iPhone X Has the 'Most Innovative and High Performance' Smartphone Display Ever Tested (macrumors.com) 233
The display in the iPhone X is produced by Samsung and improved by Apple, says screen technology analysis firm DisplayMate. The company has released a display shoot-out for the iPhone X, praising Apple's technology in areas like the higher resolution OLED screen, automatic color management, viewing angle performance, and more. Mac Rumors reports: According to DisplayMate, the iPhone X has the "most innovative and high performance" smartphone display it has ever tested. DisplayMate also congratulated Samsung Display for "developing and manufacturing the outstanding OLED display hardware in the iPhone X." iPhone X matched or set new smartphone display records in the following categories: highest absolute color accuracy, highest full screen brightness for OLED smartphones, highest full screen contrast rating in ambient light, and highest contrast ratio. It also had the lowest screen reflectance and smallest brightness variation with a viewing angle. The iPhone X's 5.8-inch OLED display includes a taller height to width aspect ratio of 19.5:9, 22 percent larger than the 16:9 aspect ratio on previous iPhone models (and most other smartphones). Because of this DisplayMate noted that the iPhone X also has a new 2.5K higher resolution with 2436x1125 pixels and 458 pixels per inch. The iPhone X's display resolution provides "significantly higher image sharpness" than can be analyzed by a person with normal 20/20 vision at a 12-inch viewing distance. DisplayMate said this means that it's now "absolutely pointless" to increase the display resolution and pixels per inch of the iPhone any further, since there would be "no visual benefit" for users.
My palm pilot (Score:3, Funny)
had a better display...... it only lacked the NSA back doors.
Re: My palm pilot (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how the takeaway by most Tech sites from the recent hardware tests has been "it's the easiest to break out of any iPhone to date." But lo and behold, here's BHD with another anus kissing fanboy article full of fluff shit that nobody cares about.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea I want reviews give praises to my phone! Not theirs. I want confirmation bias to my favor. Because I put thought in what device I want to have and I had weighed the pros and cons and made my decision. How dare someone else make a different choice! They must be paid off or just stupid. Because these benefits were all about the features that I had decided I didn’t need as much compared to other features and benefits.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple, Samsung and Google are making competing products for the same user base where they are trying to make the ultimate premium phone. The other makers are trying to either make gaming phones, or inexpensive phones. Or phones with extra ports or add on parts.
Apple and Samsung are the luxury car market thus they are compared against.
While some good devices are more like sports cars which may perform faster but has less features. Or some will be like pickup trucks that can do a heck of a lot but may be l
Google's market (Score:2)
Apple, Samsung and Google are making competing products for the same user base where they are trying to make the ultimate premium phone
Google isn't making a product directly competing for the same user base.
Google's userbase are the advertisers, and the product they sell are the eyeballs of the viewer.
They don't care if you saw the ads while looking at a Google Pixel, a Samsung Galaxy, any other random Android-running smartphone, or even Apple iPhone, for that matters. As long as they managed to expose you to the ad, they earn money.
Their other biggest revenue stream is their Play Store.
Given the huge prevalence of Android-running devices
Re: (Score:2)
Even at $1000 for a device it is still affordable for most people to purchase without making major sacrifices in their life.
How many of you get the brand name food at the market and skip the cheaper by $0.10 store brand. Just because you know you get a little bit more quality and consistency with the named brand. And the decision may only add a few more bucks to your grocery bill.
Re: My palm pilot (Score:5, Insightful)
In the Smartphone market, two players make more than 100% of the profit (meaning all the rest together make a collective loss). One of those is Apple and it makes the most profit out of smartphones. Sounds to me like it is competing very well.
Re: (Score:2)
In the Smartphone market, two players make more than 100% of the profit (meaning all the rest together make a collective loss).
Cite? I often see this claim on slashdot, and I've been seeing it for years. I find it hard to believe that all of those other smartphone makers have stayed in a market in which they lose money every year.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey genius, you're the one making an "us vs them" post. How efficient to instantly invalidate your own argument.
People with any sense recognize that the whole Apple / Android thing is good for everyone because it creates competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Once again Apple shows the rest of the industry how to do things properly and as such can charge what ever the fuck the Luke because no one else has a clue.
Thank you for demonstrating how Apple shows the rest of the industry how to do autocorrect properly. Would you like to buy a vowel?
Re: (Score:2)
Is it really funny? Or are you just bitter that you can't the best phone on the market?
I can the best phone on the market!
Re: (Score:2)
Technology dependant. (Score:3)
That to me basically says "the display that'll suck my battery dry the fastest".
Actually, that depends.
classic IPS TFT LCD display contantly needs power (to keep the light on). Thus even a whole black screen consume power (to make light that will be blocked near completely by every signle liquid cristal). Only very recent high-range desktop and TV display have started locally varying the light emitted by LED backlights to adapt to local display (they'll dim the backlight in some region of the display instead of filtering the light through the LCD).
OLED based display only need power to
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting choice (Score:4, Interesting)
Ars Technica stories of any note invariably end up here, but instead of running iPhone X is the "most breakable iPhone" [arstechnica.com], they ran with this slashvertisement instead.
BeauHD could have at least added the display is the most "innovative in fragility" as a secondary story.
Tentatively posting, critical AC posts have been removed lately, their post number 404'd.
Re: (Score:3)
critical AC posts have been removed lately, their post number 404'd.
Yes that's typical Beauhd.
Re: (Score:2)
Compared to what phones. There are some phones built like a tank. While the iPhone 4,5,8 and 10 have a front and back glass panels. Also these new devises are bigger. So there is more room for breakage. It can still be the strongest glass but still be damaged.
Also as of not these were not real world tests. They were rigged tests for reproducibility.
Normally there is a balance between flexibility and hardness. A screen that will not easily shatter is also more likely to be scratched.
That's what she said (Score:2)
"Absolutely pointless" to increase resolution? (Score:3)
Someone should let DisplayMate know that VR is a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Is it really a thing though? Looks like a flop to me.
It better... (Score:2)
iphone doesnt have shit (Score:2)
samsung developed it, and makes it, its like saying I personally own the US army ... cause I pay someone else to do it for me
Re: (Score:2)
The US Army doesn't manufacture it's own guns. Indeed, there are other armies who own the same guns and compared to those guys the US Army is, well, like Apple compared to virtually every other company making smartphones.
Re: (Score:2)
its
Re: (Score:2)
Correct the article title, please (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Should be: "Samsung's display that Apple buys for the iPhone X is the most innovative and highest performance display ever tested"
You mean the display that Samsung built to Apple's exacting specifications? (Apple basically designed the display, they just didn't manufacture it themselves).
Most expensive phone has decent screen (Score:2)
Someone missed 4k (Score:2)
They obviously didn't test it against a modern 4k phone display like https://www.sonymobile.com/ca-... [sonymobile.com]
458ppi? Try 806. What a laugh.
screen resolution (Score:2)
"DisplayMate said this means that it's now "absolutely pointless" to increase the display resolution and pixels per inch of the iPhone any further, since there would be "no visual benefit" for users."
Clearly they haven't used Google Cardboard.
Self-stroking reporting... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But they'll do it anyway, because how else are they going to sell users on the iPhone XI?
It sounds like they'll do it by turning the specs up to 11. Which is completely pointless.
Re:higher resolution (Score:4, Insightful)
Depends on your usage scenario.
I got the Daydream from Google and tried using it with my GS7. The resolution needs to increase at least 4x for it to be anywhere near realistic.
For using it as just a smartphone, I absolutely agree we've reached Peak Pixel.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
fanboiz idiot - "the video driver plays a much more important part"... It's important, not necessarily much more tard. Go hook that much more important video driver to your lcd of the 90s that could change state about once per second in the cold.
Up until about 8 years ago my job was to get video drivers and displays working well together with various baseband chips. Did that for 4 years for a major phone maker. I kinda think I know what I'm talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
Up until about 8 years ago my job was to get video drivers and displays working well together
Great, that's about the same time every smartphone manufacturer except for Apple moved on from LCD to OLED. Isn't that an amazing coincidence.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Fucking dumass
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That's 1/200th of my annual salary working in IT outside Silicon Valley!
Re: (Score:2)
If you're making 50K working in IT in Silicon Valley, you should pack your stuff and move to another state. Why?
1. If you're making just 50K in SV, clearly you have not succeeded at this IT game and
2. Living on 50K in SV is almost as tough at living on a graduate student's stipend of 15K some place in midwest.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude you are getting ripped off at your job if you work in Silicon Valley for 50k.
You probably should find a job somewhere cheaper where 50k can give you a middle class life style.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I really wish I had points to mod this up. Well-played.
Re: (Score:2)
I have seen other durability tests where the iPhone X outperform others as well. Now it is still an electronic device with large glass panels. So don’t be using it like it is a harden steal wrench (spanner for these across the pond)
That said the last screen I had broke was from an old candy bar shaped phone I got in 1998. I had broke that plastic screen in 2002 after bumping it slightly on a corner table.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because Samsung actually makes their own products, and Apple GIVES AWAY every last bit of their research because they can't make their own.
I'm sorry but I did miss the Great Apple Giveaway that they had at Apple HQ last week where every one of their competitors go to take all the research they could carry. Basically none part of what you said is true because the secretive Apple I know isn't above suing people to prevent their research from getting out. I seem to recall them firing an engineer recently because daughter posted a video taken at Apple HQ of an iPhone X prototype. That's the secretive Apple I know.
Also, are you sure Samsung makes a
Re: Thanks for this insightful Marketing Ploy Beau (Score:5, Interesting)
"Apple can't compete against a broad and open market."
Wait... isn't Apple functioning in the world economy? Did I miss something about Apple being uniquely out of the free market economy now? ;-P
It would an amazing achievement to make such massive profits given that they are isolated in their own narrow and closed economic system.
Re: Thanks for this insightful Marketing Ploy Beau (Score:5, Informative)
The question is why you would post as an AC? But to counter to your point that's like saying Porsche can't compete against a broad and open market. They only makes sports cars and make themselves the most expensive choice. They should make more mini-vans for soccer moms. And to also counter your point it's not factually true. Can you get an iPhone cheaper than a Samsung or LG? Have you heard of the SE, 6, 6 Plus, 7, 7 Plus? I mean it's not like Apple doesn't have 8 models going from $350 to $999.
They constantly position themselves in a magical made-up segment, like that guy who shoots the wall of a barn then goes and draw the target around his bullet holes.
A made-up segment? They target the high end for computers and the phones cover a broad spectrum. So what? Why are you mad that Apple goes after a very specific market?
Re: Extra value or extra appeal (Score:4, Interesting)
A made-up segment? They target the high end for computers and the phones cover a broad spectrum. So what? Why are you mad that Apple goes after a very specific market?
Quite. It's not as though the specific market is the very rich. People who want an iPhone range from those on the poverty line up to the rich and famous. It's all about the 'draw' of the product to the consumer. >p>I recall seeing a news article about a nurse in the UK who wanted a Dodge Viper for £70k - around 3 years wages. She stopped going out, buying superfluous items and eventually she got the Viper. It didn't make sense to me but the product resonated with her.
The iPhone is small change in comparison and much more useful. Apple has managed to convince consumers that there is extra value to their products for 10 years and the competition between Apple and other manufacturers benefits us all right?
Re: (Score:2)
. Apple has managed to convince consumers that there is extra value to their products for 10 years and the competition between Apple and other manufacturers benefits us all right?
No. Apple like any other brand needs to convince everyone that their product is worth it. As for extra value, do you mean besides the years of software updates Apple iPhones seem to have which are longer than their Android counterparts? You mean besides a software library that doesn't have a reputation for malware?
Re: (Score:3)
The only people making it an Apple vs. Samsung competition are the Apple advocates. For everybody else, the smartphone business is a whole bunch of suppliers, and weird Apple off in their own headgame.
Um, you mean besides the poster above who is clearly pro-Samsung and anti-Apple? I wouldn't call him an Apple advocate. It would seem that contrary to OP's assertion that would give Apple an advantage: They can get whatever component they want from a competitor but no competitor buys components from them as they never sell them.
Apple can't compete against a broad and open market. They always narrow the comparison to themselves and the most expensive choice 'The Rest of Us' could choose.
I would say the iPhone is strong contrary to your point. You want a smartphone not made by Apple; you have plenty of choice: Apple still makes a lot of money and is a powerful playe
Re: (Score:2)
There are a few ways to make products. One is to use off-the-shelf components and piece them together to make your own product. This completely off-the-shelf model tends to be quick and produce lower cost products since there is very little R&D overhead incurred. But it tends toward 'me too' products with little / no innovation in hardware.
Yes but only applies to hardware where there is anything to innovate. That doesn't apply to commodity hardware. For example, what R&D improvements could Apple gain by making their own RAM? Not much. Open multiple phones of the same model and you might get RAM from multiple suppliers.
What Puls4r is alluding to is that Apple's R&D develops some great components, then gives those components to others to manufacture (like Samsung and TSMC making Apple's signature ARM processors, or Samsung making Apple's 'improved' display. What Puls4r is contending is that Apple is giving their potential competitors an advantage by giving them the know-how (and paying them to develop the tooling and process needed) to make better products without them incurring the R&D cost, information and technique they can then employ on their own competing products (even if not exactly copy, but take the learning about what improvements are possible, etc...).
The flaw in that logic is that only Apple "gives away R&D" because Apple is the only one does this. Every single smartphone manufacturer outsources some part. Some component makers also do this. For example, Qualcomm do
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing keeping them alive is lock-in technologies and their walled garden, and that'll die out eventually as Samsung surpasses them in every technology avenue.
If Samsung is so great, why does it abandon it's smartphone and tablet users in two years or less since the device announcement date? The price premium of Apple devices is well worth it because your device will be getting timely security updates and OS upgrades for up to five years. The old iPad Mini 2 and iPhone 5S which were available sinc
Re:Thanks for this insightful Marketing Ploy Beau. (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah. So Apple has the greatest display tech..... that their biggest competitor (Samsung) makes
You seem to be under the misapprehension that Samsung is a company. Samsung is a collection of largely independent companies that hate each other only slightly less than they hate all non-Korean companies. It's very misleading to think that Samsung displays, Samsung CPUs, and Samsung phones are made by the same company - Samsung phones often include non-Samsung parts even when there is a Samsung equivalent.
Outsourcing manufacturing fails every, single, time. You give away your technology, teach others to make it, and then get yourself toasted as they figure out how to make it better, cheaper, faster, or just copy it so they don't have to pay for an R&D budget.
There are basically no companies that build products without using any third-party suppliers. Apple makes their own CPUs, GPUs, and OS. They buy RAM and displays from third parties and buy flash from factories that they own but which are operated by third parties. In contrast, Samsung fabs their own SoCs, but typically using CPU and GPU IP that they've licensed from third parties (their flagship Exynos line contains ARM-designed GPUs, and ARM-designed CPUs, though the most recent iterations have also included a Samsung-designed CPU core). Their OS is largely under the control of Google. I'm not really sure what your point is.
All companies do something like this, because manufacturing and R&D both have huge economies of scale. The more units you can amortise the costs across, the better, and if one supplier is selling to a dozen integrators then it's likely to be better and cheaper than anything designed in house. This was why AMD spun off Global Foundries, for example: they were producing around 20% of the volume of chips that Intel produced, and so couldn't compete building fabs with the latest technology, but when GF started fabbing chips for other vendors this volume went up and they were more able to compete (plus AMD had the option of using other companies' fabs if GF stumbled over a particular process node).
Re: (Score:2)
Open up an Apple II computer and you'll see it's made entirely from bits made by other manufacturers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If it's that easy then why doesn't a Samsung phone have the the best smartphone display according to DisplayMate? Maybe there might have been some improvements made by Apple. Also it might be the case that Samsung as very large corporation with different markets and divisions might not have total synergy and cooperation across different divisions.
Re:So basically (Score:5, Informative)
If it's that easy then why doesn't a Samsung phone have the the best smartphone display according to DisplayMate?
They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple.
And it also gave Apple iPhone 7 [displaymate.com] the best LCD display in previous years. But you've missed my point: Why would Apple have the best Samsung display over Samsung phones?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Your assertion relies on the assumption that this display is in fact the latest that Samsung could offer to anyone. Also you are kinda ignoring that the Galaxy Note 8 was only released 1 month prior to the iPhone X
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's more profitable for Samsung to do so?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying that it would profit Samsung more to sell a component to Apple that the best instead of using it within the same company to drive sales of their smartphones? I just want to be clear that's what you're saying.
High-end components have better margin. Apple sell more high-end phones compared to Samsung, so yes, selling high-end components through Apple is more profitable than selling them through the S and Note lines.
Re: (Score:2)
High-end components have better margin. Apple sell more high-end phones compared to Samsung, so yes, selling high-end components through Apple is more profitable than selling them through the S and Note lines.
The major flaw in your premise is that nothing says that Samsung Display division must only sell the best displays to one and only one customer.
Re: (Score:2)
High-end components have better margin. Apple sell more high-end phones compared to Samsung, so yes, selling high-end components through Apple is more profitable than selling them through the S and Note lines.
The major flaw in your premise is that nothing says that Samsung Display division must only sell the best displays to one and only one customer.
Well, you did ask "sell a component to Apple that the best instead of using it within the same company"
Re: (Score:2)
No, I asked if the other poster was saying that. The whole quote was: "So you're saying that it would profit Samsung more to sell a component to Apple that the best instead of using it within the same company to drive sales of their smartphones?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Big companies are often not at all joined up and often consider different divisions as competitors, not part of the same company. Quite often large companies are internally highly dysfunctional.
For instance, when I worked for IBM some years ago, we needed a display (basically a standalone monitor) for a system we were selling to an Extremely Large Competitor. IBM made just the display we needed itself, but they would only sell it to us - another IBM division - at full retail price, so we ended up using
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The best LCD. OLED is not LCD. The Galaxy S7 was "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested."
http://www.displaymate.com/Gal... [displaymate.com]
Until they tested the exploding Note 7. Despite its battery flaws, its display was even better:
http://www.displaymate.com/Gal... [displaymate.com]
And more recently, the Galaxy S8 beat that score:
http://www.displaymate.com/Gal... [displaymate.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Samsung produced homeopathic quantities of iPhone X displays they are selling to Apple for a high price.
Maybe even Samsung think the difference is not worth the extra price, so that display was not included in their Note 8. It's not as if it was day and night between the two.
Samsung had the best display for years, beating Apple for all the recent years. Now, Apple may have a slight edge from November 2017 onwards, but I expect Samsung to take back the crown in April with their next flagship. Maybe App
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe even Samsung think the difference is not worth the extra price, so that display was not included in their Note 8. It's not as if it was day and night between the two.,
How do you know that the price difference were in the displays? The price difference at retail of the phones is about $100 ($999 vs $899) but you can get the Note 8 cheaper. The iPhone X does have basically a miniaturized Kinect module that the Note 8 doesn't so that adds to their cost. But what I do know they were both tested by DisplayMate and they decided the iPhone X is better.
Samsung had the best display for years, beating Apple for all the recent years. Now, Apple may have a slight edge from November 2017 onwards, but I expect Samsung to take back the crown in April with their next flagship. Maybe Apple wanted to have the crown for a few months as a condition to switch to Samsung displays.
Again my point is not that Apple has a display that Samsung doesn't in a false dichotomy. My point is that Samsung doesn't ALSO
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that the price difference were in the displays?
I never talked about the total price of the phone. Apple has insanely high profit margins on iPhones, so that alone may explain why the iPhone X is $100 more expensive.
What I meant is that of all the displays Samsung can make, the best one is probably the most expensive. Maybe Samsung decided it wasn't worth it to invest $X to get a better display in their Note 8, because it wouldn't result in significantly more sales.
Or maybe buying a part and sticking it into your phone isn't all it takes to get the most out of a part?
It's a possibility. I'd say a lot less probable than every other possibility I mentioned i
Re: (Score:2)
I never talked about the total price of the phone.
But how do you know that the component was in fact more expensive. All we can gauge the relative cost is the total cost of the product. And the iPhone X is $100 more expensive overall.
Apple has insanely high profit margins on iPhones, so that alone may explain why the iPhone X is $100 more expensive.
Wouldn't adding in a Kinect module increase the cost of the iPhone X? Also this introduces a false dichotomy that the profit margins on the Note 8 are not "insanely high". Samsung overall has lower profit margins than Apple on phones, but Samsung makes many more models and targets more segments some of which are lower profit.
What I meant is that of all the displays Samsung can make, the best one is probably the most expensive. Maybe Samsung decided it wasn't worth it to invest $X to get a better display in their Note 8, because it wouldn't result in significantly more sales.
B
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Samsung was able to produce a higher resolution panel with worse color reproduction characteristics and they chose that for the Note 8. Maybe they could have chosen the iPhone X panel for a lower cost and they still preferred the Note 8 one.
But chances are Apple had nothing to do with what makes that panel so great in displaymate's opinion. Just like my Dell monitor has the same performance no matter what type of PC I connect to it.
Re: (Score:2)
But chances are Apple had nothing to do with what makes that panel so great in displaymate's opinion.
So Apple choosing to calibrate their display for more color accuracy and performance had nothing to do with it? From what I've seen Samsung phones are calibrated for more vibrant color. At times it's over-saturated. It looks better but it's not as accurate. That's why DisplayMate said they have the best display as they actually test for color accuracy.
Just like my Dell monitor has the same performance no matter what type of PC I connect to it.
It does if your one PC has a better video card. It also depends on what each PC has set in their monitor calibration settings.
Re: (Score:2)
So Apple choosing to calibrate their display for more color accuracy and performance had nothing to do with it?
It shouldn't. Scores shouldn't be awarded on calibration. And what do you mean by "performance"?
Anyways, it's the first time in years that Apple can beat Samsung according do DisplayMate. And this is by using a Samsung display.
So despite their poor color accuracy, Samsung phones had better displays for years.
From what I've seen Samsung phones are calibrated for more vibrant color. At times it's over-saturated. It looks better but it's not as accurate.
So which is it, the display or the software?
It does if your one PC has a better video card.
No. That was my point. The video card and the rest of the PC doesn't matter. It's a digital connection. If my PC tells the monitor to turn on pixel #42 with c
Re: (Score:2)
Finally, what makes you think that Samsung would put the best display they could make on their phones?
Because then the your premise is that Samsung doesn't want to put the best components in their phones.
Samsung sell plenty of phones, not all of them have the same display - clearly they don't think that they need to put the absolute best display on every phone they ship.
I never said that they need to put the best display in every single phone. I said why wouldn't Samsung have the best display in their phone namely their flagship phone.
It's entirely plausible that they chose a somewhat lower end part for their phone than the one Apple specced into theirs. Why would that be weird?
It would mean that you are saying Samsung doesn't always use the best parts.
Re: (Score:2)
It would mean that you are saying Samsung doesn't always use the best parts.
I can guarantee you that they don't. I can also guarantee that Apple does not, either. See the way it works in a business is that stakeholders for a project sit down and figure out the specifications needed to make that product successful. Once they have made those decisions, they build the product according to those specifications. They do not seek out parts and suppliers that are able to grossly exceed those specifications if it causes an increase in cost. Even if the cost increase is only $0.10 they
Re: (Score:2)
I can guarantee you that they don't. I can also guarantee that Apple does not, either. See the way it works in a business is that stakeholders for a project sit down and figure out the specifications needed to make that product successful. Once they have made those decisions, they build the product according to those specifications. They do not seek out parts and suppliers that are able to grossly exceed those specifications if it causes an increase in cost. Even if the cost increase is only $0.10 they would not pay for the most expensive part when they're planning on using millions of units of those parts. If every company used the absolute best parts they could get their hands on, you would not be able to afford the products they're selling. It would greatly limit your choices and purchasing power. It could also greatly decrease their profit margins.
Again, I'm not saying Samsung should use the best parts for every single model of phone. I'm asking why Samsung didn't use the best display for their flagship phone if it's that easy just to stick in a part. Or is the process of using a part involve engineering and optimization, perhaps?
Also you are not taking into consideration the fact that Samsung's flagship phone went into production almost a year ago so that they could meet their March release date. It's quite possible that this screen technology was not ready when Samsung started production in 2016.
The Note 8 was released 6 weeks before the iPhone X. Samsung maintains multiple lines of "flagship phone". The S8 was released in March.
Re: (Score:2)
The Note 8 was released 6 weeks before the iPhone X. Samsung maintains multiple lines of "flagship phone". The S8 was released in March.
The Note 8 is NOT a flagship phone. Just go ahead and Google "Samsung Flagship phone" and you'll see that people are all talking about the S8 and the upcoming S9. No one mentions the Note 8. And you know Samsung is not going to take risks with the Note 8 after the absolute bath they took on the Note 7
Re: (Score:2)
Much of the attention over the last month may have been around Apple's new iPhones. But Samsung recently launched a beast of a flagship smartphone that goes head to head with the best from Apple. After a couple of weeks trying it out, here's how we found the Galaxy Note 8.
As 2017 draws to a close, it's a good time to take stock of the current state of the smartphone market by examining the vital statistics of leading vendors' flagship handsets. Apple's iPhone 8, 8 Plus and X, Samsung's Galaxy S8/S8+ and Galaxy Note 8. . .
Samsung Electronics said Thursday it was planning to launch in the second half of this year a new flagship phone, leading to speculation that the company is planning an alternative to the ill-fated Galaxy Note7 that had to be recalled last year.
The launch of a new flagship smartphone this year and continuing sales of the Galaxy S8 and S8+ will help Samsung counter Apple’s launch of a new version of its iPhone. Apple usually unveils new phones in September.
Samsung does announce a S series phone in the first half of the year and a Note series in the second half," said Kiranjeet Kaur, research manager for client devices at IDC Asia/Pacific.
Samsung makes 2 flagship phones a year whereas Apple only release one. It's been this way for years. Unfortunately for Samsung last year's Note 7 was problematic.
Re: (Score:3)
If it's that easy then why doesn't a Samsung phone have the the best smartphone display according to DisplayMate? Maybe there might have been some improvements made by Apple. Also it might be the case that Samsung as very large corporation with different markets and divisions might not have total synergy and cooperation across different divisions.
Because their hatred and fanboism will not allow them to acknowledge that Apple actually does have something to do with engineering this stuff. If it was all off the shelf tech then, as you suggest, anyone could build “the best display we’ve ever tested”.
456 ppi? (Score:2)
Hello Apple, welcome to 2014
- a BlackBerry Passport user
Re:So basically (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, it's because Samsung prefers to have a vibrant display over an accurate one. OLEDs are known for awesome saturated colors, and Samsung capitalizes heavily on that.
The problem is, if you go for that, while images "pop", they also get horribly inaccurate - reds can be too red, for example. Likewise, it's also often too blue. So Samsung may make the displays, but they don't really calibrate them on their devices. They pretty much exploit it to give you those super-saturated colors at the expense of color accuracy and gamut.
So a Samsung phone will "pop", but take a few photos and things look off. You can set them into sRGB mode, but then they look horrible.
Apple chose to make the Samsung display less saturated, and more accurate. Since OLEDs naturally have an increased color gamut, they enabled switching between sRGB and DCI-P3 gamuts, so you can have your wide HDR video gamuts but not sacrifice color accuracy.
Add to that decreased reflectance (i.e., how much glare), and color shift/color decrease as you increase viewing angle and those measures are what is being objectively measured. Samsung may very well have all those attributes, but their color inaccuracy is what killed them.
I would expect if you compared an iPhone X and an Samsung S8 together, the S8 screen will seem more "vibrant" and "pop" over the iPhone's screen. It'll be very pretty but super-saturated colors can make photos look unrealistic so a few photos will leave something to be desired.
And yes, Samsung has had OLED screens for years. The problem for Apple has always been availability - Samsung likely could not handle the volume of iPhone orders until this year - it takes time to ramp up, and the iPhone X will pretty much demand Samsung produce twice as many screens as they ever needed. (There aren't many manufacturers of OLED screen making equipment, and of them, they can only produce about 3 machines a year. Apple probably has had to purchase their entire output for several years running so Samsung would be able to even have the manufacturing capacity to make another 80+M screens a year, up from 80+M screens a year).
Re: (Score:2)
DisplayMate compared the calibrated screen in the iPhone to the uncalibrated screen in the Note 8.
FTA: "What makes the iPhone X the Best Smartphone Display is the impressive Precision Display Calibration Apple developed"
I'd be surprised if a calibrated Note 8 screen would fare much differently.
Re: (Score:2)
DisplayMate compared the calibrated screen in the iPhone to the uncalibrated screen in the Note 8.
Please show me in the DisplayMate analysis of the Note 8 [displaymate.com] where what you say is true. It doesn't appear in the iPhone X analysis [displaymate.com] as them comparing anything to the Note 8. In the both analyses, both phones are tested under the same calibration modes.
FTA: "What makes the iPhone X the Best Smartphone Display is the impressive Precision Display Calibration Apple developed"
Um, no. What the author actually wrote: "Apple's display is the best because of the calibration of their phones." What you read: "We cheated by calibrating the iPhone X and not the Note 8." Please read the Note 8 analysis again. What the author is talking about is
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple "improvements" aren't to the screen, those are the same as the ones that Samsung makes for itself and anyone else willing to pay. The "improvement" is that they added multiple ambient light sensors that adjust the screen white balance to give more accurate colours in different lighting conditions.
Of course, most users don't want accurate colours, they want popping colours and high contrast. When Google made accurate colours the default on the Pixel 2 people complained that it was too dull and flat
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, most users don't want accurate colours, they want popping colours and high contrast. When Google made accurate colours the default on the Pixel 2 people complained that it was too dull and flat looking.
Some users don't want accurate colors. I would be you that a professional would.
Re: (Score:2)
The complexity of business. Samsung OLED display unit isn’t in competition with Apple, Apple is actually their #1 customer. Apple will give them specs and engineering designs which they may be contractual set to not share with its own phone units. So Samsung cannot use Apples specs for their phone. So Samsung phone unit will need to come up with its own specs and have their OLED display unit make it for them.
Samsung advantage is that it is the same company they can have these displays a bit cheape
Re: (Score:3)
Any forum is only as good as the content posted and the level of commentary.
Silly bickering and misguided egos always can drag things down. .... just look at basically any political website to see the brainiacs having a go at each other in nonsensical but predictable ways.
Seems like sometimes Slashdot, on certain stories attracts such useless banter.
But mostly it is fun to read and still has interesting content despite the lame commentary that seems to have surged across our society.
Too many internet tough
Re: (Score:2)
Then the answer is clear: become overweight, so you'll need to buy bigger shirts and bigger pants which have bigger pockets.
Re: (Score:2)
... 18:9 ratio
(my bad)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
No, they meant 1 : 0.461538461538.
Re: (Score:2)
doesnt do an OS ( darwin is just a skin on top of freeBSD)
That's not factually true [wikipedia.org]. Darwin is the open source variant of macOS which is derived from NextSTEP which is a long way derived from BSD. That's like saying humans are just skins on top of orangutans.
doesnt do a processor (dumped its own powerPC chip in favor of intel)
Yes because Dell, HP, Lenovo (formerly IBM), etc. all made their own processors for their x86 computers in the last decade . . . wait none of them did.
processor was bought from ARM under license
Not factually true either. Buying an architecture license is from ARM is not buying a processor from ARM. Ask Qualcomm.