Raymond Soneira has been getting more and more infatuated with his "objective" instruments. He's way off in the weeds with some numerical anomalies, meanwhile losing his ability to make commonsense judgments with his eyes and brain.
I agree. I was at the Apple Store yesterday checking out the iPad Pro. There is no way the Surface screen is better. The iPad Pro's display looks amazing. The Surface Pro display isn't bad by any means, but it doesn't come close to the iPad Pro display in my opinion.
But they are both using much of the same technology and both have been scientifically tested to be extremely close in performance, to the point that it's really very unlikely that you would notice any difference. How could one 'not come close'?
Raymond Soneira has been getting more and more infatuated with his "objective" instruments. He's way off in the weeds with some numerical anomalies, meanwhile losing his ability to make commonsense judgments with his eyes and brain.
Isn't that kind of like saying 'well, the laser rangefinder says that Object A is 100 meters away and Object B is 110 meters away, but from my vantage point they both appear to be the same size. So they must be the same size!'
'Common sense judgements with his eyes and brain' are not the same as objective measurements, and an A- rating vs. A does not make the iPad Pro screen terrible.
I realize this may be cherry-picking, but look at the Brightness and Contrast scores. These qualities contribute a large part of how us humans assess visual performance:
The low reflectance contributes to Excellent to Very Good ratings across the iPad product line. One test I feel that is very important and has practical benefit is "Screen Readability in High Ambient Light," with all three iPads rated as Excellent. I think sacrificing a slight amount of color accuracy to achieve high performance in these areas is worth the minor trade-off.
Overall, given the current level of display technology, it is not surprising to see that there is near parity amongst all of the various upper tier manufacturers. While there is certainly room for improvement, we are pretty much in the "splitting hairs" realm. This reminds me of a situation a little over ten years ago, when I was in a demo suite with a bunch of projector display engineers tweaking a projector being fed with a 480i component video source. HD had not quite taken hold, but even then it was apparent to some of us that the image was only going to get so good, and that we were basically spinning our wheels. Us techies can be such dweebs at times.
Ancedotal evidence is all I need when it comes to screens and displays.
No two eye balls are the same. My eyes may have certain defeats, who knows. But IMO the iPad Pro screen destroys the Surface. And all that matters is what I SEE. Because I won't be using someone elses eyeballs to use my iPad.
I'm sorry but I'm really disappointed by this. I really believed the iPad Pro was easily going to have the best quality tablet display out there. It doesn't and to add insult to injury, that of the bloody Surface Pro 4 is better! At least the Mini 4's display is as good as MS's.
Oh, so they're closer than I thought...not quite as disappointed anymore!
I always find it fascinating how people trust someones interpretation of a set of numbers, without checking actual numbers and without knowing metrics of how a certain number is translated into a category "good/very good/ best"
That is why I posted numbers here.
And judging by numbers iPad Pro screen definitely doesn't fall behind MS Surface 4 screen. It is rather both have their strong sides and weak spots, but they are certainly in the same category.
Raymond Soneira has been getting more and more infatuated with his "objective" instruments. He's way off in the weeds with some numerical anomalies, meanwhile losing his ability to make commonsense judgments with his eyes and brain.
Why not? Consumer electronics are meant to be measured with instruments, not used by people.
Why not? Consumer electronics are meant to be measured with instruments, not used by people.
:no:
What a ridiculous assertion. Who cares what some set of specs says?? The screen quality is obvious!! All you have to do is look at it. What's important...
Total and utter bullshit. I've seen both and the Pro totally destroys the Surface screen. I don't need some nerd in a lab to tell me what my eyes are seeing.
I'm sorry but I'm really disappointed by this. I really believed the iPad Pro was easily going to have the best quality tablet display out there. It doesn't and to add insult to injury, that of the bloody Surface Pro 4 is better! At least the Mini 4's display is as good as MS's.
What a ridiculous assertion. Who cares what some set of specs says?? The screen quality is obvious!! All you have to do is look at it. What's important...
Oh wait, that was sarcasm wasn't it.
not sure if your own post is sarcastic or not, but that is why the google/android cheer team will never understand apple -- it's not about the specs, it's about the final experience. some spec may say the Pro is behind the Surface per some display metric, but in actual use that doesnt seem to matter.
not sure if your own post is sarcastic or not, but that is why the google/android cheer team will never understand apple -- it's not about the specs, it's about the final experience. some spec may say the Pro is behind the Surface per some display metric, but in actual use that doesn't seem to matter.
I thought sarcasm was obvious to any reader but apparently it was not.
I agree. I was at the Apple Store yesterday checking out the iPad Pro. There is no way the Surface screen is better. The iPad Pro's display looks amazing. The Surface Pro display isn't bad by any means, but it doesn't come close to the iPad Pro display in my opinion.
Maybe it's the much better Anti-Glare of the iPad screen over the surface that makes the ipad look better in real world use!
Microsoft did go all out with a good screen also!! It's just who wants to deal with Anti-Virus software, Firewalls, Spyware software, and the 30+ security updates a month it seems. I know as I get so many of them every month on my Windows Desktop. I just want my tablet to turn on and work and not deal with all that crap. That in the end is really why the surface is failing. You have a thing that's trying to be everything to everyone.
Personally I think maybe Windows RT ONLY for tablets and phones and left the full OS for Desktop's and Laptop's. RT designed for complete Touch screen access and none of that crap on Full Windows, Mouse and keyboard. Few people want to reach up and touch the screen on a laptop, but especially a desktop. That's what a mouse or trackpad is for.
While sales of the surface is growing every year as they get better, it's still a TINY fraction of iPad sales. I'm going to assume even the ipad PRO alone will have more sales then the surface.
If absolute quality of viewing really mattered to people then Panasonic would still be producing plasma TV's and Samsung would have been out of business a long time ago.
I love my 2 50" Panasonic Plasma's and hope I get a number of years more out of them. Though my one in my Bedroom is shutting off at times for some reason. I'm not sure if it's the TV, or maybe something to do with the new AppleTV sending a off signal t it? It didn't start doing it until I got the new AppleTV.
Plasma's have a better picture at at a lower cost and yet people still went after LCD display's. It's sickening. I don't know of people were scared of screen burn in? I've been gaming for years on mine and there's none of that. Maybe since they use LCD displays on their computers that it's good enough for their HDTV? maybe it's the way to bright Vivid Mode the LCD's are putting out in the stores over the Plasma displays that no one in their right mind would watch their TV like that at Home!!! Or it was the larger profit selling LCD's over the Plasma's so LCD's were pushed onto people. lastly, the higher power requirements of Plasma's. Though that was dropping.
The market seems to pick the worse formats!!! VHS over BETA. BETAMAX had the better picture also, but people went with VHS as it could hold more. Same with HD DVD over BlueRay. HD DVD was the better format for a number of reasons, but Blu-Ray could hold a little more after they finally figured out how to produce the duel layer discs reliably.
I'm sure the surface has a great screen, doesn't mean I want to deal with all the Windows issues on a tablet that i just want to work. The Anti-Glare is a lot better on the iPad Pro screen over the surface, and in real world viewing, maybe that's enough to make the iPad screen look better to people. Especially in a store with overhead florescent lights.
I love my 2 plasmas. Will keep the running as long as I can. Oh, and I don't have any Bill Gates / Steve Balmer / stuff in the house. Just purchased an iPad pro for my daughter. She thinks it is simply beautiful. I could not agree more. Might have to get one for myself one day.
Comments
I agree. I was at the Apple Store yesterday checking out the iPad Pro. There is no way the Surface screen is better. The iPad Pro's display looks amazing. The Surface Pro display isn't bad by any means, but it doesn't come close to the iPad Pro display in my opinion.
But they are both using much of the same technology and both have been scientifically tested to be extremely close in performance, to the point that it's really very unlikely that you would notice any difference. How could one 'not come close'?
Raymond Soneira has been getting more and more infatuated with his "objective" instruments. He's way off in the weeds with some numerical anomalies, meanwhile losing his ability to make commonsense judgments with his eyes and brain.
Isn't that kind of like saying 'well, the laser rangefinder says that Object A is 100 meters away and Object B is 110 meters away, but from my vantage point they both appear to be the same size. So they must be the same size!'
'Common sense judgements with his eyes and brain' are not the same as objective measurements, and an A- rating vs. A does not make the iPad Pro screen terrible.
I realize this may be cherry-picking, but look at the Brightness and Contrast scores. These qualities contribute a large part of how us humans assess visual performance:
http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_2015_ShootOut_1.htm#Brightness_Contrast
The low reflectance contributes to Excellent to Very Good ratings across the iPad product line. One test I feel that is very important and has practical benefit is "Screen Readability in High Ambient Light," with all three iPads rated as Excellent. I think sacrificing a slight amount of color accuracy to achieve high performance in these areas is worth the minor trade-off.
Overall, given the current level of display technology, it is not surprising to see that there is near parity amongst all of the various upper tier manufacturers. While there is certainly room for improvement, we are pretty much in the "splitting hairs" realm. This reminds me of a situation a little over ten years ago, when I was in a demo suite with a bunch of projector display engineers tweaking a projector being fed with a 480i component video source. HD had not quite taken hold, but even then it was apparent to some of us that the image was only going to get so good, and that we were basically spinning our wheels. Us techies can be such dweebs at times.
But what is the difference?
So iPad Pro is behind MS Surface 4 in terms of screen quality?
Riiight.
Lets see what Displaymate numbers are for both:
---------------- iPad Pro | MS Surface Pro4
Color Gamut 105% | 102%
Absolute color accuracy: (Average/Max) 2.6/6.6 | 1.9/ NA(no numerical values given)
Image contrast accuracy: Very Good, Slightly irregular | Very good , Image contrast slightly too low,
Average gamma: 2.13 | NA (no numerical values given)
Average screen reflection 2.6% | 5.6%
Mirror reflection 2.8% | 6.3%
contrast rating in high ambient light: 163 (excellent) | 78 (very good).
Calibration: Very good but WP is slightly too blue 7164K 1.8 JNCD from D65 WP | Excellent 6886K 1.5 JNCD from D65 WP
Max brightness measured 424 cd/m^2 | 436 cd/m^2
Lowest peak brightness: 4 cd/m^2 | 7 cd/m^2
True black brightness at 0 lux: 0.26 cd/m^2 | 0.31 cd/m^2
Constrast ratio at 0 lux: 1631 | 1406
p.s. S65 was a typo, of course. D65 is a correct version.
I'm sorry but I'm really disappointed by this. I really believed the iPad Pro was easily going to have the best quality tablet display out there. It doesn't and to add insult to injury, that of the bloody Surface Pro 4 is better! At least the Mini 4's display is as good as MS's.
So iPad Pro is behind MS Surface 4?
Riiight.
Lets see what Displaymate numbers are for both:
---------------- iPad Pro | MS Surface Pro4
Color Gamut 105% | 102%
Absolute color accuracy: (Average/Max) 2.6/6.6 | 1.9/ NA(no numerical values given)
Image contrast accuracy: Very Good, Slightly irregular | Very good , Image contrast slightly too low,
Average gamma: 2.13 | NA (no numerical values given)
Average screen reflection 2.6% | 5.6%
Mirror reflection 2.8% | 6.3%
contrast rating in high ambient light: 163 (excellent) | 78 (very good).
Calibration: Very good but WP is slightly too blue 7164K 1.8 JNCD from S65 WP | Excellent 6886K 1.5 JNCD from S65 WP
Max brightness measured 424 cd/m^2 | 436 cd/m^2
Lowest peak brightness: 4 cd/m^2 | 7 cd/m^2
True black brightness at 0 lux: 0.26 cd/m^2 | 0.31 cd/m^2
Constrast ratio at 0 lux: 1631 | 1406
Oh, so they're closer than I thought...not quite as disappointed anymore!
Oh, so they're closer than I thought...not quite as disappointed anymore!
I always find it fascinating how people trust someones interpretation of a set of numbers, without checking actual numbers and without knowing metrics of how a certain number is translated into a category "good/very good/ best"
That is why I posted numbers here.
And judging by numbers iPad Pro screen definitely doesn't fall behind MS Surface 4 screen. It is rather both have their strong sides and weak spots, but they are certainly in the same category.
Why not? Consumer electronics are meant to be measured with instruments, not used by people.
What a ridiculous assertion. Who cares what some set of specs says?? The screen quality is obvious!! All you have to do is look at it. What's important...
Oh wait, that was sarcasm wasn't it.
(In first LOL)
Eye*s*? You've got two? :-)
what injury? what insult?
(the handwringing is absurd)
not sure if your own post is sarcastic or not, but that is why the google/android cheer team will never understand apple -- it's not about the specs, it's about the final experience. some spec may say the Pro is behind the Surface per some display metric, but in actual use that doesnt seem to matter.
Note the use of the word "sarcasm" and "LOL".
I agree. I was at the Apple Store yesterday checking out the iPad Pro. There is no way the Surface screen is better. The iPad Pro's display looks amazing. The Surface Pro display isn't bad by any means, but it doesn't come close to the iPad Pro display in my opinion.
Maybe it's the much better Anti-Glare of the iPad screen over the surface that makes the ipad look better in real world use!
Microsoft did go all out with a good screen also!! It's just who wants to deal with Anti-Virus software, Firewalls, Spyware software, and the 30+ security updates a month it seems. I know as I get so many of them every month on my Windows Desktop. I just want my tablet to turn on and work and not deal with all that crap. That in the end is really why the surface is failing. You have a thing that's trying to be everything to everyone.
Personally I think maybe Windows RT ONLY for tablets and phones and left the full OS for Desktop's and Laptop's. RT designed for complete Touch screen access and none of that crap on Full Windows, Mouse and keyboard. Few people want to reach up and touch the screen on a laptop, but especially a desktop. That's what a mouse or trackpad is for.
While sales of the surface is growing every year as they get better, it's still a TINY fraction of iPad sales. I'm going to assume even the ipad PRO alone will have more sales then the surface.
If absolute quality of viewing really mattered to people then Panasonic would still be producing plasma TV's and Samsung would have been out of business a long time ago.
I love my 2 50" Panasonic Plasma's and hope I get a number of years more out of them. Though my one in my Bedroom is shutting off at times for some reason. I'm not sure if it's the TV, or maybe something to do with the new AppleTV sending a off signal t it? It didn't start doing it until I got the new AppleTV.
Plasma's have a better picture at at a lower cost and yet people still went after LCD display's. It's sickening. I don't know of people were scared of screen burn in? I've been gaming for years on mine and there's none of that. Maybe since they use LCD displays on their computers that it's good enough for their HDTV? maybe it's the way to bright Vivid Mode the LCD's are putting out in the stores over the Plasma displays that no one in their right mind would watch their TV like that at Home!!! Or it was the larger profit selling LCD's over the Plasma's so LCD's were pushed onto people. lastly, the higher power requirements of Plasma's. Though that was dropping.
The market seems to pick the worse formats!!! VHS over BETA. BETAMAX had the better picture also, but people went with VHS as it could hold more. Same with HD DVD over BlueRay. HD DVD was the better format for a number of reasons, but Blu-Ray could hold a little more after they finally figured out how to produce the duel layer discs reliably.
I'm sure the surface has a great screen, doesn't mean I want to deal with all the Windows issues on a tablet that i just want to work. The Anti-Glare is a lot better on the iPad Pro screen over the surface, and in real world viewing, maybe that's enough to make the iPad screen look better to people. Especially in a store with overhead florescent lights.
Some of you guys are way too sensitive about this stuff. Microsoft's display is slightly better? Well done Microsoft.
I love my 2 plasmas. Will keep the running as long as I can. Oh, and I don't have any Bill Gates / Steve Balmer / stuff in the house. Just purchased an iPad pro for my daughter. She thinks it is simply beautiful. I could not agree more. Might have to get one for myself one day.