Well, the OLED expert they just hired might not be happy to hear this ;-)
He's a screen expert who worked with OLED. His main job area was in printing technologies. People are assuming that he only works with OLED so they can speculate about Apple using OLED. The fact is his job skills would translate to many different areas of LCD/OLED production.
As to people whining about multitasking, I have yet to see someone give a compelling reason why you'd need to run multiple Apps on your phone. Usually they don't understand what multitasking is or how it's implemented on an iPhone.
iOS is a fully pre-emptive multi-threaded, multitasking OS. Apple has made a choice not to allow Apps free reign to run. The important word here is choice. Haters will try and spin it to say that iOS has an inferior architecture to Android which is simply not true. Apple could enable multitasking for Apps as simple as flipping a switch since iOS already supports it. Apple just limits what Apps can do for the sake of battery life and performance/responsiveness. Again, it's simply a choice made by Apple, not a limitation of the OS itself.
Apple's method of handling multitasking is actually very good. There are only certain things people really need to be able to do at the same time. Phone calls, music/audio, e-mail, notifications and so on. Apple has services to handle all these, so if you have a Music App you can enable the ability to play music in the background (multitask) simply by using the service Apple provides. This is far more efficient than having an entire App multitasking when only a small portion of its functionality actually needs to multitask. It also makes developers think a little bit about what they want to achieve to write more efficient code than simply taking the "well, the OS will multitask my App for me, so I don't really have to code any special behavioirs for it".
What's funny is Android has horrible multitasking as well and neither Android or iOS can be called "true multitasking" (the buzz word so many haters like to throw around). Android can and will terminate Apps without warning if it needs memory. This is because neither Android or iOS have virtual memory (swap file) where they can use storage as RAM when memory gets low. They simply close the App. No OS can be said to have "true multitasking" if it can simply close an App for no other reason then memory getting low. Mis-behaving App? Hung App? Sure, close away. But not a fully functioning App that has done nothing wrong and is the victim of low system resources.
Further, Android emplys the exact same technique Apple does for closed Apps. It remembers the state of the App. This way when the App is stated again, it can resume more or less in the same state it was when force closed. From Android Developers: "If a user later returns to an application that's been killed, Android needs a way to re-launch it in the same state as it was last seen, to preserve the "all applications are running all of the time" experience." See that? To preserve the "illusion" that all applications are running all the time, when in fact some may have been killed.
In Android you can "request" that an App have priority to stay running (for example, background music), but there's no guarantee it won't get killed, it just has less of a chance of getting killed. What if you launch several Apps that all make an explicit request to stay active? Having to "request" that the OS not kill off your App is not the hallmark of a "true multitasking" OS.
iOS is a very stable OS but it is time for some big additions. Notifications alone could use a ton of improvements. For example, why can't we swipe away or close individual notifications under an app after we have read it but leave the remaining ones. Right now the only "X" is for the app itself which is useless if you want to keep some and erase others under an app. Then you have the weather, facebook, and twitter under notifications. How about some choice on what we see there?
Then you have the search screen with all that wasted space. That might be a good place to have some useful settings easily accessible. I would also like an easier way to access my 8th screen without swiping 8 times. I also hate the slow scroll on websites. For a really long website like this forum for example, you have to scroll forever to get to the bottom, why can't they let you have an option to speed scroll to the bottom? very annoying.
iOS is in need of some major improvements as it really is stale. You really have a hard time finding many differences between iOS 6 and iOS 3. I am not suggesting they copy anything from Android, Windows, or the new Blackberry OS, but I am suggesting they do something to bring some excitement back to iOS and make a new and much improved OS. I am really hoping that iOS 7 will blow us away in innovation and making it a far more complete user experience and address many current shortcomings and annoyances.
I am suggesting they do something to bring some excitement back to iOS and make a new and much improved OS. I am really hoping that iOS 7 will blow us away in innovation and making it a far more complete user experience and address many current shortcomings and annoyances.
Why does my OS need "excitement"? Isn't that the job of the apps?
Why does my OS need "excitement"? Isn't that the job of the apps?
Maybe excitement wasn't the best choice of words, but after using virtually the same iOS with almost no changes or new features for around 4 years I am ready for something new. I mentioned several examples you chose to ignore. There are many others. iOS is stale to a lot of people besides me. It is time for some big advances.
As to people whining about multitasking, I have yet to see someone give a compelling reason why you'd need to run multiple Apps on your phone.
First, let me note that I agree with most of your comments. Some additional thoughts and notes:
Re: multiple apps at the same time, I think it would be handy on tablets, especially when running apps originally meant for phones. Why use a subset of the screen (like in iOS) or spread the app out huge (like in Android)... just let me run two or more apps in screen sections, if I wish. (Samsung has started doing this a bit.)
Re: iOS and Android app/memory management: yes, they both ended up using the same main methodology, because it makes sense for a non-critical user oriented OS. Many mobile OSes have been designed the same. (Even Windows Mobile was designed to signal apps to shut down on low memory; however, few developers obeyed that rule.)
Re: forced app shutdown. Yes, both same, with the exception that on Android, you can write your core app as a Service, which will be restarted automatically as soon as there's memory again. Or, in most cases, using a system alarm to restart an app would be enough, too.
See, you keep leaving out the 'b'. It's "stable," not "stale."
Seriously, aren't you embarrassed to repeat this cliché? You guys need to come up with a new word. Your language skills and your thinking are stale.
Nope, it is stable but also quite stale. Not mutually contradictory. When I can move the cursor where I want to easily, or even scroll to the bottom of a webpage without a dozen flicks I will stop calling it stale. Even a backspace key (not backspace delete btw) would be a nice change. What is really different between iOS 3 and iOS 6? I don't want change for the sake of change, I want Apple to address some very serious shortcomings and make some substantial improvements to make it easier and faster to accomplish common tasks. There are many areas Apple needs to make some very substantial changes or additions.
OLEDs can be a lot more accurate already than they are. Some panels allow your own adjustments even. For phones using them, they're not color correct out of laziness to a large extent and the belief people WANT saturated colors because it adds ooh's and ahh's on the shelf next to 'washed out' LCDs. Most people aren't color experts and don't care. Case and point there's hacking tools out there people use on these Samsung phones to adjust color with a simple software mod.
I very much doubt that. OLEDs on screens that size would suck battery more than LCD. Even Samsung's tablets use LCD screens.
I don't like how LED TVs are put to the brightest setting to wow consumers. Samsung doesn't use OLED in their devices because I don't think OLED is ready for use in small devices, and I think we're still years away from it.
IOS experience needs to be updated and I'm looking at you iTunes/videos/music app.
Also multitasking on iPad.
Mulittasking is a little misleading. First off, if you double click on the Home Button, it brings up that apps that are currently "Running". That is what multiasking is. It's running multiple apps at the same time. If you want to "quit" an app because you have too many running, then you press and hold until the icons jiggle and then delete those that you don't want running at the same time.
The fundamental difference is that iOS devices are running full screen apps whereas OS X laptops/desktops are running apps in different windows that can run either full screen mode or in window mode.
You can do a four finger swipe on an iPad to cycle through different apps running. Some apps WILL pause other apps because it's kind of dumb to have videos playing at the same time as music playing on another app while you are playing a game. But,some apps are written so they keep playing music in the background while you do something else that does something similar. It's all how the apps are written and work with one another.
Personally, I just think they should give us the ability to switch apps with only 1 finger swipes instead of four finger swipe.
Another thing to consider is that these ARM chips are STILL 32 Bit and it may take another year or so until they start releasing 64 bit ARM chips, so they can only do so much, especially since battery life is important, but Apple still has excellent chip design as compared to others.
The OS will go through it's evolution as time moves on. The thing you have to realize that they don't want to make the OS too confusing to use and too bloated where it doesn't have a good user experience and that includes draining the battery. sit back and relax. Things will work out. I'm not worried about all of the "whiz bang" features of another OS from someone else. Apple is still the Number 1 supported OS for app and hardware development for practically all industries. If there is an app that is available on another platform, tell them to write the app for iOS. But so far, there aren't many on other platforms that I would want that aren't already available on an iPad.
Yeah, they need to update the music player. If you want to check out another one. Check out McDSP, they just released a music app that's pretty good. It's called LouderLogic.
Yes, please, tell us more about how iOS is the worst thing to ever be put on any sort of storage but refuse to actually explain what's wrong with it…
All iOS devices already have multitasking. Get over it.
I think some Android user spread some misleading info. Typical of them.
I wish they gave us options of swiping through apps. I would prefer a single finger swipe instead of a four finger swipe. Resizeable icons would nice. Plus a new app switcher bar would be nice. I would also like another slide down window to instantly change certain settings that I frequently change. I change certain settings quite frequently turning on/off BlueTooth, reconnecting to BlueTooth devices, reconnecting to WiFi, turning on/off tethering, etc. and having quick access would be nice. Maybe another pull down menu for selecting apps. There is a lot they could do. Plus they should allow for more apps on the dock where they app icons get smaller so we can cram more in the dock like OS X.
I have worked in the professional photographic lab field for 30 years and for much of that time colour matching was a black art, trying to match dyes against pigments and different levels of UV reflectivity as well as critical densitometric colour control.
Having recently purchased an ipod touch, I can, with some authority say that the colour matching abilities of the screen with photos taken with the inbuilt camera, in a variety of mixed lighting conditions and subtle shades of tones, is not less that utterly astounding.
If I did not see it with my own eyes I would not believe such colour fidelity is possible. I cannot see how it could be improved. To hear talk about 'saturation' in the OLED displays, sounds ludicrous to me. The current apple retina displays are about as perfect with regards to colour as it is possible to get,
"If you ever buy anything online and really want to know what he color is, as many people do, you should really think twice before you depend on the color from an OLED display," he said in a swipe at rivals like Samsung, which uses OLED displays on its Galaxy S3 smartphone.
"There are many attributes to the display, and what Apple does is sweat every detail," he said. "We care about all of them and we want the best display, and I think we've got it." He immediately followed that, though, by repeating: "I'm not going to talk about what we're going to do in the future."
This isn't necessarily a swipe at OLED technology in general. It's a swipe at Samsung's current OLED technology.
What Tim said: "I'm not going to talk about what we're going to do in the future."
What Tim meant: "We'll ship OLED panel products the minute we can get great color fidelity and high yields."
If I did not see it with my own eyes I would not believe such colour fidelity is possible. I cannot see how it could be improved. To hear talk about 'saturation' in the OLED displays, sounds ludicrous to me. The current apple retina displays are about as perfect with regards to colour as it is possible to get,
Yup. Apple's 2012 iPhone/iPad screens basically nail color accuracy tests. And they do this at scale. After charging up the high DPI marketing angle for a couple of years, in 2012, they started making very color accurate screens.
Not sure where they can go with displays in the future, other than a little more of everything: better power efficiency, thinner, less reflective and closer to the glass surface. The bang for the buck is getting smaller and smaller.
I'm always amazed at how good my iPhone 4S display is whenever I go from looking at TN displays (basically 90% (?) of personal computer displays) to my 4S display. It's just amazing. Going from a 4S to whatever is the best in 2013? The bang for the buck won't be as huge.
...people WANT saturated colors because it adds ooh's and ahh's on the shelf next to 'washed out' LCDs. Most people aren't color experts and don't care.
Considering Galaxy phones ship with the display being set to a default 'over-saturated' setting (Dynamic) instead of the 'regular' setting (Natural), I think Samsung at least agrees with you.
Considering Galaxy phones ship with the display being set to a default 'over-saturated' setting (Dynamic) instead of the 'regular' setting (Natural), I think Samsung at least agrees with you.
well my point was how Samsung views it, not my own personal, so yes...
1 - I'd rather have a color saturated OLED that I can read in plain sunlight than a color accurate IPS LCD that I can't, not to mention that OLED offers other possibilities, such as the ability to display very dim screen savers with useful information without wasting almost any battery. I feel that currently all Apple products are lacking in outdoors usability -- Siri addresses this on the iPhone in most cases, but not on the iPad. I wonder whether a bright electroluminescent screen could address this...
2 - Multitasking in iOS is actually quite bad. For starter, the double tap menu with the list of random apps is quite outdated; a a table containing the apps' icons and their windows; contents (current or grabbed just before they were moved to background) would look much better. Secondly there are these awful limitations preventing apps from running for more than 10 minutes unless those apps are associated to specific profiles (accessory, location tracking, music, or VoIP) or are left running in the foreground when the device is locked. I would, for example, like to leave an IRC or IM client running for extended periods of time no matter the battery drain; as a user I should have that option, with the default being the current behavior, but unfortunately nothing short of having a developer license to run my own applications on the device with one of the favored profiles or jailbreaking gives me this kind of functionality.
I work with Apple stuff and spend at least four or five hours in Xcode every day. I like Apple more than most. But to be frank, LCD technology is fundamentally inferior to OLED. The hard contrasts and garish colors on Samsung OLED phones (and it happens) are not a result of weakness in the display tech, but the display tech being too vicious and accurate with content designed and calibrated to look good on inferior displays. A good analogy is a MacBook Retina display with non-retina programs - it looks like crap because of the source, not the display.
To really use the capability inherent in an OLED display, you would need source material with a gamut and dynamic range to match - and you don't see that around very often. But intrinsically, LCD's are a mish-mash of colorspaces - they take an RGB signal (adding up from black to white) and physically render it CMYK (subract from an absolute whitespace - the backlight - to the color desired, like an inket printing on paper). For all LCD's advantages, that is a Rube Goldberg approach to rendering a pixel, and it cannot come anywhere near black levels of displays that actually can turn off.
Apple is playing down OLED displays because that is one critical technology they are absolutely not competitive in. No suppliers, no in-house tech (they're rapidly trying to remedy that now), and they've alienated the biggest player in it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Well, the OLED expert they just hired might not be happy to hear this ;-)
He's a screen expert who worked with OLED. His main job area was in printing technologies. People are assuming that he only works with OLED so they can speculate about Apple using OLED. The fact is his job skills would translate to many different areas of LCD/OLED production.
As to people whining about multitasking, I have yet to see someone give a compelling reason why you'd need to run multiple Apps on your phone. Usually they don't understand what multitasking is or how it's implemented on an iPhone.
iOS is a fully pre-emptive multi-threaded, multitasking OS. Apple has made a choice not to allow Apps free reign to run. The important word here is choice. Haters will try and spin it to say that iOS has an inferior architecture to Android which is simply not true. Apple could enable multitasking for Apps as simple as flipping a switch since iOS already supports it. Apple just limits what Apps can do for the sake of battery life and performance/responsiveness. Again, it's simply a choice made by Apple, not a limitation of the OS itself.
Apple's method of handling multitasking is actually very good. There are only certain things people really need to be able to do at the same time. Phone calls, music/audio, e-mail, notifications and so on. Apple has services to handle all these, so if you have a Music App you can enable the ability to play music in the background (multitask) simply by using the service Apple provides. This is far more efficient than having an entire App multitasking when only a small portion of its functionality actually needs to multitask. It also makes developers think a little bit about what they want to achieve to write more efficient code than simply taking the "well, the OS will multitask my App for me, so I don't really have to code any special behavioirs for it".
What's funny is Android has horrible multitasking as well and neither Android or iOS can be called "true multitasking" (the buzz word so many haters like to throw around). Android can and will terminate Apps without warning if it needs memory. This is because neither Android or iOS have virtual memory (swap file) where they can use storage as RAM when memory gets low. They simply close the App. No OS can be said to have "true multitasking" if it can simply close an App for no other reason then memory getting low. Mis-behaving App? Hung App? Sure, close away. But not a fully functioning App that has done nothing wrong and is the victim of low system resources.
Further, Android emplys the exact same technique Apple does for closed Apps. It remembers the state of the App. This way when the App is stated again, it can resume more or less in the same state it was when force closed. From Android Developers: "If a user later returns to an application that's been killed, Android needs a way to re-launch it in the same state as it was last seen, to preserve the "all applications are running all of the time" experience." See that? To preserve the "illusion" that all applications are running all the time, when in fact some may have been killed.
In Android you can "request" that an App have priority to stay running (for example, background music), but there's no guarantee it won't get killed, it just has less of a chance of getting killed. What if you launch several Apps that all make an explicit request to stay active? Having to "request" that the OS not kill off your App is not the hallmark of a "true multitasking" OS.
Then you have the search screen with all that wasted space. That might be a good place to have some useful settings easily accessible. I would also like an easier way to access my 8th screen without swiping 8 times. I also hate the slow scroll on websites. For a really long website like this forum for example, you have to scroll forever to get to the bottom, why can't they let you have an option to speed scroll to the bottom? very annoying.
iOS is in need of some major improvements as it really is stale. You really have a hard time finding many differences between iOS 6 and iOS 3. I am not suggesting they copy anything from Android, Windows, or the new Blackberry OS, but I am suggesting they do something to bring some excitement back to iOS and make a new and much improved OS. I am really hoping that iOS 7 will blow us away in innovation and making it a far more complete user experience and address many current shortcomings and annoyances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
I am suggesting they do something to bring some excitement back to iOS and make a new and much improved OS. I am really hoping that iOS 7 will blow us away in innovation and making it a far more complete user experience and address many current shortcomings and annoyances.
Why does my OS need "excitement"? Isn't that the job of the apps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
Why does my OS need "excitement"? Isn't that the job of the apps?
Maybe excitement wasn't the best choice of words, but after using virtually the same iOS with almost no changes or new features for around 4 years I am ready for something new. I mentioned several examples you chose to ignore. There are many others. iOS is stale to a lot of people besides me. It is time for some big advances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
As to people whining about multitasking, I have yet to see someone give a compelling reason why you'd need to run multiple Apps on your phone.
First, let me note that I agree with most of your comments. Some additional thoughts and notes:
Re: multiple apps at the same time, I think it would be handy on tablets, especially when running apps originally meant for phones. Why use a subset of the screen (like in iOS) or spread the app out huge (like in Android)... just let me run two or more apps in screen sections, if I wish. (Samsung has started doing this a bit.)
Re: iOS and Android app/memory management: yes, they both ended up using the same main methodology, because it makes sense for a non-critical user oriented OS. Many mobile OSes have been designed the same. (Even Windows Mobile was designed to signal apps to shut down on low memory; however, few developers obeyed that rule.)
Re: forced app shutdown. Yes, both same, with the exception that on Android, you can write your core app as a Service, which will be restarted automatically as soon as there's memory again. Or, in most cases, using a system alarm to restart an app would be enough, too.
See, you keep leaving out the 'b'. It's "stable," not "stale."
Seriously, aren't you embarrassed to repeat this cliché? You guys need to come up with a new word. Your language skills and your thinking are stale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
See, you keep leaving out the 'b'. It's "stable," not "stale."
Seriously, aren't you embarrassed to repeat this cliché? You guys need to come up with a new word. Your language skills and your thinking are stale.
Nope, it is stable but also quite stale. Not mutually contradictory. When I can move the cursor where I want to easily, or even scroll to the bottom of a webpage without a dozen flicks I will stop calling it stale. Even a backspace key (not backspace delete btw) would be a nice change. What is really different between iOS 3 and iOS 6? I don't want change for the sake of change, I want Apple to address some very serious shortcomings and make some substantial improvements to make it easier and faster to accomplish common tasks. There are many areas Apple needs to make some very substantial changes or additions.
I don't like how LED TVs are put to the brightest setting to wow consumers. Samsung doesn't use OLED in their devices because I don't think OLED is ready for use in small devices, and I think we're still years away from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo1234
IOS experience needs to be updated and I'm looking at you iTunes/videos/music app.
Also multitasking on iPad.
Mulittasking is a little misleading. First off, if you double click on the Home Button, it brings up that apps that are currently "Running". That is what multiasking is. It's running multiple apps at the same time. If you want to "quit" an app because you have too many running, then you press and hold until the icons jiggle and then delete those that you don't want running at the same time.
The fundamental difference is that iOS devices are running full screen apps whereas OS X laptops/desktops are running apps in different windows that can run either full screen mode or in window mode.
You can do a four finger swipe on an iPad to cycle through different apps running. Some apps WILL pause other apps because it's kind of dumb to have videos playing at the same time as music playing on another app while you are playing a game. But,some apps are written so they keep playing music in the background while you do something else that does something similar. It's all how the apps are written and work with one another.
Personally, I just think they should give us the ability to switch apps with only 1 finger swipes instead of four finger swipe.
Another thing to consider is that these ARM chips are STILL 32 Bit and it may take another year or so until they start releasing 64 bit ARM chips, so they can only do so much, especially since battery life is important, but Apple still has excellent chip design as compared to others.
The OS will go through it's evolution as time moves on. The thing you have to realize that they don't want to make the OS too confusing to use and too bloated where it doesn't have a good user experience and that includes draining the battery. sit back and relax. Things will work out. I'm not worried about all of the "whiz bang" features of another OS from someone else. Apple is still the Number 1 supported OS for app and hardware development for practically all industries. If there is an app that is available on another platform, tell them to write the app for iOS. But so far, there aren't many on other platforms that I would want that aren't already available on an iPad.
Yeah, they need to update the music player. If you want to check out another one. Check out McDSP, they just released a music app that's pretty good. It's called LouderLogic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yes, please, tell us more about how iOS is the worst thing to ever be put on any sort of storage but refuse to actually explain what's wrong with it…
All iOS devices already have multitasking. Get over it.
I think some Android user spread some misleading info. Typical of them.
I wish they gave us options of swiping through apps. I would prefer a single finger swipe instead of a four finger swipe. Resizeable icons would nice. Plus a new app switcher bar would be nice. I would also like another slide down window to instantly change certain settings that I frequently change. I change certain settings quite frequently turning on/off BlueTooth, reconnecting to BlueTooth devices, reconnecting to WiFi, turning on/off tethering, etc. and having quick access would be nice. Maybe another pull down menu for selecting apps. There is a lot they could do. Plus they should allow for more apps on the dock where they app icons get smaller so we can cram more in the dock like OS X.
Originally Posted by drblank
I wish they gave us options of swiping through apps.
We have that.
I would prefer a single finger swipe instead of a four finger swipe.
That would break every single app. Do you not realize that one-finger swipe is taken?
I would also like another slide down window to instantly change certain settings that I frequently change.
That could be in Notification Center.
Plus they should allow for more apps on the dock where they app icons get smaller so we can cram more in the dock like OS X.
There's a minimum hit box size. Apps aren't there yet, but no app should be larger or smaller than any other. It breaks the at-a-glance aspect, too.
Having recently purchased an ipod touch, I can, with some authority say that the colour matching abilities of the screen with photos taken with the inbuilt camera, in a variety of mixed lighting conditions and subtle shades of tones, is not less that utterly astounding.
If I did not see it with my own eyes I would not believe such colour fidelity is possible. I cannot see how it could be improved. To hear talk about 'saturation' in the OLED displays, sounds ludicrous to me. The current apple retina displays are about as perfect with regards to colour as it is possible to get,
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"If you ever buy anything online and really want to know what he color is, as many people do, you should really think twice before you depend on the color from an OLED display," he said in a swipe at rivals like Samsung, which uses OLED displays on its Galaxy S3 smartphone.
"There are many attributes to the display, and what Apple does is sweat every detail," he said. "We care about all of them and we want the best display, and I think we've got it." He immediately followed that, though, by repeating: "I'm not going to talk about what we're going to do in the future."
This isn't necessarily a swipe at OLED technology in general. It's a swipe at Samsung's current OLED technology.
What Tim said: "I'm not going to talk about what we're going to do in the future."
What Tim meant: "We'll ship OLED panel products the minute we can get great color fidelity and high yields."
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe
Even Samsung's tablets use LCD screens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Samsung doesn't use OLED in their devices because I don't think OLED is ready for use in small devices, and I think we're still years away from it.
In addition to numerous smartphone models, Samsung uses an OLED screen in their Galaxy Tab 7.7 tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack
If I did not see it with my own eyes I would not believe such colour fidelity is possible. I cannot see how it could be improved. To hear talk about 'saturation' in the OLED displays, sounds ludicrous to me. The current apple retina displays are about as perfect with regards to colour as it is possible to get,
Yup. Apple's 2012 iPhone/iPad screens basically nail color accuracy tests. And they do this at scale. After charging up the high DPI marketing angle for a couple of years, in 2012, they started making very color accurate screens.
Not sure where they can go with displays in the future, other than a little more of everything: better power efficiency, thinner, less reflective and closer to the glass surface. The bang for the buck is getting smaller and smaller.
I'm always amazed at how good my iPhone 4S display is whenever I go from looking at TN displays (basically 90% (?) of personal computer displays) to my 4S display. It's just amazing. Going from a 4S to whatever is the best in 2013? The bang for the buck won't be as huge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe
...people WANT saturated colors because it adds ooh's and ahh's on the shelf next to 'washed out' LCDs. Most people aren't color experts and don't care.
Considering Galaxy phones ship with the display being set to a default 'over-saturated' setting (Dynamic) instead of the 'regular' setting (Natural), I think Samsung at least agrees with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
Considering Galaxy phones ship with the display being set to a default 'over-saturated' setting (Dynamic) instead of the 'regular' setting (Natural), I think Samsung at least agrees with you.
well my point was how Samsung views it, not my own personal, so yes...
1 - I'd rather have a color saturated OLED that I can read in plain sunlight than a color accurate IPS LCD that I can't, not to mention that OLED offers other possibilities, such as the ability to display very dim screen savers with useful information without wasting almost any battery. I feel that currently all Apple products are lacking in outdoors usability -- Siri addresses this on the iPhone in most cases, but not on the iPad. I wonder whether a bright electroluminescent screen could address this...
2 - Multitasking in iOS is actually quite bad. For starter, the double tap menu with the list of random apps is quite outdated; a a table containing the apps' icons and their windows; contents (current or grabbed just before they were moved to background) would look much better. Secondly there are these awful limitations preventing apps from running for more than 10 minutes unless those apps are associated to specific profiles (accessory, location tracking, music, or VoIP) or are left running in the foreground when the device is locked. I would, for example, like to leave an IRC or IM client running for extended periods of time no matter the battery drain; as a user I should have that option, with the default being the current behavior, but unfortunately nothing short of having a developer license to run my own applications on the device with one of the favored profiles or jailbreaking gives me this kind of functionality.
I work with Apple stuff and spend at least four or five hours in Xcode every day. I like Apple more than most. But to be frank, LCD technology is fundamentally inferior to OLED. The hard contrasts and garish colors on Samsung OLED phones (and it happens) are not a result of weakness in the display tech, but the display tech being too vicious and accurate with content designed and calibrated to look good on inferior displays. A good analogy is a MacBook Retina display with non-retina programs - it looks like crap because of the source, not the display.
To really use the capability inherent in an OLED display, you would need source material with a gamut and dynamic range to match - and you don't see that around very often. But intrinsically, LCD's are a mish-mash of colorspaces - they take an RGB signal (adding up from black to white) and physically render it CMYK (subract from an absolute whitespace - the backlight - to the color desired, like an inket printing on paper). For all LCD's advantages, that is a Rube Goldberg approach to rendering a pixel, and it cannot come anywhere near black levels of displays that actually can turn off.
Apple is playing down OLED displays because that is one critical technology they are absolutely not competitive in. No suppliers, no in-house tech (they're rapidly trying to remedy that now), and they've alienated the biggest player in it.