That's ridiculous.
A 1 year cycle is perfect for their products.
Nobody in their right state of mind would buy more of the same gadgets without at least 12 months of amortization time.
It is Samsung, Nokia, and everyone else that is doing wrong, by pumping out new models faster than their rate of adoption. With a 1 year cycle, Apple has more R&D time to develop a better product, and catches most consumers, even those who already own an Apple product, when the upgrade bug bites.
Agreed. There's things Apple should've thought of, but an October release for an iPhone 4S is still not that long gone. It was 5 months newer than the SGS2, and they could've easily packed say a 4" or 4.3" screen and it wouldn't feel as blown away by today's 4.8" screen.
Heck, take an SGS2. It's not a bad phone at all. In fact it can run anything you throw at it. Sure it might not feel as fast as an SGS3 or One X, but I'd say that has to do with Android's hardware optimizations over anything. 60fps smoothness should be easily attainable with any hardware in the past 2 years.
Android phones have benefited largely from brute force hardware upgrades like massive 2GB RAM, quad core CPUs. Apple hardware has shown that it doesn't desperately need all these crazy specs to do well.
The iPhone 4S is a damn fast phone, and if they had launched it just with a bigger screen, I think it wouldn't feel as left behind with the market today. Launching a phone every 3 months doesn't really benefit anyone. It hurts the consumers most. Samsung and HTC have learned this and too have yearly product cycles.
Edit: If you take the idiotic US market out of the picture, Samsung has launched the SGS1, SGS2, SGS3 in a yearly cycle. HTC launched the Desire, Sensation, and now One X in yearly cycles too. Motorola's probably the worst company in terms of launching products left and right.