actually, that term applies to a bunch of phony accounts that all pretend to be in agreement with each other to suggest credibility to other readers, much like the way that there are a half dozen anonymous accounts on AI who approve and agree with each other's posts for delivering personal attacks with zero legitimate content. Surprise! they all love Android.
I don't think you guys are fooling anyone though.
I have a hard time agreeing with this statement. AI seems to do a pretty good job of screening people. For quite some time my posts were delayed by at least 24 hours. When I mentioned it, Tallest Skill who was once a moderator back when I was just reading, Told me new posters have a probation period and they screen for ip addresses that are the same. I was more impressed than insulted by that revelation. Just because there is more than one person that disagrees with you doesn't mean they are all the same person. Lol
Look at the very bottom of that chart on top till you find screen resolution. Compare. Apples and Oranges, AI, and misleading headline.
But that's the whole point. Samsung is saddling their processors and GPU with ultra-high resolution screens that offer questionable benefits to the end user over the 1920x1080 resolution that Apple is using, or that they used in the last generation.
People also tend to also forget that the AMOLED displays that Samsung and others use only have two color subpixels per pixel (Pentile RG-BG) instead of the standard three color scheme (RGB). That means the effective resolution of those displays are near 20% less than the advertised numbers.
As long as this statement means you are confirming that Corrections = Daniel Eran Dilger–meaning it’s no longer an anonymous connection–I’m fine with it.
It's a complete idiocy on their part to keep driving screen resolution up for no reason other than to spec-up a product and thus have their chips under delivering. But that's because they have no sense whatsoever to make a product that stands on it's own with attention to detail, design, software, and good customer service, which in my personal experience Samsung's should be the worst on the globe right now.
The only thing they got going is screen tech and chip tech, the former of which is quite good, the latter average. Slap on an android with tons of garbage on it, add a pen or something and some woeful design, put out some ridiculous ads showcasing how your only purpose is define yourself via your competitor and not your own merits and you get a product and a company that really is something of a frankenstein monster.
Articles like this really just make me sad about the journalism here, in what universe is this "poor"? Slightly behind in some tests is what I'd call it, while ahead in other tests.
Etc etc. The objective minded can see more over here:
Be sure to look for "offscreen" tests to be sure the test is run at the same resolution on all devices, more important than the onscreen which is different by device.
Articles like this really just make me sad about the journalism here, in what universe is this "poor"? Slightly behind in some tests is what I'd call it, while ahead in other tests.
Be sure to look for "offscreen" tests to be sure the test is run at the same resolution on all devices, more important than the onscreen which is different by device.
The entire point of the article is that high performance off-screen doesn't necessarily equate to high performance on-screen e.g. real world performance.
As long as this statement means you are confirming that Corrections = Daniel Eran Dilger–meaning it’s no longer an anonymous connection–I’m fine with it.
It's hard to know where to begin, because what you just wrote is a bunch of bull.
If three phones (say: Note 4, Nexus 6 and Droid Turbo) have the same SOC and the same version of Android, they'd perform within 5% of each other if you average the benchmarks.
(Heck, even with somewhat dif. versions of Android, they'll be close to each other!)
Android 5 is nicely faster with ART over Dalvik. So the current benchmarks under Android 4 are not that useful in judging the Nexus 6 performance which ships with 5.
Comments
...or if you're in the other camp they may be saying "suck on this". 8-)
I have a hard time agreeing with this statement. AI seems to do a pretty good job of screening people. For quite some time my posts were delayed by at least 24 hours. When I mentioned it, Tallest Skill who was once a moderator back when I was just reading, Told me new posters have a probation period and they screen for ip addresses that are the same. I was more impressed than insulted by that revelation. Just because there is more than one person that disagrees with you doesn't mean they are all the same person. Lol
Look at the very bottom of that chart on top till you find screen resolution. Compare. Apples and Oranges, AI, and misleading headline.
But that's the whole point. Samsung is saddling their processors and GPU with ultra-high resolution screens that offer questionable benefits to the end user over the 1920x1080 resolution that Apple is using, or that they used in the last generation.
People also tend to also forget that the AMOLED displays that Samsung and others use only have two color subpixels per pixel (Pentile RG-BG) instead of the standard three color scheme (RGB). That means the effective resolution of those displays are near 20% less than the advertised numbers.
I don't think you guys are fooling anyone though.
What users are the suspected socks?
This is the one I was referring to, and again wrong answer, but you did quite well with the others.
I don't cower behind an anonymous identity, mr lord raging hypocrite.
WTF? We don't even know who Corrections is.
WTF? We don't even know who Corrections is.
Are you being serious? Corrections = DED
I don’t cower behind an anonymous identity…
As long as this statement means you are confirming that Corrections = Daniel Eran Dilger–meaning it’s no longer an anonymous connection–I’m fine with it.
It's a complete idiocy on their part to keep driving screen resolution up for no reason other than to spec-up a product and thus have their chips under delivering. But that's because they have no sense whatsoever to make a product that stands on it's own with attention to detail, design, software, and good customer service, which in my personal experience Samsung's should be the worst on the globe right now.
The only thing they got going is screen tech and chip tech, the former of which is quite good, the latter average. Slap on an android with tons of garbage on it, add a pen or something and some woeful design, put out some ridiculous ads showcasing how your only purpose is define yourself via your competitor and not your own merits and you get a product and a company that really is something of a frankenstein monster.
Articles like this really just make me sad about the journalism here, in what universe is this "poor"? Slightly behind in some tests is what I'd call it, while ahead in other tests.
Etc etc. The objective minded can see more over here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8613/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-review/8 ;
Be sure to look for "offscreen" tests to be sure the test is run at the same resolution on all devices, more important than the onscreen which is different by device.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/07/29/google-appears-ready-to-ditch-android-over-its-intellectual-property-issues
The entire point of the article is that high performance off-screen doesn't necessarily equate to high performance on-screen e.g. real world performance.
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50724/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50725/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50726/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50727/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50728/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50729/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50730/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50731/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
An authoritative reply or citation is needed before I can accept this claim.
This just means Steve Jobs was Pablo Picasso. Because they both received credit for saying the same quote.
It's hard to know where to begin, because what you just wrote is a bunch of bull.
If three phones (say: Note 4, Nexus 6 and Droid Turbo) have the same SOC and the same version of Android, they'd perform within 5% of each other if you average the benchmarks.
(Heck, even with somewhat dif. versions of Android, they'll be close to each other!)
Android 5 is nicely faster with ART over Dalvik. So the current benchmarks under Android 4 are not that useful in judging the Nexus 6 performance which ships with 5.
I don't know.
I thought this reply by Corrections was him stating that he was DED.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o6xq3gxga03bj0m/AI.png?dl=0
There were other similar postings. I never realized that the identity of Corrections was a big thing. Seriously.
I don't cower behind an anonymous identity, mr lord raging hypocrite.
Lol…you mean like you did in the mid 2000s (2007ish) with the Prince McLean pen name and sock puppetting?
I was hoping "L" would be for "Lung Butter".
Who cares about specs?
What about that name!
Google blew me away when they finally revealed "L" to be "Lollipop".
Nobody is as innovative as them.
yup, Lollipop - perfect for suckers.