Jump to content

Talk:IPhone 5s

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 122.150.200.116 (talk) at 11:12, 24 September 2013 (→‎Fingerprint scanner - privacy/security issues: Senator Al Franken to be added to article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Secure Enclave

Does anyone know if the "secure enclave" where the fingerprint data gets saved is the same thing as a TPM device? By TPM I mean this thing.


Bryan (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move to "iPhone 5s"?

Apple's website lists today's new devices as the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c except in pre-rendered hero-text where the letter can be boxed, and even then, the letter could be considered a "large s" rather than a "capital S". Any reason not to move the page to reflect this? (Same with the 5c/5C) --11rcombs (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Apple's website uses the lowercase form and I don't see a compelling reason to do otherwise. CaseyPenk (talk) 20:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, yes there is: WP:UCN. 5S, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]; 5s, [6]; mix of both, [7]. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 21:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Likes of Sky and BBC in the UK also use 5S.[8][9] Previous articles for the 3G, 3GS and 4S all use capital letter.Blethering Scot 21:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lowercase @ The Verge, The Guardian, IGN, ZDNet. CaseyPenk (talk) 21:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you aren't cherrypicking. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 22:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3G and 3GS aren't analogous because Apple referred to both of those using all-caps. The only analogous phone is 4s, which many sources refer to with the lowercase 's.' CaseyPenk (talk) 22:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone, please refrain from changing the name back and forth until a consensus is reached. The edit history today would be crowded enough without any edit wars. - Josh (talk | contribs) 22:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Let's hold off on reverting until we reach consensus. CaseyPenk (talk) 22:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I assert a combination of WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:TM. Even though Apple randomly changed it to lowercase, people will still call it the 5S per the precedent of the 4S. Its a judgement call, but for legibility and consistency between articles, I'd go with capitals. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also note that the official logo uses an uppercase S. I'm definitely leaning toward 5S. - Josh (talk | contribs) 22:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Which part of WP:TM? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, even the "4S", as you call it, was officially named the 4s. Just look at the official Apple store page for the 5s. Nowhere is it called the "5S", and even in the URL a lowercase s is used. The logo does not necessarily use a capital "s", just one in a larger font size. Aradalf (talk) 01:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Apple never called the 4S the 4s before today. Just look at Apple press releases. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 03:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Needs to be iPhone 5S. The iPhone 5s is plural of iPhone 5. JOJ Hutton 03:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation from Lifehacker

A Lifehacker article has explained the lowercase/uppercase situation. The author explains why early reports were confused about the capitalization scheme:

Every time Apple refers to the iPhone 5c or 5s in text form on its site, the letters are lower case. So there’s no issue there. However, there are two reasons many people are confused, and why so many early and speculative reports used capital letters instead.

The author concludes:

[...] I would suggest the new models can only be referred to with lower case. That’s how they’ve been named, right from the start. Accuracy matters.

It seems likely that many websites will be correcting their references to the 5s, or at least sticking with the lowercase references for future articles, now that they know which name Apple uses. But even now, the lowercase name is common. The first page of Google results for "iphone 5s" (Google is case-insensitive) returns 7/10 lowercase results (4 of those from Apple) and 3/10 uppercase results. The other pages indicate that usage is very much mixed. CaseyPenk (talk) 19:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your speculating entirely there are you psychic It seems likely that many websites will be correcting their references. If we started looking at the quality i.e. reliability not blogs which should be automatically ruled out for reliability purposes the story is very even. An RM should be requested and a line taking in regard to all previous models and their naming as its not one for this phone and another for the prior.Blethering Scot 20:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did you notice what I said - "But even now"? It's already clear that the lowercase name is widespread, so there's no speculation required on my part. I was including the speculation because I find it to be true based on how many sources appear to have switched to the lowercase form in just the past few hours; but my finding that the new lowercase name is common holds true regardless.
  • This case is not analogous to previous cases, so a blanket rule would not apply. This and the 5c are the only models that are consistently lowercase. Apple retroactively changed 4S to 4s, but they didn't do so thoroughly and the capitalized name is already widespread. With these new 5x phones the paradigm has shifted from uppercase to lowercase. CaseyPenk (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources

Ive looked through the reliable sources not tech or blogs in the UK and Independent,The Telegraph, The Scotsman, SKY, BBC, Guardian, Daily Record, The Sun, Daily Mirror, The Metro, Evening Standard, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Financial Times, The Times, Daily Star, Herald, Ev Telegraph. In short thats all the reliable sources I've tried so far.

Im not American so i dont know most of the agencies over there but looking at the mainstream American sources again reliable main stream media not tech or blogs. NY TImes, CNN, New York Daily, Chigago Tribune, USA Today, Fox News, Time, ABC.Blethering Scot 20:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • CNN, USA Today (*especially*), Fox News, and ABC often stray into casual news and pop culture gossip; they are most certainly not tech experts. The Time link appears to be a blog entry. I believe NY Daily News is a tabloid - sensational and not very accurate. I give credence to NYT and Chicago Tribune because of their editorial standards and broader perspective (thinking beyond just trivial headlines), but tech blogs are equally if not more reliable when reporting on tech. CaseyPenk (talk) 20:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your hilarious with your commentary, casual or non causual which is your opinion not fact they are reliable sources. Tech blogs are not an indication of notability nor are blogs a reliable source. All reliable source media in the UK use capital and looking around it seems most countries are the same. Being a tech expert is not needed in this case what is needed is reliable sources. These are reliable sources whether tabloid or broadsheet. Blogs are not reliable at all.Blethering Scot 20:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to return to the capital 5S

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. -- tariqabjotu 02:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IPhone 5s → IPhone 5S – Its clear looking at reliable sources and by reliable i mean non tech blogs that these reliable sources use the capital. rather than lower case. See all of the following Independent,The Telegraph, The Scotsman, SKY, BBC, Guardian, Daily Record, The Sun, Daily Mirror, The Metro, Evening Standard, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Financial Times, The Times, Daily Star, Herald, Ev Telegraph NY TImes, CNN, New York Daily, Chigago Tribune, USA Today, Fox News, Time, ABC. In addition the precedent set with previous versions of the iphone all use the capital as well. See IPhone 3G IPhone 3GS, IPhone 4S. We need to look at reliable sources not simply tech blogs which are never considered reliable or notable. Blethering Scot 20:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strongly oppose. The previous iPhones had different naming schemes; this and the 5c are the first iPhones with lowercase model numbers. Also, tech blogs are most certainly reliable in this case. CaseyPenk (talk) 21:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not exactly true is it.Blethering Scot 21:02, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just to prove the point regarding the precedent. Apple call the iPhone 4S the 4s on their official site.[10].Blethering Scot 21:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Apple just started referring to it as the lowercase 4s yesterday, to match with the 5s/5c. Prior to yesterday, it was the 4S. CaseyPenk (talk) 21:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously! There is clear precedent here that has to be taken into consideration in addition to the considerable source evidence. You've made your point considerably rightly or wrongly and its time to leave it and see what others think. Thats the point of an RM and given you moved the article against consensus it should have been moved back point blank as controversial and taken to an RM. The burden of proof as said below is therefore on you and the case is unconvincing but time to leave it like i am and leave to all the uninvolved editors who this RM will attract. Blethering Scot 21:52, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article was moved yesterday with little discussion. There seems to be at least a general agreement that the title should be 5S not 5s. In addition, this would be consistent with both articles iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4S. Furthermore both this article and the iPhone 5c article were started as both iPhone 5S and iPhone 5C, so the burden of proof should fall on the editor or editors who wish to argue for lowercase per WP:RETAIN. JOJ Hutton 19:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"There is clear precedent here"
Yes it does precedent has to be taken into consideration along side the high level of reliable sourced in evidence here. Your are picking and choosing and as i said this RM should and will run people will make there opinions stop replying to every single persons point made. The closing admin does not need to here all the crap thirty odd times. Once is enough. You are seriously boring me now so as i said the last time good night and good luck with proving that your controversial move from the original title was correct.Blethering Scot 22:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have a good night too. CaseyPenk (talk) 22:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The jury is out on the proper title - see this article (I also mentioned it above) regarding the capitalization. CaseyPenk (talk) 19:53, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The burden lies on the editor who wishes to make the name change from its original. The original was capitalized. It should go back to that. And then if you still wish to have it lowercase, then you should request an RM. JOJ Hutton 19:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I retract my opposition. Keep it at iPhone 5s. MOS:TM advises us to "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one." By staying with 5S, we are inventing a new style, as many sites are (as noted) switching to 5s. Additionally, "5s" is a model number, not a word. How a model code is formatted does not matter, since its not a word (and need not follow "standard [...] capitalization rules"). And I know you're getting tired of the Nintendo examples, but we gladly allow Nintendo DSi. Same situation. (thenagain, a certain company made a lowercase "i" synonymous with "internet") ViperSnake151  Talk  20:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • *Picks jaw up from the floor* This was the last thing I ever expected. Thank you for pointing out the MOSTM page - that provides some good guidance. I would say there is no "standard" way to format a model number like this; English conventions don't specify which way to go. Thank you for your willingness to consider the other side; it's a good example for the rest of us, myself included. CaseyPenk (talk) 20:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Personally the way i read MOS:TM i would go the opposite way.Blethering Scot 21:00, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So do I – I think they say quite specifically the opposite, as per other comments made referring to them. I suggest you re-read them ViperSnake151, as you are seemingly misunderstanding what they actually mean. Jimthing (talk) 06:35, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: My reading of MOS:TM indicates that it's mostly silent on this issue. The only thing I can see is this line: "Using all caps is preferred if the letters are pronounced individually, even if they don't stand for anything.". The decapitalisation of "4S" indicates it's a style choice more than anything. I would wait a while to see how RSes capitalise it. Sceptre (talk) 22:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Although common usage will probably gradually gravitate toward one side or the other (or toward whatever CNET goes with), current usage is still skewed strongly toward 5S: [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]. WP:UCN says "We do not know what terms will be used in the future, but only what is and has been in use, and is therefore familiar to our readers." I personally would support moving the iPhone 4S to "4s" or any other article incl. iPad mini if third-party sources would call it that (when pigs fly...). Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:07, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Erm, sorry, but that's never going to happen. As discussed ad nauseam(!)... iPad Mini and iPod Touch use 'non-branded' naming, thus are correctly following proper English language noun naming convention of all caps for first letter, with an added sentence in their lead about how Apple stylise them, which concisely clarifies the situation. Jimthing (talk) 03:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus can change. CaseyPenk (talk) 04:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing to do with this discussion, whatsoever. Jimthing (talk) 06:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The MOS as Wikipedia's house style it is subject to change and very flexible per IAR (e.g. Tech N9ne, DEFCON, WiMAX). Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 04:25, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's how the phone is more commonly referred to. Hot Stop talk-contribs 01:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support. iPhone 5S for sure, for many decent thought-out non-onesided external link-bait reasons!: (1) naming fits-in with previous models on WP, whilst still a judgement call (as this is only a convenience factor, and not WP policy for naming), but for legibility and consistency between articles, capital would thus be better, (2) the plural of iPhone 5 is often iPhone 5s, (3) as per countless previous discussions I've been involved in with regards to Apple product naming; we do NOT have to use the Apple 'branding' stylised version(!) (e.g. we use iPod Touch not iPod touch – not exactly the same but for similar reasons – in that case it's following proper English first-letter cap'd grammar for nouns), in this case MOS:TM says "Using all caps is preferred if the letters are pronounced individually, even if they don't stand for anything", (4) using links for guidance is usually entirely misleading (both over time and region found!), even if you insist on using this, "5S" seems to have the slight edge over lowercase naming.
    So overall, using uppercase has many redeeming virtues (especially following MOS:TM!) over lowercase. Jimthing (talk) 02:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I said LINKS IN GENERAL mislead the evidential truth! Nothing to do with your sodding links in particular, which are as bad as others at attempting to prove your point. So stop getting on your high-horse with everyone and anyone that happens to disagree with you, by quoting irrelevant WP TOS at will and adding notices wrongly on their talk pages, making yourself look very stupid in the process. Jimthing (talk) 05:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • You accused me of warring on my talk page without checking the FACTS concerned (similar to what you're doing here really isn't it, so you obviously make a habit of doing so repeatedly!) – so unsurprisingly, yes you were making a complete and utter idiot of yourself, by misappropriating the adding of notices to users pages without correct justification for doing so. Stop attempting to show-off, showing other experienced users links to WP policy pages they already know about that have absolutely no baring on what they did or said, and stop issuing notices to other users before having the correct justification for doing so. Thank you. Jimthing (talk) 06:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately that's not what the rules on WP say, so is not correct analysis of the issues concerned. See previous comments from many users now... concerning using correct full capitalisation under WP rules, to reiterate MOS:TM says "Using all caps is preferred if the letters are pronounced individually, even if they don't stand for anything", as well as the major issue of iPhone 5 plural being exactly the same "iPhone 5s" which is going to cause a great deal of confusion when writing prose in a huge number of articles about the iPhone and related topics, and then another issue of WP not using "branding" versions of names wherever possible when we can easily follow correct English noun capitalisation (e.g.'s we use iPod Touch NOT the branded "iPod touch", iPad (3rd generation) & iPad (4th generation) NOT the branded "The new iPad" for both models, etc.]. Instead we have historically been able to deal with this issue efficiently by simply using a sentence in the LEAD to explain any branding, e.g. "often stylised as iPod touch", so there is clear precedence for how to handle this using caps across WP for very good reasons. We have to think LONGTERM about the site, not short-term branding decisions that are likely to cause many clarity problems in future across the site. Thanks. Jimthing (talk) 21:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment"' - Just wait! We should see what way the media leans towards (ie 5s or 5S)
  • Support the return of the articles original name to the iPhone 5S. And I oppose the fact that this article was previously moved without discussion, then the redirect was immediately edited with some bogus edit, which prevented the article from simply being moved back. So now we have to go through this RM which we shouldn't have had to do in the first place. MOS:TM clearly states that letters that are pronounced individually should be capitalized. JOJ Hutton 21:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Per MOS:TM.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I asked for some clarification on how 5s/5S applies within MOS:TM; Croctotheface said that in relation to my assertion that the capitalization rule is more about acronyms or otherwise capitalized words (and not about strings which aren't really words), "either one fits pretty comfortably within standard English". ViperSnake151  Talk  22:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since I got tagged, I may as well comment for myself! I think that either one will work fine as far as MOSTM is concerned, so the decision probably comes down to whatever preferences people have. I'd probably go with "5S", for consistency with similarly named iPhone models, because a capital S more strongly suggests the letter S, and because "5s" kind of reads like "fives." I can envision arguments for "5s" that are reasonable, though I don't find them as compelling. If it turns out that I'm wrong, and over time sources indicate that standard English usage calls for "5S" and not "5s," then I'd make a much stronger recommendation. Croctotheface (talk) 11:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • support it's not pronounced "i-phone fives" itss pronounced "i-phone five es". as in 5 and S. although officially with miniscule, its far too intrusive for them to use miniscule S. and the same for wikipedia. and the same goes for iPhone 5c, as sources do use capital C.Lucia Black (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

iPhone image color?

Should we keep the color of the iPhone in the image Gold or should someone get the black version? Justinhu12 (talk) 04:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have them both created, but this is simply a case of WP:JDLI applied to files. Zach Vega (talk to me) 11:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow, good job Zach, very nicely done! I think the white/gold is probably best of those two for good reasons: firstly, it's obviously the first model to use this colour scheme (the other two are very similar to the previous gen iPhone 5, aren't they), and secondly, you can see the plain button detail with the Touch ID ring on the white version much better (certainly compared to the black colour), which is the 'tentpole' new function added to the iPhone 5S. Good stuff. Jimthing (talk) 21:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK Justinhu12 (talk) 03:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fingerprint scanner - privacy/security issues

The article should consider in more depth the possible privacy/security issues with the fingerprint scanner.

Does the NSA (and GCHQ) already have the ‘key’ to your iPhone?

If you have visited the USA in about the last 10 years, on clearing immigration you will have to have given the US a (digital) copy of your fingerprints.

So, if your fingerprints are to be the new ‘key’ to the iPhone (and other future gadgets to follow), who exactly has a copy of that ‘key’?

If the NSA already has the ‘key’ to your iPhone, it is not a great leap to imagine that software could be made so that that ‘key’ could be used remotely to access your data.

It has already been shown that these Governmental agencies have an unquenchable thirst to spy on their own citizens (let alone people outside of their country).

Likewise, if you obtained a UK biometric passport (or an UK ID card) then GCHQ will have a digital copy of your fingerprints. Also, in the UK, if you were arrested (but were never convicted of an offense), then the police have the right to take and keep your fingerprints.

If finger print technology becomes the gold standard means of authenticating your identity (e.g. to access email, banking as well as phone data), then your fingerprints could become the ultimate ‘skeleton key’ for all your data.

Again, the question remains, who already has that data and who could get a hold of it?

Unlike passwords, a fingerprint cannot be ‘reset’

What happens if your fingerprint data becomes compromised?

In traditional security systems, when a password has been cracked, it is a small matter to reset your password (or passwords). However, you can never ‘reset’ a fingerprint. If compromised, your finger prints will remain a permanent open backdoor to your personal security.

It seems that some people are happy for the UK Government (and successive Governments) to have such data, and to be spied on by them. However, what happens if someone else gets a copy of your fingerprints?

High-tech criminal fraud is already big business worldwide and criminal gangs are particularly adept at hacking, and so might actively seek to get your finger print data. With the advent of iPhone5S and iTunes allowing purchases using fingerprint data (and further business models no doubt set to follow) criminal gangs will be incentivized like never before to get your fingerprint data.

In the future, there may be more value in stealing your phone for its fingerprint data than stealing the phone itself. As for the phone re-sale market, you will have to be pretty sure that your fingerprint data is gone, or you may lose considerably more than you made selling your phone.

If your fingerprint data became compromised, perhaps you could try to block the use of your fingerprints as a means of authentication, but you would need to notify every person, business, and governmental organ that your fingerprints have been compromised. Good luck with that!

In the future, if fingerprints become the standard means of authenticating your identity, then you should take great care who you give that data to now, if stolen your life could become very difficult in the future.

iSpy an iPhone?

122.150.200.116 (talk) 11:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very compelling case directed at horrible topics such as government surveillance and theft. It would serve much better in the article itself, with citations, of course. Do you want us to add some of this information?Zach Vega (talk to me) 22:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I'll look up some references! 122.150.200.116 (talk) 12:40, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also: Senator Al Franken, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law, has written to Apple boss Tim Cook explaining his security concerns: [22] 122.150.200.116 (talk) 11:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

5th generation; not 7th

If this is 7th generation, then what makes the iPhone 5C? 6.5th generation? In that case I think that this phone is 5.5th generation and the iPhone 5 is the 5th generation phone. Giggett (talk) 18:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen, Wikipedia is the only one trying to count "generations" of iPhones. I believe this generation system is original research and should be removed from each article that includes it. - Josh (talk | contribs) 20:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure this is the 7th iPhone:
Phone Number / Generation
iPhone (2007) 1
iPhone 3G (2008) 2
iPhone 3GS (2009) 3
iPhone 4 (2010) 4
iPhone 4S (2011) 5
iPhone 5 (2012) 6
iPhone 5C (2013) 6
iPhone 5S (2013) 7
The iPhone 5C is completely separate from this release cycle, as it is a different series. Zach Vega (talk to me) 22:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand how the naming and whats considered part of the same series. Why is iPhone 5C not part of the general series???Lucia Black (talk) 00:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The iPhone 5C is a lower-end phone and does not succeed the iPhone 5, while the iPhone 5S does. Zach Vega (talk to me) 01:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You would think of the 5C as a variant of the iPhone 5, same series just different variant.Cky2250 (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. The 5S is the 7th gen, while the 5C would be classed as 6th gen being just an almost identical internally variant of the original 5. Jimthing (talk) 06:17, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stock Shortages

Are the major stock shortages for launch worth mentioning.[23][24]Blethering Scot 19:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it isn't for a marketing ploy, as in they purposely made a shortage to make everyone want to buy it day one, I would say it would be worth it for historic reasons.Cky2250 (talk) 19:41, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, defo worth mentioning, as there have been hardly any available, and so this has been reported upon in the press widely accordingly. My incidentally example... I was ~60th out of around 350-400 people queuing in the UK outside a medium-sized Apple Store, and they had sold out of ALL the gold models and most of the others too, by around the 50th person queuing in front of me, leaving only TWO of the nine variants of 5S models left! I had to walk away with nothing, as did most of the others behind me as we either couldn't get the size/colour we wanted or wouldn't get ANYTHING as they'd all gone (I hung around and literally saw 90% leave after I had with nothing!) — many of us shocked and highly annoyed we had been kept there queuing unnecessarily for two hours by staff who knew the low stock levels and did nothing to advise queuers of the situation (clearly we were being used as an Apple marketing toy, what with zero online pre-orders, to make the launch publicity look good!). To cap this failure off, Apple have failed to have a backup stock availability email system in place at their physical stores for those who missed-out either, where you sign-up to be emailed by your local Apple Store when they have one available for you to pick-up with 24hours, as they did last year. So anyone wanting one from a physical store, is expected to GUESS when stock might be there, and also be really lucky to be there when the stock is?! Stupid and appallingly bad way to treat customers: who dreams up these distribution systems, as they should be fired! Jimthing (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC) (for those so unless you order online,[reply]

the hacking the Iphone 5S

it will be a security chaos once malware comes out. your life will be ruined, it will drain your bank account, the banks won't trust you, there is no way to stop the fraud, it will be like this, you information will be sold on the underground economy for as little as 7 cents. you will be impersonated forever. FockeWulf FW 190 (talk)FockeWulf FW 190FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What does this have to do with the article? Would you like to add something about hacking the iPhone 5S? Zach Vega (talk to me) 17:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:IPhone_5s&oldid=574306215"