Although the UK still favours live television, the latest findings suggest that we are beginning to replace our secondary TVs with other devices.

The TV Licensing TeleScope report is published annually and its latest offering underlines just how important watching things as they happen remains.

But one fascinating finding is that the average number of televisions per household has crashed from 2.3 to 1.83 in the last ten years.

Goggle not Google

That stat suggests that, although we are as attached to our main gogglebox as we ever have been, our spare rooms / kids bedrooms are far less likely to have a television in.

And that, you would assume, is because we are using laptops and tablets more and more to keep up to date with our favourite programmes.

This is borne out by the fact that the amount of TV we watch is up from 3 hours 36 minutes in 2006 to a fairly substantial 4 hours and two minutes today.

For long term observers of the fascinating UK TV market there's a familiar feel to the data.

The UK population is increasingly using mobile devices to watch television, but we're still at our happiest sat in front of our big screen television in our front room watching live TV as it happens.

The recent 4G spectrum auction could have raised almost £3 billion more than the £2.3 billion it did, according to new figures published by the auctioneer, government communications watchdog, Ofcom.

The tally, paid to the government by the UK's mobile operators in exchange for the right to roll out next-gen mobile internet speeds, fell well short of chancellor George Osborne's £3.5 billion budgeted estimate.

That alone was enough to worry Britain's bean counters, but it seems that, but for Ofcom's bidding rules, the sum obtained could have far outstripped the chancellor's wildest expectations.

New figures published by Ofcom have revealed that the total bids made by operators came to £5.2 billion, more than double the amount the auction will raise for the treasury.

Second bidder rules

The "theoretical" £5.2 billion would have been the amount paid by the operators had all of the top bids for 800MHz and 2.6GHz frequencies been accepted.

Instead, Ofcom employed a "second bidder" rule meaning that the winning party only had to pay slightly more than the next highest bidder in order to obtain their spectrum.

This system, which had been used in other European countries in their auctions, was outlined to ensure the bidding was harder to rig.

However, this has led to accusations that Ofcom had "over-engineered" the bidding process and as a result, the UK's purse strings will be a little tighter.

"Ofcom over-engineered the auction and it neither raised the amount that the government was looking for nor did it ensure that spectrum found its way into the hands of everybody who wanted it," a source at one bidder told The Guardian.

Reserves and caps

Ofcom has also set aside a portion of the spectrum for Three, the UK's smallest network, to ensure it received some of the spectrum, while it also placed caps on the amount of spectrum O2 and Vodafone were allowed to buy, both of which may have lowered the potential income for the treasury.

Vodafone had bid £2 billion for its spectrum, but only ended up paying £790m, whereas O2 owner Telefonica had bid £1.2 billion but ended up paying considerably £550 for the share of the pie they were able to purchase. Three, on the other hand was only asked to pay the "reserve price" of £225m for its share.

Ofcom responded by saying: "We are entirely comfortable with the rules that we put in place on the caps and the reserved spectrum to ensure that there is effective competition in future to the benefit of UK consumers and businesses."

They say the best defence is a good offence and Apple has attempted to reassert the superiority of the iPhone 5 with a new website outlining how the device still smacks down its high profile Android rivals.

The new 'Why iPhone' portion of Apple's website, launched on Saturday, just two days removed from the Samsung Galaxy S4 launch, explains why "there's the iPhone and there's the rest."

It touts hardware design, customer satisfaction awards, the togetherness of iOS over Android, the safety and selection offered by the App Store and the quality and popularity of the iSight camera, among other features.

It's a somewhat unexpected and defensive move from Apple as the company hasn't felt the need to defend the iPhone against rivals in its marketing materials, rather letting the features speak for themselves.

Is Retina still the gold standard?

The defensive nature of the campaign is outlined by the praise Apple lavishes upon the iPhone's Retina Display.

It explains that only the iPhone and other Apple products have the Retina Display, and claimed that the iPhone "ushered in the era of super hi-res displays."

However, the iPhone 5's 1136 x 640 resolution and 326 ppi pixel-density have been bested by the 5-inch, 1080p HTC One, Sony Xperia Z and Samsung Galaxy S4 handsets, that all rate above 440ppi.

And while it's true that only Apple products have one, for all intents and purposes, 'Retina Display' is a marketing term rather than a technological advance that consumers should be coveting.

Oh snap

The site, which is also bullish about the iPhone 5's battery life and the power of its A6 processor, also touts the merits of the iPhone's rear-facing 8-megapixel iSight camera.

It calls it "the world's most popular camera," citing the fact that the iPhone 4S, iPhone 4 and iPhone 5 are the top three cameras used to upload photos to Flickr.

"While other smartphones simply tout large amounts of megapixels, taking great pictures is about so much more," the company says, in response to 13-megapixel offerings from its Android competitors.

Support system

The company also makes clear that its status as the hardware and software manufacturer keeps everything perfectly integrated, while the threat of malware is seen off by a stringent App Store approval process.

Finally, it outlines the support system, claiming that any problems with the iPhone can be handled through its own in store channels, rather than seeking assistance from multiple parties.

The post reads: "With other smartphones, you're not sure where to go for help. Call the manufacturer, and they tell you to call your service provider. Call your service provider, and they tell you to contact the OS developer. Getting answers shouldn't be that hard. And with Apple, it never is."

Running scared?

It certainly seems that Apple's marketing team has decided to go on the offensive in order to protect its territory against a swathe of ever-improving, well-hyped and critically acclaimed Android rivals.

With the iPhone 5 only half way into its annual life-cycle, perhaps its a smart, well-timed play to outline the perceived superiority of that device.

The three big Android rivals HTC, Samsung and Sony all launching their flagship 2013 offerings this spring, while there's at likely to be least six months left before we see a new iPhone

What are your thoughts on Apple's shift in strategy? Is it running scared or just throwing out a few truth bombs? Let us know in the comments section below.