed, used and shared by foreign actors, as well as to be aware of which country’s laws apply.”

Champagne’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment seeking details about what evidence led to the government’s dissolution demand, how long ByteDance has to comply and why the app is not being banned.

A TikTok spokesperson said in a statement that the shutdown of its Canadian offices will mean the loss of hundreds of well-paying local jobs.

“We will challenge this order in court,” the spokesperson said.

“The TikTok platform will remain available for creators to find an audience, explore new interests and for businesses to thrive.”

The federal Liberals ordered a national security review of TikTok in September 2023, but it was not public knowledge until The Canadian Press reported in March that it was investigating the company.

At the time, it said the review was based on the expansion of a business, which it said constituted the establishment of a new Canadian entity. It declined to provide any further details about what expansion it was reviewing.

A government database showed a notification of new business from TikTok in June 2023. It said Network Sense Ventures Ltd. in Toronto and Vancouver would engage in “marketing, advertising, and content/creator development activities in relation to the use of the TikTok app in Canada.”

Even before the review, ByteDance and TikTok were lightning rod for privacy and safety concerns because Chinese national security laws compel organizations in the country to assist with intelligence gathering.

Such concerns led the U.S. House of Representatives to pass a bill in March designed to ban TikTok unless its China-based owner sells its stake in the business.

Champagne’s office has maintained Canada’s review was not related to the U.S. bill, which has yet to pass.

Canada’s review was carried out through the Investment Canada Act, which allows the government to investigate any foreign investment with potential to might harm national security.

While cabinet can make investors sell parts of the business or shares, Champagne has said the act doesn’t allow him to disclose details of the review.

Wednesday’s dissolution order was made in accordance with the act.

The federal government banned TikTok from its mobile devices in February 2023 following the launch of an investigation into the company by federal and provincial privacy commissioners.

— With files from Anja Karadeglija in Ottawa

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.

Source link

Health

Here is how to prepare your online accounts for when you die

Published

3 weeks ago

October 24, 2024

Anne Joseph

LONDON (AP) — Most people have accumulated a pile of data — selfies, emails, videos and more — on their social media and digital accounts over their lifetimes. What happens to it when we die?

It’s wise to draft a will spelling out who inherits your physical assets after you’re gone, but don’t forget to take care of your digital estate too. Friends and family might treasure files and posts you’ve left behind, but they could get lost in digital purgatory after you pass away unless you take some simple steps.

Here’s how you can prepare your digital life for your survivors:

Apple

The iPhone maker lets you nominate a “ legacy contact ” who can access your Apple account’s data after you die. The company says it’s a secure way to give trusted people access to photos, files and messages. To set it up you’ll need an Apple device with a fairly recent operating system — iPhones and iPads need iOS or iPadOS 15.2 and MacBooks needs macOS Monterey 12.1.

For iPhones, go to settings, tap Sign-in & Security and then Legacy Contact. You can name one or more people, and they don’t need an Apple ID or device.

You’ll have to share an access key with your contact. It can be a digital version sent electronically, or you can print a copy or save it as a screenshot or PDF.

Take note that there are some types of files you won’t be able to pass on — including digital rights-protected music, movies and passwords stored in Apple’s password manager. Legacy contacts can only access a deceased user’s account for three years before Apple deletes the account.

Google

Google takes a different approach with its Inactive Account Manager, which allows you to share your data with someone if it notices that you’ve stopped using your account.

When setting it up, you need to decide how long Google should wait — from three to 18 months — before considering your account inactive. Once that time is up, Google can notify up to 10 people.

You can write a message informing them you’ve stopped using the account, and, optionally, include a link to download your data. You can choose what types of data they can access — including emails, photos, calendar entries and YouTube videos.

There’s also an option to automatically delete your account after three months of inactivity, so your contacts will have to download any data before that deadline.

Facebook and Instagram

Some social media platforms can preserve accounts for people who have died so that friends and family can honor their memories.

When users of Facebook or Instagram die, parent company Meta says it can memorialize the account if it gets a “valid request” from a friend or family member. Requests can be submitted through an online form.

The social media company strongly recommends Facebook users add a legacy contact to look after their memorial accounts. Legacy contacts can do things like respond to new friend requests and update pinned posts, but they can’t read private messages or remove or alter previous posts. You can only choose one person, who also has to have a Facebook account.

You can also ask Facebook or Instagram to delete a deceased user’s account if you’re a close family member or an executor. You’ll need to send in documents like a death certificate.

TikTok

The video-sharing platform says that if a user has died, people can submit a request to memorialize the account through the settings menu. Go to the Report a Problem section, then Account and profile, then Manage account, where you can report a deceased user.

Once an account has been memorialized, it will be labeled “Remembering.” No one will be able to log into the account, which prevents anyone from editing the profile or using the account to post new content or send messages.

It’s not possible to nominate a legacy contact on Elon Musk’s social media site. But family members or an authorized person can submit a request to deactivate a deceased user’s account.

Passwords

Besides the major online services, you’ll probably have dozens if not hundreds of other digital accounts that your survivors might need to access. You could just write all your login credentials down in a notebook and put it somewhere safe. But making a physical copy presents its own vulnerabilities. What if you lose track of it? What if someone finds it?

Instead, consider a password manager that has an emergency access feature. Password managers are digital vaults that you can use to store all your credentials. Some, like Keeper,Bitwarden and NordPass, allow users to nominate one or more trusted contacts who can access their keys in case of an emergency such as a death.

But there are a few catches: Those contacts also need to use the same password manager and you might have to pay for the service.

___

Is there a tech challenge you need help figuring out? Write to us at onetechtip@ap.org with your questions.

Source link

Tech

Google’s partnership with AI startup Anthropic faces a UK competition investigation

Published

3 weeks ago

October 24, 2024

Anne Joseph

LONDON (AP) — Britain’s competition watchdog said Thursday it’s opening a formal investigation into Google’s partnership with artificial intelligence startup Anthropic.

The Competition and Markets Authority said it has “sufficient information” to launch an initial probe after it sought input earlier this year on whether the deal would stifle competition.

The CMA has until Dec. 19 to decide whether to approve the deal or escalate its investigation.

“Google is committed to building the most open and innovative AI ecosystem in the world,” the company said. “Anthropic is free to use multiple cloud providers and does, and we don’t demand exclusive tech rights.”

San Francisco-based Anthropic was founded in 2021 by siblings Dario and Daniela Amodei, who previously worked at ChatGPT maker OpenAI. The company has focused on increasing the safety and reliability of AI models. Google reportedly agreed last year to make a multibillion-dollar investment in Anthropic, which has a popular chatbot named Claude.

Anthropic said it’s cooperating with the regulator and will provide “the complete picture about Google’s investment and our commercial collaboration.”

“We are an independent company and none of our strategic partnerships or investor relationships diminish the independence of our corporate governance or our freedom to partner with others,” it said in a statement.

The U.K. regulator has been scrutinizing a raft of AI deals as investment money floods into the industry to capitalize on the artificial intelligence boom. Last month it cleared Anthropic’s $4 billion deal with Amazon and it has also signed off on Microsoft’s deals with two other AI startups, Inflection and Mistral.

Source link