Don't make the mistake of assuming 'experience' is synonymous with 'performance' either.

Side-by-side comparisons aren't really of any real-world significance. Very few people do that when forming their opinions. For the average person, performance either detracts from the experience, or it doesn't.

There are many other factors that are more important to experience than performance. Does the interface conflict with their expectations? Does the user find the features to be self-explanatory? Does the device enable the user to conform to social expectation?

> People don’t buy specs, they buy experiences.

More specifically, people don't buy actual experiences, they buy expectations of experience. 99%+ of people who buy a phone haven't had more than a couple of moments of experience with it. They buy it because they expect it to be good based on their first impressions and/or preconceived notions.

I think you will need to be more specific. I have never seen a difference in high-end phones with Apple versus Samsung or any of the other Android phones with the latest Snapdragon.

> iPhone is able to keep all apps in suspense, whereas android unloads them

Android also saves activity state for fast resume and keeps activities running until there is memory pressure. I've heard people complain about iOS devices in this regard because they do the same thing but don't have enough memory to do it effectively.

I don't agree with that. With the advent of WSL on Windows you can happily run Linux whenever you want and have all the normal ubuntu pieces available to you without starting a VM. You also get the windows application catalog, which is essentially every piece of major software ever written. With WSL now in the picture, I don't see how a BSD-based OS could beat it given that many applications that an apt install can give you aren't available as easily or at all there.

Samsung, too.