I bought my son a MotoG back in 2017. Because I kept reading that it was a good midrange Android phone. It was slow running “native” apps, web performance was even worse.

He was more than happy to “upgrade” to my iPhone 6s (2015) in 2018. Performance was noticeable better. Also, it is still supported by the latest version of iOS.

Of course by then the phone was three years old so I replaced the battery.

ios 14 won't support 6s most probably and soon your iphone 6s will go to trash.

So your comment is lucky to have some truth for a couple of months while I look at my trashed iphone5 and iphone 6.

The iPhone 6s would have gotten 5 years of os upgrades. But, just because Apple won’t support a device with latest version of iOS, doesn’t mean that it won’t provide security patches and bug fixes. For instance, Apple released bug fix patches for iOS 9 and iOS 10 supporting phones back to 2011 last year.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/22/apple-issues-ios-...

As far as going into the trash. I had an old iPad 1st generation (2010) that last saw an OS upgrade in 2011. I could still download the “last compatible version” of apps like Netflix, Hulu, Plex and Crackle and they still work. iCloud syncing also works with Apple’s iWork apps and the built in apps (except for Notes).

basic html support doesn't work on earlier versions of ios safari due to the wrong decision that safari is bundled to ios.

you heard safari is the new internet explorer? that's why it's impractical and unsafe to use earlier versions of ios.

I’ve “heard” a lot of things. But, my first generation iPad from 2010 could render any page that I went to. Of course it crashed all of the time because that iPad only had 256Mb of RAM.

As far as being “unsafe”, Apple was publishing patches for iOS 9 and 10 as late as the middle of last year.

But do you really want to compare Apple supporting older hardware to Android?

Yeah regarding no filesystem, not sure if it is dumb but I was using Dexie(IndexedDB wrapper,) to store images as base64 strings. It works but what can suck is the time to turn it back to an image to be displayed. Which using small thumbnails it's not bad but without pagination(seems obvious you should) but it's so much data it throws a chromium-level error so idk ... But was faster to reach MVP than RN for me with my skills. There was an offline-first requirement so that's why the images are stored that way but it has a remote REST API for sync and S3 for storing the large images.

I'd be curious about the performance difference storing them as blobs https://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/02/storing-images-and-files-i...

thanks for the idea, I will try it because it looks like BLOB is smaller than base64 and looks like maybe faster to render too due to not having to decode/encode. It is unfortunate I was not aware of this sooner with regard to the "data format juggling" but still...

I'm having an issue where there's too much data being loaded/pulled from Indexed DB so I have to do stuff like pagination, but this will help no doubt.