Early reviews of iPhone 6s & 6s Plus praise cameras & 3D Touch, fret over battery life & storage
Early reviews of the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus posted on Tuesday were generally positive, agreeing that they're some of the best smartphones on the market, even if owners of Apple's 2014 models can safely wait until next year.
On 3D Touch, Stern commented that while it isn't always faster, intuitive, or enabled where it should be, it can speed up some actions. The reviewer's favorite feature was actually Live Photos, which capture 3 seconds of video alongside a still shot.
The Verge was upbeat on 3D Touch, calling it fun and useful. The site joined the Journal in criticizing Apple, however, for treading water with unchanged battery life and 16 gigabytes of base storage.
iPhone 6s will mainly be attractive to people who have an iPhone from 2013 or earlier, or who are signed up to a plan allowing them to switch devices without penalty, Pogue said.
Things like 3D Touch, upgraded cameras, and Live Photos are said to help secure the iPhone's preeminence. As with other reviewers though, Mossberg contended that Apple should boost the base storage on iPhones to 32 gigabytes, since Live Photos take twice as much space as the phone's already bigger 12-megapixel still photos.
Wall Street Journal
One of the more critical -- though still very positive -- reviews came from the Journal's Joanna Stern, who noted that while the new phones have snappy performance, better cameras, and tougher aluminum shells, they fail to address some of the biggest demands with smartphones -- such as better battery life, more storage, and screens that won't break. Storage is said to be a particular problem, since the cheapest 6s models are still limited to 16 gigabytes despite features like Live Photos and 4K video consuming even more space.On 3D Touch, Stern commented that while it isn't always faster, intuitive, or enabled where it should be, it can speed up some actions. The reviewer's favorite feature was actually Live Photos, which capture 3 seconds of video alongside a still shot.
The Verge
The site called the 6s Plus not just "the best iPhone ever made," but "the best phone on the market," simply blowing away the iPhone 5s and anything older. It claimed that people should skip the regular 6s, on the basis that all phones will probably reach the size of the Plus within a year or so.The Verge was upbeat on 3D Touch, calling it fun and useful. The site joined the Journal in criticizing Apple, however, for treading water with unchanged battery life and 16 gigabytes of base storage.
Yahoo Tech
David Pogue described 3D Touch and faster performance as the "meat" that might draw someone to upgrade, labeling everything else "really delicious gravy." The cameras on the devices are said to be high-quality, but Pogue noted that they're not radically better than those on the 6 and 6 Plus, and that features like Live Photos and 4K video are not especially useful at the moment.iPhone 6s will mainly be attractive to people who have an iPhone from 2013 or earlier, or who are signed up to a plan allowing them to switch devices without penalty, Pogue said.
Re/code
Walt Mossberg referred to the 6s as "the best smartphone out there, period," and something worth switching to for owners of Android devices or older iPhone models.Things like 3D Touch, upgraded cameras, and Live Photos are said to help secure the iPhone's preeminence. As with other reviewers though, Mossberg contended that Apple should boost the base storage on iPhones to 32 gigabytes, since Live Photos take twice as much space as the phone's already bigger 12-megapixel still photos.
Comments
If you think 16 GB isn't enough...buy the other ones. Oh, you'd rather save a few bucks than get what you actually need? Not Apple's problem. Or anyone else's.
The Verge
It claimed that people should skip the regular 6s, on the basis that all phones will probably reach the size of the Plus within a year or so.
That has to be dumbest thing I've ever heard. Not only is that not going to happen, analytics suggest iPhone 6 Plus is barely as popular as the iPhone 5c, and the iPhone 6 at its 4.7" size is what the overwhelming majority actually use.
The storage is an absolute joke at this point. And it's not 16GB, it's 12 if you're lucky. Somehow Apple can sell a TV unit for $149 with 32GB but can't sell an iPhone with that much for $649.
Do you really not understand this? The majority of the people that buy the 16 GB model DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH STORAGE IT HAS.
Do you have no concept of the consumer market at all? A fraction of buyers even know or give a shit at all about that. All they see is "$199, $299, $399. I'll take the $199."
Why on earth would Apple give up a $2-3/device margin when they don't need to? This decision of theirs has absolutely positively 100% zero effect on sales volume, and means probably half a billion in revenue.
Apple once again proving they are the premiere mobile ARM processor designer.
2500 on Geekbench single core is incredible performance. And before someone chimes in about the clock speed increase from 1.4GHz to 1.8GHz, that only gets you to around 2070 on Geekbench.
So Apple has clearly done some optimizations to the A9 to give it a significant boost in performance BEFORE they added a slight clock increase.
The storage is an absolute joke at this point. And it's not 16GB, it's 12 if you're lucky. Somehow Apple can sell a TV unit for $149 with 32GB but can't sell an iPhone with that much for $649.
Yeah it stinks with the 16GB. I reduced my apps down to 3 pages, I have no photos or videos, I reduced media stored in mail and messages, and I still have < 1GB free.
The 16GB iPhone is about one thing: keeping iPhone ASPs high. And yes Apple cares about that as much as it does customer sat. It's not just about whether 16GB is enough (I would argue it's not others disagree). If 16GB is enough than wouldn't 32GB be enough too? Yet Apple somehow felt giving you more storage in the mid tier for the same price was the right thing to do. Of course everyone knows why. There's more margin to play with at the higher end and the more people Apple can get to spend a $100 more the higher the iPhone ASPs which is what Wall Street wants. Once Apple feels enough of the install base has moved to the middle tier (and won't go back down) then they'll maybe raise the entry level storage to 32GB.
The storage is an absolute joke at this point. And it's not 16GB, it's 12 if you're lucky. Somehow Apple can sell a TV unit for $149 with 32GB but can't sell an iPhone with that much for $649.
My wife and daughters get by perfectly fine with 16GB iPhones. But I guess when Apple makes a stellar product people have to fine SOMETHING to complain about.
The storage is an absolute joke...Apple can sell a TV unit for $149 with 32GB but can't sell an iPhone with that much for $649.
i completely agree.
16 GB as standard is ridiculous.
Imagine if the MacBook started at 60 GB...
At least you're admitting it's a blatant money grab.
Do you really not understand this? The majority of the people that buy the 16 GB model DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH STORAGE IT HAS.
Do you have no concept of the consumer market at all? A fraction of buyers even know or give a shit at all about that. All they see is "$199, $299, $399. I'll take the $199."
Why on earth would Apple give up a $2-3/device margin when they don't need to? This decision of theirs has absolutely positively 100% zero effect on sales volume, and means probably half a billion in revenue.
At least you're admitting it's a blatant money grab.
Apple isn't a charity.
And they'd get by fine with 32GB too. I was getting along fine with 32GB but Apple decided I deserved 64GB for the same price. Of course I wasn't going to reject it and I doubt 16GB customers would reject a bump to 32GB either.:)
Do you really not understand this? The majority of the people that buy the 16 GB model DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH STORAGE IT HAS.
Do you have no concept of the consumer market at all? A fraction of buyers even know or give a shit at all about that. All they see is "$199, $299, $399. I'll take the $199."
Why on earth would Apple give up a $2-3/device margin when they don't need to? This decision of theirs has absolutely positively 100% zero effect on sales volume, and means probably half a billion in revenue.
Then they are in for a nasty surprise then, aren't they? Which in large part is the point. 16Gb is no longer sufficient for even minimal use and should no longer be the starting point. 32 GB is the starting point for the Samsung S6 and the same should be the case for the iPhone 6S. It would be fine if the storage was expandable via micro SD card.
Overall, this is an incredible phone. They managed to almost double the speed again, and the 3D touch seems like it's going to be a big boost to the way we use the phone. TouchID is very useful, and now it's faster to use touch id than it is to manually unlock the phone. Better cameras are also very important because it's the only way most people take pictures. Finally, we're getting 2 gigs of RAM, and that will increase free space by about three times (because the system and background tasks take around half a gig by themselves).
I do agree with the battery and storage complaints, although the storage doesn't affect me because I just get the larger size. However, I have plenty of friends and relatives who run into trouble because all their pictures and videos can eat space fast. The battery is a bigger issue, especially because the phone is so good that people spend more and more time using it. I think it's by a huge margin the biggest shortcoming of the iPhone, but that's because the hardware is almost perfect in every other way.
Do you really not understand this? The majority of the people that buy the 16 GB model DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH STORAGE IT HAS.
Do you have no concept of the consumer market at all? A fraction of buyers even know or give a shit at all about that. All they see is "$199, $299, $399. I'll take the $199."
Why on earth would Apple give up a $2-3/device margin when they don't need to? This decision of theirs has absolutely positively 100% zero effect on sales volume, and means probably half a billion in revenue.
I would add, many people just use the cloud for storage or have little music, pictures etc, 16GB suits their needs just fine.
However, IMO, perception can be reality too--- many people (probably not enough to matter to Apple, thus their decision) understand Apple is also the most profitable company in the world and understand it would not hurt Apple at all to spend the extra 50 cents or what ever for that extra memory. And if they did that, it would create 'longer lasting, potentially better functioning phone experience'(how are those 8GB phones doing?). They may also worry moves like may give the perception that Apple is just another low down, money grubbing SOB corporation (well they are but... shhh). I'm obviously no CEO, but I have read/heard that at times, business decisions are based on creating good perception (marketing, reality distortion fields etc)--- and not always the cold, harsh accounting of the dollars and cents of the moment.
Where is Taylor Swift? (case in point)
Just wait until the next storage bump in a few years when it will be 16GB, 128GB and 256GB.
One of the more critical -- though still very positive -- reviews came from the Journal's Joanna Stern, who noted that while the new phones have snappy performance, better cameras, and tougher aluminum shells, they fail to address some of the biggest demands with smartphones -- such as better battery life, more storage, and screens that won't break.
Well, if Apple won't address those issues, allow me.
1) What percentage of the customer base needs better battery life? I use my phone all day for everything, and usually finish the day with about 80% left, unless I've been doing hours of GPS with the screen on. But I do live in a city, so the cell coverage is decent, and I have some of the battery-draining features disabled, like background refresh for most apps.
2) You get what you pay for. This can easily be solved by covering the part of your computer screen that displays the 16gb option with a piece of masking tape or your hand. It does seem to me that they should probably start at 32gb, but since they do offer options with much more storage, I figure this is part of how they make their money, and I cough up the extra $100. If you resent the $100, buy some Apple stock, and you'll more than recover the outlay. That's what I did.
3) This is a tough one. Truly unbreakable glass is something that has eluded mankind for centuries, and I'm sure if Apple could spend a billion bucks and have it appear on their doorstep, it would already be done. I'm sure they're working on it, and I'd be surprised if anyone has better screen glass than they do. Sometimes being the best in the world has to be good enough, until better technology arrives.
Here we go again. Apple has made a huge update with the 6S. Much better cameras front & rear, the world's most intelligent selfie flash, 4K recording, worlds most advanced processor, faster Touch ID, 3D Touch on the screen and also managed to make it stronger (new aluminum and glass).
And yet people are going to try and control the narrative to talk about whether they should have made a 16GB phone or why the battery life should be better.
At least you're admitting it's a blatant money grab.
Is that what I said? Profit-margin-motivated decisions are not balant money grabs. Especially when they are backed up by EVERYTHING ELSE I SAID.