Launch dates are relevant in technology because... it's technology. It's how we can judge things like CPUs and GPUs relative to their predecessors and successors.
My point is thanks to leaks we already know that the iPhone 7 is more of the same probably, so saying that most of this is just a 6S problem is fallacy. If anything the upcoming iPhone 7 will be an even better datapoint of how Apple mails in its designs when it comes to hardware and form factor if the iPhone SE (basically 6S guts shoved in a 5S, lazy as it gets) didn't already prove that.
Not sure why you're bringing up OLED here
Because ALL iPhone should have OLEDs TODAY if iPhones really were the best hardware on the market. The best screens are OLEDs period, there is a reason that OLEDs are used for VR. iPhones could have OLEDs right now if Apple was willing to take the margin hit, which they are not. That makes the iPhone the best hardware "that Apple can throw together and still keep massive margins," which is different from outright having the best hardware overall.
You think putting a 1440p resolution screen in a 5" device is innovative? How many people can even tell the difference between 1080p and 1440p in a device that small?
No, I think putting a 720p screen on a flagship phone in 2015 is a rip off. I maybe can't see the difference between a 5 inch 1080p screen and a 5 inch 1440p one, but I sure as hell can see all the fringing on fonts on the current regular sized iPhone. It really bugs me, enough to get the Plus model for that alone. Plus as I said the real benefit of higher resolution displays is VR.
Firstly, VR content consumption is never going to be optimal (let alone decent) when it's driven by the smartphone's inbuilt display, because optimal VR rendering is best delivered by two separate inbuilt displays (one for each eye).
Who cares about optimal, smartphone VR is all about affordable. See I actually have a Galaxy VR (had it for years) and I really enjoy it plus everyone I show it to is amazed by it. Turns out good enough is good enough sometimes, especially for just looking around remote places or simple games.
Why would you even want VR rendering done on your smartphone?
Because smartphone VR > no VR. Unless you are volunteering to buy me a Vive and a monster computer to go with it you are being kinda snobbish on this point. Galaxy VR is neat enough for what it is, and will be the first VR experience for MILLIONS of people. I have it, have used it, and you obviously have not so I can tell you it gives you enough to have a VR experience that shows you the future power of VR.
And BTW that is all you get with ANY VR platform right now. The gen 1 models of Oculus and Vive have so many limitations it's obvious gen 2 models will blow them out of the water. So really premium VR doesn't exist on the planet yet outside of labs, which means that anything we get is just an indicator of what we will get in the future. If all you can buy is a halfbaked product no matter what, most people would prefer to spend $100 (price of Galaxy VR helmet) and use their phone over $800 (price of Vive) plus a monster PC. As I said, it's good enough to wow people when I show them.
Plus I have to make the point that neither Oculus nor Vive have anything to do with Apple, so the broader point is how Samsung is more innovative on hardware is based on the fact that they are at least IN the VR game unlike Apple that has no native VR solution for its handsets. Hell Apple doesn't even sell a computer that could run the Vive or Oculus, meaning anyone that cares about VR
has to go outside their ecosystem. This is a clear win for Android, and Daydream is about to make that gap massive.
Rendering the home screen or settings page is not multitasking, and really shouldn't be stuttering. It's because Android is poorly optimised, and TouchWiz is 10 times worse.
I am talking hardware, not software. I already admitted iOS is a nicer OS. The issue is the hardware it runs on is behind the times (except storage and CPU) so Apple can keep massive margins, and that people try to justify that behind the times hardware because they have to buy it to get iOS. I don't do that, I admit the hardware is a dinosaur (besides a few exceptions) and I have it to get iOS. Therefore I have no problems with someone wanting iOS. I have a problem with someone telling me that a iPhone is more advanced hardware-wise than a Galaxy when the Galaxy blows it away on almost every hardware metric besides SoC and storage.
Design is a function of the time it exists in. As I said at the start of my post, you can only judge things relative to the period in which they were released.
Which is why I keep going on and on about the
2013 LG G2. Android has had small bezels on its flagship phones since 2013, so the "function of the time" is Apple could have that too if they didn't coast on designs for two plus years to maximize margins. Apple is the richest company in the world, you can't tell me they couldn't shrink a bezel when much poorer companies like LG, Samsung and even OnePlus can do it. The answer is they don't want to because they don't have to, not some BS argument that they did the best they could given what they have.
The iPhone 6s is nearing the end of its flagship life, and it reflects what Apple determined was optimal in terms of engineering and design compromises prior to its launch.
First of all the iPhone 7 looks to be the same design basically so it's not like Apple is even TRYING to innovate on this metric. Secondly what Apple considered to be "optimal" (especially on the phablet design) simply isn't when compared to the competition. That is the whole issue- the iPhone doesn't exist in a bubble. Yeah maybe only it runs iOS, but we have other smartphones and many of them BLOW AWAY the iPhone design.
I mean Apple keeps the same hardware design two years in a row- no one else does that and thrives! How can you argue they do they best they can when they mail it in every other year? The only thing that can be arguing is that Apple has a right to have stagnant hardware due to how they built their brand perception and their OS vendor lock in, which I can't disagree with.
...maybe the only people calling the 6 Plus a disaster just vehemently hate Apple?
I can point out a few unbiased reviews that point out the fat bezels or top heavy design if you want.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/16/6155009/apple-iphone-6-plus-review
Sure, I can double-tap the Home button to bring the top of the screen down, but this is an awkward gesture given how top-heavy the iPhone 6 Plus feels. I know it's tricky to get user interfaces right, but after only using the iPhone 6 Plus for an hour or so I'd already come up with possible improvements, which I'll go through later. I would have expected Apple to have put more thought into this.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/the-pros-and-cons-of-iphone-6-plus-ownership/
The extra height increases the surfboard-like nature of the 6 Plus — it’s a well-balanced package, but it’s so long it can feel top-heavy if you don’t grab it in the middle. It’s less stable to hold in one hand than Samsung’s Note 3, which is a bit more squat and squared-off. It’s a tiny difference in spec-sheet dimensions, but in day-to-day use the Note 3 definitely feels smaller.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2016/01/29/forget-thinness-get-rid-of-these-bezels/
Being an iPhone 6s Plus user myself, I have no qualms with the battery life I’m experiencing and would like Apple to continue focusing on slimming down devices, but by cutting out the atrociously large bezels surrounding my screen rather than slicing off a couple more millimeters from the back.
That last one is a iPhone only site to prove my point of how wrong you are. Killing the messenger doesn't change the message.
Again, you're judging the success and failure of a device simply by its spec sheet.
Aka its hardware. That is exactly what I am doing. I am saying the hardware is behind the competition. I don't debate that the OS is better or that the iPhone is the most successful product in human history in sales terms. I just think that success is due to early mover advantage, brand value, and OS lock-in rather than market-leading hardware. The hardware is behind in almost every way and will be until 2018 probably.
The fact that the 6 Plus and 6s Plus exhibited strong sales (and the iPhone SE) shows that Apple's engineering choices were justified.
No, it just shows how millions of people are locked into iOS or the Apple brand name. Just like millions of people will buy the iPhone 7 despite being pissed it got rid of a headphone jack they use- if you are heavily invested in iOS then Apple could crap in a box and you would have to buy it (aka the iPad 3) because there is no competition for iOS devices. That doesn't mean you can't compare the hardware to other smartphones though, they all do the same general stuff even if the OS is a little more janky sometimes on the Android side.
Like, I find it interesting that you condition your statement by saying "there is no benefit to the Plus iPhones but size if you exclude features the small iPhone should have anyway" -- that's a bit of a straw man argument. It's akin to saying "there is no benefit to the GTX 1080 relative to the GTX 980 Ti... if you exclude the performance and newly supported features which the older card should have anyway!"
Well I do think the 980 ti should have had real async support like Nvidia promised but that is a whole other debate. Let's leave GPUs out of it.
Blows away is an exaggeration...
Maybe, depends on how much you need OIS or low light performance. In the CPU forum even 10% can be "blows away." The aperture difference between the models is bigger than that (2.2 vs 1.9).
Like I said, you judge products in the times they are launched. You can't complain about how slow and ugly a NES is now -- its prime was back in 1985!
I can complain that a 2015 iPhone has larger bezels than a 2013 LG G2 because they are from the same time (well actually the G2 is older). I can complain the 2014 iPhone 6 Plus had less effective RAM than the 2012 iPhone 5. I can complain that the 2015 iPhone 6S has fringing on fonts that the 2013 LG G2 doesn't have. I can complain that Apple obviously holds its punches on hardware for margin. Free country plus it's a good argument with real merit.
The only thing I can't do is expect them to do anything about it, not when millions will buy whatever they sell because they need iOS and then justify that purchase to themselves on some BS point of "that was the best the richest company in the world can do."
Hopefully a partnership with Intel means they are willing to be more aggressive on the hardware-side going forward, as Intel has the best process probably.