Android's model for 64-bit support also seems superior to all other operating systems, in terms of not adding the "64-bit memory bloat" (which is roughly 30 per

Android's model for 64-bit support also seems superior to all other operating systems, in terms of not adding the "64-bit memory bloat" (which is roughly 30 percent more memory required for 64-bit apps), so in terms of RAM needed 64-bit Android apps should actually require less than 64-bit iOS apps. However, I'm not completely sure whether Google just restricts the addresses length to 32-bit, or they are keeping the apps 32-bit even on the 64-bit architecture. It sounds like the former, but I really hope it's not the latter. So far I've not seen ARMv8 supported in the SDK and Nvidia's 64-bit Denver CPU still comes out as 32-bit in benchmark tests, even on Android Lollipop. I don't know whether that's related in any way, or it's some other Google screw-up (not being ready on time with Aarach64 support), or it's just the benchmarks who don't support ARMv8 yet. Oh and I agree with your comment on storage. Google should impose more "reasonable" requirements. In 2010, even high-end HTC flagships came with like less than 200 MB free storage. Absolutely unacceptable, even at the time. I've hated my HTC phone for so long because it, and it kind of made me not want to get HTC ever again now, since the brand is tainted in my mind. Today, even $50 Android phones shouldn't have less than 4GB internal storage (which is like 1GB free storage), but those over $100-$150 should all have at least 8GB. Most people should get at least 16GB. When I'll buy a flagship phone a year or so from now I intend to get one with 64GB internal and a UHS-I 128GB microSD to shoot 4k video and RAW pictures.