I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
What do you mean, "figure out what to do"
The Home Button is perfect the way it is.
Android devices with their stupid software home button that ruins the resolution, barely ever works, and loses all tactile meaning is a piece of shit.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/184353/samsung-to-ape-apples-touch-id-with-touch-style-fingerprint-sensor-in-galaxy-s6-report/80#post_2662607" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Rogifan</strong> <a href="/t/184353/samsung-to-ape-apples-touch-id-with-touch-style-fingerprint-sensor-in-galaxy-s6-report/80#post_2662607"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br /><br />I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.<br /><br /><img alt="iPhone-6-Plus-vs-LG-G3-11-620x618.jpg" src="http://cdn.gottabemobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/iPhone-6-Plus-vs-LG-G3-11-620x618.jpg" /><br /><br /><img alt="Apple-iPhone-6-vs-Motorola-Moto-X-2014-TI.jpg" src="http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/reviews/165216-thumb/Apple-iPhone-6-vs-Motorola-Moto-X-2014-TI.jpg" /><br /><br />To me a better implementation would have been to <strong>not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID</strong> so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.</div></div><p><br />What do you mean, "figure out what to do"</p><p> </p><p>The Home Button is perfect the way it is.</p><p> </p><p>Android devices with their stupid software home button that ruins the resolution, barely ever works, and loses all tactile meaning is a piece of shit.</p>
You may have had a point about ruining resolution but barely ever work? Of course they never work and that's why they keep on selling.
Apple's implementation of the home button I would say is far from perfect. Having a big circle ensures the bottom bezel will always be larger than it needs to be but at the moment with Apple ID it does fit. So unless Apple comes up with a differing implementation it has to stay.
Now that's pathetic! In 32-bit mode, none of the 64-bit advantages are available, such as double the number of integer and floating point registers. But I'm sure the 5433 cost more--which is good for Apple! " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
It does seem a very curious thing to do. According to Anandtech there are still advantages to using ARMs 64 bit architecture, but that doesn't sound like it would be the principle reason. Maybe at some point Samsung will release an update that flips the 64 bit switch in Note 4s that have the chip. It is a mystery.
OK, so what did Tim Cook say about the iPhone display that makes you think he felt 3.5" or 4" was the only display size worth having and that there was no need to ever increase the display size if both the technology and consumer interest matched Apple's goals?
Well there is this:
I guess one handed uses was only "common sense" in 2012 and 2013. Apple never gave a 'why' for the increased size of the 6 and 6 Plus. Go back and watch the keynote and neither Tim Cook nor Phil Schiller really explained why Apple went bigger. Schiller went right in to specs and features. Heck their tag line for the new phones was "Bigger than Bigger". What the heck does that mean?!?
Anyone with a half functioning brain would know that there was no way Apple could go another year with a 4" flagship phone. The stock would have been hammered and customers would have left in droves. People stayed because they were confident larger sizes were coming.
Software buttons don't work in the same way touching icons on an iphone screen doesn't work. The biggest class action in history awaits.
You know what is going to happen. Apple will come up with a very ingenious and slick way of incorporating fingerprint sensing into the screen - or more likely buy some other companies solution, and will do away with a physical home button so the entire front surface of the phone is a slick and elegant glass surface. The acolytes will start praising the new Apple innovation as the greatest thing ever and will loudly ridicule any Samsung phone with a physical button on the front as being a dinosaur. I will point out that Nokia did the whole glass front with capacitive buttons things years ago and then someone else will reply that Apple were just waiting till they could do it right and actually planned to do this in 1995.
Yes it does. There's more than one way to solve a problem.
But that has nothing to do with on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution does it? That comment was what I was curious about. Do you know anything about it being an issue?
No! Apple implementing a fairly common, not innovative form factor just means Apple is targeting the customer base that made the form factor popular. It doesn't mean Apple is copying anyone, especially Samsung (who is just another face in the crowd).
Well the consumer made one touch finger print sensors popular. Why wouldn't Samsung and others try to implement something similar? If they violate specific Apple/Authentec patents then Apple sues.
Look I hate Samsung as much as anyone. I don't own any Samsung products. But it's hard to deny they were the ones who made large screen phones popular.
Apple made large screens popular with the iPad. Samsung couldn't possibly compete with the same size, so they settled with the compromised phablet phones.
I don't think Apple should have succumbed to copying Samsung with the 5.5" phablet iPhone 6 Plus. They didn't copy netbooks, and they shouldn’t have made a 5.5" phone. 4.7", maybe, but it’s still too large in its current incarnation. If they reduced the bezels substantially, the 4.7" might be better, but I suspect around 4.2" would be more realistic.
Then why did they, because they wanted to, or because they had to?
Honestly... Apple never HAS to do anything. They march to the beat of their own drum. They've had no problems selling any phone. Most companies can only dream of having the same sort of success that Apple has in smartphones.
Phones have X inch screens. You can literally use any number for X.
The issue is... Apple has only ever had 2 screen sizes in their entire smartphone history... while everyone else has used a variety of sizes.
That doesn't mean Apple was right or wrong... screen size is just a decision. And it's one decision out of many that have to be made.
My point is not that Apple had to do it because everyone else was.
I don't think for a second Apple said, "let's see what others are doing and then let's follow them in everyone else is doing it." They did it because 1) the consumer's interest was there, and 2) the technology was there. Remember the iPhone 6 is lighter than all of the 3.5" iPhones and a smaller box volume than all 3.5" iPhones up through the iPhone 3GS. A 4.7" iPhone simply wasn't a reasonable expectation then for many, many reasons.
They didn't have to. Apple doesn't get scared of the competition.
So I guess never in Apple history has Apple released a larger or smaller sized version of an existing product before the iPad/iPhone? Of course we'll exclude the iPod and iMac, MacBook, ...
Who said anything about scared? Apple noted the trend to small light laptops in the netbook class, took the idea onboard and made a better product in the form of the Airs. Same thing with 7" tablets. Apple saw that they were becoming very popular so they developed the iPad mini. Same again with phones - Apple clearly saw the considerable success Samsung had with the Notes and the general rising popularity of large screened phones made by Samsung and others, particularly in Asia where they became the sole computer class device for many people.
In none of these instances did Apple pioneer or lead by introducing these form factors. They looked at the market trends and reacted. Are you really trying to argue that Apple lead the way or that they produced such products purely on their own whim and with no reference to what other companies were doing or how well their devices were being received? Or do you seriously think they always planned to make such products and that it was just sheer coincidence that other companies beat them to it?
In no way am I being critical of Apple in any way, they have had the great sense to profit from the market experimentation that others have done. One might almost call them cunning - they stood back and let Samsung absorb the development costs of the natural selection process - what some refer to as hurling shít at a wall and seeing what sticks - and have now jumped in with products that are like those that stuck.
You're rewriting history.
The MacBook Air was nothing like netbooks.
The iPad Mini was nothing like the 7" Android tablets. Just because it was only 0.9" bigger on paper, everyone jumps to the conclusion that Apple simply copied the 7" tablets. But, in fact, the iPad Mini's screen area was over 40% larger than the 7" tablets of that time, which put it into a different league of user experience.
With the 6 Plus, you're correct, though; there, Apple is simply—and mistakenly—aping Samsung.
And? if a slight increase in weight over its predecessor makes an iPhone not worthy of buying then very few iPhones were valid purchases. The iPhone 5C is heavier than iPhone 5, iPhone 3S heavier than iPhone 4S, iPhone 4S heavier than iPhone 4, iPhone 4 heavier than iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 3GS heavier than iPhone 3G.
And? if a slight increase in weight over its predecessor makes an iPhone not worthy of buying then very few iPhones were valid purchases. The iPhone 5C is heavier than iPhone 5, iPhone 3S heavier than iPhone 4S, iPhone 4S heavier than iPhone 4, iPhone 4 heavier than iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 3GS heavier than iPhone 3G.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Apple noted the trend to small light laptops in the netbook class
I nominate that comment for both the stupidest comment and worst attempt at revisionist history for the 2015 Troll Awards (aka: Trollies).
I know.
I'm just pleased that I own the lightest iPhone ever to have been made, and consider the 6 and 6 Plus to be regressions in that respect. ????
Yes it does. There's more than one way to solve a problem.
But that has nothing to do with on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution does it? That comment was what I was curious about. Do you know anything about it being an issue?
By on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution, I think he/she mean the buttons wasted screen real estate.
Comments
I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
What do you mean, "figure out what to do"
The Home Button is perfect the way it is.
Android devices with their stupid software home button that ruins the resolution, barely ever works, and loses all tactile meaning is a piece of shit.
And why is she only looking at the footprint, and not the usability of the device. We don't live in fucking Flatland.
Apple's implementation of the home button I would say is far from perfect. Having a big circle ensures the bottom bezel will always be larger than it needs to be but at the moment with Apple ID it does fit. So unless Apple comes up with a differing implementation it has to stay.
Now that's pathetic! In 32-bit mode, none of the 64-bit advantages are available, such as double the number of integer and floating point registers. But I'm sure the 5433 cost more--which is good for Apple!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
It does seem a very curious thing to do. According to Anandtech there are still advantages to using ARMs 64 bit architecture, but that doesn't sound like it would be the principle reason. Maybe at some point Samsung will release an update that flips the 64 bit switch in Note 4s that have the chip. It is a mystery.
Well there is this:
I guess one handed uses was only "common sense" in 2012 and 2013. Apple never gave a 'why' for the increased size of the 6 and 6 Plus. Go back and watch the keynote and neither Tim Cook nor Phil Schiller really explained why Apple went bigger. Schiller went right in to specs and features. Heck their tag line for the new phones was "Bigger than Bigger". What the heck does that mean?!?
Anyone with a half functioning brain would know that there was no way Apple could go another year with a 4" flagship phone. The stock would have been hammered and customers would have left in droves. People stayed because they were confident larger sizes were coming.
What does usability have to do with screen size? Does iOS make better use of the larger real estate than Android? I'm not aware that it does.
As for "barely ever works" that's a ridiculous claim IMO that certainly doesn't help lend credence to the accuracy of your other comments.
The LG has the buttons on the back.
Software buttons don't work in the same way touching icons on an iphone screen doesn't work. The biggest class action in history awaits.
You know what is going to happen. Apple will come up with a very ingenious and slick way of incorporating fingerprint sensing into the screen - or more likely buy some other companies solution, and will do away with a physical home button so the entire front surface of the phone is a slick and elegant glass surface. The acolytes will start praising the new Apple innovation as the greatest thing ever and will loudly ridicule any Samsung phone with a physical button on the front as being a dinosaur. I will point out that Nokia did the whole glass front with capacitive buttons things years ago and then someone else will reply that Apple were just waiting till they could do it right and actually planned to do this in 1995.
But that has nothing to do with on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution does it? That comment was what I was curious about. Do you know anything about it being an issue?
No! Apple implementing a fairly common, not innovative form factor just means Apple is targeting the customer base that made the form factor popular. It doesn't mean Apple is copying anyone, especially Samsung (who is just another face in the crowd).
Well the consumer made one touch finger print sensors popular. Why wouldn't Samsung and others try to implement something similar? If they violate specific Apple/Authentec patents then Apple sues.
Look I hate Samsung as much as anyone. I don't own any Samsung products. But it's hard to deny they were the ones who made large screen phones popular.
Apple made large screens popular with the iPad. Samsung couldn't possibly compete with the same size, so they settled with the compromised phablet phones.
I don't think Apple should have succumbed to copying Samsung with the 5.5" phablet iPhone 6 Plus. They didn't copy netbooks, and they shouldn’t have made a 5.5" phone. 4.7", maybe, but it’s still too large in its current incarnation. If they reduced the bezels substantially, the 4.7" might be better, but I suspect around 4.2" would be more realistic.
Then why did they, because they wanted to, or because they had to?
Honestly... Apple never HAS to do anything. They march to the beat of their own drum. They've had no problems selling any phone. Most companies can only dream of having the same sort of success that Apple has in smartphones.
Phones have X inch screens. You can literally use any number for X.
The issue is... Apple has only ever had 2 screen sizes in their entire smartphone history... while everyone else has used a variety of sizes.
That doesn't mean Apple was right or wrong... screen size is just a decision. And it's one decision out of many that have to be made.
They've had 4 screen sizes, not 2.
My point is not that Apple had to do it because everyone else was.
I don't think for a second Apple said, "let's see what others are doing and then let's follow them in everyone else is doing it." They did it because 1) the consumer's interest was there, and 2) the technology was there. Remember the iPhone 6 is lighter than all of the 3.5" iPhones and a smaller box volume than all 3.5" iPhones up through the iPhone 3GS. A 4.7" iPhone simply wasn't a reasonable expectation then for many, many reasons.
But the 6 is still heavier than the 5 and 5s.
They didn't have to. Apple doesn't get scared of the competition.
So I guess never in Apple history has Apple released a larger or smaller sized version of an existing product before the iPad/iPhone? Of course we'll exclude the iPod and iMac, MacBook, ...
Who said anything about scared? Apple noted the trend to small light laptops in the netbook class, took the idea onboard and made a better product in the form of the Airs. Same thing with 7" tablets. Apple saw that they were becoming very popular so they developed the iPad mini. Same again with phones - Apple clearly saw the considerable success Samsung had with the Notes and the general rising popularity of large screened phones made by Samsung and others, particularly in Asia where they became the sole computer class device for many people.
In none of these instances did Apple pioneer or lead by introducing these form factors. They looked at the market trends and reacted. Are you really trying to argue that Apple lead the way or that they produced such products purely on their own whim and with no reference to what other companies were doing or how well their devices were being received? Or do you seriously think they always planned to make such products and that it was just sheer coincidence that other companies beat them to it?
In no way am I being critical of Apple in any way, they have had the great sense to profit from the market experimentation that others have done. One might almost call them cunning - they stood back and let Samsung absorb the development costs of the natural selection process - what some refer to as hurling shít at a wall and seeing what sticks - and have now jumped in with products that are like those that stuck.
You're rewriting history.
The MacBook Air was nothing like netbooks.
The iPad Mini was nothing like the 7" Android tablets. Just because it was only 0.9" bigger on paper, everyone jumps to the conclusion that Apple simply copied the 7" tablets. But, in fact, the iPad Mini's screen area was over 40% larger than the 7" tablets of that time, which put it into a different league of user experience.
With the 6 Plus, you're correct, though; there, Apple is simply—and mistakenly—aping Samsung.
And? if a slight increase in weight over its predecessor makes an iPhone not worthy of buying then very few iPhones were valid purchases. The iPhone 5C is heavier than iPhone 5, iPhone 3S heavier than iPhone 4S, iPhone 4S heavier than iPhone 4, iPhone 4 heavier than iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 3GS heavier than iPhone 3G.
I nominate that comment for both the stupidest comment and worst attempt at revisionist history for the 2015 Troll Awards (aka: Trollies).
But the 6 is still heavier than the 5 and 5s.
And? if a slight increase in weight over its predecessor makes an iPhone not worthy of buying then very few iPhones were valid purchases. The iPhone 5C is heavier than iPhone 5, iPhone 3S heavier than iPhone 4S, iPhone 4S heavier than iPhone 4, iPhone 4 heavier than iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 3GS heavier than iPhone 3G.
Apple noted the trend to small light laptops in the netbook class
I nominate that comment for both the stupidest comment and worst attempt at revisionist history for the 2015 Troll Awards (aka: Trollies).
I know.
I'm just pleased that I own the lightest iPhone ever to have been made, and consider the 6 and 6 Plus to be regressions in that respect. ????
Yeah... the iPhone has 4 screen sizes now.
I meant 2 screen sizes for the first 7 generations of the iPhone... while other phones were experimenting with a variety of sizes.
Sorry for the confusion... and thanks for the correction.
Yes it does. There's more than one way to solve a problem.
But that has nothing to do with on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution does it? That comment was what I was curious about. Do you know anything about it being an issue?
By on-screen buttons ruining screen resolution, I think he/she mean the buttons wasted screen real estate.
They're not there all the time. Apps can take advantage of the entire screen.
They're not there all the time. Apps can take advantage of the entire screen.
How do you access these buttons from these apps?