Huawei again accused of passing off DSLR photos as smartphone shots

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 47
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.

    In almost all the reviews that I have read so far, AI is the significant drawback of P20 Pro!!! Without it, the phone takes decent photos (not class leading though) in good light. The lesser the light, the better the P20 Pro's camera over other phones. I am talking about rear camera(s). Selfie camera - Not sure.
  • Reply 42 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,463member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    Again, if your sales are niche market, who cares?
  • Reply 43 of 47
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    Again, if your sales are niche market, who cares?

    It is a small market, without a doubt. And we won't get exact figures on how much Huawei managed to sell them anyway, with them bundling the P20 lite while sharing the information. But that should NOT detract from appreciating a nice piece of technology, isn't it? If sales is the ONLY factor for "appreciating" ANYTHING, then porn also sells well. Does that mean it needs to be appreciated, compared to anything else which sells "lesser" in price/quantity?
  • Reply 44 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,318member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    Again, if your sales are niche market, who cares?
    Erm, you came out battered and bruised in another thread on this very subject!

    Are you trying to go down that road again?

    The P20 series (excluding P20 Lite) sales are over 9 million units. Some niche! Not that it matters in the slightest.

    Total sales of the whole P20 series are projected at over 20 million units.

    There are no official P20 Pro sales figures just as there are none for any iPhone model.

    The P20 Pro is acclaimed almost universally and comes in at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X. You should try to get over that. 

  • Reply 45 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,463member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    Again, if your sales are niche market, who cares?
    Erm, you came out battered and bruised in another thread on this very subject!

    Are you trying to go down that road again?

    The P20 series (excluding P20 Lite) sales are over 9 million units. Some niche! Not that it matters in the slightest.

    Total sales of the whole P20 series are projected at over 20 million units.

    There are no official P20 Pro sales figures just as there are none for any iPhone model.

    The P20 Pro is acclaimed almost universally and comes in at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X. You should try to get over that. 

    You keep making these same points, but you have yourself supporting my basic contention; worthy of praise, but too expensive for most buyers. Hence, niche, or better, boutique.

    For the record, I'm hardly battered and bruised; I seem to recall that you ended up acquiescing on the numbers. Hint (you don't get to 9 million P20 models to date, your estimate, without including the P20 Lite, which itself leads to the 20 million P20's, all models, a year, which is Huawei's stated estimate.

    Most buyers aren't that interested in a triple lens smartphone, and myself, I find that Samsung has the better configuration coming out with the S10; three color imagers, three different stabilized lens focal lengths, at wide, normal, and telephoto, which is especially better for video.

    I expect a similar configuration for one model of next year's iPhone.
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 46 of 47
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,318member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    nunzy said:
    Huaway is totally dishonest. Their camera must really suck.



    I believe all ads for smartphone cameras that imply they were shot on the phone should be from the phone. That, at the very least.

    Huawei often adds a clarifying note to marketing material to make it clear that images pictured on the screens of phones in some ads were not actually shot on the camera of those phones.

    This is quite normal even if I don't agree with it. Apple too:

    https://petapixel.com/2017/06/30/truth-shot-iphone-style-ads/

    A similar thing happens with video game ads and Apple has been in hot water on a few occasions too.



    Apple shooting an ad with an iPhone using "additional accessories and software" isn't anything like shooting an ad with a dslr and then passing it off as a smartphone.

    It is, in fact, quite normal for photographers and videographers to use "additional accessories and software" to produce the best image/video from a given sensor, backed up with skill and experience.

    Funny thing, these "additional accessories and software" aren't all that expensive for someone to adopt in their workflow.

    https://www.filmicpro.com/gear/

    Oh, and here's the link to petapixel's article on the same Huawei ad creation;

    https://petapixel.com/2018/08/20/huawei-caught-faking-smartphone-photos-with-a-dslr-again/
    But that misses the entire point.
    No, this is the point;



    "taking it to the next level"

    It's still just capturing light on a smartphone sensor; only more options with accessories, and skills required.
    That is irrelevant.

    The point was the ads were for the phone. Not for the accessories.

    Now, if the accessories needed to produce the same footage were included in the box, that would be completely different. But they aren't.

    The point is, the phone is advertised using footage to market it which implies the phone itself is capable of taking that footage - out of the box. In fact, that is the sole reason Apple includes that tiny disclaimer on each ad because Apple knows that that is being implied.

    Content has to be processed for delivery on different media but I'd prefer that the content were taken on the phone being marketed and without extras unless they are included in the box.

    That applies to everyone, Apple, Huawei, Samsung etc.
    We are eleven years into iPhones. There's billions of actual iPhone photos available online to anyone considering purchase. More to the point, the image quality of actual photos and videos used in the ads, and content created with current iPhones, or Premium Android OS devices, is beyond the capabilities of most televisions and monitors to reproduce accurately. Smartphone images, as far as the masses are concerned, are beyond good enough.

    Your concerns are nonsense. It'a a purity test, and in your case, a means of mitigating the unscrupulous ad that Huawei produced and ran.
    Ha! Just look at the first link I posted for the selfie comparisons and tell me the iPhone X took 'good enough' photos.

    No. It isn't nonsense for selfies and you can expect a lot more marketing for selfies in the coming months.

    In general photography, smartphone quality is more than good enough, but then phones will move beyond general 'quality' and improve in other areas. The P20 Pro is so acclaimed because it does things other phones simply can't. Tripod-free, long, low noise night exposures, x3 optical zoom, x5 hybrid zoom, AI assisted stabilisation etc.
    The P20 Pro is so acclaimed that most of the people, like yourself that are pushing it, find it too expensive to own, but I'm willing to look at accurate sales data for the P20 Pro, if it exists.

    Meanwhile, I'm guessing that somewhere in the neighborhood of 175 million iPhones with dual cameras, 8's and X plus the upcoming new models will be sold in 2018.

    As for the selfie test, not impressed with the marginal benefits of the 24 MP dual camera of selfies, but the AI helps, again, marginally over the iPhone X.
    Credit where due - The Huawei P20 Pro camera has been praised by almost all websites for extra-ordinary low-light photography, which is simply NOT possible in ALL other smartphones till date (including iPhone X, 8 plus, Samsung Galaxy S9/Note 9 etc)..
    Again, if your sales are niche market, who cares?
    Erm, you came out battered and bruised in another thread on this very subject!

    Are you trying to go down that road again?

    The P20 series (excluding P20 Lite) sales are over 9 million units. Some niche! Not that it matters in the slightest.

    Total sales of the whole P20 series are projected at over 20 million units.

    There are no official P20 Pro sales figures just as there are none for any iPhone model.

    The P20 Pro is acclaimed almost universally and comes in at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X. You should try to get over that. 

    You keep making these same points, but you have yourself supporting my basic contention; worthy of praise, but too expensive for most buyers. Hence, niche, or better, boutique.

    For the record, I'm hardly battered and bruised; I seem to recall that you ended up acquiescing on the numbers. Hint (you don't get to 9 million P20 models to date, your estimate, without including the P20 Lite, which itself leads to the 20 million P20's, all models, a year, which is Huawei's stated estimate.

    Most buyers aren't that interested in a triple lens smartphone, and myself, I find that Samsung has the better configuration coming out with the S10; three color imagers, three different stabilized lens focal lengths, at wide, normal, and telephoto, which is especially better for video.

    I expect a similar configuration for one model of next year's iPhone.
    I didn't 'end up' doing anything with the numbers. My stance was the same from beginning to end.

    Not niche nor boutique and the Samsung won't be here until next year. By that time, the P30 Pro will have arrived. As for Apple, I wouldn't rule out a triple lens setup this year but if it doesn't happen and is included in next year's refresh, that would put them more than a year and a half behind. And don't forget that they are already (since last year!) behind in other important areas like battery and modem too.

    One term that seems to be appearing in many rumours of late is the idea of low cost or inexpensive. We'll see if iPhone prices get tweaked downwards next month but if they do, you can thank Huawei for that.

    And for all intents and purposes, the P20 Pro will be moving out of the spotlight very soon to make way for the Mate 20 series which should take things up a notch ;-) with battery, and modem improvements in particular along with the new SoC etc. For its part, the Honor Magic 2 could also turn some heads come December.
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 47 of 47
    claire1claire1 Posts: 494unconfirmed, member
    An iKnockoff manufacturer that uses a stolen OS that cheated Apple and lied to the public is lying, cheating and stealing?!?!?!!?

    *Shocked*
Sign In or Register to comment.