While I agree with Apple?s decision to not go with the AMOLED, I would have to disagree with the previous posters who say the Nexus One is unreadable outside. I have had one since launch (along with an iPhone 3G), and as long as you leave the auto-brightness on, it is perfectly fine in 99% of outside conditions. As soon as you go to a set brightness, then yes, it is unreadable, but auto-brightness works great. Just felt like chiming in since I hear that all the time from fellow owners, and the majority of the time they aren?t using auto-brightness.
Also, RE: Apple Insider claiming the N1?s screen was ?soundly beat? in a ?scientific study? is a little over-dramatic. There are known flaws with the ?study," the biggest being the N1?s Gallery application has known color issues, so the article wasn?t actually giving an accurate hardware vs. hardware comparison. The same gradient picture that looks bad in the article looks just fine when displayed in the Android browser. We?ll see if that issue gets fixed with 2.2.
Apple was on the right path by looking into Samsung?s AMOLED screen, which really improves performance outside. Since that didn?t work out, Apple made the right decision to hold off for now. If the more techy users of the N1?s AMOLED screen have trouble using it outside and setting auto-brightness, then the casual users that Apple appeals too would definitely not be happy.
That said, an AMOLED screen looks so much better inside than a standard LCD that it really is only a matter of time before it gains widespread adoption. The best analogy I can give is to compare SD to HD. We always thought SD looked just fine, but once we all saw HD, SD looked rather dull from then on. I experience that same feeling when switching between my N1 and iPhone.
Definitely an interesting debate for geeks everywhere. I would encourage everyone to check out an AMOLED screen before passing judgement.
"In February, a scientific analysis of the Nexus One's OLED screen found that it was soundly beaten by the LCD display on Apple's iPhone 3GS"
Beaten if you rig the test. It was widely debunked at the time and it's frankly pathetic to see Apple Insider wheeling it out again.
There is a reason why AMOLED is gaining momentum at the expense of LCD, and it's certainly not because AMOLED is cheaper (it aint). Comparing the screen on my friend's Nexus One to my iPhone 3G is striking to say the least. His screen, putting the high resolution aside, is bright, vibrant, and actually can display black. My iPhone's screen is low contrast, dull, has horribly washed out blacks, and generally looks weak by comparison.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
I'm not using the G4 iPhone and talking about it. I'm stating that it uses less RAM than v3.1.3. What trade secrets does that violate? Are competitors going "Why didn't we think to make our systems more resource efficient with each revision?" after reading my post? Even if Apple did have my name I think I'd be fine.
If Plan A was the phone that Gizmodo got, and they end up having to go into production with Plan B, there will be riots. I don't think even Steve could spin that one at the keynote.
I definitely feel like the 3GS may have been Plan B. There were already serious rumors of a front-facing camera, and 5MP back camera back then. The good news is that if they were close to releasing that last year, it's a good bet they got it done for this year's model.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
I guarantee you that if Apple uses OLED it will not be the poor OLED used in the Nexus One. It sounds like you are getting hung up on an acronym and making a case that if Apple ever a better version of OLED, that doesn't yet exist in the market, that they are hypocrites, cheats and liars.
You also seem to be ignoring the long history of Apple choosing the best all around option, not the option that excels in one area but fails completely in others. There are many tests that clearly show the AMOLED used in the Nexus One is in many ways inferior to the iPhone's LCD.
BTW, competitors are moving to AMOLED because of the marketing hype behind it, not because they think it's better for the average user. This is a well worn idea. There have even been TV shows helping guys without personalities and confidence pickup up women by donning some ostentatious clothing so they can seem interesting. It's all a means to an end, it's just that some have more merit than others.
Good! But I do hope that they are using a better LCD quality, like IPS or FFS, so long as they have more battery life, too.
1) If the 3GS was their "back-up model" what was their original choice for the iPhone and why didn't they release it?
2) The only reason that a new iPhone is inevitable, besides the historical elements, is the lack of supply of current iPhones.
3) Can you restate your "thought"? All Apple has to do is send the GM to the factory and use that for the first batch. It's not uncommon for an x.x.1 update to come a few days after launch. I expect the GM to hit after the next Beta.
It's not likely the 3GS was the backup model as it was advanced for that.
I'm interested in what was said about AMOLEd, as it agrees with what I've been saying. The Samsung is the only AMOLED that works outdoors, and is slightly better than a good, bright LCD. But to get that brightness, too many other compromises had to be made.
My testing has shown v4.0 to use less RAM compared to v3.1.3 on a 3GS. I have about 115MB free on my 3GS right now running v4.0. I'm sure the higher resolution will require more RAM from the GPU and the better HW will increase the average RAM usage per app as developers push the envelope, but the OS itself uses less.
I find it hard to believe that the iPhone would have more RAM than the new iPad.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end
Maybe they'll wait to see what the IPS LCD in the 4th gen looks like before judging?
I think it's funny you're mocking "Apple die hards" blindly defending this yet you're making the same factually irrelevant judgement by comparing the iPhone 3Gs LCD display to an OLED display when the article clearly states the iPhone 4th generation will be using a different display.
but Apple actually has another project, dubbed N91, which is a lesser upgrade.
"It's a parallel product to back up the N90 in case there are major delays due to significant modifications in casing, display resolution, digital camera support and so forth," he said.
I've been expecting ``Plan B'' upgrade since I first heard about a SOB, who sold the prototype to Gawker's mob.
Interesting comments about iPhone OS not being multicore ready. I would have assumed that one of the advantages of using a desktop-class kernel is that it already contains features such as multicore support.
Multicore CPUs have been on ARM's roadmap for a long time. It's strikes as odd that the iPhone's software wasn't designed from the start with advanced chips taken into consideration.
If we do, I'd expect that we'll see a much darker UI emerge.
I looked for such markers in the current Betas but found none so I have to assume they either kept it very quiet (unlike the front-facign camera code) or that LCD will be used again this year.
There is a bit of a logistical issue here if Apple switches and the tech is still overly power-hungry for whites. 3rd-party devs will have to accommodate for the change in display technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planet Blue
I would love to see these tests. Thanks!
Google it. Outdoor use, overall power consumption (when not using heavy blacks to compensate), and true colour recreation are just a few of the areas I find more important than buying on buzzwords.
If Plan A was the phone that Gizmodo got, and they end up having to go into production with Plan B, there will be riots. I don't think even Steve could spin that one at the keynote.
I definitely feel like the 3GS may have been Plan B. There were already serious rumors of a front-facing camera, and 5MP back camera back then. The good news is that if they were close to releasing that last year, it's a good bet they got it done for this year's model.
How do you judge whether a rumor is serious or not? How do you know a rumor is even true?
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'm not using the G4 iPhone and talking about it. I'm stating that it uses less RAM than v3.1.3. What trade secrets does that violate? Are competitors going "Why didn't we think to make our systems more resource efficient with each revision?" after reading my post? Even if Apple did have my name I think I'd be fine.
Isn't the developer NDA supposed to prevent people from talking about firmware that hasn't been put into wide release?
I find it hard to believe that the iPhone would have more RAM than the new iPad.
It does seem unlikely.
On the other side of that, I'm still shocked that the iPad only came with 256MB RAM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Isn't the developer NDA supposed to prevent people from talking about firmware that hasn't been put into wide release?
I am talking about RAM used by the firmware, not the firmware itself, so I'm going to call it a grey area. Plus, it's a lot less info than AI posts in their articles, which include specific details and screenshots. I think I'll be alright.
Don't know why Apple has to be so picky about OLED technology. Who cares that it's not ready for primetime.
Just do it.
Microsoft did so with the Zune, and everyone else is jumping on the OLED bandwagon. They can use early adopters as a focus group, then fine tune it for the "real" version. They should also pre-announce it to gauge consumer interest, then ditch it if the feedback is less than stellar.
While I agree with Apple?s decision to not go with the AMOLED, I would have to disagree with the previous posters who say the Nexus One is unreadable outside. I have had one since launch (along with an iPhone 3G), and as long as you leave the auto-brightness on, it is perfectly fine in 99% of outside conditions. As soon as you go to a set brightness, then yes, it is unreadable, but auto-brightness works great. Just felt like chiming in since I hear that all the time from fellow owners, and the majority of the time they aren?t using auto-brightness.
Also, RE: Apple Insider claiming the N1?s screen was ?soundly beat? in a ?scientific study? is a little over-dramatic. There are known flaws with the ?study," the biggest being the N1?s Gallery application has known color issues, so the article wasn?t actually giving an accurate hardware vs. hardware comparison. The same gradient picture that looks bad in the article looks just fine when displayed in the Android browser. We?ll see if that issue gets fixed with 2.2.
Apple was on the right path by looking into Samsung?s AMOLED screen, which really improves performance outside. Since that didn?t work out, Apple made the right decision to hold off for now. If the more techy users of the N1?s AMOLED screen have trouble using it outside and setting auto-brightness, then the casual users that Apple appeals too would definitely not be happy.
That said, an AMOLED screen looks so much better inside than a standard LCD that it really is only a matter of time before it gains widespread adoption. The best analogy I can give is to compare SD to HD. We always thought SD looked just fine, but once we all saw HD, SD looked rather dull from then on. I experience that same feeling when switching between my N1 and iPhone.
Definitely an interesting debate for geeks everywhere. I would encourage everyone to check out an AMOLED screen before passing judgement.
Since I've read in a few places that the Nexus ONe screen is from Samsung, there are questions about that. TH he report from Ars Technica seemed to be pretty accurate in its technical aspects. The Nexus One screen is inferior because of the compromises made. The resolution is much lower than assumed by the specs released. The way it produces color is not normal, and lacks the resolution other screens have. They've made the screen in a way that required perceptional formulas to function properly. It's similar to Tv, where color resolution is much less than luminance resolution because of the assumed lack of ability of the eye to see resolution of the same degree as luminance. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. Text is worse though.
By the way, I've responded to the other posts using my iPad, but was required to respond to this one using my computer, because the scroll bar at the right side of the text box doesn't appear, and so there is no way to scroll the text down.
Gotta agree with Apple on this one. I have a Nexus One. Unless you set the screen brightness to the absolute highest level, it's unreadable outside.
That said, I wonder why Apple didn't go Super AMOLED. Those screens have overcome most of the flaws of OLED technology.
Any number of reasons:
- Cost
- Quality
- Availability
- Reliability
Remember that Apple has undoubtedly had samples from AMOLED vendors rather than simply relying on vendors press releases claiming that they've solved all the problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalxEdward
I'm just hoping 2 things:
1. That it's available the same day they announce it.
2. That the memory thing won't be an issue. My biggest gripe (almost my only one) with my current iPhone 3G is it seems to fill up the memory and bog down way too easily
1. Amen. I skipped the 3GS and my 3G is getting old. I'm ready.
2. I doubt if it will be. So far, it doesn't appear to be like desktop computers where every version of software has much heavier hardware requirements. If anything, software vendors are getting better about minimizing their hardware requirements on the iPhone. A phone you purchase today should remain usable for years.
I have an iPad (1 GHz A4 with 256 MB of RAM) and it is quite usable. An iPhone with the same hardware should be as good (smaller screen size but higher pixel density, so total # of pixels is only slightly lower than the iPad).
"In February, a scientific analysis of the Nexus One's OLED screen found that it was soundly beaten by the LCD display on Apple's iPhone 3GS"
Beaten if you rig the test. It was widely debunked at the time and it's frankly pathetic to see Apple Insider wheeling it out again.
There is a reason why AMOLED is gaining momentum at the expense of LCD, and it's certainly not because AMOLED is cheaper (it aint). Comparing the screen on my friend's Nexus One to my iPhone 3G is striking to say the least. His screen, putting the high resolution aside, is bright, vibrant, and actually can display black. My iPhone's screen is low contrast, dull, has horribly washed out blacks, and generally looks weak by comparison.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
If you're talking about the ARs test, it hasn't been "debunked". Show some links to your statement. That test was well done, and shows actual failings of the display.
Comments
Also, RE: Apple Insider claiming the N1?s screen was ?soundly beat? in a ?scientific study? is a little over-dramatic. There are known flaws with the ?study," the biggest being the N1?s Gallery application has known color issues, so the article wasn?t actually giving an accurate hardware vs. hardware comparison. The same gradient picture that looks bad in the article looks just fine when displayed in the Android browser. We?ll see if that issue gets fixed with 2.2.
Apple was on the right path by looking into Samsung?s AMOLED screen, which really improves performance outside. Since that didn?t work out, Apple made the right decision to hold off for now. If the more techy users of the N1?s AMOLED screen have trouble using it outside and setting auto-brightness, then the casual users that Apple appeals too would definitely not be happy.
That said, an AMOLED screen looks so much better inside than a standard LCD that it really is only a matter of time before it gains widespread adoption. The best analogy I can give is to compare SD to HD. We always thought SD looked just fine, but once we all saw HD, SD looked rather dull from then on. I experience that same feeling when switching between my N1 and iPhone.
Definitely an interesting debate for geeks everywhere. I would encourage everyone to check out an AMOLED screen before passing judgement.
Beaten if you rig the test. It was widely debunked at the time and it's frankly pathetic to see Apple Insider wheeling it out again.
There is a reason why AMOLED is gaining momentum at the expense of LCD, and it's certainly not because AMOLED is cheaper (it aint). Comparing the screen on my friend's Nexus One to my iPhone 3G is striking to say the least. His screen, putting the high resolution aside, is bright, vibrant, and actually can display black. My iPhone's screen is low contrast, dull, has horribly washed out blacks, and generally looks weak by comparison.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
Didn't you sign an NDA?
I'm not using the G4 iPhone and talking about it. I'm stating that it uses less RAM than v3.1.3. What trade secrets does that violate? Are competitors going "Why didn't we think to make our systems more resource efficient with each revision?" after reading my post? Even if Apple did have my name I think I'd be fine.
I definitely feel like the 3GS may have been Plan B. There were already serious rumors of a front-facing camera, and 5MP back camera back then. The good news is that if they were close to releasing that last year, it's a good bet they got it done for this year's model.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
I guarantee you that if Apple uses OLED it will not be the poor OLED used in the Nexus One. It sounds like you are getting hung up on an acronym and making a case that if Apple ever a better version of OLED, that doesn't yet exist in the market, that they are hypocrites, cheats and liars.
You also seem to be ignoring the long history of Apple choosing the best all around option, not the option that excels in one area but fails completely in others. There are many tests that clearly show the AMOLED used in the Nexus One is in many ways inferior to the iPhone's LCD.
BTW, competitors are moving to AMOLED because of the marketing hype behind it, not because they think it's better for the average user. This is a well worn idea. There have even been TV shows helping guys without personalities and confidence pickup up women by donning some ostentatious clothing so they can seem interesting. It's all a means to an end, it's just that some have more merit than others.
Good! But I do hope that they are using a better LCD quality, like IPS or FFS, so long as they have more battery life, too.
1) If the 3GS was their "back-up model" what was their original choice for the iPhone and why didn't they release it?
2) The only reason that a new iPhone is inevitable, besides the historical elements, is the lack of supply of current iPhones.
3) Can you restate your "thought"? All Apple has to do is send the GM to the factory and use that for the first batch. It's not uncommon for an x.x.1 update to come a few days after launch. I expect the GM to hit after the next Beta.
It's not likely the 3GS was the backup model as it was advanced for that.
I'm interested in what was said about AMOLEd, as it agrees with what I've been saying. The Samsung is the only AMOLED that works outdoors, and is slightly better than a good, bright LCD. But to get that brightness, too many other compromises had to be made.
I imagine we'll see an AMOLED next year.
There are many tests that clearly show the AMOLED used in the Nexus One is in many ways inferior to the iPhone's LCD.
I would love to see these tests. Thanks!
My testing has shown v4.0 to use less RAM compared to v3.1.3 on a 3GS. I have about 115MB free on my 3GS right now running v4.0. I'm sure the higher resolution will require more RAM from the GPU and the better HW will increase the average RAM usage per app as developers push the envelope, but the OS itself uses less.
I find it hard to believe that the iPhone would have more RAM than the new iPad.
Gotta agree with Apple on this one. I have a Nexus One. Unless you set the screen brightness to the absolute highest level, it's unreadable outside.
That said, I wonder why Apple didn't go Super AMOLED. Those screens have overcome most of the flaws of OLED technology.
The Nexus One is suppoed to have a super AMOLED from Samsung.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end
Maybe they'll wait to see what the IPS LCD in the 4th gen looks like before judging?
I think it's funny you're mocking "Apple die hards" blindly defending this yet you're making the same factually irrelevant judgement by comparing the iPhone 3Gs LCD display to an OLED display when the article clearly states the iPhone 4th generation will be using a different display.
but Apple actually has another project, dubbed N91, which is a lesser upgrade.
"It's a parallel product to back up the N90 in case there are major delays due to significant modifications in casing, display resolution, digital camera support and so forth," he said.
I've been expecting ``Plan B'' upgrade since I first heard about a SOB, who sold the prototype to Gawker's mob.
Multicore CPUs have been on ARM's roadmap for a long time. It's strikes as odd that the iPhone's software wasn't designed from the start with advanced chips taken into consideration.
Of course, this story could just be BS.
I imagine we'll see an AMOLED next year.
If we do, I'd expect that we'll see a much darker UI emerge.
I looked for such markers in the current Betas but found none so I have to assume they either kept it very quiet (unlike the front-facign camera code) or that LCD will be used again this year.
There is a bit of a logistical issue here if Apple switches and the tech is still overly power-hungry for whites. 3rd-party devs will have to accommodate for the change in display technology.
I would love to see these tests. Thanks!
Google it. Outdoor use, overall power consumption (when not using heavy blacks to compensate), and true colour recreation are just a few of the areas I find more important than buying on buzzwords.
Gotta agree with Apple on this one. I have a Nexus One. Unless you set the screen brightness to the absolute highest level, it's unreadable outside.
That said, I wonder why Apple didn't go Super AMOLED. Those screens have overcome most of the flaws of OLED technology.
probably have something to do with price and supply.
when you only make one phone a year, you might want it to at least be able to keep up with demand.
If Plan A was the phone that Gizmodo got, and they end up having to go into production with Plan B, there will be riots. I don't think even Steve could spin that one at the keynote.
I definitely feel like the 3GS may have been Plan B. There were already serious rumors of a front-facing camera, and 5MP back camera back then. The good news is that if they were close to releasing that last year, it's a good bet they got it done for this year's model.
How do you judge whether a rumor is serious or not? How do you know a rumor is even true?
I'm not using the G4 iPhone and talking about it. I'm stating that it uses less RAM than v3.1.3. What trade secrets does that violate? Are competitors going "Why didn't we think to make our systems more resource efficient with each revision?" after reading my post? Even if Apple did have my name I think I'd be fine.
Isn't the developer NDA supposed to prevent people from talking about firmware that hasn't been put into wide release?
I find it hard to believe that the iPhone would have more RAM than the new iPad.
It does seem unlikely.
On the other side of that, I'm still shocked that the iPad only came with 256MB RAM.
Isn't the developer NDA supposed to prevent people from talking about firmware that hasn't been put into wide release?
I am talking about RAM used by the firmware, not the firmware itself, so I'm going to call it a grey area. Plus, it's a lot less info than AI posts in their articles, which include specific details and screenshots. I think I'll be alright.
Just do it.
Microsoft did so with the Zune, and everyone else is jumping on the OLED bandwagon. They can use early adopters as a focus group, then fine tune it for the "real" version. They should also pre-announce it to gauge consumer interest, then ditch it if the feedback is less than stellar.
While I agree with Apple?s decision to not go with the AMOLED, I would have to disagree with the previous posters who say the Nexus One is unreadable outside. I have had one since launch (along with an iPhone 3G), and as long as you leave the auto-brightness on, it is perfectly fine in 99% of outside conditions. As soon as you go to a set brightness, then yes, it is unreadable, but auto-brightness works great. Just felt like chiming in since I hear that all the time from fellow owners, and the majority of the time they aren?t using auto-brightness.
Also, RE: Apple Insider claiming the N1?s screen was ?soundly beat? in a ?scientific study? is a little over-dramatic. There are known flaws with the ?study," the biggest being the N1?s Gallery application has known color issues, so the article wasn?t actually giving an accurate hardware vs. hardware comparison. The same gradient picture that looks bad in the article looks just fine when displayed in the Android browser. We?ll see if that issue gets fixed with 2.2.
Apple was on the right path by looking into Samsung?s AMOLED screen, which really improves performance outside. Since that didn?t work out, Apple made the right decision to hold off for now. If the more techy users of the N1?s AMOLED screen have trouble using it outside and setting auto-brightness, then the casual users that Apple appeals too would definitely not be happy.
That said, an AMOLED screen looks so much better inside than a standard LCD that it really is only a matter of time before it gains widespread adoption. The best analogy I can give is to compare SD to HD. We always thought SD looked just fine, but once we all saw HD, SD looked rather dull from then on. I experience that same feeling when switching between my N1 and iPhone.
Definitely an interesting debate for geeks everywhere. I would encourage everyone to check out an AMOLED screen before passing judgement.
Since I've read in a few places that the Nexus ONe screen is from Samsung, there are questions about that. TH he report from Ars Technica seemed to be pretty accurate in its technical aspects. The Nexus One screen is inferior because of the compromises made. The resolution is much lower than assumed by the specs released. The way it produces color is not normal, and lacks the resolution other screens have. They've made the screen in a way that required perceptional formulas to function properly. It's similar to Tv, where color resolution is much less than luminance resolution because of the assumed lack of ability of the eye to see resolution of the same degree as luminance. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. Text is worse though.
By the way, I've responded to the other posts using my iPad, but was required to respond to this one using my computer, because the scroll bar at the right side of the text box doesn't appear, and so there is no way to scroll the text down.
Gotta agree with Apple on this one. I have a Nexus One. Unless you set the screen brightness to the absolute highest level, it's unreadable outside.
That said, I wonder why Apple didn't go Super AMOLED. Those screens have overcome most of the flaws of OLED technology.
Any number of reasons:
- Cost
- Quality
- Availability
- Reliability
Remember that Apple has undoubtedly had samples from AMOLED vendors rather than simply relying on vendors press releases claiming that they've solved all the problems.
I'm just hoping 2 things:
1. That it's available the same day they announce it.
2. That the memory thing won't be an issue. My biggest gripe (almost my only one) with my current iPhone 3G is it seems to fill up the memory and bog down way too easily
1. Amen. I skipped the 3GS and my 3G is getting old. I'm ready.
2. I doubt if it will be. So far, it doesn't appear to be like desktop computers where every version of software has much heavier hardware requirements. If anything, software vendors are getting better about minimizing their hardware requirements on the iPhone. A phone you purchase today should remain usable for years.
I have an iPad (1 GHz A4 with 256 MB of RAM) and it is quite usable. An iPhone with the same hardware should be as good (smaller screen size but higher pixel density, so total # of pixels is only slightly lower than the iPad).
"In February, a scientific analysis of the Nexus One's OLED screen found that it was soundly beaten by the LCD display on Apple's iPhone 3GS"
Beaten if you rig the test. It was widely debunked at the time and it's frankly pathetic to see Apple Insider wheeling it out again.
There is a reason why AMOLED is gaining momentum at the expense of LCD, and it's certainly not because AMOLED is cheaper (it aint). Comparing the screen on my friend's Nexus One to my iPhone 3G is striking to say the least. His screen, putting the high resolution aside, is bright, vibrant, and actually can display black. My iPhone's screen is low contrast, dull, has horribly washed out blacks, and generally looks weak by comparison.
Of course Apple die hards will defend this decision to the end, until Jobs shows off an iPhone 5G next next with AMOLED, when it will of course be applauded as a game changer.
If you're talking about the ARs test, it hasn't been "debunked". Show some links to your statement. That test was well done, and shows actual failings of the display.