Samsung began aggressively cranking up device resolutions on its most expensive premium flagships after Steve Jobs demonstrated iPhone 4's Retina Display back in 2010. Prior to that, Samsung was internally focused on smaller devices, not larger, higher resolution displays.
Samsung had a 301 ppi retina class screen in their S8000, a year prior to the iP4, so that is untrue. Their S8500 had a 283 ppi screen and was also released prior to the iP4, but let's not let inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story.
The S6 has 368% more pixels than the iP6 and 174% more than the Plus, so it's not surprising it's performance is less than the iP6.
However, it's not less than the iP6 Plus according to Anandtech benchmarks. The Anandtech GFXBench 3.0 score for the Samsung S6 is 15.8 and for the 6 Plus it's 14.8. The GFX 3.0 offscreen results are 26 for the S6 and 19.2 for the 6 Plus. For T-Rex it's 39.4 and 34.4 respectively. For T-Rex offscreen it's 59.4 and 42.8 respectively.
Why not write an article trashing the graphics performance of the iPhone 6 Plus vs the iPhone 6 given it is a bigger phone than the 6 with a larger screen? Did Apple make poor engineering choices there?
If you look at Basemark X benchmarks, which supposedly equate closely to gaming performance, the S6 trounces the iP6 with a score of 38651.49 vs 30626.66
I have wondered why Samsung were so extreme in the ppi and I think it might have to do with the VR headset where each eye views half the screen.
From my understanding (I can be wrong) above screenshot is about native resolution performances, that is 1334x750 for iP6 and 2560x1440 (four times the pixel quantity) for S6. When you switch to "offscreen" performances you factor out the display and you can test at the same resolution. If you want to benchmark the device, "onscreen" is the correct scenario, while if you want to benchmark the SoC, "offscreen" is the one.
These may be fair comparisons, but I would note that you had mentioned the iPhone 6 + in your post, and that was what I was responding to. You should also note that the offscreen performance is matched at 1080P so you should be able to compare those directly;
ES 3.0
s6; 1478
iP6; 1127
iP6+; 1189
ES 2.0
s6; 2636
iP6; 2391
iP6+; 2391
The GPU in the S6 looks to be 25% higher performance, at best. The question would be whether that translates to any advantage in the market, and given Apple's Metal game advantage today, I'd say that Samsung is not all that competitive with the iPhone 6/6 Plus in the "real world", i.e., this won't stop Android defections to iPhone.
Given that Apple will have the A9 out in about 6 months, I think that Samsung needed to do better overall, and while the metal build seems to be well received, we will have to see how sales pan out.
I totally agree with you. This is a just an iSheep article with no proper technical knowledge. It was just giving me a great laugh.
Anyways this is an Apple forum so can't expect anything else. However since I spend some time reading this let me clarify some things to the original Author: (just know that I own a Note 4, S4 & iPhone 4S)
- Apple iPhone 6 Plus gives 27% higher score than S6 in on-screen (native res.). But S6 has got 78% more pixels to run. S6 has 2560 x 1440 native resolution whereas iPhone 6 Plus has only 1920x1080. You might say 2K is overkill but you must try Note 4 to know the difference. I haven't noticed any performance issues while gaming on my Note 4. By the scores S6 is 40% faster than Note 4 (at same resolution). So I think S6 will be quite a performer.
- Except the on-screen performance, S6 kills iPhone 6 Plus in all other areas. Just look at your own chart. S6 gives up to 40% higher scores.
- Apple gets away with lower clock speeds and fewer cores due to its own OS, and iOS is still very inferior to Android in terms of capabilities for advanced users. But it provides a smoother experience. Multitasking is horrible on iOS. It gives a feel of quick loading of apps through saving its screenshot and displaying it while the app loads in background. App to app share is still in infancy. Customizability is not Apple's forte anyways, so no point in talking about it.
- I am not going to debate on the iPhone screen size increases & samsung learning chip fab by making chips for Apple (LOL)
- In recent reviews, S6 gives slightly better battery life (7 hrs of heavy use) than iPhone 6 (6.5 hrs heavy use). iPhone 6 Plus definitely has better battery life owing to its size. Apple is leading here even with a smaller battery.
- "The Y of Exynos" section is full of pointless crap. No idea what the author was trying to say. May be my ignorance, forgive me.
Exynos SOCs have been underwhelming for years, but the 7420 on 14nm is quite impressive and gives the A8X a decent run in performance. No doubt the A9 will jump back ahead, but give credit where it is due.
2k is unnecessary but if it draws less power than last year's 1080p screen and only benchmarks that run at native resolutions are impacted, then it doesn't seem like a big deal either way. Games in real life mostly run at 720p or 1080p anyways and you can set game resolution if you want.
The S6 is a good competitor - nice design, fast performance, gorgeous screen, good camera, 32gb standard, wireless charging. But why would an iPhone 6 user switch for basically a similar phone? DED needs to chill as the S6 will probably gobble up android flagship sakes from other OEMs, not cause iPhone 6 users to switch.
DED's not about to "chill" because of any of your spec blabber. The only thing that matters, when it occurs, is any platform switching—in either direction.
Samsung had a 301 ppi retina class screen in their S8000, a year prior to the iP4, so that is untrue. Their S8500 had a 283 ppi screen and was also released prior to the iP4, but let's not let inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story.
The S6 has 368% more pixels than the iP6 and 174% more than the Plus, so it's not surprising it's performance is less than the iP6.
However, it's not less than the iP6 Plus according to Anandtech benchmarks. The Anandtech GFXBench 3.0 score for the Samsung S6 is 15.8 and for the 6 Plus it's 14.8. The GFX 3.0 offscreen results are 26 for the S6 and 19.2 for the 6 Plus. For T-Rex it's 39.4 and 34.4 respectively. For T-Rex offscreen it's 59.4 and 42.8 respectively.
Why not write an article trashing the graphics performance of the iPhone 6 Plus vs the iPhone 6 given it is a bigger phone than the 6 with a larger screen? Did Apple make poor engineering choices there?
If you look at Basemark X benchmarks, which supposedly equate closely to gaming performance, the S6 trounces the iP6 with a score of 38651.49 vs 30626.66
I have wondered why Samsung were so extreme in the ppi and I think it might have to do with the VR headset where each eye views half the screen.
The problem for Samsung is that 6 months from now, they will have to compete against the A9 and probably haptics, and in the meantime, that small (30%) performance advantage today may not even survive the onslaught of Snapdragon 810 devices coming (late!) to the market.
Except the article is mostly incorrect. The Samsung SoC's GPU is actually slightly more powerful, it just has more pixels to drive, but games will target a performance target and upscale as needed, so it's a non-issue.
Yeah, I think you're mostly right.
The better point (which is barely touched on in the article) is that Samsung didn't make the best design choices here. The screen resolution is too high, and a quad core (technically 8 core, but really quad core) CPU in a phone is kinda dumb. Samsung could have made a phone that is virtually identical to this one in terms of performance that a user can actually perceive, but has better battery life (and lower cost, or higher profit margins for Samsung). The benchmarks I'd focus on are the web browsing benchmarks. Anandtech has those up, and the iPhone 6 beats the S6 by a decent margin. In part that's probably because Safari is a better optimized browser, in part it's because the A8 has better single thread performance than the Exynos and web browsers cannot realistically use 4 cores.
I think the two most important performance metrics for most consumers using smartphones are:
1. web browsing
2. time it takes to go from the intent to take a picture/video to being able to take the next picture/video
The third most important might be games, but the difference between #2 and #3 is a lot bigger than between #1 and #2. Apple seems to get this -- the iPhone is a web browsing, picture taking, game playing machine. And for all three, it's not just because of one component -- it's the interaction of the SOC and the software (and for the camera, it's likely not as much about the CPU/GPU part of the SOC as it is the fixed function units that we don't know much about).
I would recommend going to Anandtech if you want an actual comparison. Two excerpts that directly contradict DED's conclusions:
"The Exynos 7420 SoC appears to be class-leading in performance, although there is the obvious question of power consumption that still has to be answered. Samsung’s first 14LPE SoC seems promising, although we’ve yet to validate whether big.LITTLE is more efficient than when we last tested it in the Exynos 5433. The GPU is generally quite close to the Adreno 430, with about a 10-20% advantage in performance depending upon the workload, although at the same clock speed it probably wouldn’t have any advantage. The 1440p display can also reduce performance compared to a 1080p display."
So its class leading according to their benchmarks, and the GPU actually outperforms the Adreno 430(due to the higher clock speed)
And speaking about the display(with some Edge specific issues)
"Speaking of displays, Samsung has integrated an incredible display into both versions of the Galaxy S6. I’m really blown away at how far AMOLED has come in the past few years, as the Galaxy S6 is one of the best displays we’ve tested for luminance and overall color accuracy. The only real problems I can see are color shifts with viewing angles, and white point tending to be a bit green depending upon the unit we’re looking at. There are some edge-specific issues, namely uneven luminance and odd color shifting towards green hues on white at the edge of the display. Other than this, the display of the Galaxy S6 is relatively perfect with its dark, inky blacks and amazing color."
Contrary to the article's headline and content, the Galaxy S6 is more powerful in offscreen rendering at the same resolution (1478 vs 1189 and 2636 vs 2391). This article concentrates on the on-screen performance, but that isn't necessarily going to be relevant in the real world.
The issue is that the S6 has a higher resolution display, so it has more pixels to render if the game renders at the full native resolution.
However it is likely that games will render at a target that results in a playable experience, and then upscale to the native resolution. For both the S6 and the iPhone 6 that's likely to be a very similar resolution.
So this whole article is pointless, and it doesn't even mention "offscreen" or "onscreen" in the text, so it's likely the author doesn't understand the test itself.
Besides, when comparing the onscreen figures with the iPhone 6 Plus, the performance isn't that dissimilar, it's in the same ballpark. So the headline is very conflating of the actual issue.
My thoughts exactly. We don't need hollow victories based on spin. The results are mixed, at best. I see 1080p and fill performance exceeding that of iPhone 6.
[quote name="Taniwha" url="/t/185509/samsung-galaxy-s6-delivers-poor-graphics-performance-vs-apple-iphone-6-plus#post_2702032"]No there are not. A removable battery is a hallmark feature, particularly when you're out and about and a long way from a power source.
Actually that really isn't the case anymore. Thumb sized rechargers are everywhere and really cheap. Just got one for my iPhone and it carries 2 full charges on it. It pretty much negates the need for replacement of the battery.
....and no-one will give a shit because the thing does what it says it does on the tin. Just like the iPhone does. I have no idea what's in my iPhone except it has an a8 chip, and I'm not even sure of that and more to the point, I simply don't care. I does what I ask of it and that's all that matters. I'm sure the Galaxy is exactly the same, even if the software doesn't have the same polish.
I disagree. People need some reason to justify a purchase. “I just like it” doesn’t qualify in the age of the techie wannabe. Technical specs offer a way out, a way to justify and defend one’s choice. A lot of people use specs to confirm their bias. Specs are a marketing tool just like commercials showing babies and puppies. Sad but unfortunately true, especially for the basement neckbeards who troll AI and other Apple sites. “Octa Core” sounds better than A8 even if it isn’t.
This article is very misleading and is mostly just a bunch of bull. I'll call it for what it is. The author has a misunderstanding of on and off screen graphics and how graphic resolution works. It's also ironic how it's pointing to benchmarks as an indicator of poor performance when Apple has always said they don't care about benchmarks when they perform terrible on them and it's about user experience.
As already mentioned, the GS6 is faster depending on the benchmark you choose. I think this article is cherry picking results that favor the A8.
That said, the Exynos in the GS6 is not that impressive. Forget the octa-core nonsense - this is really a high performance quad core processor (the A53's contribute little to device performance). And if you average out all the benchmarks that matter (keeping only GPU tests rendered offscreen to keep it fair), the GS6 is only slightly faster than the iPhone 6. And considering it has twice the cores, a 50% higher clock speed, and triple the RAM we see the Exynos is simply average at best.
Apple clearly still holds the crown for most advanced ARM processors. Samsung is still stuck using off-the-shelf designs 18 months after they said they would have custom processors along with A57 based.
Except the article is mostly incorrect. The Samsung SoC's GPU is actually slightly more powerful, it just has more pixels to drive, but games will target a performance target and upscale as needed, so it's a non-issue.
It's a non-issue to anyone that doesn't care about bar graphs and tests which are most iOS users and about 3 Android users. In the end, user experience is all that matters but in the meantime, this is ammunition for the endless spec war.
M: Let me just stop you there. What about ecosystem?
S: Yes... we berieve we can win at ecosystem... ecosystem take lots time to deverop and need very measured approach... currentry we have googer pray store as well as our own app store with... thousands of great apps rike angry birds.
M: Hmmmmm.... Ok... that sounds great... as soon as my...contract's up...I'll...think about maybe...
This entire article is garbage and complete hate on samsung , I love how the main pic of the article and everything about it is the iphone 6 vs the galaxy s5 ,show the REAL numbers!!! Everything I own is samsung. Steve jobs actually had the balls to say the human eye cant see past 300 ppi... well sorry ifanboys but he was proved quite wrong, especially after comparing the new galaxy s6 screen to the old ass iphone 6 LCD screen hah! Wake up apple! You fell way behind samsung like 18 months ago. Everyones bragging about iphone 6 sales, it will be quite interesting to see the most anticipated phone of the year ( galaxy s6 edge ) prove itself quite worthy.... now continue your ignorant article, thank you!
That's not it at all. Samsung should come up with and compete with their own ideas, not just try to mimic the iPhone as closely as possible.
Exactly. Back when Apple was making black (and white), monolithic rectangles, Sammy could have easily come out with a rounded, gold phone that looked like a smooth, perfectly formed river rock. But instead, they copied Apple. But I don't blame the designers entirely (although, it does seem that their lead designer is a bit of a hack), I think it has mostly to do with clueless upper-management with no imagination. Just do a cursory overview of their Glassdoor reviews.
Comments
Samsung had a 301 ppi retina class screen in their S8000, a year prior to the iP4, so that is untrue. Their S8500 had a 283 ppi screen and was also released prior to the iP4, but let's not let inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story.
The S6 has 368% more pixels than the iP6 and 174% more than the Plus, so it's not surprising it's performance is less than the iP6.
However, it's not less than the iP6 Plus according to Anandtech benchmarks. The Anandtech GFXBench 3.0 score for the Samsung S6 is 15.8 and for the 6 Plus it's 14.8. The GFX 3.0 offscreen results are 26 for the S6 and 19.2 for the 6 Plus. For T-Rex it's 39.4 and 34.4 respectively. For T-Rex offscreen it's 59.4 and 42.8 respectively.
Why not write an article trashing the graphics performance of the iPhone 6 Plus vs the iPhone 6 given it is a bigger phone than the 6 with a larger screen? Did Apple make poor engineering choices there?
If you look at Basemark X benchmarks, which supposedly equate closely to gaming performance, the S6 trounces the iP6 with a score of 38651.49 vs 30626.66
I have wondered why Samsung were so extreme in the ppi and I think it might have to do with the VR headset where each eye views half the screen.
From my understanding (I can be wrong) above screenshot is about native resolution performances, that is 1334x750 for iP6 and 2560x1440 (four times the pixel quantity) for S6. When you switch to "offscreen" performances you factor out the display and you can test at the same resolution. If you want to benchmark the device, "onscreen" is the correct scenario, while if you want to benchmark the SoC, "offscreen" is the one.
These may be fair comparisons, but I would note that you had mentioned the iPhone 6 + in your post, and that was what I was responding to. You should also note that the offscreen performance is matched at 1080P so you should be able to compare those directly;
ES 3.0
s6; 1478
iP6; 1127
iP6+; 1189
ES 2.0
s6; 2636
iP6; 2391
iP6+; 2391
The GPU in the S6 looks to be 25% higher performance, at best. The question would be whether that translates to any advantage in the market, and given Apple's Metal game advantage today, I'd say that Samsung is not all that competitive with the iPhone 6/6 Plus in the "real world", i.e., this won't stop Android defections to iPhone.
Given that Apple will have the A9 out in about 6 months, I think that Samsung needed to do better overall, and while the metal build seems to be well received, we will have to see how sales pan out.
I totally agree with you. This is a just an iSheep article with no proper technical knowledge. It was just giving me a great laugh.
Anyways this is an Apple forum so can't expect anything else. However since I spend some time reading this let me clarify some things to the original Author: (just know that I own a Note 4, S4 & iPhone 4S)
- Apple iPhone 6 Plus gives 27% higher score than S6 in on-screen (native res.). But S6 has got 78% more pixels to run. S6 has 2560 x 1440 native resolution whereas iPhone 6 Plus has only 1920x1080. You might say 2K is overkill but you must try Note 4 to know the difference. I haven't noticed any performance issues while gaming on my Note 4. By the scores S6 is 40% faster than Note 4 (at same resolution). So I think S6 will be quite a performer.
- Except the on-screen performance, S6 kills iPhone 6 Plus in all other areas. Just look at your own chart. S6 gives up to 40% higher scores.
- Apple gets away with lower clock speeds and fewer cores due to its own OS, and iOS is still very inferior to Android in terms of capabilities for advanced users. But it provides a smoother experience. Multitasking is horrible on iOS. It gives a feel of quick loading of apps through saving its screenshot and displaying it while the app loads in background. App to app share is still in infancy. Customizability is not Apple's forte anyways, so no point in talking about it.
- I am not going to debate on the iPhone screen size increases & samsung learning chip fab by making chips for Apple (LOL)
- In recent reviews, S6 gives slightly better battery life (7 hrs of heavy use) than iPhone 6 (6.5 hrs heavy use). iPhone 6 Plus definitely has better battery life owing to its size. Apple is leading here even with a smaller battery.
- "The Y of Exynos" section is full of pointless crap. No idea what the author was trying to say. May be my ignorance, forgive me.
Exynos SOCs have been underwhelming for years, but the 7420 on 14nm is quite impressive and gives the A8X a decent run in performance. No doubt the A9 will jump back ahead, but give credit where it is due.
2k is unnecessary but if it draws less power than last year's 1080p screen and only benchmarks that run at native resolutions are impacted, then it doesn't seem like a big deal either way. Games in real life mostly run at 720p or 1080p anyways and you can set game resolution if you want.
The S6 is a good competitor - nice design, fast performance, gorgeous screen, good camera, 32gb standard, wireless charging. But why would an iPhone 6 user switch for basically a similar phone? DED needs to chill as the S6 will probably gobble up android flagship sakes from other OEMs, not cause iPhone 6 users to switch.
DED's not about to "chill" because of any of your spec blabber. The only thing that matters, when it occurs, is any platform switching—in either direction.
Your usual DED inaccurate hatchet job.
Samsung had a 301 ppi retina class screen in their S8000, a year prior to the iP4, so that is untrue. Their S8500 had a 283 ppi screen and was also released prior to the iP4, but let's not let inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story.
The S6 has 368% more pixels than the iP6 and 174% more than the Plus, so it's not surprising it's performance is less than the iP6.
However, it's not less than the iP6 Plus according to Anandtech benchmarks. The Anandtech GFXBench 3.0 score for the Samsung S6 is 15.8 and for the 6 Plus it's 14.8. The GFX 3.0 offscreen results are 26 for the S6 and 19.2 for the 6 Plus. For T-Rex it's 39.4 and 34.4 respectively. For T-Rex offscreen it's 59.4 and 42.8 respectively.
Why not write an article trashing the graphics performance of the iPhone 6 Plus vs the iPhone 6 given it is a bigger phone than the 6 with a larger screen? Did Apple make poor engineering choices there?
If you look at Basemark X benchmarks, which supposedly equate closely to gaming performance, the S6 trounces the iP6 with a score of 38651.49 vs 30626.66
I have wondered why Samsung were so extreme in the ppi and I think it might have to do with the VR headset where each eye views half the screen.
The problem for Samsung is that 6 months from now, they will have to compete against the A9 and probably haptics, and in the meantime, that small (30%) performance advantage today may not even survive the onslaught of Snapdragon 810 devices coming (late!) to the market.
Except the article is mostly incorrect. The Samsung SoC's GPU is actually slightly more powerful, it just has more pixels to drive, but games will target a performance target and upscale as needed, so it's a non-issue.
Yeah, I think you're mostly right.
The better point (which is barely touched on in the article) is that Samsung didn't make the best design choices here. The screen resolution is too high, and a quad core (technically 8 core, but really quad core) CPU in a phone is kinda dumb. Samsung could have made a phone that is virtually identical to this one in terms of performance that a user can actually perceive, but has better battery life (and lower cost, or higher profit margins for Samsung). The benchmarks I'd focus on are the web browsing benchmarks. Anandtech has those up, and the iPhone 6 beats the S6 by a decent margin. In part that's probably because Safari is a better optimized browser, in part it's because the A8 has better single thread performance than the Exynos and web browsers cannot realistically use 4 cores.
I think the two most important performance metrics for most consumers using smartphones are:
1. web browsing
2. time it takes to go from the intent to take a picture/video to being able to take the next picture/video
The third most important might be games, but the difference between #2 and #3 is a lot bigger than between #1 and #2. Apple seems to get this -- the iPhone is a web browsing, picture taking, game playing machine. And for all three, it's not just because of one component -- it's the interaction of the SOC and the software (and for the camera, it's likely not as much about the CPU/GPU part of the SOC as it is the fixed function units that we don't know much about).
I would recommend going to Anandtech if you want an actual comparison. Two excerpts that directly contradict DED's conclusions:
"The Exynos 7420 SoC appears to be class-leading in performance, although there is the obvious question of power consumption that still has to be answered. Samsung’s first 14LPE SoC seems promising, although we’ve yet to validate whether big.LITTLE is more efficient than when we last tested it in the Exynos 5433. The GPU is generally quite close to the Adreno 430, with about a 10-20% advantage in performance depending upon the workload, although at the same clock speed it probably wouldn’t have any advantage. The 1440p display can also reduce performance compared to a 1080p display."
So its class leading according to their benchmarks, and the GPU actually outperforms the Adreno 430(due to the higher clock speed)
And speaking about the display(with some Edge specific issues)
"Speaking of displays, Samsung has integrated an incredible display into both versions of the Galaxy S6. I’m really blown away at how far AMOLED has come in the past few years, as the Galaxy S6 is one of the best displays we’ve tested for luminance and overall color accuracy. The only real problems I can see are color shifts with viewing angles, and white point tending to be a bit green depending upon the unit we’re looking at. There are some edge-specific issues, namely uneven luminance and odd color shifting towards green hues on white at the edge of the display. Other than this, the display of the Galaxy S6 is relatively perfect with its dark, inky blacks and amazing color."
My thoughts exactly. We don't need hollow victories based on spin. The results are mixed, at best. I see 1080p and fill performance exceeding that of iPhone 6.
Actually that really isn't the case anymore. Thumb sized rechargers are everywhere and really cheap. Just got one for my iPhone and it carries 2 full charges on it. It pretty much negates the need for replacement of the battery.
....and no-one will give a shit because the thing does what it says it does on the tin. Just like the iPhone does. I have no idea what's in my iPhone except it has an a8 chip, and I'm not even sure of that and more to the point, I simply don't care. I does what I ask of it and that's all that matters. I'm sure the Galaxy is exactly the same, even if the software doesn't have the same polish.
I disagree. People need some reason to justify a purchase. “I just like it” doesn’t qualify in the age of the techie wannabe. Technical specs offer a way out, a way to justify and defend one’s choice. A lot of people use specs to confirm their bias. Specs are a marketing tool just like commercials showing babies and puppies. Sad but unfortunately true, especially for the basement neckbeards who troll AI and other Apple sites. “Octa Core” sounds better than A8 even if it isn’t.
This article is very misleading and is mostly just a bunch of bull. I'll call it for what it is. The author has a misunderstanding of on and off screen graphics and how graphic resolution works. It's also ironic how it's pointing to benchmarks as an indicator of poor performance when Apple has always said they don't care about benchmarks when they perform terrible on them and it's about user experience.
That said, the Exynos in the GS6 is not that impressive. Forget the octa-core nonsense - this is really a high performance quad core processor (the A53's contribute little to device performance). And if you average out all the benchmarks that matter (keeping only GPU tests rendered offscreen to keep it fair), the GS6 is only slightly faster than the iPhone 6. And considering it has twice the cores, a 50% higher clock speed, and triple the RAM we see the Exynos is simply average at best.
Apple clearly still holds the crown for most advanced ARM processors. Samsung is still stuck using off-the-shelf designs 18 months after they said they would have custom processors along with A57 based.
That's not it at all. Samsung should come up with and compete with their own ideas, not just try to mimic the iPhone as closely as possible.
Except the article is mostly incorrect. The Samsung SoC's GPU is actually slightly more powerful, it just has more pixels to drive, but games will target a performance target and upscale as needed, so it's a non-issue.
It's a non-issue to anyone that doesn't care about bar graphs and tests which are most iOS users and about 3 Android users. In the end, user experience is all that matters but in the meantime, this is ammunition for the endless spec war.
Samsung: We must win at CORES!
Me: OK
S: We must win at SIZE!
M: Uh, alright
S: We Must win at RESOLUTION!
M: Fine
S: We must win at SENSORS!
M: yeah, great
S: We must win at DESIGN!
M: Let me just stop you there. What about ecosystem?
S: Yes... we berieve we can win at ecosystem... ecosystem take lots time to deverop and need very measured approach... currentry we have googer pray store as well as our own app store with... thousands of great apps rike angry birds.
M: Hmmmmm.... Ok... that sounds great... as soon as my... contract's up... I'll... think about maybe...
That's not it at all. Samsung should come up with and compete with their own ideas, not just try to mimic the iPhone as closely as possible.
Exactly. Back when Apple was making black (and white), monolithic rectangles, Sammy could have easily come out with a rounded, gold phone that looked like a smooth, perfectly formed river rock. But instead, they copied Apple. But I don't blame the designers entirely (although, it does seem that their lead designer is a bit of a hack), I think it has mostly to do with clueless upper-management with no imagination. Just do a cursory overview of their Glassdoor reviews.
Yes I know that some on AI imagine the perfect world as one in which Apple is the only supplier. God help us if that ever happens.
That's not it at all. Samsung should come up with and compete with their own ideas, not just try to mimic the iPhone as closely as possible.
Samsung seems to require competitors, in order to have some idea of what to emulate and build...
It never seems to me that Apple needs to have competition to "push" it towards improvements, innovations, or quality.
So I'm not sure we'd suffer that much if Apple were the "only supplier"...(but God help us if almost any other company were).