Whether a screen protector is necessary or not seems to come down to lottery.
I've noticed a huge discrepancy in the quality of the oleophobic coating between different iPhone 6 devices.
For example, my launch day iPhone 6 had microscratches in the coating within a week. That's why when I had it replaced after two weeks of use, (due to a hardware issue, not the cosmetic microscratches) I immediately covered the front with a Zagg glass protector (which was great).
6 months later, I had to replace my device again (due to lunation of the front camera) which meant I inevitably lost the screen protector. Due to laziness, I didn't get another screen protector.
This new iPhone 6 is scratch-free after 3 weeks of use without a screen protector.
So, either Apple improved the quality of the oleophobic coating after launch, or the quality of the coating is simply a lottery between devices.
I've noticed a huge discrepancy in the quality of the oleophobic coating between different iPhone 6 devices.
For example, my launch day iPhone 6 had microscratches in the coating within a week. That's why when I had it replaced after two weeks of use, (due to a hardware issue, not the cosmetic microscratches) I immediately covered the front with a Zagg glass protector (which was great).
6 months later, I had to replace my device again (due to lunation of the front camera) which meant I inevitably lost the screen protector. Due to laziness, I didn't get another screen protector.
This new iPhone 6 is scratch-free after 3 weeks of use without a screen protector.
So, either Apple improved the quality of the oleophobic coating after launch, or the quality of the coating is simply a lottery between devices.