Apple's iPhone 5 is "fastest smartphone in the land"

1457910

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 186
    While it is indeed interesting stuff, it doesn't really sell me the phone as it's full of compromises and no meaningful advantages (but some meaningful disadvantages) compared to the 4S.

    Regarding the ability to remove the battery, if you can't see a use for that, you're extremely narrow minded. The irreplaceable battery is a shortcoming on any phone, as it prevents people from carrying extra fully charged battery replacements. While there are third-party accessories in the market to partially address this issue (on the iPhone 4/4S only), those accessories address the issue in an extremely inefficient way, since a lot of power is lost to charge the main battery of the phone.
  • Reply 122 of 186


    It really is very snappy. My 2 year-old 4 with 5 is kind of pokey, but the 5 with 6 is a screaming 10!

  • Reply 123 of 186

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    Once again, how about a side-by-side comparison under the same conditions? Especially one where the test conditions are spelled out.

    Many of the Geekbench numbers are based on hacked phones where many, if not most, features have been deactivated in order to get very high performance.

    PC Magazine, OTOH, ran side-by-side tests of various phones using a pretty wide variety of tests and under controlled conditions. Anyone but a fandroid would consider that to be much more reliable.


     


    Is there a possibility that some benchmark results are fake or made with hacked phones? Of course, it is possible with any smartphone ;). Only time will tell.

    Curiously the PC Mag test you are referring to is the one that got my attention because of some weird results (not the geekbench test. I thing that test is pretty legit) rather the GLBenchmark and because they used the US dual core version of S3 instead of international quad core S3.

    Does that means they were biased towards Apple? I think yes.







     

  • Reply 124 of 186
    It really is very snappy. My 2 year-old 4 with 5 is kind of pokey, but the 5 with 6 is a screaming 10!

    Even on the iPhone 4 the new Maps is snappier. It wasn't at first on my iPhone 4. I think it was beta 3(?) that really sped it up.
  • Reply 125 of 186

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Postulant View Post





    Apple made the right choice in ditching google maps.




    Ditching Google is right on so many levels for Apple.  The timing of the Maps replacement was just plain poor/rushed.  The problems with Maps will all be worked out soon, and many Android fans will still be waiting for their ICS upgrade that may never come.

  • Reply 126 of 186
    vaelian wrote: »
    it prevents people from carrying extra fully charged battery replacements.

    No it doesn't.
    While there are third-party accessories in the market to partially address this issue (on the iPhone 4/4S only) those accessories address the issue in an extremely inefficient way, since a lot of power is lost to charge the main battery of the phone.

    Quite the opposite. The external battery is more efficient and effective in every way.



    Riddle me this: Once you turn your phone of and play musical batteries with your phone that will only last half as long as the iPhone on one charge because it's a shit design with a shit battery how do you recharge those batteries? Surely you must an external battery station that will line up the connectors of you phone's internal battery because having to turn off the phone one again to switch batteries out to charge them once you find a power source is surely not the convenience and simple usage you are trying to force here.


    PS: When you can get 8 hours of continuous data usage from LTE you have to wonder how many people would even need an extra charge in a day. Apple is horrible for these companies because there batteries do last so damn long per charge and don't wear down as quickly due to the 1000 charge to 80% chemistry.

    1000
  • Reply 127 of 186
    solipsismx wrote: »

    I agree with this, but I don't agree with the time in which they did it or their seemingly lack of interest in any StreetView-like feature.
    Note: I was recorded in line yesterday for the iPhone by a NAVTEQ car. I could see Apple simply licensing their tech instead of doing their own even though they surely could have with ease. It's not like we didn't know about Apple's Maps plans years ago.
    1000
    StreetView or a better alternative will come. Because mapping cant be cultivated to perfection in a lab, Apple had no choice but to get maps in the hands of users. The longer maps sat on the shelf, the stronger Google's chokehold became.

    People keep saying it took Google 8 years to get here... As if it will take Apple that long. People must remember that Apple has the advantage of 500,000,000 mobile device in the wild now - as users use the service, data will come.

    It was a smart move. I only wish they did it sooner.
  • Reply 128 of 186
    runbuh wrote: »

    The timing of the Maps replacement was just plain poor/rushed.  The problems with Maps will all be worked out soon, and many Android fans will still be waiting for their ICS upgrade that may never come.

    I disagree. They should have gotten maps out even sooner... In the coming months even the most uninformed will realize this.
  • Reply 129 of 186
    solipsismx wrote: »
    vaelian wrote: »
    it prevents people from carrying extra fully charged battery replacements.

    No it doesn't.

    If it doesn't, then how do I easily replace an iPhone's battery?

    solipsismx wrote: »
    While there are third-party accessories in the market to partially address this issue (on the iPhone 4/4S only) those accessories address the issue in an extremely inefficient way, since a lot of power is lost to charge the main battery of the phone.

    Quite the opposite. The external battery is more efficient and effective in every way.

    So Apple defies physics now? How can you be more efficient than 100% efficiency? A significant amount of power is lost to heat when you charge a battery, which is why an external battery is a lot less efficient than an additional battery.

    solipsismx wrote: »
    Riddle me this: Once you turn your phone of and play musical batteries with your phone that will only last half as long as the iPhone on one charge because it's a shit design with a shit battery how do you recharge those batteries? Surely you must an external battery station that will line up the connectors of you phone's internal battery because having to turn off the phone one again to switch batteries out to charge them once you find a power source is surely not the convenience and simple usage you are trying to force here.

    What is this imaginary phone we're talking about? Why does it must have a crappy battery design? And when did I mention convenience?

    solipsismx wrote: »
    PS: When you can get 8 hours of continuous data usage from LTE you have to wonder how many people would even need an extra charge in a day. Apple is horrible for these companies because there batteries do last so damn long per charge and don't wear down as quickly due to the 1000 charge to 80% chemistry.

    I've had phones that lasted over a week without a charge, and this includes smartphones with replaceable batteries running Symbian. I'm mentioning this just to show how little this has to do with battery design; it's the software that makes most of the difference, if power management sucks for some reason, batteries won't last as long, and obviously power management will suck on Android devices because OEMs are usually crap at optimization and the Linux kernel has never been known for its top notch power management code.
  • Reply 130 of 186
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post


     Stolen JVM? Didn't a jury find Google not guilty?



    Mmm. No.


     


    The jury decided that a number of APIs (not the JVM, my mistake) had been infringed upon. The judge decided that no harm was done and so Google didn't have to pay any money. The decision was odd because taking Java and moving the packages and APIs around  was precisely why Microsoft lost a similar case years before. 


     


    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/oracle-wins-on-infringement-jury-stuck-on-googles-fair-use-argument/75810


     


    The patent case was a separate issue, and Oracle lost big on that one.


     


    http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240151103/Google-wins-Oracle-spat-over-Java

  • Reply 131 of 186
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post



    So Apple defies physics now? How can you be more efficient than 100% efficiency? A significant amount of power is lost to heat when you charge a battery, which is why an external battery is a lot less efficient than an additional battery.

     


     


    So how does this additional battery get charged then?

  • Reply 132 of 186
    hill60 wrote: »
    vaelian wrote: »
    So Apple defies physics now? How can you be more efficient than 100% efficiency? A significant amount of power is lost to heat when you charge a battery, which is why an external battery is a lot less efficient than an additional battery.

     

    So how does this additional battery get charged then?

    Wall socket? The point here is that charging the iPhone's internal battery using an external battery is less efficient than carrying a backup battery that can replace the battery in the phone without wasting all of its power recharging 60% of the phone's battery.
  • Reply 133 of 186
    tooltalk wrote: »
    Well, that's too bad..  seems like the average iphone users can't tell the difference anyway..
    .

    Umm, can we see the out-takes when people said " wtf, it's the same phone ..."

    Oh, yeah, it's TV, just like those Samsung ads that make fun of people who are willing to lineup to get the product that they really want ...
  • Reply 134 of 186
    vaelian wrote: »
    Wall socket? The point here is that charging the iPhone's internal battery using an external battery is less efficient than carrying a backup battery that can replace the battery in the phone without wasting all of its power recharging 60% of the phone's battery.

    1) Really?! You cram your phone's naked internal battery into a wall socket? Ridiculous!

    2) You lose half your charge from transferring a DC to DC power from a slighter higher to slighter lower voltage? Not even close. You dont even come close to half with an AC to DC conversion.
  • Reply 135 of 186

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post



    Wall socket? The point here is that charging the iPhone's internal battery using an external battery is less efficient than carrying a backup battery that can replace the battery in the phone without wasting all of its power recharging 60% of the phone's battery.




    1) Really?! You cram your phone's naked internal battery into a wall socket? Ridiculous!



    2) You lose half your charge from transferring a DC to DC power from a slighter higher to slighter lower voltage? Not even close. You dont even come close to half with an AC to DC conversion.


     


    I think what Vaelian is saying is that charging a battery is less than 100% efficient, so charging a battery to use to charge another battery is less efficient than charging the two batteries directly as it introduces an added charging cycle. True, however, lithium batteries are actually very efficient, so in reality this is not a big issue.

  • Reply 136 of 186
    I have one of those accesory batteries used to recharge the iphone battery and yes, it can only charge the iphone to about 60% capacity. The reason I bought one of these in the first place is the iphone battery only lasts about 1/2. To 2/3 of my average daily use. I would rather just have a removable battery personally.

    The comment about putting the battery directly in the wall socket was rude btw. Like you didn't know what he meant. Lame....
  • Reply 137 of 186
    vaelian wrote: »
    Wall socket? The point here is that charging the iPhone's internal battery using an external battery is less efficient than carrying a backup battery that can replace the battery in the phone without wasting all of its power recharging 60% of the phone's battery.

    Of course, you neglect to mention that the additional components added to make a battery removable and replaceable also affect battery performance in the device. So you need to carry a battery because the circuitry reduces the run time ...
  • Reply 138 of 186

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    "Benchmarks don't matter to you Appletards, right?"


     


    —The Anti-Apple Brigade, upon reading this



     


    LOL.  Right.  They don't matter to us.


     


    But when the Android Apologists try to bring specs to the experience fight, we've got them covered.

  • Reply 139 of 186

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    "Benchmarks don't matter to you Appletards, right?"


     


    —The Anti-Apple Brigade, upon reading this



    Well, using it is a breeze. Not to self promote, but in my review of the iphone 5, I wrote about how great it is as a user, and not just in terms of stats. Benchmarks are semi-important, but nothing beats real use and after using the phone for a short while I can tell you it feels incredibly fast. Pages load instantly. Apps load quickly. Everything about it is FAST. P.S my friends are in that brigade.

  • Reply 140 of 186


    Originally Posted by obsessedapple View Post

    P.S my friends are in that brigade.


     


    And you haven't converted them? Well, you know what they say about proximity of enemies… image

Sign In or Register to comment.