Damn, Anandtech pretty much destroyed all Android smartphones in their iPhone 6s review...

[Hal~9000]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9686/the-apple-iphone-6s-and-iphone-6s-plus-review

Part of the problem this year is that performance and battery life haven't been the most impressive in a lot of cases. By this point, it's really not a surprise that Snapdragon 810 doesn't deliver as much performance as it needs to for the amount of power that it draws. However, even independent of SoC it seems a lot of OEMs haven't really pushed the bar in design or attention to detail. Some phones have cameras with almost unacceptable post-processing quality, others continue to have poorly calibrated displays, and the ones that have none of those have problems with software experience or something else. In general, no Android phone I've seen this year really delivers everything that I'd want in a single package. There are phones that are clearly better than others, but nothing that rises to the level that I'd want before putting down a few hundred dollars.

In the standard web browser benchmarks, the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus are clearly in the lead. The difference in some cases is significant, but given that the benchmarks that we’re running here are all enormous optimization targets it's still a reasonable comparison point.

In this benchmark, we can see that there’s a pretty enormous performance uplift that results when you compare the iPhone 6s' to anything else out there on the market.

Looking at Basemark OS II, once again Apple is basically taking the lead across the board. The differences aren’t necessarily as enormous as they are in single-threaded browser benchmarks, but the iPhone 6s’ retain a significant overall performance lead over the next best mobile devices.

On the SoC side, it’s pretty safe to say that the A9 SoC is the best SoC in any phone today. We can talk about the TSMC and Samsung controversy, but at the end of the day regardless of which one you end up with the performance is going to be far and away better than anything else we’ve seen thus far.

Looking at both video and still image performance together, the iPhone 6s Plus arguably has the best camera in an iOS or Android smartphone today.

Overall, after spending all this time with the iPhone 6s I can’t find anything really wrong with this phone.

This year, more than ever it feels like Android smartphones at the high end have stood still, as if smartphone improvements have become a zero sum game. To make the best phone this year is therefore a pretty low bar to clear. However, the iPhone 6s, even when compared to iPhones alone, is especially noteworthy for the improvements to overall user experience.

Anandtech is pretty thorough and scientific in their reviews. Your thoughts?

 

[mclld]

But it runs iOS, that is an issue for many

Anantech isn't the gospel and final word either

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I really like and respect anantech.

I also really enjoy my iPhone 6s Plus, and my wife loves her iPhone 6s (traded here galaxy s6 for it).

I have only read the conclusion, and will the rest over the course of the day.

I don't disagree with their conclusions, but I think places on Aris Technica really hit it on the nail. The iPhone is really expensive, 16 gbs is ridiculous and greedy (I know anantech touches on this). While the iPhone 6s (and plus) maybe be the best all around phone today, price has to be considered in the rating, and its a big negative. Its a big negative for Samsung, so it should be a big negative for Apple.

Smart phones are becoming more and more like cars; most people have to have one. They are also becoming more like cars in price. You can pay more for a Lexus (or whatever luxury brand you like), and get that smooth, worry free operation. Alternatively, you can also pay less for a Hyundai, Ford, etc and get a similar level of smooth, early free operation for less money.

The above analogy works, but I believe with smartphones it is going to become a bigger deal. You can go play 650-1000+ for an iPhone, or you can go pay 500 or so for a high end Android phone like the Nexus 6p, and get a phone that is equal in some areas, worse in others, and better in some ways as well.

Anyway, thats is my thoughts. I love my iPhone, and all my other Apple products....and there is a good chance I will stay in this ecosystem for a good time to come. That being said, products like the surface book and nexus 6p make me realize that their are other, equally good options.

 

[flopticalcube]

For the money it better be the best phone on the market. $750 to get a useable amount of memory is outrageous since there are nearly as good Android phones starting under $500. Since most people pay through the contract the real price of the hardware is hidden from them but they are still paying for it.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Anyway, thats is my thoughts. I love my iPhone, and all my other Apple products....and there is a good chance I will stay in this ecosystem for a good time to come. That being said, products like the surface book and nexus 6p make me realize that their are other, equally good options.

The important thing to remember with the Nexus phones is they are basically loss-leaders to drive Android adoption, and some of their cost of ownership isn't really measured in dollars but rather in data. I don't think Google's goal is not to make money from hardware, where that is Apple's goal. Google's goal is to get people using Android so it can collect data on all your activities, habits, and other happenings, and then use that data to sell targeted ads. In this sense, they are better off selling the hardware at cost or close to cost, because their profits are derived elsewhere. You may be paying a lower price in dollars for the smartphone, but you are also paying with the data you let them mine from it. I'm not trying to make Google out to be a bad guy - but that is the quid pro quo. I use gmail and hangouts and I understand that I get a fantastic webmail and chat experience for the cost of $0 and letting Google mine data from whatever I pass through those services.

With Apple, they derive their profits from hardware sales. While they do have an ad platform, it is far different than Google's and they do not make much money from it. Indeed, Apple makes it a point and a feature that data is not mined from its users, and thereby it cannot be used to subsidize the cost of ownership.

When you compare the Nexus phones to iPhones this way, I think it makes clear that data mined from a user is worth about $200-300 (compare price difference between 16GB models of iPhone 6 and a Nexus 5X, or 64GB models of iPhone 6S Plus and Nexus 6P).

 

[kasakka]

Where the iPhone falls flat is that it has a rather low resolution display (though ok for the screen size) and they're not the most compact phones either. Even my over 2 year old Galaxy S4 packs a higher res, bigger screen in about the same size as the iPhone 6S.

For larger phones IMO the Note 5 is hard to beat. It has a bigger, higher res screen at a smaller size and weight than the 6S+.

The iPhone 6S 16 GB base model is a joke and the pricing here in Europe is absurd. I can't find a valid reason to spend over 800 euros for a 64 GB iPhone 6S when a mere 300-400 gets you an Android phone that does the same tasks perfectly fine.

It's also weird that I really like Android as a phone OS but not as a tablet OS wheareas it's the opposite with iOS. iOS works great on my iPad but there's so many things I know are awkward to do on the iPhone.

So really it is about what metrics you consider important. For just CPU and camera (including software) the iPhone 6S series is certainly one of the top dogs. I do agree with Anandtech that this year we don't have very exciting phones coming out and very few Android phones that nail it in all key areas. I've tried to find a new phone and have bought a used Oneplus One to tide me over until something better comes along.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

The important thing to remember with the Nexus phones is they are basically loss-leaders to drive Android adoption, and some of their cost of ownership isn't really measured in dollars but rather in data. I don't think Google's goal is not to make money from hardware, where that is Apple's goal. Google's goal is to get people using Android so it can collect data on all your activities, habits, and other happenings, and then use that data to sell targeted ads. In this sense, they are better off selling the hardware at cost or close to cost, because their profits are derived elsewhere. You may be paying a lower price in dollars for the smartphone, but you are also paying with the data you let them mine from it. I'm not trying to make Google out to be a bad guy - but that is the quid pro quo. I use gmail and hangouts and I understand that I get a fantastic webmail and chat experience for the cost of $0 and letting Google mine data from whatever I pass through those services.

With Apple, they derive their profits from hardware sales. While they do have an ad platform, it is far different than Google's and they do not make much money from it. Indeed, Apple makes it a point and a feature that data is not mined from its users, and thereby it cannot be used to subsidize the cost of ownership.

When you compare the Nexus phones to iPhones this way, I think it makes clear that data mined from a user is worth about $200-300 (compare price difference between 16GB models of iPhone 6 and a Nexus 5X, or 64GB models of iPhone 6S Plus and Nexus 6P).

You are not wrong, and I agree with your points.

That being said, a lot of people don't care. I may care, you may care, and a lot of people on this forum may care. But when it comes down to it, in this facebook/instagram/twitter/whatever day and age, a young person may be more willing to pay less for a phone and sacrifice some of their privacy. Targeted ads probably won't bother them, and they will benefit from the integration of google now. Google may be mining their data, but its put into a giant pool, and for all intent and purposes, no real human ever views it.

Again we can look at cars. Volvo is the safest (like an iPhone), but it isn't the cheapest, best looking, fastest, most features, etc. People still buy Jeeps like crazy, despite their tendency to role over.

Again, I agree with you, and I believe that a certain level of privacy is worth paying for. But there is that price, and then their is Apple's price. The iPhone is overpriced, if it wasn't, Apple wouldn't be the richest company in the world. They make a very desirable product, and people will pay an extreme cost for it.

The same thing can be seen with the current, underpowered core U macbook....way, way overpriced for what you get. Apple is greedy, there really isn't anyway around it. They want their profit, just like any other company, but there is a line to draw. Apple got greedy once, and it nearly ruined the company. I am not saying that is going to happen now. Again, I love my Apple products, they are great devices.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

Where the iPhone falls flat is that it has a rather low resolution display (though ok for the screen size) and they're not the most compact phones either. Even my over 2 year old Galaxy S4 packs a higher res, bigger screen in about the same size as the iPhone 6S.

For larger phones IMO the Note 5 is hard to beat. It has a bigger, higher res screen at a smaller size and weight than the 6S+.

The iPhone 6S 16 GB base model is a joke and the pricing here in Europe is absurd. I can't find a valid reason to spend over 800 euros for a 64 GB iPhone 6S when a mere 300-400 gets you an Android phone that does the same tasks perfectly fine.

It's also weird that I really like Android as a phone OS but not as a tablet OS wheareas it's the opposite with iOS. iOS works great on my iPad but there's so many things I know are awkward to do on the iPhone.

So really it is about what metrics you consider important. For just CPU and camera (including software) the iPhone 6S series is certainly one of the top dogs. I do agree with Anandtech that this year we don't have very exciting phones coming out and very few Android phones that nail it in all key areas. I've tried to find a new phone and have bought a used Oneplus One to tide me over until something better comes along.

I agree, but I find the screen to be perfectly suitable. I will take the screen, with the great battery life and performance that accompanies it.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I hate to post again so quickly, but one thing to note;

Yes the phone is expensive, too expensive (as I have said above), but it does offer the best hardware on the market. You can argue all day about the screen and camera; but the storage speed, memory, cpu, and gpu are far above anything in the android market right now...not to mention iOS ability to utilize it. Like I said, it too expensive, but you do get a damn good phone once you pay the price.

 

[lowendlinux]

If Anand says they're better then that are.

 

[oneMadRssn]

You are not wrong, and I agree with your points.

That being said, a lot of people don't care. I may care, you may care, and a lot of people on this forum may care. But when it comes down to it, in this facebook/instagram/twitter/whatever day and age, a young person may be more willing to pay less for a phone and sacrifice some of their privacy. Targeted ads probably won't bother them, and they will benefit from the integration of google now. Google may be mining their data, but its put into a giant pool, and for all intent and purposes, no real human ever views it.

Again we can look at cars. Volvo is the safest (like an iPhone), but it isn't the cheapest, best looking, fastest, most features, etc. People still buy Jeeps like crazy, despite their tendency to role over.

Again, I agree with you, and I believe that a certain level of privacy is worth paying for. But there is that price, and then their is Apple's price. The iPhone is overpriced, if it wasn't, Apple wouldn't be the richest company in the world. They make a very desirable product, and people will pay an extreme cost for it.

The same thing can be seen with the current, underpowered core U macbook....way, way overpriced for what you get. Apple is greedy, there really isn't anyway around it. They want their profit, just like any other company, but there is a line to draw. Apple got greedy once, and it nearly ruined the company. I am not saying that is going to happen now. Again, I love my Apple products, they are great devices.

I don't mean to imply a reason, but clearly people are willing to pay more for an iPhone - it outsells every single other smartphones. We can argue about whether that is for privacy, for features, for apps, for UI, for marketing, for forward compatibility, or for any other of endless reasons. But the point is, it's not overpriced if people are willing to pay it, and taking a look around, lots and lots of people are willing to pay it.

Apple isn't more greedy than any other company. The weakness is that Apple is only has one big revenue stream. Apple is only good at making money from hardware. Time and time again Apple fails at making money from selling services. This seems like greed to some that don't see the other costs, but objectively is it not more greedy than any other company. Being the richest company in the world doesn't mean the product is overpriced. If that were true, using your car analogy, Rolls Royce would be the richest car company in the world. But they're not. Apple wouldn't be the richest company if people weren't willing to pay the prices asked.

I would agree with you about it being overpriced if the data suggested that iPhone sales were slowing at a greater rate than the slowing of smartphones sales as a whole. They're not - iPhone outpaces the industry. Mac sales also consistently outpace the industry rates. To me this means the phones are priced just right.

 

[mi7chy]

I don't buy a new device to run synthetic benchmarks but to run real apps so if the review doesn't include real world apps then I don't care plus a lot of synthetic benchmarks are misleading if not scams like JD Power award that's funded by the recipient. For example, Safari browser scrolling lag even on iPad Air 2 and iPhone 6S doesn't live up to synthetic benchmarks and there's also the issue of Safari instability that can't be measured. Bias is also in question since Anandtech went to work for Apple.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I don't mean to imply a reason, but clearly people are willing to pay more for an iPhone - it outsells every single other smartphones. We can argue about whether that is for privacy, for features, for apps, for UI, for marketing, for forward compatibility, or for any other of endless reasons. But the point is, it's not overpriced if people are willing to pay it, and taking a look around, lots and lots of people are willing to pay it.

Apple isn't more greedy than any other company. The weakness is that Apple is only has one big revenue stream. Apple is only good at making money from hardware. Time and time again Apple fails at making money from selling services. This seems like greed to some that don't see the other costs, but objectively is it not more greedy than any other company. Being the richest company in the world doesn't mean the product is overpriced. If that were true, using your car analogy, Rolls Royce would be the richest car company in the world. But they're not. Apple wouldn't be the richest company if people weren't willing to pay the prices asked.

I would agree with you about it being overpriced if the data suggested that iPhone sales were slowing at a greater rate than the slowing of smartphones sales as a whole. They're not - iPhone outpaces the industry. Mac sales also consistently outpace the industry rates. To me this means the phones are priced just right.

I agree to a certain extent. But your argument disregards brand power. That is one of apples greatest strengths.

Also, most people buy phones on contracts or broken into payments. The cheaper high end phones, like the nexus, are not readily available to buy going that route. The iPhone competes on a similar price level (monthly payments) as Samsung, Htc, and LG. All three companies have one major flaw or another in their handsets, and thus the iPhone is the better deal at the price.

What if the latest nexus line was available at a monthly cost, on all carriers, like it is on project fi? We are talking half the monthly cost for a great
Phone. The brand power of Apple would persevere them for a long while, but I would guess that more and more people would start to consider the cheaper alternative, specially younger people with less income, and less ties to one ecosystem
or the other.

Hell, I agree with you, I paid for brand bee MacBook Pro retina, iPad Air 2, and two of the new generation iPhones. Don't view my post as argumentative or Apple hating. I really respect Apple and their ability to create world class hardware. I'm just saying that the price may one day play a larger role then it does now, then in the past when cheap meant horrible.

Honestly I hope the competition gives Apple the squeeze, at least a little. It's better for the user in the end.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I don't buy a new device to run synthetic benchmarks but to run real apps so if the review doesn't include real world apps then I don't care plus a lot of synthetic benchmarks are misleading if not scams like JD Power awards that's funded by the recipient. Bias is also in question since Anandtech went to work for Apple.

I don't think so. I thought andan himself did, and thus no longer writes for the site.

The current writers are independent I assume.

I mean, read the review. The dude stuck with an Htc one m7 up until the time of the review, which was highly praised by the website. I don't know if he moved to the iPhone or not, but it seems he writes what he thinks.

 

[apolloa]

Anandtech is the last place on the internet I go looking for unbiased balanced reviews on. I mean when the owner is offered a job by Apple it stinks more then a hundred acres of manure, and the Apple reviews are notably very Pro Apple.

It's not surprising Apple fans praise them and their reviews.. Apple is notorious for refusing support and disliking sites that are negative or critical towards them, yet this site was so pro Apple they offered its owner a job! Yeah it's the least trusted Apple review site on the net in my opinion.

 

[oneMadRssn]

I agree to a certain extent. But your argument disregards brand power. That is one of apples greatest strengths. Whatever the parts, the sum still shows the price is right.

Also, most people buy phones on contracts or broken into payments. The cheaper high end phones, like the nexus, are not readily available to buy going that route. The iPhone competes on a similar price level (monthly payments) as Samsung, Htc, and LG. All three companies have one major flaw or another in their handsets, and thus the iPhone is the better deal at the price.

What if the latest nexus line was available at a monthly cost, on all carriers, like it is on project fi? We are talking half the monthly cost for a great
Phone. The brand power of Apple would persevere them for a long while, but I would guess that more and more people would start to consider the cheaper alternative, specially younger people with less income, and less ties to one ecosystem
or the other.

Hell, I agree with you, I paid for brand bee MacBook Pro retina, iPad Air 2, and two of the new generation iPhones. Don't view my post as argumentative or Apple hating. I really respect Apple and their ability to create world class hardware. I'm just saying that the price may one day play a larger role then it does now, then in the past when cheap meant horrible.

Honestly I hope the competition gives Apple the squeeze, at least a little. It's better for the user in the end.

Yea, brand loyalty is certainly a factor. So is the fact it runs iOS, which is unavailable elsewhere. Like I said, there are countless factors. I think we agree that consumer pricing is a very complex multi-faceted beast.

Maybe the reason the Nexus phones aren't available from the carrier is because Google didn't want to pay the cost of getting the devices tested and approved by the carriers? Another potential reason their price is lower. I used to work for a company that wanted to sell the product with an AT&T sim card already inserted - and it was a stinkin huge pain to get approval to do that. We could have sold it without a sim card, and asked users to supply their own, doing so would have been much much easier for us, but due to the nature of the product that was a very poor option. Ultimately, we spent a ton of money and time getting the approval. I do wonder, how much cheaper could the product have been to consumers had we not done that? How much would the pain of asking users to get their own sim card and plan independently affected sales? Is it different today than in 2010 (when I was doing this)? I bet product managers at Google went through these questions as well.

I think Apple is perfectly capable of adjusting their prices as needed. They have done so many times in the past. As it stands today, the iPhone is priced correctly. There is just no objective data today that shows the base model iphone at $650 is overpriced.

Of course I do hope the price is lowered soon, and I hope some competition from Huawei and OnePlus and Google pushes the whole industry to either lower prices, or more value-added features. That said, I really like iOS and I am totally willing to pay $750 for a 64GB iPhone, and thus I do not consider it overpriced personally.

Also worth noting, the iPhone 5S is still a very good phone at a very good price. $450 for a brand new from Apple, but can easily be had for $250 if you shop around. Other than the silly taboo of buying a product first released two years ago, feature for feature, the 5S can go against many Android phones in the same price range. So it's not like Apple doesn't offer a more affordable option.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

Yea, brand loyalty is certainly a factor. So is the fact it runs iOS, which is unavailable elsewhere. Like I said, there are countless factors. I think we agree that consumer pricing is a very complex multi-faceted beast.

Maybe the reason the Nexus phones aren't available from the carrier is because Google didn't want to pay the cost of getting the devices tested and approved by the carriers? Another potential reason their price is lower. I used to work for a company that wanted to sell the product with an AT&T sim card already inserted - and it was a stinkin huge pain to get approval to do that. We could have sold it without a sim card, and asked users to supply their own, doing so would have been much much easier for us, but due to the nature of the product that was a very poor option. Ultimately, we spent a ton of money and time getting the approval. I do wonder, how much cheaper could the product have been to consumers had we not done that? How much would the pain of asking users to get their own sim card and plan independently affected sales? Is it different today than in 2010 (when I was doing this)?

I think Apple is perfectly capable of adjusting their prices as needed. They have done so many times in the past. As it stands today, the iPhone is priced correctly. There is just no objective data today that shows the base model iphone at $650 is overpriced.

Of course I do hope the price is lowered soon, and I hope some competition from Huawei and OnePlus and Google pushes the whole industry to either lower prices, or more value-added features. That said, I really like iOS and I am totally willing to pay $750 for a 64GB iPhone, and thus I do not consider it overpriced personally.

Also worth noting, the iPhone 5S is still a very good phone at a very good price. $450 for a brand new from Apple, but can easily be had for $250 if you shop around. Other than the silly taboo of buying a product first released two years ago, feature for feature, the 5S can go against many Android phones in the same price range. So it's not like Apple doesn't offer a more affordable option.

I don't think I could have said it better, and I agree with everything you stated. With the above mentioned, I would agree in saying the phone is "priced right".

I do think it would be a good gesture to make the base model 32gb, at that $650 price point, but personally don't care either way. I wouldn't go lower than 64gb personally.

Also, carriers in general are only good for messing things up. That is why I applaud Apple for offering a carrier free option, which is not only a great option IMO, but it is a decision that is already pushing the industry that way. Samsung is already rumored to start the same type of deal. First and foremost this will get phones out of the carriers hands, eventually, which can only be good. It will speed up updates for android phones (good for them), and more importantly it may broader the everyday consumers perception. If people start to default to going through the manufactures with iPhones and Galaxies; it won't take much for the consumer to begin to notice Nexus phones, Moto, etc.

Again I agree with you, hence why I owe the Apple products that I do.

 

[mi7chy]

It's not surprising Apple fans praise them and their reviews.. Apple is notorious for refusing support and disliking sites that are correctly negative or critical towards them, yet this site was so pro Apple they offered its owner a job! Yeah its the least trusted Apple review site on the net in my opinion.

You can get on Apple's bad side just for reporting the truth. If the iPhone 6 series bend issue wasn't real then why did Apple bothered to fix it with stronger aluminum on iPhone 6S series.

http://www.computerbild.de/artikel/...BILD-An-open-letter-to-Tim-Cook-10953399.html

 

[Zwhaler]

Yet the screen pales in comparison to the competition for the price. 16GB at that price too... not impressive. And iOS... That is the deal breaker (for me)

 

[oneMadRssn]

I don't think I could have said it better, and I agree with everything you stated. With the above mentioned, I would agree in saying the phone is "priced right".

I do think it would be a good gesture to make the base model 32gb, at that $650 price point, but personally don't care either way. I wouldn't go lower than 64gb personally.

Also, carriers in general are only good for messing things up. That is why I applaud Apple for offering a carrier free option, which is not only a great option IMO, but it is a decision that is already pushing the industry that way. Samsung is already rumored to start the same type of deal. First and foremost this will get phones out of the carriers hands, eventually, which can only be good. It will speed up updates for android phones (good for them), and more importantly it may broader the everyday consumers perception. If people start to default to going through the manufactures with iPhones and Galaxies; it won't take much for the consumer to begin to notice Nexus phones, Moto, etc.

Again I agree with you, hence why I owe the Apple products that I do.

Agreed. I do wish carriers were forced to give up their control over consumer devices. Seems IEEE and FCC do a pretty good job of regulating wireless standards, and ensuring all devices are within spec. Carriers just provide the infrastructure, a utility. As long as my device is compatible, that should be it.

 

[John Mcgregor]

Yet the screen pales in comparison to the competition for the price. 16GB at that price too... not impressive. And iOS... That is the deal breaker (for me)

I think people forgot what natural or closer to natural colours look like on a display after all the cartoon network jonny bravo ambled displays. Just like americans have forgotten how real food tastes after all the sugar and bad fat junk food.

1080p is just fine on a phone, because it provides a balanced performance and battery life. That's why iPhone is the best phone overall. Performance and software integration is the best.

 

[mi7chy]

I think people forgot what natural or closer to natural colours look like on a display after all the cartoon network jonny bravo ambled displays. Just like americans have forgotten how real food tastes after all the sugar and bad fat junk food.

http://displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm

"the most color accurate display that we have ever measured for a Smartphone or Tablet, which is visually indistinguishable from perfect, and is very likely considerably better than your living room TV."

If you want to see real cartoony colors look at photos of the sky taken with iPhone 6 and 6S series that are too blue/purple.

 

[John Mcgregor]

http://displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm

"the most color accurate display that we have ever measured for a Smartphone or Tablet, which is visually indistinguishable from perfect, and is very likely considerably better than your living room TV."

If you want to see real cartoony colors look at photos of the sky taken with iPhone 6 and 6S series that are too blue/purple.

Thats not displays issue, but one of the camera. Display shows the colours that are encoded in the file. What camera encoded is what's being shown. I have S6 myself and all the UI is cartoonish and looks washed out in many cases. Oversaturated. I will take good IPS panel any day.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I don't buy a new device to run synthetic benchmarks but to run real apps so if the review doesn't include real world apps then I don't care plus a lot of synthetic benchmarks are misleading if not scams like JD Power award that's funded by the recipient. For example, Safari browser scrolling lag even on iPad Air 2 and iPhone 6S doesn't live up to synthetic benchmarks and there's also the issue of Safari stability that can't be measured. Bias is also in question since Anandtech went to work for Apple.

I've lost count now how many times the difference in scrolling between iPhone and Android has been explained to you. MRU explained in great detail yet you continue to post it as lag which is false. Perhaps you can explain the lag as you have never been able to in the past. I won't hold my breath because you can't.

 

[Zwhaler]

Thats not displays issue, but one of the camera. Display shows the colours that are encoded in the file. What camera encoded is what's being shown. I have S6 myself and all the UI is cartoonish and looks washed out in many cases. Oversaturated. I will take good IPS panel any day.

The article was about the display, not the camera. They run Adobe RGB, sRGB/Rec.709 color gamuts, among other objective tests.