On iOS, that's true, but in the case of Android (which this is), more cores can be utilized for additional performance and/or efficiency. The Vulkan API, that recently launched, will also see benefits from additional cores.
Imagination Technologies (the company behind the graphics in the A# SoC's) demonstrated last year an early version of Vulkan and just some of the performance benefits of OpenGL ES vs. Vulkan on the same 4 core SoC with a PowerVR GPU:
*Vulkan is on the left
What a load of crap. The OS (iOS or Android) is not what determines how many cores can be used - they can BOTH schedule threads across cores as needed. What matters is how the developer has coded their App and whether or not the workload can actually be split up across multiple threads AND those threads are all doing an equal amount of work.
If Thread A is running on Core 1 and is doing a lot of work (keeping the core at 80%) and Thread B is running on Core 2, but sitting idle 95% of the time then there's no point splitting these threads up across two separate cores. They aren't doing the same amount of work and the extra core is providing no additional performance benefit. Better to run a single core at 85% then one core at 80% and another at 5%.
Your Vulcan comparison is pointless as it's just showing multi-threaded Vulkan vs single-threaded OpenGL. It has NOTHING to do with having a large number of slower cores (Samsung Exynos) vs a smaller number of powerful cores (Apple A9).
Android has been tested and shown to have real world benefits of multi-core CPU's:
In the end what we should take away from this analysis is that Android devices can make much better use of multi-threading than initially expected. There's very solid evidence that not only are 4.4 big.LITTLE designs validated, but we also find practical benefits of using 8-core "little" designs over similar single-cluster 4-core SoCs. -Anandtech
The difference between the ecosystems has been noted:
While for Apple it can be argued that we're dealing with a very different operating system and it is likely iOS applications are less threaded than their Android counter-parts.
"Vulkan" allows for greater efficiency and performance over OpenGL ES. It's designed for multi-core scaling not seen on its predecessor, that's the point. It's a low level, cross platform, high feature API and a new standard. These, multiple cores, when combined can outperform a pair of larger cores. In the case, the 4 cores of the Snapdragon 820 can offer higher multi-core scores than the A9's 2 cores.
Almost 9 gigs of bloatware? That is ridiculous. If Apple had that much bloatware, you would see a media frenzy followed by a class action lawsuit.
This is not going to change unfortunately. The carriers have the Android phone manufacturers by the short and curlies for one thing, so the likes of Samsung have no choice but to let the carriers install whatever they want. The thin margins on these devices also mean that manufacturers will seek out bloatware to bolster revenue.
Just to clarify, the margins for the Galaxy series are not thin. They simply just don't sell as much as Samsung would like.
It's always been a pain point that android fans have to deal with preloaded junk, but it's not like there aren't solutions. You can purchase an unlocked Nexus 6P and be done with carrier branded phones, or you can install a custom launcher like Nova, disable all the bloatware, then hide the bloatware (not put them in a folder, but make the icons disappear completely). Put in a $10 32GB SD card to expand storage and you're good to go. The beauty of Android is that you have some semblance of control over your environment. It's not perfect, but the ability to band-aid stuff you don't like it always welcome.
Most components received high marks, including the display, camera, and battery. Baig wished for USB-C, however, as well as a removable --------------->>>>> batteyr.<<<<<-------------------
I imagine I'm in quite the rare position of actually owning a 6S+ and an S7 Edge and can compare real world experiences side by side. (For development purposes I have two phones and I've just replaced my Nexus 5 with an S7 Edge).
My first honest impressions of the hardware:
The S7 screen is gorgeous. Colours pop far more than the iPhone's screen. If I browse to the same website on both phones, the S7's display is much much better. The camera is better in low light conditions on the S7. Now for me that's not a huge issue, but it might be for others.
As for the software:
Managing music if you have a big library already on iTunes is a total pain in the proverbial, requiring downloading Google Music, uploading everything without DRM to the cloud and then manually downloading again every single album from that cloud if you want offline playing (say, for example, on a plane). If you've got any iTunes music with DRM, then forget it entirely. It's stuck there. iPhone wins hands down on this because it's tightly integrated.
User Interface experience - again iPhone wins. It's consistent, predictable and intuitive, even if it does feel a bit dated. The S7 takes a stock Android model, which is already less intuitive than iOS, and adds further unnecessary complexity and buries already difficult to find system options in extra layers of 'where the hell is this?'. It's frustrating, to say the least, to set up the phone. But, having finally done it, it's less irritating for day to day use.
Speed - both seem snappy in day to day use. Neither phone suffers any lag that I can detect. They're both satisfying in that respect.
Fingerprint ID - both the iPhone and the S7 have reliable fingerprint sensors. I can't speak to the underlying system security of the stored prints on the S7 as I don't know enough about the engineering, but in use it offers similar features.
Contactless payments - Apple Pay works in the UK, where I am. Samsung's version doesn't. Indisputable win for Apple there.
The physical device itself...
The iPhone has a slightly matt back panel, the S7 has a shiny one. I've never dropped my iPhone but the S7 has slipped out of my hands several times in the past few days. It also won't stay put on the arm of the couch where the iPhone will. Sooner or later it's going to end up in or on the dog or crushed underfoot when it falls off, yet again.
Verdict?
iPhone 8 out of 10. It needs to drastically improve its camera and, frankly, iOS's UI is getting a bit dated and needs to smarten up a bit but it seriously Just Works... Physically reliable though and easy to use in the hand. So-so screen. Overall integration with music and other systems like email is exceptionally good though.
Galaxy S7 Edge - 7 out of 10. Music handling is awful if you're coming from iTunes (like many are). Body is ridiculously slippery and phones will break when they fall out of pockets or hands. Great camera. Screen is gorgeous. Android/TouchWiz user experience significantly less than optimal, but once you're set up it's not so bad.
All in all, each phone has different bugbears, but balanced out, they're pretty much on a par.
As I say, this is an honest review. My main phone remains the iPhone and I use Apple kit for the majority of my day to day stuff and will continue doing so, however I do have to give praise where its due, regardless of who is receiving it.
I imagine I'm in quite the rare position of actually owning a 6S+ and an S7 Edge and can compare real world experiences side by side. (For development purposes I have two phones and I've just replaced my Nexus 5 with an S7 Edge).
My first honest impressions of the hardware:
The S7 screen is gorgeous. Colours pop far more than the iPhone's screen. If I browse to the same website on both phones, the S7's display is much much better. The camera is better in low light conditions on the S7. Now for me that's not a huge issue, but it might be for others.
As for the software:
Managing music if you have a big library already on iTunes is a total pain in the proverbial, requiring downloading Google Music, uploading everything without DRM to the cloud and then manually downloading again every single album from that cloud if you want offline playing (say, for example, on a plane). If you've got any iTunes music with DRM, then forget it entirely. It's stuck there. iPhone wins hands down on this because it's tightly integrated.
User Interface experience - again iPhone wins. It's consistent, predictable and intuitive, even if it does feel a bit dated. The S7 takes a stock Android model, which is already less intuitive than iOS, and adds further unnecessary complexity and buries already difficult to find system options in extra layers of 'where the hell is this?'. It's frustrating, to say the least, to set up the phone. But, having finally done it, it's less irritating for day to day use.
Speed - both seem snappy in day to day use. Neither phone suffers any lag that I can detect. They're both satisfying in that respect.
Fingerprint ID - both the iPhone and the S7 have reliable fingerprint sensors. I can't speak to the underlying system security of the stored prints on the S7 as I don't know enough about the engineering, but in use it offers similar features.
Contactless payments - Apple Pay works in the UK, where I am. Samsung's version doesn't. Indisputable win for Apple there.
The physical device itself...
The iPhone has a slightly matt back panel, the S7 has a shiny one. I've never dropped my iPhone but the S7 has slipped out of my hands several times in the past few days. It also won't stay put on the arm of the couch where the iPhone will. Sooner or later it's going to end up in or on the dog or crushed underfoot when it falls off, yet again.
Verdict?
iPhone 8 out of 10. It needs to drastically improve its camera and, frankly, iOS's UI is getting a bit dated and needs to smarten up a bit but it seriously Just Works... Physically reliable though and easy to use in the hand. So-so screen. Overall integration with music and other systems like email is exceptionally good though.
Galaxy S7 Edge - 7 out of 10. Music handling is awful if you're coming from iTunes (like many are). Body is ridiculously slippery and phones will break when they fall out of pockets or hands. Great camera. Screen is gorgeous. Android/TouchWiz user experience significantly less than optimal, but once you're set up it's not so bad.
All in all, each phone has different bugbears, but balanced out, they're pretty much on a par.
As I say, this is an honest review. My main phone remains the iPhone and I use Apple kit for the majority of my day to day stuff and will continue doing so, however I do have to give praise where its due, regardless of who is receiving it.
Good review.
Only part I disagree is with the display. Yes the S7 colors really pop and are vivid. By IMO they look over saturated and fake. I prefer the iPhone display that seems to be more accurate and less in your face. It really is a preference thing though.
As far as the camera I think its closer. It seems that the iPhone focuses faster and takes pictures faster than the S7. Plus live photo's are nice.
From what I have read, Samsung's AMOLED sceens are toned down from what they used to be.
"Early reviews peg Samsung's Galaxy S7 as a serious contender for best Android smartphone"
At this point in time, there's really not much cross-platform competition in smartphones. Or if there is, it's one way -- Android to iOS switching.
When the S6 came out, sites doing trade-ins reported a significant percentage were coming from an iPhone, so it is not only one way.
And just this week I met a lady at the ATT store. She had an iPhone and 1 year ago moved to a Galaxy S6. She is on her 3rd one and wants to come back to the iPhone as soon as she can.
Only part I disagree is with the display. Yes the S7 colors really pop and are vivid. By IMO they look over saturated and fake. I prefer the iPhone display that seems to be more accurate and less in your face. It really is a preference thing though.
As far as the camera I think its closer. It seems that the iPhone focuses faster and takes pictures faster than the S7. Plus live photo's are nice.
Anandtech's measurements of the S7 display accuracy have it ahead of the iPhone in that regard, so you are just showing your bias. And as for the camera in the S7 - it focuses faster and takes photos faster than the iPhone. Continue to make things up, there is at least some amusement in your lame attempts at fiction.
In lower light, the cameras are not even close. In good light, they are both very capable.
According to Segan, Samsung's best trick was packing a larger display into an overall smaller shell than its competitors. He particularly likes the AMOLED displays, saying both S7 models "put the iPhone 6s to shame."
Like Seifert, Segan panned the inclusion of so many Samsung and Verizon apps. The non-removable bloatware took just over 9 gigabytes of Segan's 32-gigabyte storage.
In all, Segan prefers the S7's hardware but "can't unequivocally recommend it instead of an iPhone, because of the apps and services that are exclusive to Apple phones."
How does this become "the best phone" when all the reviewers have the same complaints about poor battery life and sloppy software?
Like even if I was given a review unit for free, I'd be hard pressed to say anything nice beyond the chassis design. This is because ALL Android phones have terrible software, and that problem is because it IS Android. Samsung so desperately wants it's users to switch to Tizen (which is the descendant of 7 failed Mobile OS's so far) so they can cut Google out. So what do they do? Half-ass three operating systems (Android, Tizen and Xaiomi)
What a load of crap. The OS (iOS or Android) is not what determines how many cores can be used - they can BOTH schedule threads across cores as needed. What matters is how the developer has coded their App and whether or not the workload can actually be split up across multiple threads AND those threads are all doing an equal amount of work.
If Thread A is running on Core 1 and is doing a lot of work (keeping the core at 80%) and Thread B is running on Core 2, but sitting idle 95% of the time then there's no point splitting these threads up across two separate cores. They aren't doing the same amount of work and the extra core is providing no additional performance benefit. Better to run a single core at 85% then one core at 80% and another at 5%.
Your Vulcan comparison is pointless as it's just showing multi-threaded Vulkan vs single-threaded OpenGL. It has NOTHING to do with having a large number of slower cores (Samsung Exynos) vs a smaller number of powerful cores (Apple A9).
Android has been tested and shown to have real world benefits of multi-core CPU's: The difference between the ecosystems has been noted: "Vulkan" allows for greater efficiency and performance over OpenGL ES. It's designed for multi-core scaling not seen on its predecessor, that's the point. It's a low level, cross platform, high feature API and a new standard. These, multiple cores, when combined can outperform a pair of larger cores. In the case, the 4 cores of the Snapdragon 820 can offer higher multi-core scores than the A9's 2 cores.
Utilising the CPU doesn;t matter. We keep saying the same thing over and over and over.
Good solution for the missing IR blaster on the iPhones, Note 5 and S7:
Eyekickstarter:com
Please, please just check it out.
We don't have money for ads like the others.
We have only you.
Only part I disagree is with the display. Yes the S7 colors really pop and are vivid. By IMO they look over saturated and fake. I prefer the iPhone display that seems to be more accurate and less in your face. It really is a preference thing though.
As far as the camera I think its closer. It seems that the iPhone focuses faster and takes pictures faster than the S7. Plus live photo's are nice.
Anandtech's measurements of the S7 display accuracy have it ahead of the iPhone in that regard, so you are just showing your bias. And as for the camera in the S7 - it focuses faster and takes photos faster than the iPhone. Continue to make things up, there is at least some amusement in your lame attempts at fiction.
In lower light, the cameras are not even close. In good light, they are both very capable.
sorry I don't take Anandtech's word as the end all. Sure the S7 may be superior according to their tests. But I use my own eyes to make a judgement and to me and my eyes the colors on the S7 are way too over saturated. I prefer the natural look of the iPhone.
Again Anandtech is not an expert on camera's. That's like relying on Anandtech for movie recommendations.
You can spew all the stats you want but it really boils down to user experience. And with iPhone outselling Galaxy phones by 300-400% its pretty obvious which phone is superior.
Chevy's outsell BMW's by a vast margin too. Does that make Chevy's "superior" or is it your logic that's flawed?
I'm not saying the iPhone isn't a better overall smartphone but the proof isn't in the fact they sell more.
According to Segan, Samsung's best trick was packing a larger display into an overall smaller shell than its competitors. He particularly likes the AMOLED displays, saying both S7 models "put the iPhone 6s to shame."
Like Seifert, Segan panned the inclusion of so many Samsung and Verizon apps. The non-removable bloatware took just over 9 gigabytes of Segan's 32-gigabyte storage.
In all, Segan prefers the S7's hardware but "can't unequivocally recommend it instead of an iPhone, because of the apps and services that are exclusive to Apple phones."
How does this become "the best phone" when all the reviewers have the same complaints about poor battery life and sloppy software?
Like even if I was given a review unit for free, I'd be hard pressed to say anything nice beyond the chassis design. This is because ALL Android phones have terrible software, and that problem is because it IS Android. Samsung so desperately wants it's users to switch to Tizen (which is the descendant of 7 failed Mobile OS's so far) so they can cut Google out. So what do they do? Half-ass three operating systems (Android, Tizen and Xaiomi)
Which reviewrs are complaining about poor battery life?
Phonarena measured the the S7 Edge as having a 9hr 57min battery endurance vs 9hr 11min for an iPhone 6S+
The Anandtech review also found the S7 Edge to have about an hour more endurance than the 6S+
The WSJ review found the opposite. It would be interesting to know why.
The Cnet review gave it a 10/10 for batter life and had this to say:
So I tested the Samsung Galaxy S7 in London and Berlin, while colleagues
also took it for a spin in San Francisco and Sydney. And you know what?
It did great. Better than great. In fact, the S7 was an awesome phone
that never cracked under the pressure of being the only way I take
pictures and navigate completely unfamiliar terrain, all while keeping
battery life going during long days out. And it did so with more finesse
than existing phones. I'd call it the best all-around phone out there,
better even than the excellent Google Nexus 6P and iPhone 6S. (But not quite as sexy as its fraternal twin, the larger curvy-screen S7 Edge, my top pick if you want to splurge.)
Our usual battery rundown test entails setting the screen brightness
to 50 percent, connecting the phone to WiFi and looping an HD video. I
had high hopes for the Galaxy S7 Edge and its hefty 3,600mAh battery,
but the improvement was actually fairly modest. All told, it hung around
for 14 and a half hours, only about 40 minutes longer than the Galaxy
Note 5.
The Edge fared much better in mixed use. I'd usually disconnect it
from the charger at around 7:30 AM and use the thing nearly nonstop
until I finished work at about 8 PM. Throw in a little light Kindle app
reading and a few Spotify playlists and the Edge would usually hit 10
percent around the time I went to bed. And since Marshmallow's Doze
feature kicks in when the phone is still, I'd wake up with just enough
juice to check a few emails before plugging it in.
Meanwhile, the regular Galaxy S7 survived our video gauntlet for 13
hours and 20 minutes, slightly trailing the Note 5. Mixed use also
suited the smaller phone better: It'd routinely come off the plug at 7
AM and stick around until just before I fell asleep at around 1 AM. Both
of these phones showed decidedly above-average endurance, and will
easily see you through the day. Like I said, though, the difference over
last year's models is subtle.
That doesn't sound like a battery life complaint to me.
The S7 saw its battery capacity increase nearly 20% while the S7 edge
(which is powering a much larger screen now) received a battery
with 40% larger capacity.
I am perhaps more mindful with my battery saving techniques than
most but I was very impressed by the improvements I saw in the S7 line
in regards to battery life, both phones did stellar jobs of lasting me
through the day in light of Screen-on Times floating around 6-7 hours.
So where are these unanimously negative comments on battery longevity you say exist? And while you are at it, you can find some links to this 'sloppy software' you say the reviews were panning also. Oh I know, you must be confusing reality for a dream you had last night.
Quick, nurse! He has a serious case of acute kool-aid overdose, prepare a large enema immediately as he's dangerously full of it.
kool-aid?
More like reality.
Apple will sell 250 million premium phones this year. Samsung will be lucky to sell 50 million.
The reality is the premium segment is dominated by Apple. The reason is because its a superior phone and user experience.
The people have voted with their $$$ and iPhone is the clear winner. You can spout out all the specs you want. $$$$ don't lie. But specs and publishers that have a vested interest (advertising dollars from SAmsung) do.
I wouldn't consider any iPhone below the 6 a premium phone anymore in this day and age. And when the 7 comes out the 6 shouldn't be considered one either. So now if you took same year phones and compared them it wouldn't be what you say it is. The iPhone would still sell more yes, but not the numbers you are saying.
If Samsung wants to really be a serious contender in the high end smartphone market then it shouldn't already offer buy 1 get 1 free at AT&T and T-mobile... You can be sure both carriers are not the ones paying for that promo alone, Samsung has budget just for that in their advertisement spending. Hard to sell yourself as a premium brand when your new flagship is already discounted.
If Samsung wants to really be a serious contender in the high end smartphone market then it shouldn't already offer buy 1 get 1 free at AT&T and T-mobile... You can be sure both carriers are not the ones paying for that promo alone, Samsung has budget just for that in their advertisement spending. Hard to sell yourself as a premium brand when your new flagship is already discounted.
Since theses offers only appear to be by through two carriers in the US, why do you conclude that Samsung must be involved? Why aren't such offers being made in the UK, Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK etc, etc?
If Samsung wants to really be a serious contender in the high end smartphone market then it shouldn't already offer buy 1 get 1 free at AT&T and T-mobile... You can be sure both carriers are not the ones paying for that promo alone, Samsung has budget just for that in their advertisement spending. Hard to sell yourself as a premium brand when your new flagship is already discounted.
Since theses offers only appear to be by through two carriers in the US, why do you conclude that Samsung must be involved? Why aren't such offers being made in the UK, Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK etc, etc?
Maybe because those carriers will not play ball with Samsung and share the costs of the free one. All we know is that a part of the advertising budget for Samsung is also used for marketing and promotions. They used to give free tablets and now they gave a free VR Gear to those who pre ordered. You never see discounts of that magnitude on brand new flagship iPhones on release day that is for sure. They are coming off as very desperate...
And how many of these reviewers actually like anything from Apple? As for camera reviews, I'll wait to hear from actual photography websites instead of journalists. Oh wait, I don't really care what Samsung makes, I'll never buy one anyway. What was that article I read recently, millions of Android phones infected with malware.....
All of them like Apple products to a greater or lesser degree. I think too many Apple fans take competitor's products scoring well, means Apple's products will score less. To me it's such a goofy idea to compare these two companies in the first place. One makes only premium devices for richer more elitist buyers and the other makes phones in great volume for peons to those who can afford to buy anything. Samsung sold 100 Million more smartphones than Apple last year and you can bet they were a 100 Million cheap Android smartphones. Neither iOS or Android being based on Unix clones...... are capable of getting viruses in the wild. Malware? It's about equaled out.
If anyone buys a phone simply on whether it is capable of getting malware or not..... both are capable of it and both will have kernel vulnerabilities and bugs forever. Devices and software coding in general with best security available, still only ever bring around an 85% level of trust. There is no such thing as a completely "Impenetrable Fortress" and never will be. Things can always happen in real life.... that changes things from what they seem to the opposite results. If it can be made or written it can therefore be broken. That only changes in Quantum Physics and sub atomic world! ....so let the phone makers compete on their own merits to the people who care most about them!
Comments
The difference between the ecosystems has been noted:
"Vulkan" allows for greater efficiency and performance over OpenGL ES. It's designed for multi-core scaling not seen on its predecessor, that's the point. It's a low level, cross platform, high feature API and a new standard. These, multiple cores, when combined can outperform a pair of larger cores. In the case, the 4 cores of the Snapdragon 820 can offer higher multi-core scores than the A9's 2 cores.
Just to clarify, the margins for the Galaxy series are not thin. They simply just don't sell as much as Samsung would like.
It's always been a pain point that android fans have to deal with preloaded junk, but it's not like there aren't solutions. You can purchase an unlocked Nexus 6P and be done with carrier branded phones, or you can install a custom launcher like Nova, disable all the bloatware, then hide the bloatware (not put them in a folder, but make the icons disappear completely). Put in a $10 32GB SD card to expand storage and you're good to go. The beauty of Android is that you have some semblance of control over your environment. It's not perfect, but the ability to band-aid stuff you don't like it always welcome.
My first honest impressions of the hardware:
The S7 screen is gorgeous. Colours pop far more than the iPhone's screen. If I browse to the same website on both phones, the S7's display is much much better.
The camera is better in low light conditions on the S7. Now for me that's not a huge issue, but it might be for others.
As for the software:
Managing music if you have a big library already on iTunes is a total pain in the proverbial, requiring downloading Google Music, uploading everything without DRM to the cloud and then manually downloading again every single album from that cloud if you want offline playing (say, for example, on a plane). If you've got any iTunes music with DRM, then forget it entirely. It's stuck there. iPhone wins hands down on this because it's tightly integrated.
User Interface experience - again iPhone wins. It's consistent, predictable and intuitive, even if it does feel a bit dated. The S7 takes a stock Android model, which is already less intuitive than iOS, and adds further unnecessary complexity and buries already difficult to find system options in extra layers of 'where the hell is this?'. It's frustrating, to say the least, to set up the phone. But, having finally done it, it's less irritating for day to day use.
Speed - both seem snappy in day to day use. Neither phone suffers any lag that I can detect. They're both satisfying in that respect.
Fingerprint ID - both the iPhone and the S7 have reliable fingerprint sensors. I can't speak to the underlying system security of the stored prints on the S7 as I don't know enough about the engineering, but in use it offers similar features.
Contactless payments - Apple Pay works in the UK, where I am. Samsung's version doesn't. Indisputable win for Apple there.
The physical device itself...
The iPhone has a slightly matt back panel, the S7 has a shiny one. I've never dropped my iPhone but the S7 has slipped out of my hands several times in the past few days. It also won't stay put on the arm of the couch where the iPhone will. Sooner or later it's going to end up in or on the dog or crushed underfoot when it falls off, yet again.
Verdict?
iPhone 8 out of 10. It needs to drastically improve its camera and, frankly, iOS's UI is getting a bit dated and needs to smarten up a bit but it seriously Just Works... Physically reliable though and easy to use in the hand. So-so screen. Overall integration with music and other systems like email is exceptionally good though.
Galaxy S7 Edge - 7 out of 10. Music handling is awful if you're coming from iTunes (like many are). Body is ridiculously slippery and phones will break when they fall out of pockets or hands. Great camera. Screen is gorgeous. Android/TouchWiz user experience significantly less than optimal, but once you're set up it's not so bad.
All in all, each phone has different bugbears, but balanced out, they're pretty much on a par.
As I say, this is an honest review. My main phone remains the iPhone and I use Apple kit for the majority of my day to day stuff and will continue doing so, however I do have to give praise where its due, regardless of who is receiving it.
In lower light, the cameras are not even close. In good light, they are both very capable.
Like even if I was given a review unit for free, I'd be hard pressed to say anything nice beyond the chassis design. This is because ALL Android phones have terrible software, and that problem is because it IS Android. Samsung so desperately wants it's users to switch to Tizen (which is the descendant of 7 failed Mobile OS's so far) so they can cut Google out. So what do they do? Half-ass three operating systems (Android, Tizen and Xaiomi)
We keep saying the same thing over and over and over.
I'm not saying the iPhone isn't a better overall smartphone but the proof isn't in the fact they sell more.
Phonarena measured the the S7 Edge as having a 9hr 57min battery endurance vs 9hr 11min for an iPhone 6S+
The Anandtech review also found the S7 Edge to have about an hour more endurance than the 6S+
The WSJ review found the opposite. It would be interesting to know why.
The Cnet review gave it a 10/10 for batter life and had this to say:
Engadget That doesn't sound like a battery life complaint to me.Techcrunch:
So where are these unanimously negative comments on battery longevity you say exist? And while you are at it, you can find some links to this 'sloppy software' you say the reviews were panning also. Oh I know, you must be confusing reality for a dream you had last night.
http://www.cnet.com/news/at-t-t-mobile-offering-buy-one-get-one-free-deals-on-samsung-galaxy-s7/
http://forums.androidcentral.com/samsung-galaxy-s7-edge/653805-quick-thoughts-long-time-iphone-user.html
If anyone buys a phone simply on whether it is capable of getting malware or not..... both are capable of it and both will have kernel vulnerabilities and bugs forever. Devices and software coding in general with best security available, still only ever bring around an 85% level of trust. There is no such thing as a completely "Impenetrable Fortress" and never will be. Things can always happen in real life.... that changes things from what they seem to the opposite results. If it can be made or written it can therefore be broken. That only changes in Quantum Physics and sub atomic world! ....so let the phone makers compete on their own merits to the people who care most about them!