So one company does the R&D to revolutionize an industry, some bottom-feeders blatantly copy them, and you "look forward" to buying the copy, because, really, how dare they be better?Tells us all we need to know about you.
You're living in a dream world. The press will cream their jeans over this "innovative technology", even if it takes an average of 20 swipes to work and sends actual pictures of your fingerprints to Google. Meanwhile, Apple "didn't invent fingerprint recognition", and how could anyone "trust Apple with their fingerprints" anyway?
Android as we know it is a doubly-stolen product. Basic Android, that was going to run those bogus Blackberries that Rubin canceled at that point was stolen from Oracle, and the GUI that people think of as "Android" now was stolen from Apple. Incompetently in both cases. Unfortunately, Google being brought to book for either theft is somewhere between slim and none. They'll let hardware manufacturers take the heat on patent infringement.
He talks about using the case as an antenna, which means it's a conductor. Which means it's not RF-transparent. Again—by definition.Modern antenna design is a very sophisticated science. I doubt if any random slab of metal is going to be ideal. That means the case would have to be divided up into the antenna part and its surroundings by non-conductive strips, like a printed circuit board. I see no sign of that here.
Where does everybody get this idea of unicorn hide liquid metal being transparent to radio waves? If it's metal, it's not. By definition. Being amorphous instead of polycrystalline wouldn't change that; it would probably make it an even better RF shield because the free electrons could wander through the entire piece instead of just one tiny crystal domain.
My point of view is the same as the hundreds of millions of people who buy iPhones and the hundreds of millions of people who buy normal-sized Android phones. The tens of millions of people who buy these ridiculous tombstone phones are a sliver of the market who are not worth pursuing because most of them are Apple-haters anyway.Most Android users bought their phones to save money. The tiny minority who buy these premium-priced phablet phones have to be ideologically...
The reason is the need for humungous batteries. These Android "flagships" are a very small portion of the market, a segment heavily populated by people who would never buy an Apple product in a million years. Apple would be stupid to pursue a vanishingly small sliver of a minority at the expense of making their own phone into a too-small tablet. The iPad mini is their answer to that use case, and it seems to be doing quite well.
This is pure, 100%, no-money-back, spun-glass Bullshıt. A very small minority of Android phones are in these ridiculous large sizes, and a majority of them are sold in South Korea. The only people who are bellyaching about the size of the iPhone are the usual Fandroid trolls who seem to be unaware that the only reason such huge screens are on offer is to hide the enormously larger batteries needed by their inefficient, power-sucking OS.