Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
Don't forget the amazingness of customizable widgets!
...and side-loadable malware!!
And a back button!! My brother in law switched from android to iPhone, loved it, then switched back because the iPhone doesn't have a back button... lol
But it does, you just swipe right from the left side to go backwards. Doesn't that count? I find that to be a far more elegant action than cluttering your phone with extra buttons. Did he try that and just not like it?
Also don't forget that there's now a software back button, upper left in the status bar, that allows you to go back to the previous app. Boom...back button
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
sflocal, looks like you caught one.
Damn right you care. Otherwise you wouldn't waste so much time with your BS arguments trying to diminish the fact that Apple is far ahead of everyone else with their processors.
Performance has ALWAYS been the driving force for innovation in computers. Tasks that used to only be available to those on a $50K workstation made their way to PCs. And now we can do those on a device we hold in our hands.
Well, at least iOS users can. Not only because we have superior devices, but because we have superior developers who always strive to come up with new ways to use those processors to bring us new features. Something Android users, with their inferior Apps written in a kiddie language don't understand,
How incredibly wrong you are.
Firstly, I not diminishing anything. Pick up any premium phone and use it for a while. Do you really think it will be slow to the point of actually noticing it in your everyday tasks? No. That is not even close to reality. If it were such a noticeable factor, people just wouldn't be spending $600+ on those devices. They would be buying cheaper phones or switching to iPhones. I think that makes sense to most people.
Secondly, and ignoring the first line, am I supposed to connect your first paragraph with your second? Performance was driven by the industry as a whole. Players like Motorola, IBM, AMD, Intel etc drove the processor business to where we are now on performance. Things have stagnated on the desktop. We haven't moved too far in years, and truth be told, many who bought i7's in 2009 are still very well served in spite of the years that have passed.
The focus moved to lower power options on mobile platforms. Apple has made great strides but they came through acquisitions and licencing. And low power processing is hardly a new thing. There are millions of PowerPC class embedded processors out there. Ultra low power PPC class processors were a big success. IIRC, there were very successful in the car industry. Mobile handheld computing was a possible due to efforts to miniaturize components, keep power usage down etc. Apple has done great but is by no means alone.The competition is right there. Just behind, neck and neck and ahead of Apple in some cases.
Let me say it again. Does it really matter at this point? Let me answer the question again.:NO.
For as much as you might want to look at the differences and imagine Apple to be using alien technology and is 'far out ahead' all modern premium phones, today, do pretty much the same things, in largely the same way and at a speed that is not just fast enough but way fast enough.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
No. Apple has a long and glorious history of shipping half baked products. To even claim otherwise weakens your entire stance.
Is Apple still baking fast charging?
I am not excusing anything, and claiming that I am, weakens your argument still further.
Of course Apple has had half baked features in products, and it usually occurs at introduction where all is easily forgiven; lots of that with the original iPhone, iPad and Mac Book Air. My stance is that Android OEM's rush to deliver half baked features because each device needs to stand out in the Android OEM market.
Yeah, Apple is still baking fast charging. The fact that Apple will be designing it's own power circuits rather than continuing to purchase them indicates to me that Apple is operating under due diligence.
Me, I can always charge my iPhone 7 Plus with my iPad Pro charger, and it's fast enough where it's a "non issue for most," to quote you.
You know, the original iPod was built from largely off the shelf components. Apple didn't feel any need to avoid purchasing those components and do it all alone.
They can reinvent the whole fast charging wheel if they want, but can you give me one decent reason why they couldn't implement it in a 'standard fashion' a long while ago and 'reinvent' the technology down the line?
Fast charging is a godsend. I'm glad you happen to have an iPad Pro and charger to charge your iPhone 7 more quickly but that is not fast charging. If Apple saw things that way, they could just up the power of the chargers and be done with it. I have an inkling that won't be the case, though.
It doesn't really matter in any case because if you believe what many here like to claim, fast charging isn't necessary because they get enough battery life of their phones to not need to charge. Something that shows they miss the point entirely.
People, don't you realize most consumers are just check list buyers, they have no idea what they are buying and whether it has any real value, but they can said, hey I got a phone with more pixels, more cores and more memory, and more is always better so they must have gotten what they paid for. It is shame most people have no idea what they are buying and whether it is doing what they expect. Manufacturers all know this about consumers so they sell them on the "more" features since most consumer have no idea what these benchmark mean or even notice the real world impact.
There is a lot of truth in what you say, both for Android and iPhones.
Faced by so many claims, many people stop asking questions and believe the blurb.
There's another, dare I say large, goup who simply think that if it's expensive, it must be worth it.
I'd also like to see sustained benchmarks instead of just peak benchmarks. I'll bet the A10 can run a longer time without thermal throttling to hold those benchmarks. The smartphone industry doesn't give Apple's iPhone very much credit of being an excellent device.
Besides thermal throttling, do these test once the phone is 6 months old, then a year and so. I had to use Android phones for work, and I can tell you everyone I used and I used lots of them, would begin dragging as they aged. It would take longer and longer for the phone to do things. The only way to clear it was to do a factory reset and set up your phone from scratch. The android OS would get so fragmented over time with all the cache files and such would just slow the phone down. The processors ran so hot because of this, the heat would deteriorate the battery and it would begin losing life, an 18 month old android phone could barely run two or three hour before needing charged again. But this created the external battery pack market.
Android phones maybe fast out of the box, but they can not sustain that kind of performance. Android has such poor memory and file management that is why the hardware suppliers need more memory and battery life. Google keeps claiming they fix the memory management issue, but their hardware partners keep adding more and more memory to address the slowness issues.
I guess you used all Samsung phones. If you try stock android or near stock android phones (Moto, Nexus/Pixel, Sony, HTC), they don't have this problem that you stated. From my own experience, I can say that about Motorola phones.
Google is a one horse dog and pony show. Gets most of it revenue from one product advertising revenue ......Google is DOOMED. DOOMED I tell ya.
Wall Street doesn't think so. Alphabet has a much higher valued P/E than Apple and I'm fairly certain Google Search will go unchallenged by everyone. Youtube shows no sign of letting up. The highest praise goes to Google's Android for having such huge market share percentage. The usual talk is how the iPhone is losing to Android and eventually Android will obliterate iOS. I'm fairly certain Wall Street sees Alphabet as a much stronger growth entity than it sees Apple. This is not my opinion but I think I'm in the minority. Wall Street sees Alphabet's one-trick pony (search/ad) as more powerful than Apple's one-trick pony (iPhone). P/Es don't lie. All the FANG stocks put Apple to shame in terms of P/E and share gains. Those are the stocks the big investors are betting on to crush Apple into powder.
P/E may not lie exactly, but "Mr. Market" is clearly bipolar, and he is the one who controls the P part of the P/E ratio.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
No. Apple has a long and glorious history of shipping half baked products. To even claim otherwise weakens your entire stance.
Is Apple still baking fast charging?
I am not excusing anything, and claiming that I am, weakens your argument still further.
Of course Apple has had half baked features in products, and it usually occurs at introduction where all is easily forgiven; lots of that with the original iPhone, iPad and Mac Book Air. My stance is that Android OEM's rush to deliver half baked features because each device needs to stand out in the Android OEM market.
Yeah, Apple is still baking fast charging. The fact that Apple will be designing it's own power circuits rather than continuing to purchase them indicates to me that Apple is operating under due diligence.
Me, I can always charge my iPhone 7 Plus with my iPad Pro charger, and it's fast enough where it's a "non issue for most," to quote you.
You know, the original iPod was built from largely off the shelf components. Apple didn't feel any need to avoid purchasing those components and do it all alone.
They can reinvent the whole fast charging wheel if they want, but can you give me one decent reason why they couldn't implement it in a 'standard fashion' a long while ago and 'reinvent' the technology down the line?
Fast charging is a godsend. I'm glad you happen to have an iPad Pro and charger to charge your iPhone 7 more quickly but that is not fast charging. If Apple saw things that way, they could just up the power of the chargers and be done with it. I have an inkling that won't be the case, though.
It doesn't really matter in any case because if you believe what many here like to claim, fast charging isn't necessary because they get enough battery life of their phones to not need to charge. Something that shows they miss the point entirely.
Whoosh!
That's the sound of my comment going over your head.
I didn't state that fast charging was good nor bad, merely that Apple is likely being conservative in adding that feature. That Apple will be building its own power device has nothing to do with what transpired a decade and a half ago with the iPod, and everything to do with Apple having control over the function and manufacturing, and more importantly, risk for battery problems.
Lack of fast charging doesn't appear to have any impact on sales, so I'm speculating that it isn't, yet anyway, a must have feature for iPhone. You seem to think so, but then, you thought highly of a rear touch sensor which is, in fact, a non ideal location.,,
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
sflocal, looks like you caught one.
Damn right you care. Otherwise you wouldn't waste so much time with your BS arguments trying to diminish the fact that Apple is far ahead of everyone else with their processors.
Performance has ALWAYS been the driving force for innovation in computers. Tasks that used to only be available to those on a $50K workstation made their way to PCs. And now we can do those on a device we hold in our hands.
Well, at least iOS users can. Not only because we have superior devices, but because we have superior developers who always strive to come up with new ways to use those processors to bring us new features. Something Android users, with their inferior Apps written in a kiddie language don't understand,
How incredibly wrong you are.
Firstly, I not diminishing anything. Pick up any premium phone and use it for a while. Do you really think it will be slow to the point of actually noticing it in your everyday tasks? No. That is not even close to reality. If it were such a noticeable factor, people just wouldn't be spending $600+ on those devices. They would be buying cheaper phones or switching to iPhones. I think that makes sense to most people.
Secondly, and ignoring the first line, am I supposed to connect your first paragraph with your second? Performance was driven by the industry as a whole. Players like Motorola, IBM, AMD, Intel etc drove the processor business to where we are now on performance. Things have stagnated on the desktop. We haven't moved too far in years, and truth be told, many who bought i7's in 2009 are still very well served in spite of the years that have passed.
The focus moved to lower power options on mobile platforms. Apple has made great strides but they came through acquisitions and licencing. And low power processing is hardly a new thing. There are millions of PowerPC class embedded processors out there. Ultra low power PPC class processors were a big success. IIRC, there were very successful in the car industry. Mobile handheld computing was a possible due to efforts to miniaturize components, keep power usage down etc. Apple has done great but is by no means alone.The competition is right there. Just behind, neck and neck and ahead of Apple in some cases.
Let me say it again. Does it really matter at this point? Let me answer the question again.:NO.
For as much as you might want to look at the differences and imagine Apple to be using alien technology and is 'far out ahead' all modern premium phones, today, do pretty much the same things, in largely the same way and at a speed that is not just fast enough but way fast enough.
If it didn't matter then you wouldn't write entire novels trying to convince us. Like all your previous attempts at trolling.
I have lots of powerful Apps on my iPhones and iPads that don't exist on Android. It's not imagination - it's a fact. If you're happy running basic Apps then good for you. Some of us like to do more. And that requires iOS running on an A Series processor. Not Android running on some inferior processor with inferior software.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
sflocal, looks like you caught one.
Damn right you care. Otherwise you wouldn't waste so much time with your BS arguments trying to diminish the fact that Apple is far ahead of everyone else with their processors.
Performance has ALWAYS been the driving force for innovation in computers. Tasks that used to only be available to those on a $50K workstation made their way to PCs. And now we can do those on a device we hold in our hands.
Well, at least iOS users can. Not only because we have superior devices, but because we have superior developers who always strive to come up with new ways to use those processors to bring us new features. Something Android users, with their inferior Apps written in a kiddie language don't understand,
How incredibly wrong you are.
Firstly, I not diminishing anything. Pick up any premium phone and use it for a while. Do you really think it will be slow to the point of actually noticing it in your everyday tasks? No. That is not even close to reality. If it were such a noticeable factor, people just wouldn't be spending $600+ on those devices. They would be buying cheaper phones or switching to iPhones. I think that makes sense to most people.
Secondly, and ignoring the first line, am I supposed to connect your first paragraph with your second? Performance was driven by the industry as a whole. Players like Motorola, IBM, AMD, Intel etc drove the processor business to where we are now on performance. Things have stagnated on the desktop. We haven't moved too far in years, and truth be told, many who bought i7's in 2009 are still very well served in spite of the years that have passed.
The focus moved to lower power options on mobile platforms. Apple has made great strides but they came through acquisitions and licencing. And low power processing is hardly a new thing. There are millions of PowerPC class embedded processors out there. Ultra low power PPC class processors were a big success. IIRC, there were very successful in the car industry. Mobile handheld computing was a possible due to efforts to miniaturize components, keep power usage down etc. Apple has done great but is by no means alone.The competition is right there. Just behind, neck and neck and ahead of Apple in some cases.
Let me say it again. Does it really matter at this point? Let me answer the question again.:NO.
For as much as you might want to look at the differences and imagine Apple to be using alien technology and is 'far out ahead' all modern premium phones, today, do pretty much the same things, in largely the same way and at a speed that is not just fast enough but way fast enough.
If it didn't matter then you wouldn't write entire novels trying to convince us. Like all your previous attempts at trolling.
I have lots of powerful Apps on my iPhones and iPads that don't exist on Android. It's not imagination - it's a fact. If you're happy running basic Apps then good for you. Some of us like to do more. And that requires iOS running on an A Series processor. Not Android running on some inferior processor with inferior software.
That's a possibility and if the app doesn't exist on Android, you have no option.
Which iPhone apps are you using?
You'd have to define 'basic' but it makes sense to think that almost all users use those basic apps during large parts of their time on the phone. I would like to think that anything much more complex would be better suited to a tablet or laptop/desktop.
Your special use case pretty much puts you into statistical irrelevance (needing apps that only work on iOS and that only a minority of iPhone iOS users use).
Your 'inferior' comment makes little sense when you consider that people get most of the same things done with them. It sounds elitist. The iPhone doesn't have many things a lot of Android phones do have, and have had for years but I don't say the iPhone is inferior as a result.
Oh, sorry. I forgot. Those features are the half baked, knock-off ones that Apple designed and has been perfecting for years while Android moles penetrated Apple's inner circle stole them and then rushed to market. Silly me!
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL. […] The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just is unrequited envy for them.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
I can tell you from personal experience, that many people switch to iPhone because of this very thing: snappy. Even a fraction of second, it gives a whole lot different experiences when it comes to snappiness. Once you tried iPhone after Androids, it will be hard not to switch just because of this one thing: snappy. So to say that no one would switch because iPhone is the snappiest phone is totally wrong.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
I can tell you from personal experience, that many people switch to iPhone because of this very thing: snappy. Even a fraction of second, it gives a whole lot different experiences when it comes to snappiness. Once you tried iPhone after Androids, it will be hard not to switch just because of this one thing: snappy. So to say that no one would switch because iPhone is the snappiest phone is totally wrong.
3. Apple unusually releases a new color version of latest iphone in the middle of the cycle
RED is anything but unusual. Apple always offer RED product as part of AIDS campaign every year.
Nope. If Android users were switching in numbers, you would see Apple's market share explode. People go in both directions. Smartphone snappiness just isn't an issue today. I switched from an iPhone and haven't looked back. It's not even a high end Android and I have zero speed issues. Ah, And I have an iPhone at home so I really can speak on this subject. What Was the last Android phone you used?
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL. […] The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just is unrequited envy for them.
Fixed that for ya.
But you didn't. You fixed it for yourself perhaps but not for me. Perhaps you feel better for it? I went from iPhone to Android so my envy just doesn't exist. Sorry if I'm bursting your bubble but the envy you speak of is non-existent among Android users.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL. […] The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just is unrequited envy for them.
Fixed that for ya.
But you didn't. You fixed it for yourself perhaps but not for me. Perhaps you feel better for it? I went from iPhone to Android so my envy just doesn't exist. Sorry if I'm bursting your bubble but the envy you speak of is non-existent among Android users.
Fixed it for everyone who doesn't want your fragmented, malware-infested, insecure, poorly performing iKnockoffs. You've been trolling/shilling for a while now on this site. I've seen plenty of Android shills come and go here, but your comments are like something that just won't flush and go away.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL. […] The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just is unrequited envy for them.
Fixed that for ya.
But you didn't. You fixed it for yourself perhaps but not for me. Perhaps you feel better for it? I went from iPhone to Android so my envy just doesn't exist. Sorry if I'm bursting your bubble but the envy you speak of is non-existent among Android users.
Fixed it for everyone who doesn't want your fragmented, malware-infested, insecure, poorly performing iKnockoffs. You've been trolling/shilling for a while now on this site. I've seen plenty of Android shills come and go here, but your comments are like something that just won't flush and go away.
And I thought his avatar was a reference to those nagging Avon ladies of yore that kept ringing door bells insistently trying to sell you some cheap knockoffs you won't ever want. And as his ilk is prone to do, he used anecdotal observations of his surroundings again to speak for "them". Your analogy is closer to the source.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
Some of the flagship Android phones I like don't have SD storage either. The Pixel didn't and neither did the OnePlus 3T. It might be an issue for some but its just not all that relevant to many or Google and OnePlus would have included it.
And while few say Android phones aren't snappy they have had issues with overheating (Samsung S6 Qualcomm 810). And they get far less snappy more quickly than iPhones and because of the efficiency of iOS on Apple processors my iPhone 5 is running iOS 10.3.1. How many 2012 Android flagship phones can run Nougat? For the Nexus 4 you have to download a custom ROM and it can be twitchy. Even official Nougat builds for Pixel and later Nexus models have had significant issues.
Does snappy have core value? Sure thing or we wouldn't buy flagship phones. There's a reason why folks ponied up for a flagship with a Snapdragon 821 vs a less expensive mid-range with a Snapdragon 617. Your basic argument is clearly trolling and stupid. This is hardly surprising though.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
Excusing bad design decisions - From where did you get the idea that due to bad design decisions, Android SOCs are losing those benchmark tests? It is simply a case of Apple having superior skilled people who can come out with excellent SOCs than Android SOC makers (Read Qualcomm, Samsung). Why can't you just give credit to Apple for being ahead of the competition instead of discrediting competition who are doing a fine job themselves (except that they are not at apple's level when comparisons are made).
Because iOS running on a Qualcomm processor would run faster than Android running on the same processor. There are some OS/API/Languge level design differences that make iOS more memory and processor efficient.
Were these "bad" design decisions? Not really. They were decisions that prioritized other aspects over speed and efficiency.
Comments
Firstly, I not diminishing anything. Pick up any premium phone and use it for a while. Do you really think it will be slow to the point of actually noticing it in your everyday tasks? No. That is not even close to reality. If it were such a noticeable factor, people just wouldn't be spending $600+ on those devices. They would be buying cheaper phones or switching to iPhones. I think that makes sense to most people.
Secondly, and ignoring the first line, am I supposed to connect your first paragraph with your second? Performance was driven by the industry as a whole. Players like Motorola, IBM, AMD, Intel etc drove the processor business to where we are now on performance. Things have stagnated on the desktop. We haven't moved too far in years, and truth be told, many who bought i7's in 2009 are still very well served in spite of the years that have passed.
The focus moved to lower power options on mobile platforms. Apple has made great strides but they came through acquisitions and licencing. And low power processing is hardly a new thing. There are millions of PowerPC class embedded processors out there. Ultra low power PPC class processors were a big success. IIRC, there were very successful in the car industry.
Mobile handheld computing was a possible due to efforts to miniaturize components, keep power usage down etc. Apple has done great but is by no means alone.The competition is right there. Just behind, neck and neck and ahead of Apple in some cases.
Let me say it again. Does it really matter at this point? Let me answer the question again.:NO.
For as much as you might want to look at the differences and imagine Apple to be using alien technology and is 'far out ahead' all modern premium phones, today, do pretty much the same things, in largely the same way and at a speed that is not just fast enough but way fast enough.
They can reinvent the whole fast charging wheel if they want, but can you give me one decent reason why they couldn't implement it in a 'standard fashion' a long while ago and 'reinvent' the technology down the line?
Fast charging is a godsend. I'm glad you happen to have an iPad Pro and charger to charge your iPhone 7 more quickly but that is not fast charging. If Apple saw things that way, they could just up the power of the chargers and be done with it. I have an inkling that won't be the case, though.
It doesn't really matter in any case because if you believe what many here like to claim, fast charging isn't necessary because they get enough battery life of their phones to not need to charge. Something that shows they miss the point entirely.
Faced by so many claims, many people stop asking questions and believe the blurb.
There's another, dare I say large, goup who simply think that if it's expensive, it must be worth it.
That's the sound of my comment going over your head.
I didn't state that fast charging was good nor bad, merely that Apple is likely being conservative in adding that feature. That Apple will be building its own power device has nothing to do with what transpired a decade and a half ago with the iPod, and everything to do with Apple having control over the function and manufacturing, and more importantly, risk for battery problems.
Lack of fast charging doesn't appear to have any impact on sales, so I'm speculating that it isn't, yet anyway, a must have feature for iPhone. You seem to think so, but then, you thought highly of a rear touch sensor which is, in fact, a non ideal location.,,
You might be pushing a bad position.
If it didn't matter then you wouldn't write entire novels trying to convince us. Like all your previous attempts at trolling.
I have lots of powerful Apps on my iPhones and iPads that don't exist on Android. It's not imagination - it's a fact. If you're happy running basic Apps then good for you. Some of us like to do more. And that requires iOS running on an A Series processor. Not Android running on some inferior processor with inferior software.
Which iPhone apps are you using?
You'd have to define 'basic' but it makes sense to think that almost all users use those basic apps during large parts of their time on the phone. I would like to think that anything much more complex would be better suited to a tablet or laptop/desktop.
Your special use case pretty much puts you into statistical irrelevance (needing apps that only work on iOS and that only a minority of iPhone iOS users use).
Your 'inferior' comment makes little sense when you consider that people get most of the same things done with them. It sounds elitist. The iPhone doesn't have many things a lot of Android phones do have, and have had for years but I don't say the iPhone is inferior as a result.
Oh, sorry. I forgot. Those features are the half baked, knock-off ones that Apple designed and has been perfecting for years while Android moles penetrated Apple's inner circle stole them and then rushed to market. Silly me!
RED is anything but unusual. Apple always offer RED product as part of AIDS campaign every year.
And while few say Android phones aren't snappy they have had issues with overheating (Samsung S6 Qualcomm 810). And they get far less snappy more quickly than iPhones and because of the efficiency of iOS on Apple processors my iPhone 5 is running iOS 10.3.1. How many 2012 Android flagship phones can run Nougat? For the Nexus 4 you have to download a custom ROM and it can be twitchy. Even official Nougat builds for Pixel and later Nexus models have had significant issues.
http://www.gottabemobile.com/android-7-1-1-nougat-problems-5-things-to-know/
Does snappy have core value? Sure thing or we wouldn't buy flagship phones. There's a reason why folks ponied up for a flagship with a Snapdragon 821 vs a less expensive mid-range with a Snapdragon 617. Your basic argument is clearly trolling and stupid. This is hardly surprising though.
Were these "bad" design decisions? Not really. They were decisions that prioritized other aspects over speed and efficiency.