or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon's Kindle Fire HDX bests iPad Air in display test
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amazon's Kindle Fire HDX bests iPad Air in display test - Page 3

post #81 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Click the link in the article.
Max display power consumption :
Kindle = 3.4 watts
Ipad air = 4.8 watts

Significant.
Nobody notes how much bigger the IPad air display is when they do this do they, also note that the air still delivers over 10 hours of life, the IPad mini with retina is the one that should be in this test but they seem to not care.
post #82 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post


Nobody notes how much bigger the IPad air display is when they do this do they, also note that the air still delivers over 10 hours of life, the IPad mini with retina is the one that should be in this test but they seem to not care.

Go read the original report. These numbers are normalized for the same screen size.

 

Hey let me save you the trouble....

Relative Power Efficiency

same Luminance 449 cd/m2

same 9.7 inch screen area

3.7 watts

4.8 watts

6.4 watts

This compares the Maximum Power Efficiency

by scaling to the same screen brightness and

same screen area.

 

FWIW the Kindle HDX is lighter , has much denser display and has better battery life than the Air (12 hrs), at least from the ZDNet review.


Edited by patpatpat - 11/5/13 at 6:30pm
post #83 of 96
Yes, the pixel count on the HDX will still be 33% higher.

Amazon copied the Nexus 10.
post #84 of 96
I don't get all this Kindle and/or iPad bashing tbh. I have an iPad and an iPhone, and I don't want to buy a Kindle...

But I think it's great that Amazon is competitive! I hope Kindle does well and sells a lot! Why? Because competition will force Apple to make even better products - and vice versa. Do you guys really think that the iPad and iPhone (or iPod for that matter) would be so fantastic products without any competition?

If more tablets are able to ship with fantastic screens (as Kindle seems to be), then the screen on the iPad will be made even better - and that's a comforting thought.

Now, you'll have to excuse me - I'm off to look at iPad Air pricing in Denmark 1wink.gif
post #85 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


It is really pointless. My 3Gs got iOS6 a year back, but most new features were disabled... so I ended up with a bit slower but hardly any better iOS5, in essence. And of course, there was no easy way to revert back to iOS5.

And even iOS5... I still remember iOS4 as the best fit for my phone.

Considering speed smartphones evolve - and, equally, speed smartphones become obsolete - pushing more than one - at best, two - new versions of OS is, IMHO, more of marketing bragging value than of real value for customers.

 

You know what is not pointless? from a developer stand point, they can still support the 4 years old 3Gs.  Can you point me a 4 years old Android phone still supported by developers or even by their OEM? I fail to see the value Android is getting from alienated their customers with orphan devices.

post #86 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

You know what is not pointless? from a developer stand point, they can still support the 4 years old 3Gs.  Can you point me a 4 years old Android phone still supported by developers or even by their OEM? I fail to see the value Android is getting from alienated their customers with orphan devices.

Technically all phones running 2.2 did get a couple of new features from Google in the past few months, such as a "Find my Phone" function. 

post #87 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

You know what is not pointless? from a developer stand point, they can still support the 4 years old 3Gs.  Can you point me a 4 years old Android phone still supported by developers or even by their OEM? I fail to see the value Android is getting from alienated their customers with orphan devices.

Apps for over three year old Android phones number in the 100's of thousands and there's still developer support for old versions. The phone manufacturer may have moved on to better hardware and newer features but Google hasn't forgotten them.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #88 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Apps for over three year old Android phones number in the 100's of thousands and there's still developer support for old versions. The phone manufacturer may have moved on to better hardware and newer features but Google hasn't forgotten them.

 

You can't say Froyo and Gingerbread phones still got the same level of support from developers than iOS devices of the same period.  Today a iPhone 3GS still has better values remaining than any Android device of the same period. 

post #89 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowxaf View Post
 

I'm the only one who just joined, so you must be talking about me? Except I never said (or even implied) that the Fire is great. Now I'm confused. Who are you talking about?

 

Bottom line -> If you post anything less than positive about iOS or Apple then you MUST BE A PAID TROLL. 

 

/s

post #90 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

What a mess, both the DisplayMate sales pitch and the AI article based on it.

Raymond Soniera needs an editor in the worst way. He's so hung up on his stupid "shoot out" metaphor that he either gets the biggest whopper in the story wrong, or he buries it in paragraph 17 in his obsession with prickly detail.

Does the iPad Air use an IGZO backplane? If it does, this is the first mention I've seen, and that would be a very big story. It would also be a big story if Mr. Display Expert Soniera got it wrong, so let's hope he's right. If he's right, that would be another big story—Apple said nothing about this momentous detail, but they did mention the relatively less impotant detail that they were using GF/2 technology. (Maybe that's the source for a mistake: another name for GF/2 film is DITO, Dual Indium Tin Oxide.)

"Apple Insider Staff" buries this corker somewhere in a middle paragraph of its story along with an error (?) orginating with Soniera about the iPad mini using IGZO too. And there's an error about the energy efficiency of IGZO in the AI story as well.

There's something fishy about all this. Too much seems wrong or out of place from someone whose business it is to know the hard facts about displays. AI's mistakes are probably due to it being after hours. We'll know more tomorrow, I imagine. Maybe somebody will actually make some phone calls.

The IGZO is the detail that puzzled me as well: both as something I would have expected Apple to mention and, were it an error, to be a significant litmus test on the rest of the article's accuracy.

 

FWIW teardowns I've seen mention an LG display and IIRC SHARP has the lock on IGZO?

post #91 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post
 

The IGZO is the detail that puzzled me as well: both as something I would have expected Apple to mention and, were it an error, to be a significant litmus test on the rest of the article's accuracy.

 

FWIW teardowns I've seen mention an LG display and IIRC SHARP has the lock on IGZO?

I believe Samsung, LG and Sharp have licensed IGZO technology.

post #92 of 96
I think Amazon deserves credit for producing such a quality tablet. I have a personal preference for Apple hardware and apps but could understand why many would find the fire's features and price points very appealing. I own a paperwhite and that's about as much kindle as I need for now.
post #93 of 96
Yes, quite a puzzle

First off we have continually had marketed that Igzo is lower power, especially for static images so why is there no static power draw info?
Obviously for reading purposes this is very important.
You could almost burn yourself on the old Retina iPad panels so comparison there is not really that sweet.

Now the Kindle LTPS is far more expensive to producce and unless I have been suckered by marketing has higher power draw, at least for static images.
What gives, Displaymate really do need a part 2 to this story. The dots simply do not join.
post #94 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

You can't say Froyo and Gingerbread phones still got the same level of support from developers than iOS devices of the same period.  Today a iPhone 3GS still has better values remaining than any Android device of the same period. 

Its hilarious that some peeps here think that 3 year old droid dork phones are still used. The landfills are choked with them and any other 1+ year old droid shit phone. i have an old 3gs sitting here that I bet I can get $100 for. Runs like a champ, clean- as if new.

Just saying Apples products are leaps and bounds beyond droid dork shit phones. 

Why do some feel compelled to offer ridiculous pro-google/android comments on an apple centric site?

They should get a life. better yet-  just go play with their own droid dorks.

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply
post #95 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

The IGZO is the detail that puzzled me as well: both as something I would have expected Apple to mention and, were it an error, to be a significant litmus test on the rest of the article's accuracy.

FWIW teardowns I've seen mention an LG display and IIRC SHARP has the lock on IGZO?

I think Samsung was the first display manufacturer to license IGZO patents and not Sharp based on the following link. Sharp and LG, who already produces a 55" TV using IGZO tech, are also licensees.
http://www.jst.go.jp/pr/announce/20110720-2/index_e.html

Applied Materials looks like it may be the company behind much of the IGZO production equipment.
http://blog.appliedmaterials.com/lcds-aperture-ratios-and-hummingbirds
http://touchdisplayresearch.com/?p=614

The more I read the clearer it is that most (all) of us are misunderstanding what IGZO is about and who owns right to it.

EDIT: I found a better link describing who actually developed IGZO tech and how it's licensed. The article also confirms Samsung was the first licensee.
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/economy/technology/AJ201306100079
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/8/13 at 6:20am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #96 of 96
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
Apple is charging a significant premium over the other devices...

 

Because the iPad is a premium product and wholly incomparable to these other, smaller devices, in a totally different class of tablet.


People wouldn’t accept a 13” laptop being compared to a 15”. Why are they fine with this?

 

Originally Posted by mstone View Post
You guys are being way too sensitive. DisplayMate is only a video graphics specialist. They are not evaluating the iPad vs. Kindle in any other respect except the screen performance.

 

Bingo.

 

Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post
Go read the original report. These numbers are normalized for the same screen size.

 

And how can they possibly do that?

 

FWIW the Kindle HDX is lighter , has much denser display and has better battery life than the Air (12 hrs), at least from the ZDNet review.

 

Again, not comparable products.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon's Kindle Fire HDX bests iPad Air in display test