Whenever the iPhone vs. android thing comes up, android proponents seem to always compare an actual iPhone against theoretical android phones? All of the features you're rebutting are in the actual iPhone, but you're comparing them to the entire android ecosystem.
On a point by point basis:
1. Android phones don't have co-processors for image stabilization and quality, for speech recognition, etc. They're using off the shelf parts and don't have the R&D budget to source and integrate the technology Apple has. Further, a couple of Apple's acquisitions were companies that give them an edge in power per watt.
2. Your claim about past iPhones is debatable, but it doesn't address the 4S.
3. I've --and I mean this literally-- heard people saying that competitors were replicating iTunes and it would no longer be a competitive advantage for Apple, since the very year the iTunes store was announced.
4. I think that talking to your phone like this might be a usability issue, we'll see. But nobody was used to touching their phones before Apple did it, and for a couple years after Apple announced the iPhone, people were always saying that phones with keyboards were better.
5. "Significance" is a subjective term, so you can't be wrong there- its significant to you, sure. Both products are quickly eating away at the installed base of feature phones... but it seems android makes sales to segments that just want a feature phone replacement, while the iPhone is making sales into segments where people want a smartphone. This results in iPhone users buying many more apps, using the phone to browse more, etc. Further, there is no successful android equivalent of the iPod touch or the iPad, and thus when looking at the whole market, android isn't doing as well.
6. All platforms have switching costs. Thus your claim here applies to android as well. However, since android users buy fewer apps, its easier for them to switch to the iPhone, than the reverse. The superlative app ecosystem on the iPhone works as a moat, but that effect doesn't help android as much.
On a point by point basis:
1. Android phones don't have co-processors for image stabilization and quality, for speech recognition, etc. They're using off the shelf parts and don't have the R&D budget to source and integrate the technology Apple has. Further, a couple of Apple's acquisitions were companies that give them an edge in power per watt.
2. Your claim about past iPhones is debatable, but it doesn't address the 4S.
3. I've --and I mean this literally-- heard people saying that competitors were replicating iTunes and it would no longer be a competitive advantage for Apple, since the very year the iTunes store was announced.
4. I think that talking to your phone like this might be a usability issue, we'll see. But nobody was used to touching their phones before Apple did it, and for a couple years after Apple announced the iPhone, people were always saying that phones with keyboards were better.
5. "Significance" is a subjective term, so you can't be wrong there- its significant to you, sure. Both products are quickly eating away at the installed base of feature phones... but it seems android makes sales to segments that just want a feature phone replacement, while the iPhone is making sales into segments where people want a smartphone. This results in iPhone users buying many more apps, using the phone to browse more, etc. Further, there is no successful android equivalent of the iPod touch or the iPad, and thus when looking at the whole market, android isn't doing as well.
6. All platforms have switching costs. Thus your claim here applies to android as well. However, since android users buy fewer apps, its easier for them to switch to the iPhone, than the reverse. The superlative app ecosystem on the iPhone works as a moat, but that effect doesn't help android as much.