Agreed. And they gave it away for free.... (although, given how it has evolved, that's a fair price today).
LOL. What a moronic piece. The Comments get him good, though.
Thanks for the link.
That was my point of view on it. I'm not a photographer, but I only figured the higher megapixels were only beneficial if the camera a large enough lenses that could take in more light. No point in blowing up a picture or zooming in if there's going to be excessive noise.
Primarily it's not the size of the aperture for passing light; it's the quality of the optics--and limitations of physics--in such a small lens. The resolving power of a smartphone lens is too poor for more megapixels to be significantly beneficial. Sure, you can gain a little more information by increasing the megapixels, but the returns rapidly diminish beyond the 8 MP of the iPhone. Storage requirements and processing time increase with very little gain in information. Secondarily, the more limited light-gathering ability of smaller pixels on a higher-resolution sensor produces worse results in low light.
We have an analogous situation to roughly 14 years ago when AMD revolutionized the X86 platform with the introduction of AMD64. Intel was compelled to produce ever-faster microprocessors to keep up, but Intel couldn't maintain pace (in terms of computational performance) by playing a GHz game. Eventually Intel had to make the 64-bit transition themselves and introduce other innovations to regain the performance lead.
You're neglecting the lens! Smartphone lenses just aren't up to it. More MP in a smartphone sensor isn't necessarily better, using Samsung's devices as prime examples.
ajl wrote: »
And don't forget that Samsung cheat its devices with benchmark boosting tricks.
Nope. After digesting the facts, DED concluded that Samsung was full of crap and he filled the pot accordingly.
Thanks to TeeJay2000 for the research and to FOSS Patents‘ Florian Mueller for spotting Judge Grewel’s court order.
THERE IS ONE COMPANY MORE EVIL THAN GOOGLE, BUT AT LEAST THEY ADMIT IT. I"M NOT SURE WHICH IS WORSE. MISERY LOVES COMPANY
BOYCOTT - GOOGLE AND SAMSUNG
paul94544 wrote: »
<ul style="color:rgb(21,21,21);list-style-image:none;list-style-position:outside;margin-left:0px;"><li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">July 7, 2004: Jury advised of adverse interference when Samsung allowed emails to be automatically deleted even after it was told to retain relevant emails. After Samsung’s appeal, Judge William Martini found “Samsung’s actions go far beyond mere negligence, demonstrating knowing and intentional conduct.”</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">October 17, 2005: The U.S. Department of Justice fined Samsung nearly $300M for memory price fixing within the U.S.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">Feb. 7, 2007: U.S. government fined Samsung for $90M for memory chip price fixing for violations in 2006.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">Jan.15, 2008: Samsung’s offices in Korea were raided after evidence showed that a slush fund was used to bribe government officials and other business leaders.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">July 16 2008, Samsung chairman, Lee Kun-He was found guilty in Seoul of financial wrongdoing and tax evasion. Despite prosecutor request of seven years in prison, sentence was reduced to three years followed by a pardon by the South Korean Government in 2009 to allow him to help with its successful bid to host the 2018 Winter Olympics. He is now a member of the International Olympic Committee and this ‘pardoned criminal’ returned as Samsung’s Chairman in March 2010.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">May 19, 2010: The EU Commission fined Samsung for being part of a cartel that shared confidential information and fixed memory chip prices (along with eight other firms).</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">Nov. 1, 2011: The Korean Fair Trade Commission fined Samsung for being part of a cartel that fixed prices and reduced output for TFT-LCD screens between 2001 and 2006.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">March 15, 2012: The Korean Fair Trade Commission fined Samsung for a mobile phone price fixing scheme and consumer fraud whereby consumers would be paying more than what the discounted prices advertised.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;"> July 25, 2012: Magistrate Grewal informs the jury that they could take into account that “spoliation” of evidence occurred when Samsung destroyed evidence that could have been used in the Apple lawsuit; Samsung had a policy of automatically deleting emails that were two weeks old and should have suspended that policy between August 2010 (when Apple informed Samsung of patent infringement) and April 2011 (when Apple initiated the lawsuit).</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">August 24, 2012 a jury returned a verdict finding Samsung had willfully infringed on Apple’s design and utility patents and had also diluted Apple’s trade dresses related to the iPhone. But Samsung continues to fight the ruling, and continues in their copying behavior.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">Dec 2012: EU issued a Statement of Objections (SO) against Samsung for abusing its Standard-Essential Patents in not providing FRAND rates. Samsung withdrew all SEP-based injunction requests against Apple in Europe days before the SO was issued, but to no avail.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">April. 2013, Samsung is accused of and admits hiring people in several countries to falsify reports of HTC phones “constantly crashing” and posting fake benchmark reviews.</li>
<li style="list-style:disc outside;padding-top:0px;">October 2013 Samsung in confirmed reports from independent and objective testing, found to be intentionally falsifying performance benchmarks of its flagship products: the Galaxy S4 and Note 3.</li>
<p style="color:rgb(21,21,21);margin-bottom:35px;">Thanks to TeeJay2000 for the research and to <a href="http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/10/sanctions-loom-large-samsung-execs-were.html" style="background:transparent;color:rgb(236,65,46);margin:0px;padding:0px;" target="_blank">FOSS Patents</a>
‘ Florian Mueller for spotting Judge Grewel’s court order.</p>
<p style="color:rgb(21,21,21);margin-bottom:35px;">THERE IS ONE COMPANY MORE EVIL THAN GOOGLE, BUT AT LEAST THEY ADMIT IT. I"M NOT SURE WHICH IS WORSE. MISERY LOVES COMPANY </p>
<p style="color:rgb(21,21,21);margin-bottom:35px;">BOYCOTT - GOOGLE AND SAMSUNG</p>
<p style="color:rgb(21,21,21);margin-bottom:35px;"> </p>
<p style="color:rgb(21,21,21);margin-bottom:35px;"> </p>
digitalclips wrote: »
I have been postulating this exact point for the last few years only I don't have your knowledge to back up what for me is just a gut feeling about the trend in Apple's direction.
I even suggested that perhaps an addition Intel CPU might be a BTO on higher end Macs equipped with Apple "big iron" for those that do need to virtualize some Windows OS. I remember inserting CP/M-86 cards in Apple ][s so they could run non native OSs. For the most part, for the majority, those days are now behind us thankfully as Microsoft heads towards irrelevance and oblivion.
relic wrote: »
I love the pictures my Nokia 1020 take;
suddenly newton wrote: »
Someday, when computing is ubiquitous, perhaps we'll transcend the reductionist focus on processor speed benchmarks as a linear measure of "better" and focus on the qualities of the entire product such as features and experience. Apple achieved this with the iPod Nano (who even cares what chipset it uses?), and I hope the Apple Watch will sit on the same side of sanity. But as long as tech websites continue to treat smart watches as nothing but another touchscreen device strapped to your wrist, the focus on benchmarks will continue.
Wizard, can I wait till I have a little more hair and gained a few pounds. I don't mind doing it, but I also don't want people knowing just how bad I'm actually doing here.
Exactly. The iPhone 6/6P is fast, easy and takes pretty damn good shots for a smartphone.I.e
If I was going to put up with the 1020 to try and get better shots than a simple "point & shoot camera/phone" then I'd use my D700. Only 12MP, but it'll kill the 41MP of the 1020.
And I sure as hell won't put up with the rest of the 1020 as a phone just for the camera.
Though the Nokia 1020 isn't the fastest shooter it has gotten a lot faster with software updates. Also when you shoot in normal mode, i.e. turn off full resolution it becomes a lot faster. I'm not sure what you meant by, put up with the rest of the phone as the OS is very intuitive, fast and actually fun to use. Have you actually used say a Lumia 930, I think in all honestly even the most staunch iOS user would like it. Though it's like anything else, if go you into it with a closed mind, no matter how good it is, most around these parts will shoot it down simply because it isn't an Apple product.
wizard69 wrote: »
Clipped bee photo?
The true test of a camera is a selfie????. So if you want us to believe that Nokia is up to snuff a self portrait is in order.
redhotfuzz wrote: »
LOL, this kind of news has to make the specs-are-everything Fandroid crowd downright suicidal.