My take on iOS vs Windows Phone 7.5

[jdevenberg]

So I bought an iPod Touch on Black Friday and have been using it lots. I have been using WP since February, so about 8 or 9 months. This is my take on differences between the two. The short version is, I don't think one is "better" than the other, they each excel in different areas. So I am going to go area by area.

Gaming
iOS wins hands down. Xbox Live integration is cool, and I do have an Xbox, but achievements or not, iOS has more and better games. Especially when it comes to free and low cost titles, where WP 7.5 loses its Xbox integration.

U.I.
Windows, no questions. Metro is amazing. It is better looking, just as smooth, and has a few little things that just make the UI better. For example, "slide switches" can actually be slid in Windows Phone or tapped. I like this, because I always find myself sliding them. When I switch to an Android device or use my iPod I will try and slide it 2-3 times before just tapping. Also the press and hold to bring up all available options is a feature I miss dearly from WP when I am using my iPod

Browser
In my opinion, WP gets the edge here. The iOS browser is good, but it defaults to mobile sites on websites that my phone will default to the full version, which I prefer. Also, iOS is held back by its screen. It has a 3.5" screen and a permanent bar down at the bottom for forward, back, etc. With a few tweaks, I feel iOS could be on par with WP. The screen alone would bring it to a tie possibly. Buttons in iOS are nicer to have, fewer mobile sites and universal search/address bar (vs. two boxes in iOS) are nicer on WP

Music player (note that I do not use Zune Pass)
Windows Phone has the edge if you want a subscription music service, as having Zune Pass integrate to the main music app is better than having to use a third party app. If you don't use a subscription service (like me) it is pretty much a draw. I prefer the visuals of Zune. I could see how some would prefer iOS though.

Apps
iOS has a ton of cool niche apps that would be fun to have, but would be more like download, use once to see what it does, delete. Not really an advantage in my opinion. The only app I would use on a regular basis that iOS has and WP doesn't is Hulu+. But watching shows on a 3.5" screen is so unenjoyable that I don't do it. I do have to give iOS the edge here, but it wouldn't be a deciding factor to me.

Productivity
WP is the clear winner. The inclusion of Office can't be beat. iOS has email or you can drop money on 3rd party software that isn't as good as Office on WP.

Email
I prefer the WP email app, but it really isn't so much "better" as I just like the simplistic look.

Entertainment
iOS is above WP here. Hulu+ and many channel apps give it an edge. The compatibility with "Digital Copy" movies makes it head and shoulders above WP in this department. Almost every movie I buy now days comes with a digital copy and being able to easily put it on my portable is amazing. No ripping, converting, or any of the time consuming process. Just one download and sync it over.

Software
iTunes vs. Zune is kinda like peas vs. brussel sprouts to me. I hate them both but I know I need them to keep me healthy (or organized). Its better in the long run than eating junk food (looking at you Android/Drag and Drop), so pick your poison and live with your choice.

Conclusion
Neither iOS or WP is clearly better than the other. It truly comes down to what you are using the device for. For me, I'm glad to have both. I prefer the iPod as a media player, and would want one even if I had an iPhone because I don't like leaving my phone hooked to my stereo at work. I prefer Windows Phone as a phone OS because I feel its data-centric features (skydrive, Facebook connection, Browser, Zune Pass etc.) are better than iOS. All that said, both platforms need to keep innovating. Bigger screens would bring iOS up a notch as phones and a few feature tweaks and WP could really up its multi-media game. Its a close race and I'm glad to have choice!

 

[fisci]

Good well rounded, non biased comparison!

 

[TaliZorah]

Lots of personal opinions in here but overall not a bad comparison. Personally the Xbox Live integration is something I really like about my WP7. I message friends all day. It's so cool to think that I can message them from my phone and it pops up on their TV while they are gaming.

Also I don't mind watching tv shows and movies on my small screen. I watched about 90% of Stargate SG1 (which is over 220 of 43 minute episodes) on my WP7.

 

[Exomondo]

Cool post, a lot of iOS's advantages come down to its apps (which is not surprising given Apple's 'appliance device' approach). Hopefully the WP app store continues to grow at its current pace.

 

[jdevenberg]

Lots of personal opinions in here but overall not a bad comparison.

To be fair, I never said it was a review I said it was "my" take on the differences. Thank you though. If I had more friends who played Xbox I could see how the xbox messaging could be a bigger deal.

 

[jdevenberg]

I didn't know tapping the name of the song would get you to the now playing section. I will check that out! That could very well be the difference maker in WP favor

 

[facetheduke]

would like to make a correction to the music player area. there is a shortcut to get to now playing, u just simply press either volume button and then tap on the name of the song and it instantly takes u there,

Yeah, came here to say this; I discovered the "now playing" thing on a guess.

Also, having used iTunes extensively, Zune is a godsend. iTunes is bloated and clunky. Zune "just works..."

 

[jeremyshaw]

It should be noted, iOS devices, even on a 3.5" display, is a 3:2 ratio. WP7 resolution (800x480) is closer to 16:9.5, so roughly speaking, 3.5" 3:2 is almost the same surface area as a 4" 16:9.5, though I am doing a bit of eyeballing (Focus vs iPod Touch 4G vs Focus S). Of course, how the GUI uses that space is just as important.

 

[willied]

The one part my opinion differs greatly on is the desktop software. Maybe you just need to use it longer, but I find the Zune software to be extremely more enjoyable to use and it has some major features that iTunes doesn't have (mainly the fact that you can rip music off anyone else's Zune and sync to that Zune if you want whereas you can't do the same with iPods, iPhones, etc. in iTunes, and album artwork is much more widely available on Zune, and of course it looks much nicer).

Otherwise a very nice comparison.

 

[jdevenberg]

It should be noted, iOS devices, even on a 3.5" display, is a 3:2 ratio. WP7 resolution (800x480) is closer to 16:9.5, so roughly speaking, 3.5" 3:2 is almost the same surface area as a 4" 16:9.5, though I am doing a bit of eyeballing (Focus vs iPod Touch 4G vs Focus S). Of course, how the GUI uses that space is just as important.

Aspect ratio does nothing to change surface area. A 3.5" screen is made of two 30 60 90 right triangels with hypotenuses of 3.5". Because of this, the aspect ratio of a 3.5" screen will ALWAYS be 3:2. That is why Android phones all use either 3.2" or 3.7". Those both yeild rectangles that are roughly 16:9. The surface area of an iPhone screen is 5.3" sq. A 4 inch phone (like the focus) has a surface area of 6.92" sq. This is roughly 30% larger than an iPhone screen.

EDIT:
Also edited my review to reflect the "now playing" ability. I find that Zune has a hard time recognizing my devices (Zune HD, and two HD7's). I will sometimes have to plug them in three or four times before it recognizes it. If I didn't have this issue, I would love Zune. It may be an isolated thing, but its how I feel none the less.

 

[Duvi]

Lots of personal opinions in here but overall not a bad comparison. Personally the Xbox Live integration is something I really like about my WP7. I message friends all day. It's so cool to think that I can message them from my phone and it pops up on their TV while they are gaming.

Also I don't mind watching tv shows and movies on my small screen. I watched about 90% of Stargate SG1 (which is over 220 of 43 minute episodes) on my WP7.

There are apps on iOS and Android that allow you to do the same in regards to messaging friends and checking gamerscores, compare games and much more. In fact, before the Mango update, I preferred the Android app I was using as it WAS faster.

What I would love to see is for Microsoft add the ability to send voice notes as well. That would then give it more of an edge over the 3rd party clients on iOS and Android, IMHO.

 

[Duvi]

Great comparison and thanks for sharing. I love both iOS and WP... but really do not care for Android, one bit.

 

[jeremyshaw]

Aspect ratio does nothing to change surface area. A 3.5" screen is made of two 30 60 90 right triangels with hypotenuses of 3.5". Because of this, the aspect ratio of a 3.5" screen will ALWAYS be 3:2. That is why Android phones all use either 3.2" or 3.7". Those both yeild rectangles that are roughly 16:9. The surface area of an iPhone screen is 5.3" sq. A 4 inch phone (like the focus) has a surface area of 6.92" sq. This is roughly 30% larger than an iPhone screen.

EDIT:
Also edited my review to reflect the "now playing" ability. I find that Zune has a hard time recognizing my devices (Zune HD, and two HD7's). I will sometimes have to plug them in three or four times before it recognizes it. If I didn't have this issue, I would love Zune. It may be an isolated thing, but its how I feel none the less.

Not true.

measure a 3.5" (diagonal) square's surface area - it's ~4.95 sq in.

now measure a 3.5" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3"x2"). It's 6 sq in.


UNRELATED, but...
now measure a 3.9" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.4"x2"). It's 6.8 sq in.

now measure a 4" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.5" x 2"). It's 7 sq in.

now measure a 4.3" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.6" x 2.2"). It's 7.92 sq in.

Now, one thing I want to note:

in order, that was the following:

a square, an iPod Touch 4G, Samsung Focus, Moto Atrix, Samsung Focus S.

Yup, the Focus is a 3.9" display, not 4.0", lol. Measured it myself with digital calipers (actual screen elements), otherwise, I wouldn't of believed it.

So the Focus is actually only ~13% larger than the iPhone/iPod touch display. In other words... not very much.

Of course, to be fair, the Focus has a Pentile matrix that I hate (and is more pixelated, direct comparison with Focus S), so it's actual 3.9" display isn't as ledgible in some instances vs a 329ppi 3.5" display... (though how ledgible often has a lot to do with GUI/OS, more than the display tech itself). Also to be fair, the Focus S is 16% larger than the Focus (though, the Pentile-->RGB exaggerates the display quality difference... IMO, of course).


As for why I'm a big (and tall!) idiot with 3 phones (my own ).... that's answerable later (also using Auto setting on DSLR! I'm hitting all the notes today!:lol.



However, the main point was is, yes, ratio does affect area (if same diagonal measurement). I just wanted some more info to be put out there.

 

[jdevenberg]

Not true.

measure a 3.5" (diagonal) square's surface area - it's ~4.95 sq in.

now measure a 3.5" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3"x2"). It's 6 sq in.


UNRELATED, but...
now measure a 3.9" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.4"x2"). It's 6.8 sq in.

now measure a 4" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.5" x 2"). It's 7 sq in.

now measure a 4.3" (diagonal) rectangle's surface area (say, 3.6" x 2.2"). It's 7.92 sq in.

Now, one thing I want to note:

in order, that was the following:

a square, an iPod Touch 4G, Samsung Focus, Moto Atrix, Samsung Focus S.

Yup, the Focus is a 3.9" display, not 4.0", lol. Measured it myself with digital calipers (actual screen elements), otherwise, I wouldn't of believed it.

So the Focus is actually only ~13% larger than the iPhone/iPod touch display. In other words... not very much.

Of course, to be fair, the Focus has a Pentile matrix that I hate (and is more pixelated, direct comparison with Focus S), so it's actual 3.9" display isn't as ledgible in some instances vs a 329ppi 3.5" display... (though how ledgible often has a lot to do with GUI/OS, more than the display tech itself). Also to be fair, the Focus S is 16% larger than the Focus (though, the Pentile-->RGB exaggerates the display quality difference... IMO, of course).

[URL=http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7362/dsc1090h.th.jpg]Click to view quoted image
[/URL]
As for why I'm a big (and tall!) idiot with 3 phones (my own ).... that's answerable later (also using Auto setting on DSLR! I'm hitting all the notes today!:lol.



However, the main point was is, yes, ratio does affect area (if same diagonal measurement). I just wanted some more info to be put out there.

Okay, my original point was barring squares, as we were discussing phone displays and no phone worth talking about has a square display.

A 3x2 rectangle does not have a 3.5 inch cross, its cross would be 3.6 inches. Aspect ratio is a function of the two sides lengths relative to each other. The area is also a function of the same measurements. A non square rectangle with a cross measure of 3.5" will always have an aspect ratio of 3:2. There is only one way to create a non square rectangle with the cross measure of 3.5" and that is with sides measuring 3.03" and 1.75". If the sides are any different than that the cross will not be a 3.5" line. It will be larger or smaller. Again, barring a perfect square. So, my point of all 3.5" phone screens (barring a stupid square screen Android phone) will be 3:2 aspect phones. And all phones with a 3.5" cross (barring the aforementioned hypothetical Android) will have the same surface area. There is no way to come up with a 16:9 aspect 3.5" cross rectangle.

So, even if the Focus is only 3.9" and not 4.0", the iPod/iPhone still have a surface area of 5.3", not 6" as you offered. a 3.9" non-square rectangle has a surface area of 6.59" sq. Which is 24% large, or basically 1/4 for all practical purposes, which I would say is a significant difference.


EDIT: The iPhone screen, when going by inches is in fact more or less a 1:2 aspect ratio. Apples stated 3:2 aspect ratio is for pixels, furthering my point that stated aspect ratio has absolutely nothing to do with surface (viewing) area. It is entirely about how the pixels are laid out. The iPhone 4(S) has a pixel layout of 640x960. Dividing these by 320 gives you your 2:3 (or 3:2 depending on how your holding the phone) aspect ratio. Previos iPhones were 320x480. Dividing by 160 gives you your 3:2/2:3 aspect ratio.

 

[jeremyshaw]

Okay, my original point was barring squares, as we were discussing phone displays and no phone worth talking about has a square display.

A 3x2 rectangle does not have a 3.5 inch cross, its cross would be 3.6 inches. Aspect ratio is a function of the two sides lengths relative to each other. The area is also a function of the same measurements. A non square rectangle with a cross measure of 3.5" will always have an aspect ratio of 3:2. There is only one way to create a non square rectangle with the cross measure of 3.5" and that is with sides measuring 3.03" and 1.75". If the sides are any different than that the cross will not be a 3.5" line. It will be larger or smaller. Again, barring a perfect square. So, my point of all 3.5" phone screens (barring a stupid square screen Android phone) will be 3:2 aspect phones. And all phones with a 3.5" cross (barring the aforementioned hypothetical Android) will have the same surface area. There is no way to come up with a 16:9 aspect 3.5" cross rectangle.

So, even if the Focus is only 3.9" and not 4.0", the iPod/iPhone still have a surface area of 5.3", not 6" as you offered. a 3.9" non-square rectangle has a surface area of 6.59" sq. Which is 24% large, or basically 1/4 for all practical purposes, which I would say is a significant difference.


EDIT: The iPhone screen, when going by inches is in fact more or less a 1:2 aspect ratio. Apples stated 3:2 aspect ratio is for pixels, furthering my point that stated aspect ratio has absolutely nothing to do with surface (viewing) area. It is entirely about how the pixels are laid out. The iPhone 4(S) has a pixel layout of 640x960. Dividing these by 320 gives you your 2:3 (or 3:2 depending on how your holding the phone) aspect ratio. Previos iPhones were 320x480. Dividing by 160 gives you your 3:2/2:3 aspect ratio.

If you really wanted to get accurate, the iPhone display is ~2.96in * ~1.96in with a measured ~3.52" diagonal breadth (closest measurements I could get with digital calipers). Other than neither being a "1:2" ratio, my original point still stands.

 

[Roadkillin]

And all phones with a 3.5" cross (barring the aforementioned hypothetical Android) will have the same surface area. There is no way to come up with a 16:9 aspect 3.5" cross rectangle.

If I'm not mistaken, if you have a rectangle with 1.715914" X 3.050514" sides, then the hypotenuse would be 3.5", yielding a 3.5" diagonal screen with an aspect ratio of 16:9. This may be undesirable in a phone, but I do not know why this would be physically impossible.

 

[Duvi]

Whattttttttttttttttttttttt

 

[jeremyshaw]

Whattttttttttttttttttttttt

Trust me, this conversation went nowhere the moment I started posting

 

[nomoore]

If I'm not mistaken, if you have a rectangle with 1.715914" X 3.050514" sides, then the hypotenuse would be 3.5", yielding a 3.5" diagonal screen with an aspect ratio of 16:9. This may be undesirable in a phone, but I do not know why this would be physically impossible.

Your math checks out.

In fact the Nokia Astound has a 3.5" 16x9 display. I wish I had a dial caliper to check the size on this since my wife owns one.
Nokia Astound Review - Smartphones - CNET Reviews

 

[joemd60]

I still love my Terrific Trophy!