The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
People keep saying OLED, and People keep being wrong. At this point Apple may as well use quantum dots, but current versions use Cadmium which is toxic.
OLED's have low brightness, burn in, decay/damage problems that don't exist with the current wide-gamut IPS LED backlit screens. Right now OLED's are better used in televisions that aren't persistently on.
I was eviscerated on this forum for suggesting that an Apple wearable would use OLED. Apple used it. It's also now Apple's brightest display per x-area at 1000 nits. OLED has come a long way, Apple is already using it, and Apple has a very long history of mastering in one product and then applying it another. That isn't to say Apple is close to or ever will start using OLED, but it's not something you should discount out of hand. If the next major iOS or macOS visual change at a WWDC includes mostly black pixels then OLED could be right around the corner.
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
The iPhone 7 is evolutionary as far as form factor but not features.
They added a ton of features on the 7:
1. Water Proof 2. Awesome camera 3. Crazy fast CPU, GPU 4. Solid state home button (this is a HUGE plus for anyone who has experience a broken home button) 5. Major display improvements (brighter, wider color gamut, super accurate color) 6. Significantly better battery life 7. Stereo sound, much louder speakers
Those are massive improvements.
What were the REVOLUTIONARY features in the iPhone6 from the iPhone 5S? Just a bigger screen. How is that revolutionary?
I think we sometimes forget what the word revolutionary means. To me, the only real revolutionary iPhone was the original one. It did something nothing else had done in a complete package. Sure, it didn't work the best, only supported 1 carrier, didn't have apps, etc, but it was a damn fine piece of technology for its time. It was a touchscreen phone which was unheard of in 2007 with multi-touch which was totally and completely awesome again, for 2007 with this new mobile OS that was built from the ground up to support touch. Nobody had ever seen anything like this before on a mobile phone for consumers and it sent manufacturers scrambling to come up with something similar, even as they brushed the iPhone off as something that will never take off. This is what revolutionary means in my opinion. The rest of the iPhones, were simply upgrades to last years phone as the technology advanced. Nothing really stuck out as simply amazing with the rest of the iPhones. Better processors, bigger screens, etc are NOT revolutionary.
The "revolution" is not found in a device, but in the ability of the device to serve the needs of users.
The original iPhone was revolutionary in this sense, but an iPhone with a no-hands, voice-driven user interface (Siri + Airpods) would also be revolutionary. Also, an iPhone that interacts with appliances and other capital equipment in the vicinity of the user (IoT+Home, ApplePay) would represent a "revolution." Another "revolution" might involve embedding content/data in application processor silicon, such as voice translators, maps and catalogs. It all depends upon the need for the new service (function) and the way it is implemented.
If a faster processor enables a new range of highly useful apps that were not accessible with slower processors, then referring to the new processor as "revolutionary" would be understandable. However, a mere speed increase would not deserve that label.
The Bloomberg article has an utterly offensive headline. It's essentially like saying that my stupidity is the result of your smarts. In words, not, you know, my fault.
As always, it's Apple's fault. Clickbait crap.
I don't want to give them a click; would you mind providing the title?
"Samsung crisis Began in rush to capitalize on uninspiring iPhone "
The Bloomberg article has an utterly offensive headline. It's essentially like saying that my stupidity is the result of your smarts. In words, not, you know, my fault.
As always, it's Apple's fault. Clickbait crap.
I don't want to give them a click; would you mind providing the title?
Don't you think it'll be easier for you to search in 'news' for, say, "Samsung note 7 apple fault" or something along those lines? Instead of my having to find it doing the same thing, and cut and paste?
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
apple products in general are considered evolutionary. iterative improvement is historically how apple rolls.
The Bloomberg article has an utterly offensive headline. It's essentially like saying that my stupidity is the result of your smarts. In words, not, you know, my fault.
As always, it's Apple's fault. Clickbait crap.
I don't want to give them a click; would you mind providing the title?
Don't you think it'll be easier for you to search in 'news' for, say, "Samsung note 7 apple fault" or something along those lines? Instead of my having to find it doing the same thing, and cut and paste?
Frankly, if I would have mentioned it I would have taken the extra 2 seconds to write or copy+paste the article headline instead of stating what it essentially is. You made a comment to pique interest and the primary proper noun is the word Bloomberg, which means my fastest avenue is to go to Bloomberg.com, but you said it was clickbait so I heeded your warning, hence my comment.
Thanks, lightknight. It wasn't mentioned that it was one the links that AI links to unceremoniously embed in their articles to make it appear as though they aren't a news aggregator.
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
The iPhone 7 is evolutionary as far as form factor but not features.
They added a ton of features on the 7:
1. Water Proof 2. Awesome camera 3. Crazy fast CPU, GPU 4. Solid state home button (this is a HUGE plus for anyone who has experience a broken home button) 5. Major display improvements (brighter, wider color gamut, super accurate color) 6. Significantly better battery life 7. Stereo sound, much louder speakers
Those are massive improvements.
What were the REVOLUTIONARY features in the iPhone6 from the iPhone 5S? Just a bigger screen. How is that revolutionary?
I think we sometimes forget what the word revolutionary means. To me, the only real revolutionary iPhone was the original one. It did something nothing else had done in a complete package. Sure, it didn't work the best, only supported 1 carrier, didn't have apps, etc, but it was a damn fine piece of technology for its time. It was a touchscreen phone which was unheard of in 2007 with multi-touch which was totally and completely awesome again, for 2007 with this new mobile OS that was built from the ground up to support touch. Nobody had ever seen anything like this before on a mobile phone for consumers and it sent manufacturers scrambling to come up with something similar, even as they brushed the iPhone off as something that will never take off. This is what revolutionary means in my opinion. The rest of the iPhones, were simply upgrades to last years phone as the technology advanced. Nothing really stuck out as simply amazing with the rest of the iPhones. Better processors, bigger screens, etc are NOT revolutionary.
I beg to differ. The SoC is revolutionary. The A7 was the first 64 bit mobile processor.
TSMC has CPU manufacturing processes dedicated solely for building the A10 fusion, processes no other manufacturer has access to.
The A10 performs on par with the previous generation of low power Core i7. The CPU is revolutionary. Perhaps you would like to go back to the original Samsng built ARM 11 CPU?
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
The iPhone 7 is evolutionary as far as form factor but not features.
They added a ton of features on the 7:
1. Water Proof 2. Awesome camera 3. Crazy fast CPU, GPU 4. Solid state home button (this is a HUGE plus for anyone who has experience a broken home button) 5. Major display improvements (brighter, wider color gamut, super accurate color) 6. Significantly better battery life 7. Stereo sound, much louder speakers
Those are massive improvements.
What were the REVOLUTIONARY features in the iPhone6 from the iPhone 5S? Just a bigger screen. How is that revolutionary?
I think we sometimes forget what the word revolutionary means. To me, the only real revolutionary iPhone was the original one. It did something nothing else had done in a complete package. Sure, it didn't work the best, only supported 1 carrier, didn't have apps, etc, but it was a damn fine piece of technology for its time. It was a touchscreen phone which was unheard of in 2007 with multi-touch which was totally and completely awesome again, for 2007 with this new mobile OS that was built from the ground up to support touch. Nobody had ever seen anything like this before on a mobile phone for consumers and it sent manufacturers scrambling to come up with something similar, even as they brushed the iPhone off as something that will never take off. This is what revolutionary means in my opinion. The rest of the iPhones, were simply upgrades to last years phone as the technology advanced. Nothing really stuck out as simply amazing with the rest of the iPhones. Better processors, bigger screens, etc are NOT revolutionary.
I beg to differ. The SoC is revolutionary. The A7 was the first 64 bit mobile processor.
TSMC has CPU manufacturing processes dedicated solely for building the A10 fusion, processes no other manufacturer has access to.
The A10 performs on par with the previous generation of low power Core i7. The CPU is revolutionary. Perhaps you would like to go back to the original Samsng built ARM 11 CPU?
I'd also say that TouchID was revolutionary. Yes, we've had fingerprint readers before, but nothing like this.
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
People keep saying OLED, and People keep being wrong. At this point Apple may as well use quantum dots, but current versions use Cadmium which is toxic.
OLED's have low brightness, burn in, decay/damage problems that don't exist with the current wide-gamut IPS LED backlit screens. Right now OLED's are better used in televisions that aren't persistently on.
I was eviscerated on this forum for suggesting that an Apple wearable would use OLED. Apple used it. It's also now Apple's brightest display per x-area at 1000 nits. OLED has come a long way, Apple is already using it, and Apple has a very long history of mastering in one product and then applying it another. That isn't to say Apple is close to or ever will start using OLED, but it's not something you should discount out of hand. If the next major iOS or macOS visual change at a WWDC includes mostly black pixels then OLED could be right around the corner.
The original iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS were not even feature parity with dumb phones of the era. 5MPixel cameras and Music playback were available on high-end dumb phones that cost less, so what was revolutionary was that it removed the most failure points that dumb phones have.
I guess people have selective memories when it comes to history. Here's a short list of features the original iPhone had that other phones didn't:
1) Removal of the physical keyboard in favour of a multitouch, onscreen keyboard (remember the days of typing messages by pressing number keys repeatedly?). This then enabled the next two...
2) A full web browser (albeit without Flash, but that was a good thing as we can now see). Other phones either didn't have a browser at all, or an absolutely unusable one which was mainly used to direct you to sites the manufacturer (or partners) had specifically tailored for that phone.
3) The ability to watch TV shows/movies on your phone. Even if there were phones which could do this at the time (I don't remember any), I can't imagine how you would get them onto the phone since no one else had an ecosystem like iTunes at the time. Not to mention the screens were far too small/low res.
4) An accelerometer which automatically oriented the screen to the way you were holding it. Again, I don't remember seeing any phone which had such a feature at the time. Now we just take it for granted.
5) Supported syncing all of your data (contacts, photos, call/message history, etc) to both Mac and Windows computers. Most other phones either didn't allow you to sync data to a computer, or it only worked with Windows PCs. I remember, shortly after the iPhone was released, other manufacturers were trying to support Mac by "piggybacking" on the iTunes/iPhone syncing mechanism. Truly sad.
6) Supported major OS updates. Almost every other phone I used before the iPhone either didn't give you any updates, or just a few minor bug fix releases. To get a major update, you had to get a new phone. And most of the time the new phone was built on a completely different OS/architecture which didn't support migrating information from your old phone to the new one. They were built on "disposable technology" churned out with no thought about the future (vision) whatsoever.
7) Visual voicemail. Remember the dark ages of having to go through voicemail messages one-by-one in a single order... And yes, I realize that voicemail in general is outdated these days. But it was a huge step forward at the time. One which Apple had to push carriers to support, and they'd charge/gouge extra for.
The original iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS were not even feature parity with dumb phones of the era. 5MPixel cameras and Music playback were available on high-end dumb phones that cost less, so what was revolutionary was that it removed the most failure points that dumb phones have.
I guess people have selective memories when it comes to history. Here's a short list of features the original iPhone had that other phones didn't:
1) Removal of the physical keyboard in favour of a multitouch, onscreen keyboard. Which then enabled the next two...
2) A full web browser (albeit without Flash, but that was a good thing as we can now see). Other phones either didn't have a browser at all, or an absolutely unusable one which was mainly used to direct you to sites the manufacturer (or partners) had specifically tailored for that phone.
3) The ability to watch TV shows/movies on your phone. Even if there were phones which could do this at the time (I don't remember any), I can't imagine how you would get them onto the phone since no one else had an ecosystem like iTunes at the time. Not to mention the screens were far too small/low res.
4) An accelerometer which automatically oriented the screen to the way you were holding it. Again, I don't remember seeing any phone which had such a feature at the time. Now we just take it for granted.
5) Supported syncing all of your data (contacts, photos, call/message history, etc) to both Mac and Windows computers. Most other phones either didn't allow you to sync data to a computer, or it only worked with Windows PCs. I remember, shortly after the iPhone was released, other manufacturers were trying to support Mac by "piggybacking" on the iTunes/iPhone syncing mechanism. Truly sad.
6) Supported major OS updates. Almost every other phone I used before the iPhone either didn't give you any updates, or just a few minor bug fix releases. To get a major update, you had to get a new phone. And most of the time the new phone was built on a completely different OS/architecture which didn't support migrating information from your old phone to the new one. They were built on "disposable technology" built with no thought about the future (vision) whatsoever.
If we're talking about starting a revolution in the consumer electronics market, it doesn't seem to ever be about technology naturally evolving to have a better camera, a faster processor, et al.; it's about what seeing farther down the path than anyone else and forging a path that eschews the dead weight and topples the status quo so effectively that you become the one that everyone else follows. This is what Apple did by NOT including a physical keyboard. This is what Apple did by NOT including Adobe's Mobile Flash. This is what Apple did by NOT including the 3.5mm jack this year. This is what does by continuing to focus on the user experience, not what fits on a spec sheet.
With so many in the media rushing to write how boring, how dull the iPhones 7 would be I felt they were trying to find a way to convince people to not upgrade their iPhones this year. The media decided to root for Samsung to deliver an awesome phone they could rally behind in a concerted effort to diminish Apple and elevate Samsung. When the unexpected happened the media was trapped in its own machinations. A recall of 2.5 million phones just as Apple was introducing its boring, dull, unimaginative iPhones was a nightmare scenario. Even during the recall many well known and respected writers continued to strike out at Apple while glossing over the increasing number of exploding Samsung batteries.
When performance tests showed the 2016 Note 7 performed poorly against the year old iPhone 6S, the media chose to ignore the results and praised the curved display of the Note. The media wanted Apple to fail.
When Apple introduced the iPhones with an even faster processor, water resistance, better camera, dual camera, better Touch ID, stereo speakers, better display, the media dismissed it all. Apple was playing catchup. A guy from the Wall Street Journal raved about the 12MP camera in the Note 7 mopping the floor with iPhone 6S. Then for the iPhone 7's 12 MP camera he said, "ehhh".
Now Apple is releasing some awesome commercials showing what the iPhones and Watch can do and the media is hamstrung trying to figure out what else they can possibly do to damage Apple's momentum. The headphone jack is the easiest attack. The problem is not many customers are listening. The second attack is the AirPods, but that is failing, too. The world IS moving to wireless and Apple is there. By the time Samsung releases its next phone without a headphone jack, Samsung and the media will have to come up a cohesive message of why it is a good thing for Samsung phone to not have a headphone jack. The reason can't be because iPhones don't have a headphone jack. That following the exploding battery fiasco is not going to be credible. The same goes for dual cameras. Yes, Apple,was not first, it Apple is once again shaping up to be the leader everyone else is measured with.
I am looking forward to my preordered iPhone 7 Plus Jet Black to arrive in two weeks. The media can continue to rally around Samsung and any other Android manufacturer to be the company that dethroned Apple, but the media will be proven wrong again, again and again. I recently read Apple has gtown so large it only needs 15% of its iPhone base to upgrade to have a blowout quarter.
As long as Apple does not make a major mistake that pushes fans to turn against it, Apple will be able to withstand the minutiae the media continues to hurl on a daily basis.
Why does everyone keep demanding something entirely different every year? What's wrong with simply delivering something that just works? People don't realize how difficult (and unnecessary) a total re-design is. Changing a design to meet the frivolous demands of customers and (especially) crazy analysts does not produce a better product only a different looking one.
With all due respect, that's total nonsense. Apple has delivered greatly advanced performance in processor and graphics, improved battery life, greatly improved display, and greatly enhanced camera capabilities. Apple produces engineering marvels that have changed the way we communicate on a daily basis, and how we take and use photos. What is not to like about that? These are certainly not "frivolous" enhancements. Samsung on the other hand....
The thing that worries me as a frequent flyer is the likelihood that Note 7 owners will completely disregard the airline's request to not turn on or charge the phone while onboard.
Why does everyone keep demanding something entirely different every year? What's wrong with simply delivering something that just works? People don't realize how difficult (and unnecessary) a total re-design is. Changing a design to meet the frivolous demands of customers and (especially) crazy analysts does not produce a better product only a different looking one.
As you see from the unexpectedly positive reception that the supposedly 'nothing new to get excited about' iPhone 7 received from the buying public, only the very few, very loud, and very wrong online natterers demand something entirely different every year. Most people are more sensible then them and can recognize value when they see it.
I was flying this past weekend and it was funny to hear how the prohibition of the Note 7 became a part of the pre-boarding script for each flight. In a situation where people are willing to pay for superficial perks like early boarding, it must be a real zinger to be singled out and told that your particular phone has to stay turned off or preferably go into your checked baggage. I think at least once they said "Galaxy 7" instead of "Note 7," which is a simple example of how badly an issue like this can damage a brand.
The Bloomberg article has an utterly offensive headline. It's essentially like saying that my stupidity is the result of your smarts. In words, not, you know, my fault.
As always, it's Apple's fault. Clickbait crap.
I don't want to give them a click; would you mind providing the title?
Don't you think it'll be easier for you to search in 'news' for, say, "Samsung note 7 apple fault" or something along those lines? Instead of my having to find it doing the same thing, and cut and paste?
This isn't a conversation between two people -- I'm sure many of us reacted the same way and wondered what the headline was.
I was flying this past weekend and it was funny to hear how the prohibition of the Note 7 became a part of the pre-boarding script for each flight. In a situation where people are willing to pay for superficial perks like early boarding, it must be a real zinger to be singled out and told that your particular phone has to stay turned off or preferably go into your checked baggage. I think at least once they said "Galaxy 7" instead of "Note 7," which is a simple example of how badly an issue like this can damage a brand.
No, no, no! Several airlines won't allow Note 7 to be in checked baggage. It is a risk the airline cannot afford.
The iPhone 7 is generally considered an evolutionary advancement like the iPhone 6s, above all featuring a better processor, water resistance, and new camera technology, including a dual-lens camera on the 7 Plus. Apple is thought to be saving a major redesign for next year's model, which could have an edge-to-edge OLED display with an embedded "virtual button."
And a bigger battery that works
The iPhone 7 is evolutionary as far as form factor but not features.
They added a ton of features on the 7:
1. Water Proof 2. Awesome camera 3. Crazy fast CPU, GPU 4. Solid state home button (this is a HUGE plus for anyone who has experience a broken home button) 5. Major display improvements (brighter, wider color gamut, super accurate color) 6. Significantly better battery life 7. Stereo sound, much louder speakers
Those are massive improvements.
What were the REVOLUTIONARY features in the iPhone6 from the iPhone 5S? Just a bigger screen. How is that revolutionary?
I think we sometimes forget what the word revolutionary means. To me, the only real revolutionary iPhone was the original one. It did something nothing else had done in a complete package. Sure, it didn't work the best, only supported 1 carrier, didn't have apps, etc, but it was a damn fine piece of technology for its time. It was a touchscreen phone which was unheard of in 2007 with multi-touch which was totally and completely awesome again, for 2007 with this new mobile OS that was built from the ground up to support touch. Nobody had ever seen anything like this before on a mobile phone for consumers and it sent manufacturers scrambling to come up with something similar, even as they brushed the iPhone off as something that will never take off. This is what revolutionary means in my opinion. The rest of the iPhones, were simply upgrades to last years phone as the technology advanced. Nothing really stuck out as simply amazing with the rest of the iPhones. Better processors, bigger screens, etc are NOT revolutionary.
And even that is not 100% true. Alcatel already launched a touch based mobile phone in 2003 or 2004 (with email but no web surfing). But is was not a success because it was way too heavy.
Comments
The original iPhone was revolutionary in this sense, but an iPhone with a no-hands, voice-driven user interface (Siri + Airpods) would also be revolutionary. Also, an iPhone that interacts with appliances and other capital equipment in the vicinity of the user (IoT+Home, ApplePay) would represent a "revolution." Another "revolution" might involve embedding content/data in application processor silicon, such as voice translators, maps and catalogs. It all depends upon the need for the new service (function) and the way it is implemented.
If a faster processor enables a new range of highly useful apps that were not accessible with slower processors, then referring to the new processor as "revolutionary" would be understandable. However, a mere speed increase would not deserve that label.
"Samsung crisis Began in rush to capitalize on uninspiring iPhone "
Thanks, lightknight. It wasn't mentioned that it was one the links that AI links to unceremoniously embed in their articles to make it appear as though they aren't a news aggregator.
TSMC has CPU manufacturing processes dedicated solely for building the A10 fusion, processes no other manufacturer has access to.
The A10 performs on par with the previous generation of low power Core i7. The CPU is revolutionary. Perhaps you would like to go back to the original Samsng built ARM 11 CPU?
I'd also say that TouchID was revolutionary. Yes, we've had fingerprint readers before, but nothing like this.
Were you attempting to make a POINT or are you justing being an obnoxious idiot?
http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/09/19/no-need-for-4k-display-on-apples-iphone-7-because-of-screen-quality-expert-claims
1) Removal of the physical keyboard in favour of a multitouch, onscreen keyboard (remember the days of typing messages by pressing number keys repeatedly?). This then enabled the next two...
2) A full web browser (albeit without Flash, but that was a good thing as we can now see). Other phones either didn't have a browser at all, or an absolutely unusable one which was mainly used to direct you to sites the manufacturer (or partners) had specifically tailored for that phone.
3) The ability to watch TV shows/movies on your phone. Even if there were phones which could do this at the time (I don't remember any), I can't imagine how you would get them onto the phone since no one else had an ecosystem like iTunes at the time. Not to mention the screens were far too small/low res.
4) An accelerometer which automatically oriented the screen to the way you were holding it. Again, I don't remember seeing any phone which had such a feature at the time. Now we just take it for granted.
5) Supported syncing all of your data (contacts, photos, call/message history, etc) to both Mac and Windows computers. Most other phones either didn't allow you to sync data to a computer, or it only worked with Windows PCs. I remember, shortly after the iPhone was released, other manufacturers were trying to support Mac by "piggybacking" on the iTunes/iPhone syncing mechanism. Truly sad.
6) Supported major OS updates. Almost every other phone I used before the iPhone either didn't give you any updates, or just a few minor bug fix releases. To get a major update, you had to get a new phone. And most of the time the new phone was built on a completely different OS/architecture which didn't support migrating information from your old phone to the new one. They were built on "disposable technology" churned out with no thought about the future (vision) whatsoever.
7) Visual voicemail. Remember the dark ages of having to go through voicemail messages one-by-one in a single order... And yes, I realize that voicemail in general is outdated these days. But it was a huge step forward at the time. One which Apple had to push carriers to support, and they'd charge/gouge extra for.
When performance tests showed the 2016 Note 7 performed poorly against the year old iPhone 6S, the media chose to ignore the results and praised the curved display of the Note. The media wanted Apple to fail.
When Apple introduced the iPhones with an even faster processor, water resistance, better camera, dual camera, better Touch ID, stereo speakers, better display, the media dismissed it all. Apple was playing catchup. A guy from the Wall Street Journal raved about the 12MP camera in the Note 7 mopping the floor with iPhone 6S. Then for the iPhone 7's 12 MP camera he said, "ehhh".
Now Apple is releasing some awesome commercials showing what the iPhones and Watch can do and the media is hamstrung trying to figure out what else they can possibly do to damage Apple's momentum. The headphone jack is the easiest attack. The problem is not many customers are listening. The second attack is the AirPods, but that is failing, too. The world IS moving to wireless and Apple is there. By the time Samsung releases its next phone without a headphone jack, Samsung and the media will have to come up a cohesive message of why it is a good thing for Samsung phone to not have a headphone jack. The reason can't be because iPhones don't have a headphone jack. That following the exploding battery fiasco is not going to be credible. The same goes for dual cameras. Yes, Apple,was not first, it Apple is once again shaping up to be the leader everyone else is measured with.
I am looking forward to my preordered iPhone 7 Plus Jet Black to arrive in two weeks. The media can continue to rally around Samsung and any other Android manufacturer to be the company that dethroned Apple, but the media will be proven wrong again, again and again. I recently read Apple has gtown so large it only needs 15% of its iPhone base to upgrade to have a blowout quarter.
As long as Apple does not make a major mistake that pushes fans to turn against it, Apple will be able to withstand the minutiae the media continues to hurl on a daily basis.