Larger battery coming to Apple iPhone 7 Plus along with 256GB of internal storage?

Slowly, rumors about the Apple iPhone 7 and the Apple iPhone 7 Plus are beginning to help us piece together the various features that will be available on the device. So far, we expect the next iteration of the iPhone to offer some sort of protection from water, and we also expect the 3.5mm earphone jack to be removed. An accessory for the Lightning port will offer a solution for those who want privacy while listening to audio...
This is a discussion for a news article. To read the whole news, click here


129. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013 years prior In fact that if you look it up, you will see the original Gear followed that original design and no one had a product like it. But yet you all claimed Samsung rushed with a product they never made before the eat Apple which was false. They had made one before and it actually get good reviews too. Apple has.never had one single original idea ever. It is safe to assume anytime Apple makes a move, it's because someone else was going to do it too. Just like with Force Toich. Synaptics was ready working on ot. I guess it just wasn't ready for mainstream. Apple.rished to patent their own and look what they came up with. Not only does it sick it's so limited that Apple is now talking to Synaptics to help them bring a better solution. Apple patented in 2008. However resistive touchscreens have been around for a while. These screens use a technology that senses direct pressure between two clear electrical layers that are separated by a small space, requiring an amount of force. This is why old Windows Phone and Android phones can be operated with generic gloves on and why capacitive screen cannot. Yet when we told you this isn't new you say byes but it's Apple who made it mainstream. That is a lie. Resistive touch as I recall existed on PDA devices because this is how the stylish back then interacted with the screen. The special hard rubber tip created a former of resistance which made it feel like writing get with a real pen. This is no longer required thanks to WACOM. Now you are welcome to Google and fact check everything I said because I Google Drive in order to provide you with it. Apple created a platform that is very popular and has allowed for many technologies we already had that other OEMS simply didn't put a marketing name on it to sell it.

148. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

"ARM has also stated that their 64Bit chip would become mainstream within a couple years." Is that why Apple caught everyone off guard, including Qualcomm who panicked and call it useless, but then released the sloppiest 64-bit line up of SoCs including the S810? "Why did I say it was rushed? Because after Apple.moved to 64bit, many of the iOS apps failed to work on the new chip." LOL what are you talking about? The A7 chip is backwards compatible and handles 32-bit apps the same exact way the iPhone 5 did. Stop making up "facts" just to bring down the iPhone because it's really pathetic. "Yet I recall when we ordered the iPhone 5S for our employees, they kept taking their phones back to our IT group because they didn't understand why apps that worked all the time failed to even open." That's a nice story you have there. Care to make another up because story time isn't quite over yet. "they spoke of adding biometric capabilities including but not limited to fingerprint readers and iris scanners." Yeah, AFTER the iPhone 5S. The S5 was released almost nine months after. Did we forget that? "Just because Apple did something before anyone doesn't mean it was their idea." No one claimed it was their idea. The issue at hand is you claiming they rushed their tech when they absolutely didn't. Please explain why the A7 chip was miles ahead of other SoCs at the time at launch. Also, please explain how every OEM implemented fingerprint scanners after the launch of the 5S. "When it was rumored Apple was making a smartwatch, everyone bashed Samsung saying after Samsung heard the rumor they brushed to neat Apple. But it's false. Samsung likely already knew Apple.was making the watch because Apple went to.Samsung to make the chip that goes inside. So yes since Samsung knew apple was making a watch, yes they likely used this knowledge to get a competitive edge." Lmao you contradicted yourself. You just explained how Samsung rushed the Gear smartwatch because they knew Apple was going to be releasing theirs soon. How stupid are you? I can write novels too Techie. The difference between mine and yours is I don't make up "facts" and try to argue with them. Have fun trying to refute anything I just said. :)

110. AlikMalix unregistered

I DID NOT SAY Apple MADE IT!!!! I Said Apple had it on their phones first - fully working, and available to masses!!!! Google for your information Did NOT make: Android, Maps, YouTube, G-Mail, or their Nexus Phones - All Done by someone else, Google Bought it or had Some other entity make it for them... But it's funny if Apple Had something first you say "well eventually android would done the same", But if Android got it first "Apple copied" WOOHOO, you're a winner...!!! It doesnt matter, I was replying directly to #38 ---> He said: "...Let us not forget that most of the IOS updates in recent years have been Apple following Android!" WTF... I was trying to emphasize that Android been FOLLOWING Apple as well.... AM I WRONG?

118. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

The problem is you still want Apple for.stuff and you just don't need too. Copying is when a company comes out with a product or solution that no one else ever had and then others don't too. But when you buy or use someone else's work that is also.readiky available to others, it isn't copying. Especially when you don't have the capability to make your own. I am not saying that other Oems never moved to don't hints Apple has done and vice versa. Apple has rushed to be first to try to get a competitive edge on others. That is business and that's it.

122. AlikMalix unregistered

So can I say that Android rushed to be first to have widgets and phablets and multi-tasking? And if, like you said - "Copying is when a company comes out with a product or solution that no one else ever had and then others don't too. But when you buy or use someone else's work that is also readily available to others, it isn't copying" - Then APPLE hasnt copied one thing from Android. I mean even widgets were available on a Mac before it was on windows and then Android... So is Maps, so is Camera's on phone, so is Ram, multicore CPU, split screens, and so on... It's either this or the other.. but you guys are picking out items and cry "apple copied" but when I pick out items "android was working on that already - apple just rushed to be first" You know what is really "RUSHED" the damn ForceTouch on that chineese phone Xiomi or Hiway (cant remember which one)... they rushed to announce the damn thing a week before apple actually had a product for sale and it's worthless: 1. it doesnt work outside a couple of native apps, not supported by the entire ecosystem and 2. you still cannot buy the device --- THAT'S RUSHED! Come on Techie, you know I'd give you credit, but this is petty...

134. Wiencon

Posts: 2278; Member since: Aug 06, 2014

Techie gave me another cancer right now.

163. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Really? Then how soon before you die a horrible death?

178. another1

Posts: 157; Member since: Dec 25, 2015

Dude you need to shut the hell up. You truly are embarrassing yourself. I can't believe you are an IT consultant.

180. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

He's not. Because if he was, he wouldn't be saying the garbage he's been preaching on this whole thread lol.

162. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

This is a simple and reasonable statement. "Copying is when a company comes out with a product or solution that no one else ever had and then others don't too. But when you buy or use someone else's work that is also readily available to others, it isn't copying. Every concept Apple has was already done by someone else. Its not copying when you are buying a readily available component someone else might have. Even if that component is made exclusive to you, it doesnt make it yours. Copying is when I have an original concept or idea that no one else has, I keep it exclusive ti myself and then other find a way to produce a similar product which result in a product that is similar to my own. THAT IS A COPY. Take something simple. "Retina" display is simply a coined phrase by Apple to describe a high pixel density display. Such displays have existed for years before Apple bought the one they use. Its not a copy because they bought an existing tech from another company. Samsung also has high density displays. They actually make their own. But they arent copying Apple by placing it in their phone. They simply moved with the evolution of an existing product. They simply made their own. Point an click UI's have existed on things that predate Apple by years even if it wasn't mass marketed (looking at you Xerox). Yet this UI remains unchanged for well over 40 years. Its the same point an click we've seen on PC,s PDA, feature-phones and smartphone and tablets and many other appliances. What Apple has is a "copy" because it isnt original work. It seems you arent understand what I am calling a copy by definition vs what isn't. Apple copied having maps, because others had them. RAM, CPU's and such can't be a copy because they are already mass produced an Apple simply bought them. Its like claiming Apple copied Samsung by making a big phone. In this case it isnt copying because making something bigger is simply natural progression. But it does make APple a full blown hypocrite because they bashed large sized devices, EVEN WHILE THEY ALREADY HAD ONE called the iPad. After watching 40% of the bigger phone market grow for several years, then they jumped out and made a bigger phone, that they claimed no one would buy. They didnt copy a specific hardware, what they copied was a trand that was already happening. Samsung copied Apple's style and tried to copy their cool factor. But nothing Samsung used was ever owned by Apple. None of it was novel or non-obvious. Slide-to-Unlock existed since the days of the early Egyptians. Making a graphical representation of an "existing" idea is "copying". Thus it never should have been given in patent whatsoever. No more than patenting rectangles and curves. Apple fans have this illusion, that because Apple does something first that it is their original idea and that is false.

147. tedkord

Posts: 17358; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

The embedded FP scanner was copied by Apple. 64bit was always coming, ARM announced it over a year before the iPhone got it, Apple simply rushed it out because they know their typical user will hear "we've got 64, everyone else only has 32", and assume it's twice as good. But,I agree. They take from each other. The difference is, Apple takes, patents, then sues all the while crying that everyone steals from them. And the Apple Militia runs around telling anyone who will listen that everyone copies Apple and everyone else sucks. (Note: it's gotten much better under Tim Cook, but the Militia is as rabid as ever)

154. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

You're probably the only user that can actually not be biased.

160. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Actually you simply chose to see it that way. I'm not biased either. I've said similar to what he said and I agree with him 100%.

167. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

Lol shut up. You hate everything Apple stop trying to lie to yourself.

179. another1

Posts: 157; Member since: Dec 25, 2015

He really does. He brings up Apple randomly in everyone of his comments. He's a known Apple hating troll, but actually thinks he's being fair.

181. Hexa-core

Posts: 2131; Member since: Aug 11, 2015

That's a well-stated fact!

40. thegeneral7010

Posts: 437; Member since: Dec 10, 2014

So most of Q3 2016 phones will have 256 GB of storage too, as usual most of things samsung wait for apple to do then they copy

54. joeytaylor

Posts: 957; Member since: Feb 28, 2015

Where is this 256GB phone at....can I buy one

47. rick_mobile

Posts: 358; Member since: Dec 13, 2010

Damn, if the iphone bumps up the panel resolution to atleast 2k(i use VR), gets a better camera module, and adopts fast charging, I would actually consider the iphone 7

82. rick_mobile

Posts: 358; Member since: Dec 13, 2010

the 256GB 7plus that is

50. prashant1707

Posts: 83; Member since: Nov 13, 2015

only the mid rangers will accomplish 4000+mah batteries because the SOC's are not battery friendly, while flagships will not include 4000+mah batteries because that will hamper their upgrade cycle bcoz people will become satisfied with their flagships which large OEM's do not want to occur.

63. Ahovking

Posts: 711; Member since: Feb 03, 2015

Keep in mind.. most android flagships are pushing higher more power hungry specs compared to Apple.. So iPhone won't need a 4000mAH battery to match a android flagship that is powered by a 4000mAH battery. Also the iPhone 6s Plus has a excellent battery life, and it also matches the Galaxy Note5 to the minute..

85. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

According to PA. Anyways onyx matched. It should have lasted longer considering it has 1/4 the hardware inside. You're impressed that a dual core phone with a 1080p display, 2GB of ram, no full.multitasking and more was able to other last as long as a phone with 1440p, 4GB of ram, full multitasking, dual quad core and more. Haha. So funny. Think of it this way. A car with 4 cylinders burning the same amount of gas as a car with a V8.

88. Ahovking

Posts: 711; Member since: Feb 03, 2015

Who said anything about that being impressive? When it comes to battery life, the iPhone is as good and will last as long as any other android flagship. (Trust me, Apples limited muti-tasking seems to be able to handle a lot more "muti-tasking" than samsung's so called full "muti-tasking", i cant belevie how bad samsung is at muti-tasking)

161. sissy246

Posts: 7120; Member since: Mar 04, 2015

There is not a iPhone made that will last as long as my sons s6 active.

104. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Think of it this way, that I-4 is turbo charged and can run all over the v-8. You talk about multitasking, yet it is android that is outdone by the iPhone in that department. Shall we go to youtube vids of iphones multitasking being better, and keeping even games from reloading compared to android during the test? And what is the point of multitasking. Tell me what you need it for in your day to day routine...this outta be fun. Because if you needed a 'true' multitasking machine, android is not what I would be pulling out. I can get better for cheaper through windows pc/tablet, with a data plan and skype, than any android will ever give me.

149. tedkord

Posts: 17358; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Those videos aren't multitasking. Multitasking is talks running simultaneously the while time. IOS does not do that except for a few, chosen apps. Android does.

184. Hexa-core

Posts: 2131; Member since: Aug 11, 2015

Yeah, Mini multitasking is different from FULL multitasking!

112. AlikMalix unregistered

Techie apple is performing absolutely great with "1/4" the hardware inside (what ever that means)... just because android isnt as optimized to take adavantage of hardware properly, dont for a second assume that dual core for android is the same as dual core for iphone... A car with 4 cylinders running as fast as a car with V8!!! (your words)

131. Jimrod

Posts: 1605; Member since: Sep 22, 2014

Yeah it's a perfect analogy - Android being the 1970's 5.0V8 pumping out 120bhp while returning 10mpg and Apple being the latest 1.6 4 cylinder pumping out 300bhp and getting 45mpg... I'm being flippant of course, all the top manufacturers make decent devices but I get so tired of hearing all the super-biased Fandroid crap on sites like this from people like Techie.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.