Replies

Or, you could try comparing it to a phone of similar size, like my Xperia Z5 compact. It has a smaller screen (4.6"), but only costs about $400, and I bet my battery lasts longer (2-4 days depending on usage), and that's even without me installing a custom ROM that will generally improve the battery life.

That's called standby. The iPhone 7 has a listed standby time of 10 days. So, no, you wouldn't win your bet. These listings are for using the phones for the stated purpose constantly. . . i.e. talking on a two-way 3G cellular connection for 10-12 hours nonstop until the battery gives out.

Then you have to consider other factors. The iPhones have been the fastest phones on the market for the past five years in the vast majority of the bench mark testing.

When you compare pricing, you also have to compare trade-in pricing to get actual cost of ownership. For example, I could have bought an iPhone 7 for $649 and traded in my iPhone 6S for $400. . . which meant my total cost for an iPhone 7 would have cost me only $249. I opted instead for an iPhone 7 Plus this time at $749. . . so it cost me with my trade in $349. Therefore, my iPhone 7 Plus cost me less than any of those Android phones to own.

None of those Android phones have much trade in value at all. Sorry, but that is just the truth.

I've always been able to trade in or sell my iPhones for a considerable value when upgrading.

A friend, who was very dissatisfied with his three month old top of the line Samsung Android decided to go iPhone. . . but the trade in value was only $60, after he'd paid over $600! He bit the bullet and still went Apple and has been exceedingly happy ever since.

That's called standby. The iPhone 7 has a listed standby time of 10 days. So, no, you wouldn't win your bet.

Actually, I would. My phone has a standby time of 520 hours, or over 21 days. Right now I'm at 74%, and my phone estimates I still have 47 hours of battery left. My roommate has to charge his iPhone every night or he has an extra paperweight for his desk in the morning.

None of those Android phones have much trade in value at all. Sorry, but that is just the truth.

What does trade-in value have to do with battery tests between comparable phones? You were the one complaining that their testing wasn't against a phone comparable to the iPhone7, I simply stated that those phones listed were less than comparable, but they still beat the iPhone. And I'm not sure where you're looking at for phone value, but most of those used that I see listed on Amazon or elsewhere are maybe 25% cheaper than a new one. None of them are even close to "$60"... and the only ones that are are the cheap $100 phones. Where's Apple's option for those people?