Well, the notch basically boils down to opinion. I like it. I even think it looks classy.
It does give a sensation of more screen expanse. In part, this is due to the very presence of the notch itself, which is slightly ironic.
Gruber perhaps has gone a little overboard with his reaction but as opinions go it's just one more for the pile.
Although I haven't touched one yet, and therefore have to reserve my final thoughts, I have serious doubts about the metal in the glass sandwich which looks overstated in the photos.
The camera bulge is fugly IMO but I'm not a fan of them even on a good day. Much less when they are off centre but again, this is design opinion and I might be in the minority.
When Gruber really doesn’t like something he’s not shy about voicing it. I said earlier I’d like more Apple PR on how and why some of the decisions were made. If you go to the X product page on Apple’s website they clearly are embracing the notch, not trying to hide it in any way. Which makes me wonder if the thought was the home button was something iconic and once we lose it iPhone will look like every other phone out there and so they embraced the notch because it would make the X unique. If you look at renders that put a black bar at the top and bottom the X becomes indistinguishable from many Android phones. I’m a little surprised we didn’t get dark mode as I think that would have made the notch less of an eyesore
I think you're onto something. The Home button was indeed iconic, the most visible representation of Apple's secret sauce; that which set the iPhone so starkly apart from the universe of phones that existed when it was introduced. The notch does the same thing for the next generation of iPhones; it's where the tentpole feature's underlying magic is housed. It may well be that Apple has decided to embrace the notch for this very reason, to create the statement that 'this is the iPhone, and magic lies here within.'
Well, the notch basically boils down to opinion. I like it. I even think it looks classy.
It does give a sensation of more screen expanse. In part, this is due to the very presence of the notch itself, which is slightly ironic.
Gruber perhaps has gone a little overboard with his reaction but as opinions go it's just one more for the pile.
Although I haven't touched one yet, and therefore have to reserve my final thoughts, I have serious doubts about the metal in the glass sandwich which looks overstated in the photos.
The camera bulge is fugly IMO but I'm not a fan of them even on a good day. Much less when they are off centre but again, this is design opinion and I might be in the minority.
When Gruber really doesn’t like something he’s not shy about voicing it. I said earlier I’d like more Apple PR on how and why some of the decisions were made. If you go to the X product page on Apple’s website they clearly are embracing the notch, not trying to hide it in any way. Which makes me wonder if the thought was the home button was something iconic and once we lose it iPhone will look like every other phone out there and so they embraced the notch because it would make the X unique. If you look at renders that put a black bar at the top and bottom the X becomes indistinguishable from many Android phones. I’m a little surprised we didn’t get dark mode as I think that would have made the notch less of an eyesore
I think you're onto something. The Home button was indeed iconic, the most visible representation of Apple's secret sauce; that which set the iPhone so starkly apart from the universe of phones that existed when it was introduced. The notch does the same thing for the next generation of iPhones; it's where the tentpole feature's underlying magic is housed. It may well be that Apple has decided to embrace the notch for this very reason, to create the statement that 'this is the iPhone, and magic lies here within.'
So in your opinion the "notch" is now a fixed and iconic element in Apple's iPhone lineup for the next few years? Personally I doubt that and expect it to look different again by the time the next model rolls out in 2018, but I'll grant that you along with others may know more about it than I do. While we wait to see if this is meant to be "iconic" I'll give Apple more credit for innovating a way to rid the screen of it entirely sooner rather than later.
The iPhone 8 screen area is significantly smaller than the X.
You can be so silly. The OP plainly and obviously was comparing prices between the 8 and the X. For him the 8 will be fine and dandy if he can buy it for $699 , but 40% more for the X not so much. You're saying wrong does not make it so.
Sorry bro. You are wrong.
This is like someone bitching that a 70 inch TV cost more than a 50 inch TV. Duh. Of course its going to cost more.
Comparing the price between the 8 and X is dishonest.
Dishonest? The OP doesn't see the personal value for him in spending 40% more on the X, the 8 checking the boxes for the features he thinks he wants. Seems an honest enough opinion.
The only one being dishonest is Sog with his comment about the screen size means you can't compare the iPhone 8 to the iPhone X when it comes to a purchase decision even though the unobstructed display size is 5.15", not 5.8", and the display width is the same as the iPhone 8 which means that size plays a big part in the purchase decision. Personally, I won't even consider the iPhone X design until there's a Plus equivalency.
Ignorant.
The X screen area is significantly bigger than the 8. Learn basic math. And watch your tone
Just to set the record straight...
iPhone 8, 4.7" actual display measurements: 4.69" on the diagonal, 4.092" tall, 2.3" wide. total display area: 9.41 square inches
iPhone 8+, 5.5" actual display measurements: 5.4935" on the diagonal, 4.788" tall, 2.6932" wide total display area: 12.895 square inches (37% larger than iPhone 8 display)
iPhone X, 5.8" actual display measurements*: 5.8586" on the diagonal, 5.3188" tall, 2.456" wide total display area*: 13.063 square inches (38.8% larger than iPhone 8, just 1.3% larger than iPhone 8+)
* does not account for rounded corners or sensor notch
thanks for the screen stats. I've been looking for them, but could not find them.
The X with an almost 40% larger screen area than the 8 is very significant
You're the one accusing others of not doing basic math. That's what I did, and you could have done too, theoretically. But yeah, the math supports your argument about the X have a significantly larger screen than the 8. Good guess.
You're the one accusing others of not doing basic math. That's what I did, and you could have dine too, theoretically. But yeah, the math supports your argument about the X have a significantly larger screen than the 8. Good guess.
Are the statements about playing a 16:9 video at maximum size without being cropped or the maximum size of the Safe Area really that hard to understand? I thought they were crystal clear but you posted a box resolution that doesn't seem to consider that the corners with reduces the actual diagonal size or that the notch also removes great deal of pixels, but more importantly will affect full screen of content, like a 16:9 image you want to view in its entirety, hence the Safe Area.
It would be like taking a map of the UK and then creating an x and y graph of its furtherest distances and then multiplying those two numbers to get land area. Do you honestly not see how that paints a false narrative? That red box is not the area of the UK! I understand that Sog can't grasp this point but I do expect you to understand it.
Wow John Gruber is really harsh on the notch, much more so than other Apple bloggers/Apple podcasts I’ve read/listened to. He called it “offensive” and “a joke”. Even the ATP guys weren’t that harsh (and they can pick nits like nobodies business).
I ignore it when guys like Gruber complain. Most of the time I agree with him, but sometimes I don’t. I’ve written to him a number of times over the years, AMD he’s replied back about half the time. I happen to think the notch is brilliant. I also,think that since some people, including Gruber don’t completely understand it, they don’t like it. I’m surprised at his response, and haven’t written him yet.
but if people understand that the “ears” save screen space for apps, and give us that info without having apps blank it out, requiring us to tap out to see it, then maybe they’ll appreciate it more.
Seems like where people are really hating the notch is in landscape mode, especially with apps with white background, which is why I’m a little surprised Apple didn’t introduce dark mode with the X. As far as landscape mode hoe many people really use their phone that way for things other than watching video? Seems like a non-issue.
Wow John Gruber is really harsh on the notch, much more so than other Apple bloggers/Apple podcasts I’ve read/listened to. He called it “offensive” and “a joke”. Even the ATP guys weren’t that harsh (and they can pick nits like nobodies business).
I ignore it when guys like Gruber complain. Most of the time I agree with him, but sometimes I don’t. I’ve written to him a number of times over the years, AMD he’s replied back about half the time. I happen to think the notch is brilliant. I also,think that since some people, including Gruber don’t completely understand it, they don’t like it. I’m surprised at his response, and haven’t written him yet.
but if people understand that the “ears” save screen space for apps, and give us that info without having apps blank it out, requiring us to tap out to see it, then maybe they’ll appreciate it more.
Seems like where people are really hating the notch is in landscape mode, especially with apps with white background, which is why I’m a little surprised Apple didn’t introduce dark mode with the X. As far as landscape mode hoe many people really use their phone that way for things other than watching video? Seems like a non-issue.
It is a non-issue because you don't have to watch it fullscreen with the notch and corners cutting off the video. I believe the default state is with pillars within the Safe Area.
Well, the notch basically boils down to opinion. I like it. I even think it looks classy.
It does give a sensation of more screen expanse. In part, this is due to the very presence of the notch itself, which is slightly ironic.
Gruber perhaps has gone a little overboard with his reaction but as opinions go it's just one more for the pile.
Although I haven't touched one yet, and therefore have to reserve my final thoughts, I have serious doubts about the metal in the glass sandwich which looks overstated in the photos.
The camera bulge is fugly IMO but I'm not a fan of them even on a good day. Much less when they are off centre but again, this is design opinion and I might be in the minority.
When Gruber really doesn’t like something he’s not shy about voicing it. I said earlier I’d like more Apple PR on how and why some of the decisions were made. If you go to the X product page on Apple’s website they clearly are embracing the notch, not trying to hide it in any way. Which makes me wonder if the thought was the home button was something iconic and once we lose it iPhone will look like every other phone out there and so they embraced the notch because it would make the X unique. If you look at renders that put a black bar at the top and bottom the X becomes indistinguishable from many Android phones. I’m a little surprised we didn’t get dark mode as I think that would have made the notch less of an eyesore
I think you're onto something. The Home button was indeed iconic, the most visible representation of Apple's secret sauce; that which set the iPhone so starkly apart from the universe of phones that existed when it was introduced. The notch does the same thing for the next generation of iPhones; it's where the tentpole feature's underlying magic is housed. It may well be that Apple has decided to embrace the notch for this very reason, to create the statement that 'this is the iPhone, and magic lies here within.'
So in your opinion the "notch" is now a fixed and iconic element in Apple's iPhone lineup for the next few years? Personally I doubt that and expect it to look different again by the time the next model rolls out in 2018, but I'll grant that you along with others may know more about it than I do. Personally i give Apple more credit for innovating a way to rid the screen of it entirely sooner rather than later.
As soon as I wrote that comment I knew someone would nick me on it. The right way to present your argument is to ask, if Apple in some future could indeed hide all the sensors and emitters and speaker behind the display, would they still embrace the notch as an iconic element meant to signify 'this is the iPhone?' And of course the answer to that is No. Apple would hide those elements behind the display, because it's competitors surely would, and then the iPhone would look dated. But that's not today's reality; Apple isn't trying to differentiate the iPhone from competition that has no sensor bezel. Everyone has some sort of bezel in which the sensors are housed, and Apple deliberately chose this notch approach rather than simply thinner bezels. For now, for as many years as required until we get to that future, Apple's notch, whether intended by Apple to do so or not, is already defining the new, and perhaps soon iconic, look of the new generation iPhone. Just as the round Home button and equal-sized top and bottom bezels did for the first 10 years of iPhone.
Wow John Gruber is really harsh on the notch, much more so than other Apple bloggers/Apple podcasts I’ve read/listened to. He called it “offensive” and “a joke”. Even the ATP guys weren’t that harsh (and they can pick nits like nobodies business).
I ignore it when guys like Gruber complain. Most of the time I agree with him, but sometimes I don’t. I’ve written to him a number of times over the years, AMD he’s replied back about half the time. I happen to think the notch is brilliant. I also,think that since some people, including Gruber don’t completely understand it, they don’t like it. I’m surprised at his response, and haven’t written him yet.
but if people understand that the “ears” save screen space for apps, and give us that info without having apps blank it out, requiring us to tap out to see it, then maybe they’ll appreciate it more.
I agree the Notch is the best option available right now.
IMO, its much better than the much larger top and bottom bezel on the Samsung phones. Or the horribily bad non-symetrical bottom bezel on the Essential phone.
The X gives the impression of a true bezeless phone on all 4 corners and on 3 of 4 sides. It really is amazing looking.
Of course I'd prefer a phone with no notches and no bezels, but that just isn't possible yet.
Gruber is also forgeting that the Notch is necessary to make FaceID a reality. Sure Apple could have put less sensors and made the notch smaller. But then it would have to use a shitty fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone like Samsung/Essential and all the other trash Android junk
I really don’t think Gruber gets this. This seems to one place where he’s being small minded. Apple could have easily not had a notch if they just brought the top bezel across the entire screen as others do. That would have completely “solved” the notch problem in an easier, and apparently, cheaper way. Then, of course, they would have had to decide about what to do with the bottom, with the rounded corners, because people would then be complaining that the top of the screen was straight to the corner, but the bottom wasn’t, and that it looks bad. Samsung uses a bezel there as well, likely, at least in part, because of that. If Apple did that though, they would then be accused of copying Samsung’s design
so then they could round off the top of the screen below the full width bezel to make it symmetrical. But then some people would complain that Apple cut off usable space on the screen up there, and so Apple could....
well, you get the idea.
not only is the notch actually a better way to do things with a full size screen, but it’s actually easier, from a design viewpoint.
It is certain that the notch is ugly and inconsistent. One reason Apple can live with that may be a smaller notch in the works, or no notch at all. So Apple may have expected the users grab the "true full screen" idea as early as possible and tolerate that ugliness a couple of years. Given that they also offer the iPhone upgrade program there is nothing wrong with that expectation. For those who can't tolerate the notch at all there is already the 8 solution. I find the notch discussion useless and If I comment about it, it is just for the sake of technical curiosity. The aspect ratio is a more crucial issue IMHO.
I believe sincerely that Apple can develop a notch-less model. They can slightly thicken the steel frame, to embed minuscule cameras and sensors, or they can make the notch very tiny and unnoticeable so that they can still dismiss the sensation of "bezel" for example. The speaker may be embedded under the display, Xiaomi has done that already. I have a feeling that we may not be so far away from a totally notch-less model.
The point is, the smartphone form factor has already reached its limits. Design has not much to do in this situation. But the engineering still has. From this point, this is miniaturization that will play crucial role in the further evolution of the smartphone form factor.
Wow John Gruber is really harsh on the notch, much more so than other Apple bloggers/Apple podcasts I’ve read/listened to. He called it “offensive” and “a joke”. Even the ATP guys weren’t that harsh (and they can pick nits like nobodies business).
I ignore it when guys like Gruber complain. Most of the time I agree with him, but sometimes I don’t. I’ve written to him a number of times over the years, AMD he’s replied back about half the time. I happen to think the notch is brilliant. I also,think that since some people, including Gruber don’t completely understand it, they don’t like it. I’m surprised at his response, and haven’t written him yet.
but if people understand that the “ears” save screen space for apps, and give us that info without having apps blank it out, requiring us to tap out to see it, then maybe they’ll appreciate it more.
I agree the Notch is the best option available right now.
IMO, its much better than the much larger top and bottom bezel on the Samsung phones. Or the horribily bad non-symetrical bottom bezel on the Essential phone.
The X gives the impression of a true bezeless phone on all 4 corners and on 3 of 4 sides. It really is amazing looking.
Of course I'd prefer a phone with no notches and no bezels, but that just isn't possible yet.
Gruber is also forgeting that the Notch is necessary to make FaceID a reality. Sure Apple could have put less sensors and made the notch smaller. But then it would have to use a shitty fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone like Samsung/Essential and all the other trash Android junk
I really don’t think Gruber gets this. This seems to one place where he’s being small minded. Apple could have easily not had a notch if they just brought the top bezel across the entire screen as others do. That would have completely “solved” the notch problem in an easier, and apparently, cheaper way. Then, of course, they would have had to decide about what to do with the bottom, with the rounded corners, because people would then be complaining that the top of the screen was straight to the corner, but the bottom wasn’t, and that it looks bad. Samsung uses a bezel there as well, likely, at least in part, because of that. If Apple did that though, they would then be accused of copying Samsung’s design
so then they could round off the top of the screen below the full width bezel to make it symmetrical. But then some people would complain that Apple cut off usable space on the screen up there, and so Apple could....
well, you get the idea.
not only is the notch actually a better way to do things with a full size screen, but it’s actually easier, from a design viewpoint.
Like I said if Apple had a small bezel on the top and bottom it would look exactly like existing Android phones like the LG G6. Gruber is much more critical of the notch than the ATP guys were. Also the fact that Apple’s marketing is clearly embracing the notch tells me it’s not something they’re embarressed by or trying to hide. It’s like they’re saying hey this exists for a reason and here’s why. Gruber says Ive has lost his mind but the idea that one person at Apple made this decision (or could veto it) is absurd.
Well, the notch basically boils down to opinion. I like it. I even think it looks classy.
It does give a sensation of more screen expanse. In part, this is due to the very presence of the notch itself, which is slightly ironic.
Gruber perhaps has gone a little overboard with his reaction but as opinions go it's just one more for the pile.
Although I haven't touched one yet, and therefore have to reserve my final thoughts, I have serious doubts about the metal in the glass sandwich which looks overstated in the photos.
The camera bulge is fugly IMO but I'm not a fan of them even on a good day. Much less when they are off centre but again, this is design opinion and I might be in the minority.
When Gruber really doesn’t like something he’s not shy about voicing it. I said earlier I’d like more Apple PR on how and why some of the decisions were made. If you go to the X product page on Apple’s website they clearly are embracing the notch, not trying to hide it in any way. Which makes me wonder if the thought was the home button was something iconic and once we lose it iPhone will look like every other phone out there and so they embraced the notch because it would make the X unique. If you look at renders that put a black bar at the top and bottom the X becomes indistinguishable from many Android phones. I’m a little surprised we didn’t get dark mode as I think that would have made the notch less of an eyesore
I think you're onto something. The Home button was indeed iconic, the most visible representation of Apple's secret sauce; that which set the iPhone so starkly apart from the universe of phones that existed when it was introduced. The notch does the same thing for the next generation of iPhones; it's where the tentpole feature's underlying magic is housed. It may well be that Apple has decided to embrace the notch for this very reason, to create the statement that 'this is the iPhone, and magic lies here within.'
It’s clear they’ve decided to embrace the notch but I don’t think it’s because they love it but rather they can’t really do what they want right now and they don’t want to look like every Android phone on the market (which is what would be the case had they used small black bezels on the top and bottom).
This wasn't a "hands-on", the video was a synopsis of the new iPhone. 90% of the video is spent telling the viewer about the all the new features. Hands-on should have been just that, a video spending the time showing us the new iPhone in-hand. So disappointing!
Wow John Gruber is really harsh on the notch, much more so than other Apple bloggers/Apple podcasts I’ve read/listened to. He called it “offensive” and “a joke”. Even the ATP guys weren’t that harsh (and they can pick nits like nobodies business).
I ignore it when guys like Gruber complain. Most of the time I agree with him, but sometimes I don’t. I’ve written to him a number of times over the years, AMD he’s replied back about half the time. I happen to think the notch is brilliant. I also,think that since some people, including Gruber don’t completely understand it, they don’t like it. I’m surprised at his response, and haven’t written him yet.
but if people understand that the “ears” save screen space for apps, and give us that info without having apps blank it out, requiring us to tap out to see it, then maybe they’ll appreciate it more.
I agree the Notch is the best option available right now.
IMO, its much better than the much larger top and bottom bezel on the Samsung phones. Or the horribily bad non-symetrical bottom bezel on the Essential phone.
The X gives the impression of a true bezeless phone on all 4 corners and on 3 of 4 sides. It really is amazing looking.
Of course I'd prefer a phone with no notches and no bezels, but that just isn't possible yet.
Gruber is also forgeting that the Notch is necessary to make FaceID a reality. Sure Apple could have put less sensors and made the notch smaller. But then it would have to use a shitty fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone like Samsung/Essential and all the other trash Android junk
I really don’t think Gruber gets this. This seems to one place where he’s being small minded. Apple could have easily not had a notch if they just brought the top bezel across the entire screen as others do. That would have completely “solved” the notch problem in an easier, and apparently, cheaper way. Then, of course, they would have had to decide about what to do with the bottom, with the rounded corners, because people would then be complaining that the top of the screen was straight to the corner, but the bottom wasn’t, and that it looks bad. Samsung uses a bezel there as well, likely, at least in part, because of that. If Apple did that though, they would then be accused of copying Samsung’s design
so then they could round off the top of the screen below the full width bezel to make it symmetrical. But then some people would complain that Apple cut off usable space on the screen up there, and so Apple could....
well, you get the idea.
not only is the notch actually a better way to do things with a full size screen, but it’s actually easier, from a design viewpoint.
Like I said if Apple had a small bezel on the top and bottom it would look exactly like existing Android phones like the LG G6. Gruber is much more critical of the notch than the ATP guys were. Also the fact that Apple’s marketing is clearly embracing the notch tells me it’s not something they’re embarressed by or trying to hide. It’s like they’re saying hey this exists for a reason and here’s why. Gruber says Ive has lost his mind but the idea that one person at Apple made this decision (or could veto it) is absurd.
If there was a bezel on the top and bottom then it wouldn't have the rounded corners which I'd argue is what makes it a stunning looking device and adds to the complexity of the design. That effect makes it looks like it's from the future and I'll be surprised if anyone can copy that in quantity any time soon.
The notch, while not attractive and possibly distracting for the moment will fall away the way "if you don't have a HW keyboard it's a toy" argument has since 2007. We already know Apple has worked out the logistics for developers so this can continually be reduced in every way without affecting 3rd-party app usage. Perhaps within a decade the notch will disappear all the way as components get put behind the display, inside the display, or in the steel frame.
You're the one accusing others of not doing basic math. That's what I did, and you could have dine too, theoretically. But yeah, the math supports your argument about the X have a significantly larger screen than the 8. Good guess.
Are the statements about playing a 16:9 video at maximum size without being cropped or the maximum size of the Safe Area really that hard to understand? I thought they were crystal clear but you posted a box resolution that doesn't seem to consider that the corners with reduces the actual diagonal size or that the notch also removes great deal of pixels, but more importantly will affect full screen of content, like a 16:9 image you want to view in its entirety, hence the Safe Area.
It would be like taking a map of the UK and then creating an x and y graph of its furtherest distances and then multiplying those two numbers to get land area. Do you honestly not see how that paints a false narrative? That red box is not the area of the UK! I understand that Sog can't grasp this point but I do expect you to understand it.
I'll use your own approach to arguing a point. Here goes... Can you honestly not know what an asterisk means when presented in a table of data? Did you honestly not read the footnote that indicated the measurements do not take into account the rounded corners or the notch? Did you seriously not go to Apple's own website to see how they advertise the X tech specs as "2436-by-1125-pixel resolution at 458 ppi" with no accounting for the loss of pixels and screen area due to the rounded corners and notch?
Do you honestly not see how your debating style is abrasive?
Well, the notch basically boils down to opinion. I like it. I even think it looks classy.
It does give a sensation of more screen expanse. In part, this is due to the very presence of the notch itself, which is slightly ironic.
Gruber perhaps has gone a little overboard with his reaction but as opinions go it's just one more for the pile.
Although I haven't touched one yet, and therefore have to reserve my final thoughts, I have serious doubts about the metal in the glass sandwich which looks overstated in the photos.
The camera bulge is fugly IMO but I'm not a fan of them even on a good day. Much less when they are off centre but again, this is design opinion and I might be in the minority.
When Gruber really doesn’t like something he’s not shy about voicing it. I said earlier I’d like more Apple PR on how and why some of the decisions were made. If you go to the X product page on Apple’s website they clearly are embracing the notch, not trying to hide it in any way. Which makes me wonder if the thought was the home button was something iconic and once we lose it iPhone will look like every other phone out there and so they embraced the notch because it would make the X unique. If you look at renders that put a black bar at the top and bottom the X becomes indistinguishable from many Android phones. I’m a little surprised we didn’t get dark mode as I think that would have made the notch less of an eyesore
I think you're onto something. The Home button was indeed iconic, the most visible representation of Apple's secret sauce; that which set the iPhone so starkly apart from the universe of phones that existed when it was introduced. The notch does the same thing for the next generation of iPhones; it's where the tentpole feature's underlying magic is housed. It may well be that Apple has decided to embrace the notch for this very reason, to create the statement that 'this is the iPhone, and magic lies here within.'
It’s clear they’ve decided to embrace the notch but I don’t think it’s because they love it but rather they can’t really do what they want right now and they don’t want to look like every Android phone on the market (which is what would be the case had they used small black bezels on the top and bottom).
Pretty much in agreement. They can't hide the sensors, like for ten years they didn't have the tech to hide the Home button functionality under the display, and so they chose to embrace it as iconic. Yup.
You're the one accusing others of not doing basic math. That's what I did, and you could have dine too, theoretically. But yeah, the math supports your argument about the X have a significantly larger screen than the 8. Good guess.
Are the statements about playing a 16:9 video at maximum size without being cropped or the maximum size of the Safe Area really that hard to understand? I thought they were crystal clear but you posted a box resolution that doesn't seem to consider that the corners with reduces the actual diagonal size or that the notch also removes great deal of pixels, but more importantly will affect full screen of content, like a 16:9 image you want to view in its entirety, hence the Safe Area.
It would be like taking a map of the UK and then creating an x and y graph of its furtherest distances and then multiplying those two numbers to get land area. Do you honestly not see how that paints a false narrative? That red box is not the area of the UK! I understand that Sog can't grasp this point but I do expect you to understand it.
I'll use your own approach to arguing a point. Here goes... Can you honestly not know what an asterisk means when presented in a table of data? Did you honestly not read the footnote that indicated the measurements do not take into account the rounded corners or the notch? Did you seriously not go to Apple's own website to see how they advertise the X tech specs as "2436-by-1125-pixel resolution at 458 ppi" with no accounting for the loss of pixels and screen area due to the rounded corners and notch?
Do you honestly not see how your debating style is abrasive?
I saw your asterisk, where you claim it's 38.x% more area which Sog went and rounded up to 40%. You don't think that's disingenuous when talking about an unobstructed display, or the OP's comment when deciding how the X benefits him over the 8 when they have the same display width? That's what you're arguing. You're feeding into a bullshit narrative that could've easily made an argument for how the X is nearly in the middle of but slightly closer to the Plus for the Safe Area without using the box resolution and then referring to it as area.
It should be clear that non-rectangular displays require a slightly different level of thought when considering how content will be presented. Even if we were only talking about rounded corners on the display and no notch, there would still need to be a Safe Area for displaying a 16:9, panoramic, or any other image as intended.
Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X? 64GB and 256GB? What happened to 128GB? Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone. Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive. Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing. No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model. I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models. bummer.
paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.
If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099. With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
Just maybe he was the one in the middle?
You know, low, mid, high?
It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.
Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.
It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.
Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X? 64GB and 256GB? What happened to 128GB? Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone. Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive. Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing. No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model. I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models. bummer.
paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.
If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099. With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
Just maybe he was the one in the middle?
You know, low, mid, high?
It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.
Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.
It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.
It's still upsell. However you paint it.
No it isn't. It's medium- (64) and high-capacity (256) on the flagship devices. They've eliminated low-capacity (32). Now you want to redefine medium (64) as "low" and introduce a mid-medium as the new "medium".
Classic goalpost moving. Per usual.
Love how Android users work so hard to find reasons to dislike products they aren't going to use.
If you think about it - people that post all day, every day, on a site devoted to a company they don't like that makes products they don't intend to buy - has to be some type of mental disorder.
Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X? 64GB and 256GB? What happened to 128GB? Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone. Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive. Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing. No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model. I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models. bummer.
The fact that it was at the perfect price point is precisely why it doesn't exist. It's Apple's way of nudging you into the more expensive model.
It is pure evil but at least 64GB is usable. In the days when it was 16GB or 64GB it was far worse of 16GB was the only one you could afford.
For most people, 64GB is plenty. I’ve read a number of articles that said that Apple found that most people either bought the lowest configuration, or the highest. Not everyone, but most. So it makes sense to raise the minimum, giving greater value, cut the middle out, and give a good price for a lot more. That’s exactly what they did here. It used to be $100 more from 16 to 32, remember? Then another $100 to 64. This is really good pricing these days.
unfortunately, prices for NAND have been rising for a year now, and it’s expected to continue to at least mid year, next year, when new plants will come online.
Unfortunately actually thinking about things like the increase in component costs isn't something the average whiner in this site is likely to do. They just want to point out how "evil" (yes that word was used by a few on this thread) Apple is for having more expensive products than last year.
You're the one accusing others of not doing basic math. That's what I did, and you could have dine too, theoretically. But yeah, the math supports your argument about the X have a significantly larger screen than the 8. Good guess.
Are the statements about playing a 16:9 video at maximum size without being cropped or the maximum size of the Safe Area really that hard to understand? I thought they were crystal clear but you posted a box resolution that doesn't seem to consider that the corners with reduces the actual diagonal size or that the notch also removes great deal of pixels, but more importantly will affect full screen of content, like a 16:9 image you want to view in its entirety, hence the Safe Area.
It would be like taking a map of the UK and then creating an x and y graph of its furtherest distances and then multiplying those two numbers to get land area. Do you honestly not see how that paints a false narrative? That red box is not the area of the UK! I understand that Sog can't grasp this point but I do expect you to understand it.
I'll use your own approach to arguing a point. Here goes... Can you honestly not know what an asterisk means when presented in a table of data? Did you honestly not read the footnote that indicated the measurements do not take into account the rounded corners or the notch? Did you seriously not go to Apple's own website to see how they advertise the X tech specs as "2436-by-1125-pixel resolution at 458 ppi" with no accounting for the loss of pixels and screen area due to the rounded corners and notch?
Do you honestly not see how your debating style is abrasive?
I saw your asterisk, where you claim it's 38.x% more area which Sog went and rounded up to 40%. You don't think that's disingenuous when talking about an unobstructed display, or the OP's comment when deciding how the X benefits him over the 8 when they have the same display width? That's what you're arguing. You're feeding into a bullshit narrative that could've easily made an argument for how the X is nearly in the middle of but slightly closer to the Plus for the Safe Area without using the box resolution and then referring to it as area.
It should be clear that non-rectangular displays require a slightly different level of thought when considering how content will be presented. Even if we were only talking about rounded corners on the display and no notch, there would still need to be a Safe Area for displaying a 16:9, panoramic, or any other image as intended.
No, it's not what I'm arguing, if it were, I'd have left off any footnote. Duh! I was simply providing rough numbers for the X where exact numbers would have been incredibly cumbersome to derive. Again, duh! How obtuse can you possibly become? Go calculate the fucking numbers if you want to fight that battle. Don't complain to me when I clearly put the caveat in there.
As for safe areas, your opinion is just one regarding whether there NEEDS to be a 'safe' area where no part of an image is hidden. Even on a document, many, including me, might not care if the corners are cut off, especially since it's the bottom corners. The top won't scroll into the ears anyway, because that'll now be reserved for the phone status info. So the top of a document space is flat across. The bottom is cut off by rounded corners, but you read from top to bottom, meaning you're scrolling information up into the display and rarely reading right to the bottom edge. And, guess what. Down there resides that bar representing the way back to the home screen, so that implies data isn't scrolling on from the very bottom anyway. Ugh, geeze it's tedious dealing with you.
And, wait... one more thing... did I even make any statement in my comment on screen size about usable size? I did not. I was merely presenting the math based on Apple's advertised display dimensions and ppi counts per device. You have this habit of sticking words in people's mouths and telling us what we are thinking. I think you need to critically examine your own agenda when making comments here.
Comments
It would be like taking a map of the UK and then creating an x and y graph of its furtherest distances and then multiplying those two numbers to get land area. Do you honestly not see how that paints a false narrative? That red box is not the area of the UK! I understand that Sog can't grasp this point but I do expect you to understand it.
It is certain that the notch is ugly and inconsistent. One reason Apple can live with that may be a smaller notch in the works, or no notch at all. So Apple may have expected the users grab the "true full screen" idea as early as possible and tolerate that ugliness a couple of years. Given that they also offer the iPhone upgrade program there is nothing wrong with that expectation. For those who can't tolerate the notch at all there is already the 8 solution. I find the notch discussion useless and If I comment about it, it is just for the sake of technical curiosity. The aspect ratio is a more crucial issue IMHO.
I believe sincerely that Apple can develop a notch-less model. They can slightly thicken the steel frame, to embed minuscule cameras and sensors, or they can make the notch very tiny and unnoticeable so that they can still dismiss the sensation of "bezel" for example. The speaker may be embedded under the display, Xiaomi has done that already. I have a feeling that we may not be so far away from a totally notch-less model.
The point is, the smartphone form factor has already reached its limits. Design has not much to do in this situation. But the engineering still has. From this point, this is miniaturization that will play crucial role in the further evolution of the smartphone form factor.
It’s clear they’ve decided to embrace the notch but I don’t think it’s because they love it but rather they can’t really do what they want right now and they don’t want to look like every Android phone on the market (which is what would be the case had they used small black bezels on the top and bottom).
'Just look at the screen'
rather than
'Look at the clever gubbins array above the screen.'
The notch, while not attractive and possibly distracting for the moment will fall away the way "if you don't have a HW keyboard it's a toy" argument has since 2007. We already know Apple has worked out the logistics for developers so this can continually be reduced in every way without affecting 3rd-party app usage. Perhaps within a decade the notch will disappear all the way as components get put behind the display, inside the display, or in the steel frame.
Do you honestly not see how your debating style is abrasive?
Pretty much in agreement. They can't hide the sensors, like for ten years they didn't have the tech to hide the Home button functionality under the display, and so they chose to embrace it as iconic. Yup.
It should be clear that non-rectangular displays require a slightly different level of thought when considering how content will be presented. Even if we were only talking about rounded corners on the display and no notch, there would still need to be a Safe Area for displaying a 16:9, panoramic, or any other image as intended.
It is true, you can't fix stupid...
As for safe areas, your opinion is just one regarding whether there NEEDS to be a 'safe' area where no part of an image is hidden. Even on a document, many, including me, might not care if the corners are cut off, especially since it's the bottom corners. The top won't scroll into the ears anyway, because that'll now be reserved for the phone status info. So the top of a document space is flat across. The bottom is cut off by rounded corners, but you read from top to bottom, meaning you're scrolling information up into the display and rarely reading right to the bottom edge. And, guess what. Down there resides that bar representing the way back to the home screen, so that implies data isn't scrolling on from the very bottom anyway. Ugh, geeze it's tedious dealing with you.
And, wait... one more thing... did I even make any statement in my comment on screen size about usable size? I did not. I was merely presenting the math based on Apple's advertised display dimensions and ppi counts per device. You have this habit of sticking words in people's mouths and telling us what we are thinking. I think you need to critically examine your own agenda when making comments here.