No, 3.5" was the largest size Jobs could stuff in his skinny jeans pocket... watch him pull it out of his pants at the "All Things D" interview shortly after it was introduced.
My point is Jobs had considered large screen sizes when iPhone being developed. Samsung never invented it because Jobs has talked about it. In fact Samsung got the idea from Jobs.
For some people! Innovation is higher spec than Apple. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Where is Apple's 4K Cinema Display? Dell, HP and Samsung all have curved monitors on the market or coming soon. Where is Apple's? Curved TVs are gimmicky but curved monitors are very cool. Why is Apple late to that party?
TV?? TV is boring right now.. there is no innovation on it... it's just BIG, FLAT, CURVE, SQUARE, TRIANGLE, etc etc..
In the full suite of tests on the Anandtech site, the A7 was better in 18 benchmarks while the Exynon 5433 was better in 14. Why is that pathetic? It is clearly an extremely capable and fast processor, so is the A7. Why do you feel the need to use stupid, emotive laden and inaccurate terms like 'pathetic'. It's like looking at lap times on various circuits and claiming a Nissan GTR is 'pathetic' because it had a slower lap time around slightly more than half the circuits than a Porsche GT3 - or vise versa.
I have no real knowledge about how good or not the AnTuTu benchmarking process is, but it gives the 5433 a score of 40303 vs a score of 29430 for the A7.
It's pathetic. 8 cores (4 high performance and 4 lower) and a higher clock speed and it's still slower. And it's over a year older than the A7, which in technology is like an eternity. Plus the Exynos 5433 isn't even a Samsung processor - it's just a copy of an ARM design. Despite Samsung telling us all along they were going to start custom designing processors. Well, Samsung, where is your custom processor.
Even more pathetic is the Note 4 is running in 32bit mode. Shipping a 64bit processor and not even enabling it? Then we'll see a newer updated Note 4 in a couple months with a "real" 64bit processor. So the Note 4 will come with a 32bit processor (805), and hobbled 64bit processor (5433) and a real 64bit processor. Talk about fragmentation. And Samsung thinks it's going to get developers to code for their devices?
Samsung, Qualcomm and the rest have nowhere to go since they already maxed out their cores and clock speed. Apple comes along with a simple addition of an extra core to the A8X and suddenly they have the fastest processor out there. Apple has plenty of headroom left in their processors since they did things right the first time around: they designed a processor that's faster by being more efficient and executing more instruction per clock. Everyone else kept their same crappy core designs and just added more cores while cranking the clock. They have made very little advancement in the basic core architecture. Now they're stuck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
NOW we have trolls saying that Samsung was first with a 300+ PPI display, and yet back in 2010 all we heard was that it's pointless and stupid, and it proved Apple was only about marketing without any innovation that made the user experience better.
Note the S8000 was only a 3.1" display with only 384,000 pixels, and I doubt it was anywhere near as fluid as the iPhone 4 with 614,400 pixels. On top of that, the iPhone 4 had over 600,000 pre-orders, and was Apple's longest sold iPhone. I wonder how many orders that S8000 had in total?
Edit: I almost forget… it's Pen-FUCKING!-Tile. That puts the effective pixel down by 1/3rd to 256,000.
Also, the S8000 had a resistive touchscreen while the iPhone had capacitive a full 2 years earlier with the original iPhone. I mean, if we're comparing EVERYTHING about the screen.
No, the idea of large fabulist are not invented by Samsung. When Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, he talked about the larger screens. Jobs and his teams have thought about the larger screens. I bet Samsung copycats have watched Jobs keynotes then. They must think since Apple choose not to produce a larger screen iPhone, Samsung could produce it. Samsung marketing has a strategy of producing all kinds of smartphones. They do not know which kind will sell. They let the market to decide. Big screens are more costly as can be seen from iPhone 6 Plus. I think this is the real reason Jobs choose 3.5" in the beginning.
You wrote, "Name one of those things that weren't available with Android prior to iOS 8"
64-bit Android WAS NOT AVAILABLE prior to iOS 8, nor will there will be a true 64-bit version of the Android ecosystem for many years to come.
I said one of those things, meaning one of the things I had listed. I never listed 64-bit so that's just changing the subject. The fact is Android had third-party keyboards, actionable notifications, widgets, and inter-app communications before iOS did.
No what's silly is every time someone else does something people here immediately claim Apple's being copied. I can guarantee you if Apple released a 5.5" phone and two years later Samsung did the same most here would've called Samsung out for copying. Plus there's plenty of thiings in iOS that Apple borrowed either from jailbreak community or other platforms. Third party keyboards, extensions, widgets, actionable notifications all existed on Android before they did on iOS. What bothers me is blatant copying like that new tablet from Nokia that looks exactly like an iPad mini. Or some of the stuff Samsung used to do and Xiaomi is currently doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
What does copying have to do with innovation? I never said a larger screen phone was "innovative" but the fact is Samsung had one before Apple did so in that sense Apple is the one copying, no?
So, if Apple has been working on the iPhone since at least 2005, what are the odds that there are hundreds of prototype designs, many that are "phat" that have never seen the light of day? How can you copy something from someone else when you have already developed it many times over? Apple calls it "a thousand no's for every yes" but Samsung's would be "if there's a wall, we'll throw something against it".
You really think making a smartphone class device with a larger display was some amazing innovation that Apple didn't ever consider until they saw others do it poor for years?
That is what you're saying in your "innovation" comment!!!
Please explain to me how others have done it poor. And I'm specifically talking about a larger device, not Android in general, not 64-bit. What was poor about the Galaxy S3? What's currently poor about the LG G3 or HTC One?
Screen size is simply a decision. You can make an LCD panel in pretty much any size imaginable.
So no... Apple did not "ape" the Galaxy Note because they put a certain sized screen in the iPhone.
Really? Then how come we didn't get a large screen iPhone until after they became popular (especially in Asia). Let's not forget in 2012 Apple said they made the phone taller but not wider so it could be comfortably used with one hand. I guess that no longer applies in 2014 or everybody's hands of gotten bigger?
Please explain to me how others have done it poor. And I'm specifically talking about a larger device, not Android in general, not 64-bit. What was poor about the Galaxy S3? What's currently poor about the LG G3 or HTC One?
Large and heavy with a good display but poor battery life, or good battery life in a poor display, for both poor battery life and a poor screen. Then you have the ones with the high PPI displays and/or large screens that had SOC's that couldn't handle the load. All this results in a poor user experience.
Really? Then how come we didn't get a large screen iPhone until after they became popular (especially in Asia). Let's not forget in 2012 Apple said they made the phone taller but not wider so it could be comfortably used with one hand. I guess that no longer applies in 2014 or everybody's hands of gotten bigger?
I don't know why... I wasn't in on the decision process.
Again... screen size is a decision. Nothing more.
Are you telling me that every time a company makes a 42" TV today... it was become someone else made a 42" TV years ago?
Or every time a company makes a white car today... it was become someone else made a white car decades before?
Of course not. Things like screen size, colors, etc are all decisions... out of the many decisions that have to be made.
But you seem confident that the only reason Apple put a 5.5" screen in the iPhone 6+ is because someone else did. Good luck with that.
So why did Apple follow that trend to its extreme limits then? Especially when with the iPhone 5 it was all about being able to comfortably use it with one hand. That certainly doesn't apply to the 6 Plus.
A couple of reasons.
To begin with, Apple will only release their latest tech when they have bled the previous tech for all its worth. Fact is that even with all the pundits and armchair CEOs screaming for a phablet, Apple was still making big money with the smaller phone. I think it was pretty obvious that they would wait until they were ready to enter the Chinese market.
The other reason is that Apple's strategy is not to be the first to the market. They prefer to watch others flounder and then learn from their mistakes.
You claim that Apple followed a trend. What they actually did was implement a feature at the right time, when they had advanced their OS and their battery tech to a point where they could support a large screen without hideously compromising the battery life, and they could build it cheaply enough to keep the money rolling in.
They could have adopted Samsung's "throw poo at the wall and pray it sticks" strategy. I'm glad they didn't.
I think the problem is that you share Samsung's inability to consider things strategically. Samsung will dump feature after feature into a phone and then wonder why it makes little difference to their bottom line.
Apple will consider a strategy and then build the phone to meet that strategy. For example, in this thread, you have fixated on the size of the screen to prove your argument. The problem is that the screen size is just a feature. The real product release for 2014 was Apple Pay. That's the innovation you were looking for.
Now, before you dash off looking for examples of similar technology from Samsung, think 'strategy'. Don't just think 'fingerprint reader', think 'secure enclave', think 'tokenized system that ensures no one sees your private details', think 'peace of mind for the banks and their customers.'
It is called a secure enclave. Secure element is the term Google used for their version years ago. Also look up up trusted platform module, it is what Intel has been using for their version even before that.
"Samsung to Ape Apples Touch ID..." Well guys, I find it a bit funny that here´s been posted about a hundred replies to this article. But noone has tried to dig into the background for it.
What you´ve been doing is perhaps typically american. You have heard or seen about the patent processes between Apple an Samsung, and you just repeat what youve heard about that and now you believe youve stated somethin important. In Sweden many people think that americans are silly people really. You just repeat what youve heard in massmedia or for example the headline of this text as a kind of truth - go "ape" .
If you make a brief research by googling, you will find that the mentioned Fingerprint cards company, has been supplying chinese bank with their own "touch" fingerprint scanners for about 10 years now. Those scanners were used for the banks officials to log into their working systems, so it could not have been one of your ordinary simple pc-scanners (those work like taking a photograph, remember the german politician?) .
The complex design of these scanners you could compare taking a camera photo with a radar, because thats what it is. It´s all based on silicon chips sending out an electrical signal into the finger, and much like a radar reading the echoing of it. If it is bad weather the radar still can see, and this technique is reading under the dead outer skin layer and into the living flesh beneath. It also can apprehend local temperature variations in the fingerprint simultaneously.
Now looking at the history, this swedis company has its basic patent for this back in 1981.
For the last ten years, a lot of other kinds of fingerprint scanning designs have been sorted out in the markets because of poor security or poor convenience, this silicon design remains as the ultimate. Three years ago there were three companies in the world with this kind of design. Authentec that now is Apple was one, Validity that now is Synaptics was the second, and little Fingerprint Cards is the third. Validity/Synaptics was adopted by Samsung. But thanks to that their basic design is of a class B compared to Authentec and FPC, Samsung had a bitter setback on the use. The thing is that Validitys basic patent doesnt allow to scan whole fingerprints but "islands" of parts of the fingerprint. And they also build their scanners on a film, not on a silicon chip like Autentec and FPC. On this film there is like silicon islands. They have had very poor outcome of the production, the waste has been over 50 % so its very expensive.
However, FPC started a year before Iphone 5 was introduced with fingerprint scanner to develop their own touch scanner for OEMs. This was because they were contacted by Microsoft looking for new security solutions. Microsoft made a thorough study of comparing swipe sensors to touch sensors (remember this is one year before any one knew if Apple woud release a touch). Outcome from this was that FPC started developing their own touch sensor beginning by scaling down their bigger area sensor that they were selling to the chinese banks. To make a long history shorter, it debuted in the Huawei Mate 7 last summer.
During last year there was also a juridicial investigation being made by the US pat authorities as to wether Apples, FPCs Synaptics patents were colliding, and they were not. So this question is already settled.
It is called a secure enclave. Secure element is the term Google used for their version years ago. Also look up up trusted platform module, it is what Intel has been using for their version even before that.
Apple also has both Secure Enclave and Secure Element. They are not interchangeable terms.
Secure Enclave has to do with TouchID:
Fingerprint data is encrypted and protected with a key available only to the Secure Enclave.
Secure Element has to do with Apple Pay:
Actual card numbers are not stored on the device, instead, a unique Device Account Number is created, encrypted and stored in the Secure Element of the device.
The revisionism going on is just amazing, isn't it? Then of course there was the iPad, where Apple came up with the one and only size that was effective to use - until they saw Samsung, Nexus and other 7" tablets being adopted with glee by the public because the segment of the population who wanted to carry a tablet about with them found the smaller size preferable.
Now you might think I am being negative about Apple, I am not, I am being negative about the revisionist tendencies of some overly committed Apple enthusiasts who rationalise everything Apple does so that no credit can fall on anyone except Apple. Apple adopting good ideas from elsewhere, refining the ideas and their implimentation, is something Apple does very well and is one of their greatest strengths.
Here is a classic example:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz
A couple of reasons.
To begin with, Apple will only release their latest tech when they have bled the previous tech for all its worth. Fact is that even with all the pundits and armchair CEOs screaming for a phablet, Apple was still making big money with the smaller phone. I think it was pretty obvious that they would wait until they were ready to enter the Chinese market.
The other reason is that Apple's strategy is not to be the first to the market. They prefer to watch others flounder and then learn from their mistakes.
You claim that Apple followed a trend. What they actually did was implement a feature at the right time, when they had advanced their OS and their battery tech to a point where they could support a large screen without hideously compromising the battery life, and they could build it cheaply enough to keep the money rolling in.
Where does one start with that?:
...yes, but as we can all see from the spectacular success of the 6, not as much money as they could have made with a larger phone.
...Not being first to market is an Apple strategy? They wait to copy? Like the unibody all metal 4, or touch-id, or 64bit processor, or motion coprocessor - etc.
...What is this battery tech that no one else has? It can't be very good because excepting The 6 Plus, iPhones are usually average or poor in battery life comparisons because Apple always chooses thinness in preference to battery life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
Large and heavy with a good display but poor battery life, or good battery life in a poor display, for both poor battery life and a poor screen. Then you have the ones with the high PPI displays and/or large screens that had SOC's that couldn't handle the load. All this results in a poor user experience.
I bought my son an LG G2. It has a fantastic, gorgeous screen. It's the same height as the 6, is slightly wider but has a massive 33% better battery life than the 6 and even slightly better battery life than the 6+ because it's 2mm thicker, yet it has a 5.2" screen with the same number of pixels as the Plus, yet it's lighter. The SOC can definitely handle the load and it delivers a very good user experience. If Apple had copied its thin bezels and thickness, they could have had just one model of 6 and could have incorporated all the extra features of the Plus like the camera and bigger battery. The G2 also has an OIS camera that can shoot 4K video - well, after my son put the G3 firmware on it.
Don't you ever get bored hanging out on an Apple enthusiast's blog constantly saying silly things?
He's doing the same on MacRumors. But on Macrumors they are welcomed because several moderators actually are exactly like them, and keep banning Apple's enthusiasts....
Fortunately on this forum moderation is much better.
On MR there is a strong community of haters basically spreading fud about Apple on every post.
And they clearly put a couple of Apple products in their signature, pretending to be Apple users, while they just are haters.
Comments
No, 3.5" was the largest size Jobs could stuff in his skinny jeans pocket... watch him pull it out of his pants at the "All Things D" interview shortly after it was introduced.
My point is Jobs had considered large screen sizes when iPhone being developed. Samsung never invented it because Jobs has talked about it. In fact Samsung got the idea from Jobs.
For some people! Innovation is higher spec than Apple.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Where is Apple's 4K Cinema Display? Dell, HP and Samsung all have curved monitors on the market or coming soon. Where is Apple's? Curved TVs are gimmicky but curved monitors are very cool. Why is Apple late to that party?
TV?? TV is boring right now.. there is no innovation on it... it's just BIG, FLAT, CURVE, SQUARE, TRIANGLE, etc etc..
In the full suite of tests on the Anandtech site, the A7 was better in 18 benchmarks while the Exynon 5433 was better in 14. Why is that pathetic? It is clearly an extremely capable and fast processor, so is the A7. Why do you feel the need to use stupid, emotive laden and inaccurate terms like 'pathetic'. It's like looking at lap times on various circuits and claiming a Nissan GTR is 'pathetic' because it had a slower lap time around slightly more than half the circuits than a Porsche GT3 - or vise versa.
I have no real knowledge about how good or not the AnTuTu benchmarking process is, but it gives the 5433 a score of 40303 vs a score of 29430 for the A7.
Even compared with the iPhone 6, the Note 4 is anything but 'pathetic': http://tabshowdown.blogspot.ie/2014/12/apple-a8-vs-snapdragon-805-vs-exynos.html
It's pathetic. 8 cores (4 high performance and 4 lower) and a higher clock speed and it's still slower. And it's over a year older than the A7, which in technology is like an eternity. Plus the Exynos 5433 isn't even a Samsung processor - it's just a copy of an ARM design. Despite Samsung telling us all along they were going to start custom designing processors. Well, Samsung, where is your custom processor.
Even more pathetic is the Note 4 is running in 32bit mode. Shipping a 64bit processor and not even enabling it? Then we'll see a newer updated Note 4 in a couple months with a "real" 64bit processor. So the Note 4 will come with a 32bit processor (805), and hobbled 64bit processor (5433) and a real 64bit processor. Talk about fragmentation. And Samsung thinks it's going to get developers to code for their devices?
Samsung, Qualcomm and the rest have nowhere to go since they already maxed out their cores and clock speed. Apple comes along with a simple addition of an extra core to the A8X and suddenly they have the fastest processor out there. Apple has plenty of headroom left in their processors since they did things right the first time around: they designed a processor that's faster by being more efficient and executing more instruction per clock. Everyone else kept their same crappy core designs and just added more cores while cranking the clock. They have made very little advancement in the basic core architecture. Now they're stuck.
NOW we have trolls saying that Samsung was first with a 300+ PPI display, and yet back in 2010 all we heard was that it's pointless and stupid, and it proved Apple was only about marketing without any innovation that made the user experience better.
Note the S8000 was only a 3.1" display with only 384,000 pixels, and I doubt it was anywhere near as fluid as the iPhone 4 with 614,400 pixels. On top of that, the iPhone 4 had over 600,000 pre-orders, and was Apple's longest sold iPhone. I wonder how many orders that S8000 had in total?
Edit: I almost forget… it's Pen-FUCKING!-Tile. That puts the effective pixel down by 1/3rd to 256,000.
Also, the S8000 had a resistive touchscreen while the iPhone had capacitive a full 2 years earlier with the original iPhone. I mean, if we're comparing EVERYTHING about the screen.
Wrong.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/jobs-no-ones-going-to-buy-a-big-phone/
I said one of those things, meaning one of the things I had listed. I never listed 64-bit so that's just changing the subject. The fact is Android had third-party keyboards, actionable notifications, widgets, and inter-app communications before iOS did.
No what's silly is every time someone else does something people here immediately claim Apple's being copied. I can guarantee you if Apple released a 5.5" phone and two years later Samsung did the same most here would've called Samsung out for copying. Plus there's plenty of thiings in iOS that Apple borrowed either from jailbreak community or other platforms. Third party keyboards, extensions, widgets, actionable notifications all existed on Android before they did on iOS. What bothers me is blatant copying like that new tablet from Nokia that looks exactly like an iPad mini. Or some of the stuff Samsung used to do and Xiaomi is currently doing.
What does copying have to do with innovation? I never said a larger screen phone was "innovative" but the fact is Samsung had one before Apple did so in that sense Apple is the one copying, no?
So, if Apple has been working on the iPhone since at least 2005, what are the odds that there are hundreds of prototype designs, many that are "phat" that have never seen the light of day? How can you copy something from someone else when you have already developed it many times over? Apple calls it "a thousand no's for every yes" but Samsung's would be "if there's a wall, we'll throw something against it".
Please explain to me how others have done it poor. And I'm specifically talking about a larger device, not Android in general, not 64-bit. What was poor about the Galaxy S3? What's currently poor about the LG G3 or HTC One?
Really? Then how come we didn't get a large screen iPhone until after they became popular (especially in Asia). Let's not forget in 2012 Apple said they made the phone taller but not wider so it could be comfortably used with one hand. I guess that no longer applies in 2014 or everybody's hands of gotten bigger?
Large and heavy with a good display but poor battery life, or good battery life in a poor display, for both poor battery life and a poor screen. Then you have the ones with the high PPI displays and/or large screens that had SOC's that couldn't handle the load. All this results in a poor user experience.
I don't know why... I wasn't in on the decision process.
Again... screen size is a decision. Nothing more.
Are you telling me that every time a company makes a 42" TV today... it was become someone else made a 42" TV years ago?
Or every time a company makes a white car today... it was become someone else made a white car decades before?
Of course not. Things like screen size, colors, etc are all decisions... out of the many decisions that have to be made.
But you seem confident that the only reason Apple put a 5.5" screen in the iPhone 6+ is because someone else did. Good luck with that.
A couple of reasons.
To begin with, Apple will only release their latest tech when they have bled the previous tech for all its worth. Fact is that even with all the pundits and armchair CEOs screaming for a phablet, Apple was still making big money with the smaller phone. I think it was pretty obvious that they would wait until they were ready to enter the Chinese market.
The other reason is that Apple's strategy is not to be the first to the market. They prefer to watch others flounder and then learn from their mistakes.
You claim that Apple followed a trend. What they actually did was implement a feature at the right time, when they had advanced their OS and their battery tech to a point where they could support a large screen without hideously compromising the battery life, and they could build it cheaply enough to keep the money rolling in.
They could have adopted Samsung's "throw poo at the wall and pray it sticks" strategy. I'm glad they didn't.
I think the problem is that you share Samsung's inability to consider things strategically. Samsung will dump feature after feature into a phone and then wonder why it makes little difference to their bottom line.
Apple will consider a strategy and then build the phone to meet that strategy. For example, in this thread, you have fixated on the size of the screen to prove your argument. The problem is that the screen size is just a feature. The real product release for 2014 was Apple Pay. That's the innovation you were looking for.
Now, before you dash off looking for examples of similar technology from Samsung, think 'strategy'. Don't just think 'fingerprint reader', think 'secure enclave', think 'tokenized system that ensures no one sees your private details', think 'peace of mind for the banks and their customers.'
The original surface was a table.
It is called a secure enclave. Secure element is the term Google used for their version years ago. Also look up up trusted platform module, it is what Intel has been using for their version even before that.
Hi!
"Samsung to Ape Apples Touch ID..." Well guys, I find it a bit funny that here´s been posted about a hundred replies to this article. But noone has tried to dig into the background for it.
What you´ve been doing is perhaps typically american. You have heard or seen about the patent processes between Apple an Samsung, and you just repeat what youve heard about that and now you believe youve stated somethin important. In Sweden many people think that americans are silly people really. You just repeat what youve heard in massmedia or for example the headline of this text as a kind of truth - go "ape" .
If you make a brief research by googling, you will find that the mentioned Fingerprint cards company, has been supplying chinese bank with their own "touch" fingerprint scanners for about 10 years now. Those scanners were used for the banks officials to log into their working systems, so it could not have been one of your ordinary simple pc-scanners (those work like taking a photograph, remember the german politician?) .
The complex design of these scanners you could compare taking a camera photo with a radar, because thats what it is. It´s all based on silicon chips sending out an electrical signal into the finger, and much like a radar reading the echoing of it. If it is bad weather the radar still can see, and this technique is reading under the dead outer skin layer and into the living flesh beneath. It also can apprehend local temperature variations in the fingerprint simultaneously.
Now looking at the history, this swedis company has its basic patent for this back in 1981.
For the last ten years, a lot of other kinds of fingerprint scanning designs have been sorted out in the markets because of poor security or poor convenience, this silicon design remains as the ultimate. Three years ago there were three companies in the world with this kind of design. Authentec that now is Apple was one, Validity that now is Synaptics was the second, and little Fingerprint Cards is the third. Validity/Synaptics was adopted by Samsung. But thanks to that their basic design is of a class B compared to Authentec and FPC, Samsung had a bitter setback on the use. The thing is that Validitys basic patent doesnt allow to scan whole fingerprints but "islands" of parts of the fingerprint. And they also build their scanners on a film, not on a silicon chip like Autentec and FPC. On this film there is like silicon islands. They have had very poor outcome of the production, the waste has been over 50 % so its very expensive.
However, FPC started a year before Iphone 5 was introduced with fingerprint scanner to develop their own touch scanner for OEMs. This was because they were contacted by Microsoft looking for new security solutions. Microsoft made a thorough study of comparing swipe sensors to touch sensors (remember this is one year before any one knew if Apple woud release a touch). Outcome from this was that FPC started developing their own touch sensor beginning by scaling down their bigger area sensor that they were selling to the chinese banks. To make a long history shorter, it debuted in the Huawei Mate 7 last summer.
During last year there was also a juridicial investigation being made by the US pat authorities as to wether Apples, FPCs Synaptics patents were colliding, and they were not. So this question is already settled.
ThankYou .
Apple also has both Secure Enclave and Secure Element. They are not interchangeable terms.
Secure Enclave has to do with TouchID:
Fingerprint data is encrypted and protected with a key available only to the Secure Enclave.
Secure Element has to do with Apple Pay:
Actual card numbers are not stored on the device, instead, a unique Device Account Number is created, encrypted and stored in the Secure Element of the device.
Wrong.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/jobs-no-ones-going-to-buy-a-big-phone/
The revisionism going on is just amazing, isn't it? Then of course there was the iPad, where Apple came up with the one and only size that was effective to use - until they saw Samsung, Nexus and other 7" tablets being adopted with glee by the public because the segment of the population who wanted to carry a tablet about with them found the smaller size preferable.
Steve Jobs thoroughly trashed the idea of the 7" tablet - then Apple saw them selling well and joined the crowd: http://appleinsider.com/articles/10/10/18/steve_jobs_squashes_rumors_of_smaller_7_inch_ipad
Now you might think I am being negative about Apple, I am not, I am being negative about the revisionist tendencies of some overly committed Apple enthusiasts who rationalise everything Apple does so that no credit can fall on anyone except Apple. Apple adopting good ideas from elsewhere, refining the ideas and their implimentation, is something Apple does very well and is one of their greatest strengths.
Here is a classic example:
A couple of reasons.
To begin with, Apple will only release their latest tech when they have bled the previous tech for all its worth. Fact is that even with all the pundits and armchair CEOs screaming for a phablet, Apple was still making big money with the smaller phone. I think it was pretty obvious that they would wait until they were ready to enter the Chinese market.
The other reason is that Apple's strategy is not to be the first to the market. They prefer to watch others flounder and then learn from their mistakes.
You claim that Apple followed a trend. What they actually did was implement a feature at the right time, when they had advanced their OS and their battery tech to a point where they could support a large screen without hideously compromising the battery life, and they could build it cheaply enough to keep the money rolling in.
Where does one start with that?:
...yes, but as we can all see from the spectacular success of the 6, not as much money as they could have made with a larger phone.
...Not being first to market is an Apple strategy? They wait to copy? Like the unibody all metal 4, or touch-id, or 64bit processor, or motion coprocessor - etc.
...What is this battery tech that no one else has? It can't be very good because excepting The 6 Plus, iPhones are usually average or poor in battery life comparisons because Apple always chooses thinness in preference to battery life.
Large and heavy with a good display but poor battery life, or good battery life in a poor display, for both poor battery life and a poor screen. Then you have the ones with the high PPI displays and/or large screens that had SOC's that couldn't handle the load. All this results in a poor user experience.
I bought my son an LG G2. It has a fantastic, gorgeous screen. It's the same height as the 6, is slightly wider but has a massive 33% better battery life than the 6 and even slightly better battery life than the 6+ because it's 2mm thicker, yet it has a 5.2" screen with the same number of pixels as the Plus, yet it's lighter. The SOC can definitely handle the load and it delivers a very good user experience. If Apple had copied its thin bezels and thickness, they could have had just one model of 6 and could have incorporated all the extra features of the Plus like the camera and bigger battery. The G2 also has an OIS camera that can shoot 4K video - well, after my son put the G3 firmware on it.
Only a fandroid could see similarities between the Note and the iPhone 6+
He's doing the same on MacRumors. But on Macrumors they are welcomed because several moderators actually are exactly like them, and keep banning Apple's enthusiasts....
Fortunately on this forum moderation is much better.
On MR there is a strong community of haters basically spreading fud about Apple on every post.
And they clearly put a couple of Apple products in their signature, pretending to be Apple users, while they just are haters.
A coherent operative system....
Yes it was indeed. And it was the iPhone 4.