Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
Google is a one horse dog and pony show. Gets most of it revenue from one product advertising revenue ......Google is DOOMED. DOOMED I tell ya.
Wall Street doesn't think so. Alphabet has a much higher valued P/E than Apple and I'm fairly certain Google Search will go unchallenged by everyone. Youtube shows no sign of letting up. The highest praise goes to Google's Android for having such huge market share percentage. The usual talk is how the iPhone is losing to Android and eventually Android will obliterate iOS. I'm fairly certain Wall Street sees Alphabet as a much stronger growth entity than it sees Apple. This is not my opinion but I think I'm in the minority. Wall Street sees Alphabet's one-trick pony (search/ad) as more powerful than Apple's one-trick pony (iPhone). P/Es don't lie. All the FANG stocks put Apple to shame in terms of P/E and share gains. Those are the stocks the big investors are betting on to crush Apple into powder.
Enron Corp. is a company that reached dramatic heights, only to face a dizzying collapse. The story ends with the bankruptcy of one of America's largest corporations.
Enron was in bad shape for a long time, but analysts kept beating the drum.
Analysts certainly shouldn't have had a problem reading the writing -- it stood out like graffiti. Yet as recently as last week [November 22 2001], more than half of the 15 analysts following the company rated the stock at least a buy: Six had Enron (ENE: down $0.25 to $0.36, Research, Estimates) a strong buy and two a buy, according to First Call. Yeah, and the Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable.
Enron was one of the most widely hyped stocks of 2000, climbing 88.6 percent in an otherwise brutal market. Goldman Sachs market guru Abby Joseph Cohen sang the stock's praises. The stock was widely held in mutual funds of prominent money management firms like Janus, Alliance and AIM. Even as the stock of the energy trading firm started to trade more like a technology stock than a stodgy utility company, few questioned the valuation.
2. Benchmark scores seem to have some meaning to Apple users suddenly which never mattered before
3. Apple unusually releases a new color version of latest iphone in the middle of the cycle
4. Apple unusually releases THE BEST VFM tablet (iPad 2017, costing about 50% of competing Android tablets with similar performance - Samsung Tab S3)
Are the sales of iphone 7 & 7 plus not as per expectations? Needless to say, extremely high expectations which come with the territory of being THE TOP profitable OEM of smartphones for 10 consecutive years.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
"A very large percentage"? Really? Are you just blowing smoke or just making things up?
SD cards are overrated on smartphones. My method is certainly not scientific at all, but every person I know with an SD-enabled smartphone has never once used an SD card with it. Don't imply there's some phantom "very large percentage" of iPhone users out there.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
"A very large percentage"? Really? Are you just blowing smoke or just making things up?
SD cards are overrated on smartphones. My method is certainly not scientific at all, but every person I know with an SD-enabled smartphone has never once used an SD card with it. Don't imply there's some phantom "very large percentage" of iPhone users out there.
Then clearly those users are in the minority. How are SD cards overrated? They resolve a number of real everyday problems.
My own non scientific experience paints a different picture. Have you ever seen message boards with people saying they never use their SD slots? Most Android phone makers include them. Don't you think thay if few people used them, manufacturers would have moved away from them? I have yet to see an iPhone or iPad user NOT complain about the paltry 16GB on their devices.
More space gives you more options. Whether you use them or not is your decision. If you put two identical iPhone models on the market with the sole difference of an SD slot, I would bet my house on the SD model winning out in sales. And one of the reasons it would win out is that people would opt for lower onboard memory configurations (saving money) and top them up with SD cards.
How much would you bet?
As you can see, I'm not blowing smoke or making it up.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Don't forget the amazingness of customizable widgets!
...and side-loadable malware!!
And a back button!! My brother in law switched from android to iPhone, loved it, then switched back because the iPhone doesn't have a back button... lol
Funny ‘cause I have a friend at work who touts the back button as well. Showed him that on an iPhone you just swipe right to go back; and the back link in the top right. Argument was over quickly.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
sflocal, looks like you caught one.
Damn right you care. Otherwise you wouldn't waste so much time with your BS arguments trying to diminish the fact that Apple is far ahead of everyone else with their processors.
Performance has ALWAYS been the driving force for innovation in computers. Tasks that used to only be available to those on a $50K workstation made their way to PCs. And now we can do those on a device we hold in our hands.
Well, at least iOS users can. Not only because we have superior devices, but because we have superior developers who always strive to come up with new ways to use those processors to bring us new features. Something Android users, with their inferior Apps written in a kiddie language don't understand,
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
Excusing bad design decisions - From where did you get the idea that due to bad design decisions, Android SOCs are losing those benchmark tests? It is simply a case of Apple having superior skilled people who can come out with excellent SOCs than Android SOC makers (Read Qualcomm, Samsung). Why can't you just give credit to Apple for being ahead of the competition instead of discrediting competition who are doing a fine job themselves (except that they are not at apple's level when comparisons are made).
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
No. Apple has a long and glorious history of shipping half baked products. To even claim otherwise weakens your entire stance.
Is Apple still baking fast charging?
I am not excusing anything, and claiming that I am, weakens your argument still further.
2. Benchmark scores seem to have some meaning to Apple users suddenly which never mattered before
3. Apple unusually releases a new color version of latest iphone in the middle of the cycle
4. Apple unusually releases THE BEST VFM tablet (iPad 2017, costing about 50% of competing Android tablets with similar performance - Samsung Tab S3)
Are the sales of iphone 7 & 7 plus not as per expectations? Needless to say, extremely high expectations which come with the territory of being THE TOP profitable OEM of smartphones for 10 consecutive years.
1. The writer's block has been removed? 2. Benchmarks and real world performance have always mattered. But we are smart enough to ignore straight numbers that are being faked or have no ability to be leveraged in the real world. It's like one of those Hellcat Muscle Cars. It has 707 HP and can go fast in a straight line, but it fails other drivability tests. It's just not a very useful use of HP. 3. They typically do this with Color Red products. They have released color options mid-cycle before (remember the white iPhone 4s?) 4. This was always the plan of Apple, to move the price point downward. But it doesn't make sense if you are selling every tablet you make at a premium price. Simply put, Apple didn't have to reduce the price of their products until now. Now that they have economy of scale with the A8/A9 series processors, they can release lower-cost options while still maintaining their premium pricing on the "Pro" line. Apple is simply doing what they've done with the Mac line... differentiate. This will put added pressure on Android markets to lower their prices. We already know the A9 is a "beast" from the stats we've seen. We can also expect that Apple will sit on the A9 on that device for about two years while their "Pro" line increases in speed with the A11, etc.
Analysts and pundits have long wanted Apple to reduce prices and increase marketshare. Now that they are doing it, you think the sky is falling? You can reduce prices and still remain profitable if you do it right. I doubt that Apple dropped margins much on this new iPad.
People, don't you realize most consumers are just check list buyers, they have no idea what they are buying and whether it has any real value, but they can said, hey I got a phone with more pixels, more cores and more memory, and more is always better so they must have gotten what they paid for. It is shame most people have no idea what they are buying and whether it is doing what they expect. Manufacturers all know this about consumers so they sell them on the "more" features since most consumer have no idea what these benchmark mean or even notice the real world impact.
I'd also like to see sustained benchmarks instead of just peak benchmarks. I'll bet the A10 can run a longer time without thermal throttling to hold those benchmarks. The smartphone industry doesn't give Apple's iPhone very much credit of being an excellent device.
Besides thermal throttling, do these test once the phone is 6 months old, then a year and so. I had to use Android phones for work, and I can tell you everyone I used and I used lots of them, would begin dragging as they aged. It would take longer and longer for the phone to do things. The only way to clear it was to do a factory reset and set up your phone from scratch. The android OS would get so fragmented over time with all the cache files and such would just slow the phone down. The processors ran so hot because of this, the heat would deteriorate the battery and it would begin losing life, an 18 month old android phone could barely run two or three hour before needing charged again. But this created the external battery pack market.
Android phones maybe fast out of the box, but they can not sustain that kind of performance. Android has such poor memory and file management that is why the hardware suppliers need more memory and battery life. Google keeps claiming they fix the memory management issue, but their hardware partners keep adding more and more memory to address the slowness issues.
Hmm... Fandroids infesting this site seem to be conveniently quiet at the moment. They must be firing-up their spinning machines to fabricate some kind of fake-news on how this benchmark is somehow flawed or staged.
LOL.
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
When you can't win the argument find some other straw man to beat: complain about iPhones lacking SD slots in relation to a story comparing phone speeds.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
We have been here many times before. I remember when it took nearly an hour to burn a CD. Speed was important for years but when you could burn a disc in afew minutes, people stopped caring about if one device was two or three minutes faster or slower.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
Excusing bad design decisions seems to be your forte, and that, in a nutshell, is why Android OS OEM's lose these benchmark tests. I would go further and argue that most of these bad design decisions are merely marketings attempts to differentiate devices from the crowd.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
No. Apple has a long and glorious history of shipping half baked products. To even claim otherwise weakens your entire stance.
Is Apple still baking fast charging?
I am not excusing anything, and claiming that I am, weakens your argument still further.
Of course Apple has had half baked features in products, and it usually occurs at introduction where all is easily forgiven; lots of that with the original iPhone, iPad and Mac Book Air. My stance is that Android OEM's rush to deliver half baked features because each device needs to stand out in the Android OEM market.
Yeah, Apple is still baking fast charging. The fact that Apple will be designing it's own power circuits rather than continuing to purchase them indicates to me that Apple is operating under due diligence.
Me, I can always charge my iPhone 7 Plus with my iPad Pro charger, and it's fast enough where it's a "non issue for most," to quote you.
2. Benchmark scores seem to have some meaning to Apple users suddenly which never mattered before
3. Apple unusually releases a new color version of latest iphone in the middle of the cycle
4. Apple unusually releases THE BEST VFM tablet (iPad 2017, costing about 50% of competing Android tablets with similar performance - Samsung Tab S3)
Are the sales of iphone 7 & 7 plus not as per expectations? Needless to say, extremely high expectations which come with the territory of being THE TOP profitable OEM of smartphones for 10 consecutive years.
1. The writer's block has been removed?
<Muthu:> I don't get you. It was just an observation that DED seems to be writing more articles in last 1 week compared to previous 3 months to me. It gave me an impression that DED seems it necessary to promote Apple products lot more than usual.
2. Benchmarks and real world performance have always mattered. But we are smart enough to ignore straight numbers that are being faked or have no ability to be leveraged in the real world. It's like one of those Hellcat Muscle Cars. It has 707 HP and can go fast in a straight line, but it fails other drivability tests. It's just not a very useful use of HP.
<Muthu:> Agreed and we can leave it at that.
3. They typically do this with Color Red products. They have released color options mid-cycle before (remember the white iPhone 4s?)
<Muthu:> It was long back. Apple usually releases new color options to "increase" sales. What is the sudden need for it this year which they did not do even last year?
4. This was always the plan of Apple, to move the price point downward. But it doesn't make sense if you are selling every tablet you make at a premium price. Simply put, Apple didn't have to reduce the price of their products until now. Now that they have economy of scale with the A8/A9 series processors, they can release lower-cost options while still maintaining their premium pricing on the "Pro" line. Apple is simply doing what they've done with the Mac line... differentiate. This will put added pressure on Android markets to lower their prices. We already know the A9 is a "beast" from the stats we've seen. We can also expect that Apple will sit on the A9 on that device for about two years while their "Pro" line increases in speed with the A11, etc.
<Muthu:> It was never a plan of Apple to move the price point downward. Did they ever say so? Economy of scale - It was available even with A8 when Apple delayed iPad Air 2 release by 6 months, instead opted for A8X at a higher price point. Apple deliberately slowed down the tablet market by introducing a new tablet at a higher price at that time (which made perfect sense to me since Android OEMs have given up in tablets anyway). The economy of scale on A8/A9 was available even 1 year back for releasing a cheaper version when Apple released the 9.7 inch iPad Pro at a much higher price point.
Analysts and pundits have long wanted Apple to reduce prices and increase marketshare. Now that they are doing it, you think the sky is falling? You can reduce prices and still remain profitable if you do it right. I doubt that Apple dropped margins much on this new iPad.
<Muthu:> Yes, the much derided "Analysts" in this forum wanted Apple to reduce the prices and increase marketshare. They want the same for iphones/Mac/Macbook etc... as well. But why Apple found it necessary to do what "Analysts" expect them to do? Why now?
Comments
I think you will find that absolutely nobody cares. Not even in the slightest.
The value (if there is any) is in the graph. The rest is of little value to anyone (not even the iPhone fanatics).
We are always reminded that no SD storage on iPhones is a non issue even though the vast majority of iPhone users would actually use an SD card if they had access to one. That alone though, would not make many users switch.
The same applies to speed. No one would switch because of the results presented here.
Speed on premium phones in 2017 is another one of those non-issues. When was the last time you heard about someone unboxing a premium Android phone and saying it wasn't 'snappy'?
So, does which phone is snappiest in 2017 really have any core value? Not really.
The reality is that a very large percentage of iPhone users would see a tangible value increase with the inclusion of an SDcard but very few Android users would see an equivalent increase in value with a bit more speed.
The results are useful for Android users to compare Android phones. The iPhone numbers just have curiosity value for them.
However, I get the sensation that this article has little to do with the benchmark results and was really just another opportunity to take a stab at Google.
Apple is both a hardware and software company with a long pedigree in both.
Google is an advertising company dabbling in both.
Samsung is a hardware company dabbling in software.
Enron Scandal: The Fall of a Wall Street Darling
Where Wall Street went wrong
As for Apple being a one trick pony, if Apple were to go insane and close its iPhone division today it'll still be large enough to be a Fortune 100 company from the remaining Macs and Services division.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/26/apple-services-will-be-size-of-fortune-100-company-by-2017-cook-says
What is going on here???
1. DED is writing more articles than usual
2. Benchmark scores seem to have some meaning to Apple users suddenly which never mattered before
3. Apple unusually releases a new color version of latest iphone in the middle of the cycle
4. Apple unusually releases THE BEST VFM tablet (iPad 2017, costing about 50% of competing Android tablets with similar performance - Samsung Tab S3)
Are the sales of iphone 7 & 7 plus not as per expectations? Needless to say, extremely high expectations which come with the territory of being THE TOP profitable OEM of smartphones for 10 consecutive years.
People do indeed care when their phones are too slow in completing tasks or even switching on. I've personally had problems with Android devices being too slow with activating the camera or even co-ordinating camera and flash together.
SD cards are overrated on smartphones. My method is certainly not scientific at all, but every person I know with an SD-enabled smartphone has never once used an SD card with it. Don't imply there's some phantom "very large percentage" of iPhone users out there.
iPhone knockoffs not as good as real iPhone
My own non scientific experience paints a different picture. Have you ever seen message boards with people saying they never use their SD slots? Most Android phone makers include them. Don't you think thay if few people used them, manufacturers would have moved away from them? I have yet to see an iPhone or iPad user NOT complain about the paltry 16GB on their devices.
More space gives you more options. Whether you use them or not is your decision. If you put two identical iPhone models on the market with the sole difference of an SD slot, I would bet my house on the SD model winning out in sales. And one of the reasons it would win out is that people would opt for lower onboard memory configurations (saving money) and top them up with SD cards.
How much would you bet?
As you can see, I'm not blowing smoke or making it up.
Same thing happened with FPS and lately with pixel density. Same thing with content delivery over fibre etc.
The difference today between premium smartphone speeds is a non issue for most.
For that, Android OEM's provides all kinds of unique features that iPhone does not, but thanks so much to them for providing market testing while Apple calmly continues development, under wraps, until these features are fully baked and can be added to the iPhone/iPad line.
sflocal, looks like you caught one.
Damn right you care. Otherwise you wouldn't waste so much time with your BS arguments trying to diminish the fact that Apple is far ahead of everyone else with their processors.
Performance has ALWAYS been the driving force for innovation in computers. Tasks that used to only be available to those on a $50K workstation made their way to PCs. And now we can do those on a device we hold in our hands.
Well, at least iOS users can. Not only because we have superior devices, but because we have superior developers who always strive to come up with new ways to use those processors to bring us new features. Something Android users, with their inferior Apps written in a kiddie language don't understand,
Excusing bad design decisions - From where did you get the idea that due to bad design decisions, Android SOCs are losing those benchmark tests? It is simply a case of Apple having superior skilled people who can come out with excellent SOCs than Android SOC makers (Read Qualcomm, Samsung). Why can't you just give credit to Apple for being ahead of the competition instead of discrediting competition who are doing a fine job themselves (except that they are not at apple's level when comparisons are made).
Is Apple still baking fast charging?
I am not excusing anything, and claiming that I am, weakens your argument still further.
2. Benchmarks and real world performance have always mattered. But we are smart enough to ignore straight numbers that are being faked or have no ability to be leveraged in the real world. It's like one of those Hellcat Muscle Cars. It has 707 HP and can go fast in a straight line, but it fails other drivability tests. It's just not a very useful use of HP.
3. They typically do this with Color Red products. They have released color options mid-cycle before (remember the white iPhone 4s?)
4. This was always the plan of Apple, to move the price point downward. But it doesn't make sense if you are selling every tablet you make at a premium price. Simply put, Apple didn't have to reduce the price of their products until now. Now that they have economy of scale with the A8/A9 series processors, they can release lower-cost options while still maintaining their premium pricing on the "Pro" line. Apple is simply doing what they've done with the Mac line... differentiate. This will put added pressure on Android markets to lower their prices. We already know the A9 is a "beast" from the stats we've seen. We can also expect that Apple will sit on the A9 on that device for about two years while their "Pro" line increases in speed with the A11, etc.
Analysts and pundits have long wanted Apple to reduce prices and increase marketshare. Now that they are doing it, you think the sky is falling? You can reduce prices and still remain profitable if you do it right. I doubt that Apple dropped margins much on this new iPad.
Besides thermal throttling, do these test once the phone is 6 months old, then a year and so. I had to use Android phones for work, and I can tell you everyone I used and I used lots of them, would begin dragging as they aged. It would take longer and longer for the phone to do things. The only way to clear it was to do a factory reset and set up your phone from scratch. The android OS would get so fragmented over time with all the cache files and such would just slow the phone down. The processors ran so hot because of this, the heat would deteriorate the battery and it would begin losing life, an 18 month old android phone could barely run two or three hour before needing charged again. But this created the external battery pack market.
Android phones maybe fast out of the box, but they can not sustain that kind of performance. Android has such poor memory and file management that is why the hardware suppliers need more memory and battery life. Google keeps claiming they fix the memory management issue, but their hardware partners keep adding more and more memory to address the slowness issues.
Yeah, Apple is still baking fast charging. The fact that Apple will be designing it's own power circuits rather than continuing to purchase them indicates to me that Apple is operating under due diligence.
Me, I can always charge my iPhone 7 Plus with my iPad Pro charger, and it's fast enough where it's a "non issue for most," to quote you.