jalves

Played with the system while on DL 837 yesterday, an A330 from ATL to HNL. Can't say I noticed any improved responsiveness to the touch. I generally just watch the moving map and found that the touch controls for the arrows and zoom were spotty. You'd touch the spot and sometimes it registered right away. Other times it took multiple tries to get it to recognize a touch.

Just to check I also went to the video selection screens and moved around there a bit looking through the various selections. Similar problems there too.

cestmoi123

Because everybody (you included) knew what they meant, since describing a UI as "iPhone-like" is a much more standard turn of phrase than describing it as "Android-like."

Also, your 20-30% metric should really be more like 40-50%. iPhone is around 44% of all smartphones in the US, and smartphone penetration among air passengers (when you weight it by travel frequency) is in the mid-90% range.

gooselee

Not in my circles. And even where people are using company-issued iPhones, that's not technically a "choice".

DING! This is why the Apple ecosystem always seems to get stuff first. Because although it's a lower share of the overall market, it remains the biggest single unified/standardized share. Program for iOS and you capture 20% of the market. Program for some version/form factor of Android and you get maybe 10% that works flawlessly, and then you have to tweak/mod to get the remainder.

Why not just say "smartphone-like"? Why brand it at all?

For us true geeks, yes, we know what they mean. But I very much do NOT want an iPhone-like experience.

cestmoi123

If you're measuring on handset share, it's more like 44% (US figure, and a pretty good proxy of the addressable market for a US-based airline like Delta - I'd bet that, weighted by frequency of flight, their customer base is notably higher % iPhone than that). If you're measuring on revenue (i.e. you actually are trying to run a business writing apps), it's more like 2/3s iPhone.

It's only the "true geeks" who would consider Android to not be an "iPhone-like experience."

As an Android user, I'd much prefer the iPhone experience for IFE - I don't care about customization, flexibility, etc. I just want it to deliver video to me seamlessly.

Qwkynuf

Is that what they meant by "iPhone-like"?

I figured that it meant that the battery would be dead before the movie was over.

BusTrav8yrs

Based on pure speculation not fact.

I am both and wouldn't touch an iPhone if you gave it to me free.

cestmoi123

This data is from 2014, but it has Apple with a 2/3 share of smartphone sales for households with >$100k incomes.

http://fortune.com/2014/02/21/apple-...100000-a-year/

That certainly matches my anecdotal experience - among my colleagues and clients (very very few with incomes under $100k), I'd estimate iPhones have 90% share.

MCO Flyer

jdrtravel

One feature that I wish they would offer would be the ability to play content from your own device (especially a phone) on the screen.

BenA

A few airlines tried implementing this, but those solutions require granting the aircraft access to read data on your device, which is at best ill-advised and at worst a serious security concern. No thanks.

An alternative would be a system like Miracast or a mobile HDMI/DisplayPort link that simply mirrors the image from your device on the seat. But there isn't a good standard for that: Miracast requires wireless, which would potentially interfere with Gogo service, and MHL is dying with the MicroUSB port. USB-C DisplayPort Alternate Mode (phew) is maybe the most reasonable option, but most IFE systems are based on standard tablet platforms, and the hardware cost to add video input support for a feature that wouldn't get much use (subtract out all iPhone users, users without the latest devices, and then account for the needed tech-savviness of setting it up... not a popular feature.)

I assert that most passengers who want to watch video onboard are excited about watching recent movies they wouldn't otherwise have free streaming access to, which is a bias for content served from the plane. The remaining aficionados probably travel with a reasonable device of their own.

Don't get me wrong, getting work done with multiple monitors on a plane would be incredible, and is certainly technically possible with USB-C. But I don't think it's something we'll see until the standard stabilizes a bit more.

flyerCO

Also there was the issue of not being able to prevent inappropriate content. The few had seen it on eventually stopped allowing it.

runningformqm

defrosted

Starting to go off topic, but yet I just watched a movie yesterday that was heavily edited not only for visual content but terrible voice overs for language! It was an "older" movie so maybe they just stopped doing it. However I was thankful for it because I watched the movie over two flights and the second flight I sat beside 2 UM's so since I knew it was edited I could watch the conclusion without harming my seat mates young minds. Although this day and age they probably have seen much worse than what I was watching.

Back on topic, based on the screen shots I look forward to the better Netflix style fast forward, often times I watch part of a movie on one flight and finish it on another, and finding my place is a pain in the current interface.

Also I could care less about watching my content on their screen. But that is just me.

jdrtravel

I don't really see how someone watching this content on the seatback vs. on a laptop screen is really that different. In both cases it's not appropriate for children and could potentially make other pax feel uncomfortable, but I don't get why it matters what screen it is on when most screens can easily be viewed by nearby pax.

defrosted

Common sense wise I agree.... but lawyers may disagree... I am sure someone could argue the airline would have some responsibility for what it shows on their screens.