I don't know where you've been, but people mention it all the time. People certainly noticed it, as evidenced by how many people are posting in this topic about how this finally explains what they've known all along. I certainly noticed lag on my 3G, which was much improved on the 4S, but still noticeable. In the early days Android was notoriously laggy, mentioned frequently in comparison to iOS, and while they've improved somewhat they are apparently still behind Apple on the latency race. Now, we actually have real numbers to prove it, and a third party test that can continue to measure as new devices come along.
Admittedly, I only jumped into the smartphone scene in 2009, when I got a Blackberry Storm (gaaakkkkk). I never noticed anyone talking about lag or improvements in response when I jumped into the Apple world with the iPhone 4 two years later. Nothing about how much smoother touch was on the 4 compared to the 3GS.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just never noticed. And I haven't seen it brought up all that often since. As for Android, I've played with a number of devices since, and I've never noticed a moment where pressing an icon or link failed to respond, or the screen felt like it was lagging too far behind my finger press. What I did notice were hitches and occasional breaks in framerate, which can look like input lag, but isn't quite.
If you really think about it, it's almost impossible to tap a link on anything that has -200ms response time, and have it fail to pick it up. Think of it like this, the average amount of time it takes for a person to complete a single blink is around 200-400ms. For a press to fail to connect, you'd have to jab your finger at the screen and have it make full contact in about one half to one quarter of the amount of time it takes you to blink. No one presses a screen that fast. Hell, I'm not even sure it's physically possible. Your average casual press probably takes about 400-750ms. Not quite a second, just....boomp. And there you go.
The only other upside to a low response time is scrolling, like I showed in that video above above. And much like I said, it only becomes an issue in a select few situations. For the most part, no one notices or even cares that the screen isn't scrolling 1:1 to your finger.
55ms vs. 115 is such a small difference from a general use perspective that it's nearly nonexistant. Yeah, it's there. Yeah, it'll show up in tests. No, it doesn't make one device feel super speedy and another slow, laggy crap.
I'd like to think you're not just a troll, but it's obvious you haven't watched the video or read anything from various companies (like Oculus VR) who have studied input latency extensively to understand perception and improve user experience.
Just saw this. I'm gonna say that this is somewhat comparing apples to oranges. See, your eyes move very, very quickly, add in balance, and the way you expect things to move, and you have a situation where even the tiniest discrepancy can make for a lot of people getting sick and throwing up everywhere because they're getting motion sick. You absolutely have to have as low a latency as possible to achieve realistic results when it comes to stuff like the Oculus VR.
Flipping through the springboard and webpages on the iPhone? Even at 55ms, you've got to contend with a goodly bit of lag while scrolling. Yet you never notice it because it's not directly tied to your perception of the world around you. Most of the time you're tracking words or icons with your eyes, rather than how they relate to the position of your finger.