[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy Note 3] jazzmachine:
All valid points, and at least you know what you're getting into :good:

Personally, I had the iPhone OG - 4, ALWAYS jailbroken, etc. before I decided to ditch my 4 for a Note II, on which I discovered Tweaked and started getting pretty deeply into Android. Maybe a year or more after that, my Dad, who is strictly Apple (works in the field) cracked the screen very minorly, not affecting use at all, but he wanted to upgrade anyway so just went and picked up the new at the time "Retina" iPad and offered the completely usable iPad 2 to me. As it turned out, I picked it up 2 days after the current jailbreak exploit was patched and the iPad firmware auto-updated it, making it unjailbreakable untill ?? (all I know is not before it got stolen :( ) I mean, free iPad, why not? I've got a Note 8, but I'm sure I could use it for something... except the dullness of the stock IOS UI pretty much killed the desire to. This was seriously the first time in YEARS that I had used un-jailbroken IOS (I think this was soon before v7 was released) and it is (was?) so incredibly mind-numbingly boring! I mean, truly wtf kind of UI consists solely and unmodifiably of the Applications directory, which is the only part of the system you can touch, graphically rendered in a static grid which can be conveniently arranged into folders that have a hard limit on how many elements they complain. That pretty much accounts for the alleged RAM requirements (although, I'm thoroughly unconvinced that Apple couldn't increase the performance of existing software, err - "apps", or allow a higher level of, for ex., "console-quality" games by cutting just a bit into their margin for an extra gig of memory or at least freakin 512kb). So yeah, that stock (or even jailbroken, which adds a plethora of options including themeing) iOS vs. whatever Android launcher with numerous pages packed with widgets, live wallpaper, etc, etc. obviously the latter REQUIRES more RAM, but that doesn't even remotely imply that IOS apps wouldn't benefit / be more capable if they had more memory to make use of. From my Android-centric perspective, it makes even less sense since that's the platform that now completely runs on 64 bit architecture and is able to address more RAM but just doesn't. I mean, my desktop PC runs OK on 8 gigs, but it runs a HELL of a lot better on 16.

I think it boils down to: IOS requires only 1 GB and it obviously runs fine, so there's no "perceived need" for additional memory (especially considering the stereotypical iOS user-base - which clearly doesn't include you, Bataga :) ) So here we are at the ol' debate between "what it needs" and "what it can use". I doubt many would argue against the notion that doubling the RAM on the iPhone would improve the performance and software capabilities considerably. IOW, give people a taste of iOS on an iPhone 6 with 2 gigs, then try to remove that extra gig - call it a "complimentary upgrade" and Apple Store lines will circle blocks... obviously device takes a performance hit, and they now need 2 gigs of RAM because the complimentary "upgrade" drastically reduced the performance metrics of their phone. What is Apple's deal with memory anyway... freaking soldering it into Macbook Airs just so they can charge like 4x retail for an extra 4 GB DIMM? I like OS X and sometimes run it in a VM or decreasingly frequently on bare metal (PC is self-built Hackintosh). I've changed GPUs on this specific machine 3 times (ending up with a GTX 660 that I'm QUITE happy with)... try switching out the GPU on an Apple machine... I don't even know if you can do it on the newest MacPros anymore and if you can, you need the Apple specific version (which is only slightly different, but something like a c-note more than the regular "reference model" or whatever). Anyway, good luck man. Hope the 6 treats you well (and is jailbreakable) :)