Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

comparedial.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 509 posts

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#141

Post by RulerOf »

vuln wrote: post #87
GeorgeTirebiter wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

0. does it have a stylus / pen? If not, unacceptable. Ergo, all iPhones are unacceptable. (Yes, I used to work at EO, running the GO PenPoint Operating System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenPoint_OS?useskin=vector , and also worked at GRiD, putting wireless LAN into the GRiDPAD RC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRiDPad?useskin=vector . I like pens. I might be biased.)

> 0. does it have a stylus / pen? All modern touch screen phones are compatible with a stylus. I'm sure it would be harder to find one that isn't. The accuracy may not be the best on budget models. Unless you mean _is a stylus / pen included with the phone_?

>All modern touch screen phones are compatible with a stylus.

Opinion here, but capacitive styluses suck. I wouldn't bother with a stylus unless it was something like Wacom or Apple Pencil tech.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#142

Post by wetpaws »

thewataccount wrote: post #32
yumraj wrote: post #19

The one, and only benchmark, I care about is battery longevity. Not how long battery lasts before needing charge, but how many years it lasts before dropping to say 80% of original capacity that it needs to be replaced or the phone needs to be updated. Most, if not all, modern phones are performant enough that I won’t need to update for a long time, if not for the battery issues. At least for my use case.

FWIW my iPhone 7+ went 5 years and holds a charge for ~12 hours. It was just at 78% when I replaced it a few weeks ago but TBH that number is very... random (I used to do phone repair). If you have a charger at your desk/car then honestly you could likely go even longer. I've seen people struggling after 2 years though so it's rather random. Just a random N=1 sample for you

12 hours is laughably small running time

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#143

Post by lxgr »

minusf wrote: post #48
gbil wrote: post #15

I like my slower android in which I can run my browser engine of choice, install any program I want in an easy way without time limitations and customize it in general as I want. Did I mention that it has a USB-C connector too? Disclaimer: I have an old iphone, used iphone 11 for weeks then went back to Android and I daily drive a M1 Pro Macbook

what choice is that? firefox or chrome based skins? a duopoly is not a choice. however silly it is, apple's silly browser rule is the only thing standing in full on chrome monoculture. chrome is the new ie.

> a duopoly is not a choice.

It's more choice than a monopoly.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#144

Post by tempoponet »

lasfallas wrote: post #86
barbazoo wrote: post #46

Why anyone would get a Samsung is beyond me. The amount of bloatware they install is insane and a lot of that you can't even uninstall. Plus it takes so long to get OS updates. And then there is Bixby or what that piece of shit is called.

2017 called and wants your comment back. Samsung is best Android manufacturer in class regarding OS upgrades and security updates, Bixby can be switched off and actually performs well in tests. Visible bloatware has been reduced significantly and most of the visible apps you can uninstall or deactivate.

2023 calling - According to this Ars article from 3 days ago the Galaxy S23 install size is 4x that of stock Android.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/02/the-samsung-galaxy-s...

It's not that comforting just being able to uninstall/disable things after paying ~$1000 for hardware loaded with apps that benefit everyone but the customer.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#145

Post by wetpaws »

tootie wrote: post #76
yumraj wrote: post #19

The one, and only benchmark, I care about is battery longevity. Not how long battery lasts before needing charge, but how many years it lasts before dropping to say 80% of original capacity that it needs to be replaced or the phone needs to be updated. Most, if not all, modern phones are performant enough that I won’t need to update for a long time, if not for the battery issues. At least for my use case.

Moto G Power has a 3-day battery and costs $130 new and unlocked. I didn't even bother looking at the rest of the specs. It's works exactly fine.

I wish I could have galaxy note stylo with Moto g battery and not the miniscule one that Samsung uses everywhere.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#147

Post by jaywalk »

Wingman4l7 wrote: post #139
konart wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in which I can run my browser engine of choice Soon on iOS too, to be fair. USB-C to follow most likely.

> USB-C to follow most likely Only because Apple was forced to by an EU ruling. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they restrict sales of USB-C phones to EU-only, out of spite.

I would be absolutely shocked if they made such a basic hardware feature region-specific. There is practically zero chance that USB-C isn't rolled out worldwide with the iPhone 15.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#148

Post by yamtaddle »

Zurrrrr wrote: post #131
yamtaddle wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has Android gotten a lot better on that front? Last I developed for Android was after they had some big push to improve battery life and they were still a ton worse.

They've never been that bad in my experience. My guess is you were using something preinstalled with a ton of battery leeching crap. Android itself doesn't do that, but much like buying a PC, it's hard to stop manufacturers loading it up with cruft.

I had a lot of experience with tons of devices from both ecosystems (because I was at least part-time in mobile dev) from about 2011-2019 and a consistent hallmark of Android devices—regardless of manufacturer, Google's own devices weren't much better—was that their battery life, and especially idle battery life, was markedly worse than iOS devices. In fact, I came into that world as an Android user, and gaining extensive exposure to both ecosystems was what convinced me I'd be better off in almost every way by switching. Android devices only stopped being an absolute joke, by comparison, near the end of that span, but were still lagging on both performance (as far as actual in-practice UX, not benchmarks) and real-world battery life. But it's entirely possible they've closed the gap since.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#149

Post by acdha »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #10

I guess my question is - why do I care about geekbench? When was the last time someone who doesn't play games on their phone thought "man, I wish this was faster"? Because it's been years for me. The good news I hear is that Samsung is finally improving their battery life. That is a score that I actually care about.

You care about single-core performance when you use the web: things like JavaScript processing, layout, etc. will bottleneck on one core and since developers are shipping more code this is probably the most noticeable difference. It's also a little hard to tell in some cases since there are many “native apps” which use an embedded web view for some of their UI.

This is important for developers to know about because if you use a recent iPhone your experience is not just fundamentally better than any Android user's but it's especially significant compared to the kinds of cheaper phones many people buy. Look at the chart here: a Galaxy S22 is comparable to the iPhone XS which shipped 4 years earlier but even the S22 towers over the Moto E30 & other budget phones.

https://infrequently.org/2022/12/performance-baseline-2023/#...

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#150

Post by fullstop »

cokeandpepsi wrote: post #112
metalliqaz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why buy a Pixel only to replace the OS? Pixels are basically minimum viable hardware to deliver Google software. Without the Google software, its just a mid-range phone at high-end prices.

the a series are well priced/supported and do more than enough for me, you can pick one up for $300 and be good for years.. all while there are people making monthly payments for 1,200 iphones

> all while there are people making monthly payments for 1,200 iphones

A lot of the carrier /manufacturer incentives (in the USA) have been fantastic lately, especially if you had an older device which could be traded in.

Right now, through Google, you can trade a Pixel 5a in when buying a Pixel 6a and pay $50 for the upgrade.

Post reply on HN