Mobile phones review - Best smartphones

The difference is likely due to sampling/response bias - although I would have thought that CHOICE survey respondents were more likely to have Apple phones.

4 Likes

There are some interesting unexpected contradictions evident in the Choice reliability results table. Approx 4300 phones scored from 6000 responses, is perhaps the data that needs clarification. What happened with the other 1700 responses?

I’d expect on a value proposition Apple might be less popular, but more reliable and in use for more years. Hence cheap and cheerful for one part of the market might describe some products with a short life cycle, hence more sales and unlikely Apple product. At the higher end, higher cost and hopefully durability with a longer time to replacement for Apple. Perhaps users hanging on to their iPhones sees more over time going for minor repair/fault remedy compared to other brands which some might consider more disposable. Samsung make both high end and cheap and cheerful models. Should reliability be on more than just brand to find the best value?

4 Likes

I’ll jump in on the reliability survey results to provide some more background on the different sample sizes etc.as that’s what we do in the Consumer Insights team (with the help of a lot of other people).

As some of you would know, the survey covers different product categories, smartphones being one of them.

This year, 6009 people overall took the survey (thank you to everyone who participated!).

One of the first questions in the survey is to understand who has bought which products new in a given time period. For smartphones we look at a 5 year purchase period, 2015-2019. That gives us the number of products for the smartphone category, here nearly 4,300 that were then analysed by brand to establish the respective brand reliability and service satisfaction scores.

I’ll share your questions and feedback on the sampling with the wider team as well, as it’s important for us to know that this point could be clearer.

5 Likes

You are brave - mention numbers here and the community will split hairs or discuss the finer points of statistical analysis for days!

(It’s a hobby - much more interesting than a vocation.)

2 Likes

:laughing: Thanks for the warning - that’s all good.

3 Likes

Another quick note from me to let you know that we’re updating the article based on your feedback so that it’s clearer what sample size the results are based.

7 Likes

:slightly_smiling_face: Thanks.

No splitting hairs, although statistically it might make the few that remain appear to be more numerous.

P.S.
I follow keeping a quality phone for longer. That may explain an interest in the average age of certain brands/models and at what point in time they needed repair or attention. Broadly within the first month of purchase, first year, or more than two years. Between work and home and my partner over 25 years I can’t recount a phone physically failing. Two had cracked screens due to misadventure. One a Samsung S2 or S3 had an intermittent software bug long passed warranty (Android update, or not supported anymore?). In the modern era of non removable batteries, the iPhone 4S became awkward with short battery life after 6yrs. But by then it was at end of Apple support anyway. The reliability report offers a less optimistic view. Are the mobiles of the previous 5 years poorly made? It’s a rhetorical question. :wink:

4 Likes

You might mean it rhetorically, but I intend to treat it literally.

Companies at this time in history exist to make profits they can pass on to their shareholders. There are only a few ways of making profits:

  1. Grow the market. Worked fine with mobile phones for a couple of decades, but the market is close to saturated.
  2. Charge more per unit. Well, Apple already does this.
  3. Use cheaper parts/suppliers. Prices tend to go down for consumer electronics anyway, but this helps companies to save on what they manufacture.
  4. Give your product a limited useful life (build in obsolescence). This has been done for decades, but with computers and mobile phones manufacturers and software providers are effectively colluding to ensure people have to upgrade. (Again, in Apple’s case no collusion is required because it sells both hardware and software.) Windows 10 no longer supports older CPUs and motherboards, for instance.

Little of this is consumer-friendly, but companies do not exist to be consumer-friendly.

5 Likes

We reveal the top five phones for battery life and quick charging:

3 Likes

Some 75 phones tested.

That must have made a dent in the piggy bank.

Who gets the top performer?

1 Like

I’m not sure that CHOICE operates in the same way as Australia Post.

1 Like

Does it matter? I’d be more concerned if I just got the dud. :wink:

On the reviews:
The latest Choice reviews were a real eye opener with the $2,000+ phones at the very top only a few percent different in scores from those closer to $1,000.

Even the now ancient in tech terms iphone 8 and several other branded models scored exceptionally well in comparison and fall in the $700-$999 price range.

With top Samsung and Apple products priced at $2500 or higher, is it just possible “Smartphones, smarter than the average user”?

One $299 model with dual sim looks a great contender for the second phone (For that other network) and travel when it resumes.

The one criticism of the reviews is the lack of any assessment of the signal strength performance of each mobile. I’d rate any mobile with substandard radio/cell performance a fail whether it cost $2999 or $299. More so the former as the latter you might write off or trade in for a different model. Or did I miss that?

Opportunity?
Which phone is best for regional and rural use, travellers as well as the non urbanised amongst us?
Is it worth considering @BrendanMays?

6 Likes

I had a similar discussion with Choice a while back, noting test reports had everything except how well a mobile worked as a phone. As for real world experiences there are a few allied topics that affect phones being phones, beside the phones, including

and some now dated input to the question about what is important,

3 Likes

My current phone is going off lease very shortly. Apart from the obvious comment about why any phone provider would think leasing is a sensible model, I have decided to change ecosystems.

In deciding what phone I would get, security and privacy were at the top of my list. The current phone gets basic security updates over a month after they are first published, and that is simply not good enough. That said, I do like a large telephonic device.

So I considered a contract with one of Australia’s mobile phone networks or resellers - but all seemed quite expensive for what one got when looking at the phones that were updated in a timely manner (iPhone or Pixel). The Pixel is also a little small.

My next comparison was about buying a phone outright. This came down to a choice between the Nokia 8.3 (big phone, Android One so is updated as quickly as Pixel) or a more expensive large iPhone model.

I eventually settled on the latter, but have ordered a refurbished device that is a couple of years old. Sure it’s not the latest model, but Apple is still updating phones that are five or six years old - while Android One only promises security updates for first three years (and feature updates for two).

My expectation is that this next phone should last at least three to five years - and unfortunately only Apple seems prepared to support phones for that period of time.

1 Like

Battery capacity and battery life are very important when a mobile phone does not work well in the ‘low signal’ area located less 35km from a capital city GPO. Because the phone is constantly scanning trying to find ‘better’ signal, it chews up a lot of energy and depletes the battery state of charge faster than if it was in - just how close to the city centre do you need to be to get 'better than rural signal" in the Telstra network?

It must be worse when, say 50 or 100 km away from GPO, let alone further out.

3 Likes

More so when the signal picked up by the mobile is strong enough to cause the phone to ring, and the mobile is unable to transmit a reliable strong signal to maintain the connection once answered.

Every mobile model performs differently. Some are less capable than others. We need to know.

3 Likes

Since March 2020 one of the things I look for in a mobile phone is “able to be washed”
(cold water, a little bit of soap or detergent, rub with hands - rather like how we all wash our hands frequently these days).

2 Likes

Whilst the signal at our home in Mt Sheridan, and my wife’s sister’s home SW of Innisfail is not very good, the signal at my wife’s sister’s home north of Mareeba is terrible.

My phone normally lasts all day with minimal battery drain, but after we got home from Mareeba after Xmas lunch, I called my sister and spoke with her husband for around 20 minutes.

When the call ended, my phone had an alarm showing that the battery was at 1% charge and it was about to shut down.

The phone had received no calls and had only one outgoing call since being disconnected from the charger that morning but the battery was almost fully discharged due to trying to access the distant cell tower.

1 Like

Many are not although some are marketed as surviving water immersion. We use computer screen wipes from Office Works etc instead. Also great for tablet devices.

The marketing of mobile phones with water resistance is reminiscent of the days of watches sold as water proof to 50-100m. Ultimately they were shown to be a shonky claim. Unless the product was a certified and tested divers watch.

The soap and running water test would be an interesting one. Would the testers still recommend a product of it failed?

2 Likes

I think to get rid of viral fragments, the water needs to be hot. So, no, I would not do it and I would not expect that Apple would replace my phone if I was stupid enough to try it. I give mine a wipe over with alcohol wipes.

2 Likes