Originally Posted by JeffDenver
The whole issue was about how Android is all just about specs...what is the point of advertising a 64-bit CPU if the vast majority of apps and/or the UI itself do not even leverage it yet? If Android did that, Apple people would call it a gimmick.
I agree that "Apple people" would call it a gimmick if Android did it. But Android didn't do it. Apple did. So here you are, an Android fan, doing what you said Apple fans would do- calling it a gimmick. It is not- it actually improves the speed and performance of the device. What is the point of advertising a 64-bit CPU if..... You are kidding, right? It is a *differentiator* Apple has it. Android doesn't. Of course they are going to promote it. And Apple marketing is freakin' brilliant. But just because something has brilliant marketing doesn't mean the product itself doesn't have merit. The more Apple can make the conversation about '64-bit' the more they win- and Android sites and fans fall into that conversation easily. Apple has a great marketing team with a *great* product.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
All has nothing to do with it. The iPhone 5S already delivers increased performance today by using the new ISA. That's a fact. If the iPhone with everything else being equal in HW was still running 32-bit it would perform worse.
I agree with you on this, and that was in fact my point. 64-bit has already proven its merit *now* I do also believe it is just at the start of showing off its benefit. Apple is well poised to launch future rocketships.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
His "proof" that the iPhone is slower with 64-bit is ridiculous on multiple scales. Besides not comparing the same OSes at 32 and 64-bit he's also not even coming close to comparing the same HW. The Galaxy has to use beefier HW to even play in the same pool and therefore has to use a much larger battery to maintain any equivalency to battery life. We're talking a 2.45GHz CPU with 2 GiB RAM with a 2800 mAh battery compared to the iPhone 5S's 1.3Ghz with 1 GiB RAM and a 1450 mAh battery and yet the device from 2013 still trounces the Galaxy phone in comparable processing tests despite it being a newly released device. On top of that you have that first test in that video he thinks "proves" the iPhone sucks showing the Flickr app loading faster on the iPhone. Twice.
On this I disagree with you on a few points. The two devices are far from 'copying' each other on at least this issue, but I don't think either side gets to pick and choose the elements that favor their device and say anything else shouldn't count. I think devices get to use whatever they have 'as delivered.' If Apple had the capability and actually delivered their existing device with their CPU at 2.45GHz, 2 GiB RAM, and a 2800 mAh battery- it most likely would have blown the competition out of the water. But they didn't. If Samsung delivered all that beefy hardware on a 64-bit platform with 64-bit apps, they may have completely smoked the 5s. But they didn't. If you are doing a speed test between a Lamborghini and a Ducati motorcycle, the Ducati fan doesn't get to say the Lambo needs to remove two tires in order to make the race comparably representative or that the Ducati is faster 'per tire.' The iPhone is faster 'per core.' So what? In that case, the Samsung is faster 'per bit.' It just doesn't matter. Its about what happens when you have what you have in your hands, turn it on, and start doing stuff.
On the flip side, posting speed tests of the 5s running 32 bit apps is dubious at best. It is capable of running 64-bit apps and so it is absolutely fair game to compare the 5s' 64-bit app speeds to 32-bit android speeds. If Apple only had a handful of 64-bit apps there might be an argument- but they have tons of them. Get over it Android fans and stop trying to skew reality to what you *wish* were true.
I like that video. because all I see is two great phones. The S5 is newer and *should* be a bit faster, but it by no means is leaving the older 5s in the dust- and the 5s clearly wins a few too.
Hopefully the 6 is just a monster performance-wise.