I'm not sure if I should cringe or laugh... If you can't beat 'em... copy (wait, no, what?)
Copy what? something that doesn't exist.
Well it does exist, on certain Huawei phones for instance. On the iPhone there are several longtime Apple users here who are saying Apple won't be one of those using a similar camera array. Google surprisingly has confirmed theirs.
From another Apple fan site:
"The strategy is quite revealing for a phone that isn’t usually announced until early October. However, it brilliantly allows Google to control the narrative of what its next device looks like rather than face a torrent of renders in the coming months. This is in sharp contrast to the near constant leaks that plagued the last two Made by Google phones.
Of course, there are still many unknowns about the Pixel 4. Google did not release what the front of the phone looks like. The lack of a fingerprint sensor nearly confirms the use of face recognition, with current rumors suggesting a full-width bezel up top to house everything."
The rumors and renders that I have seen for Apple's next release, point to three cameras in the visual spectrum; wide, normal, and short telephoto, in an equilateral triangular array configuration. That would in fact be different than Google's Pixel 4 configuration, and different that most of the other triple camera designs that have been released to date, some of which have linear array configurations, which wouldn't be as useful for depth perception.
Of course, within that equilateral array configuration, there is a question of how the sensors are aligned, ie, all aligned landscape, or two landscape and one portrait.
As for Google's confirmation, they don't have to worry about the Osborne Effect as they have no existing comparable product to deprecate, and certainly are in a situation in the marketplace where the Pixel 4 will be well received by the media as "Android's iPhone" with a "pure" Google experience.
Edit;
Just wanted to add that Apple has yet to introduce a time of flight sensor on the iPhone's back, and I have heard no rumors to that effect.
You know Fandroids will praise the square on the Pixel 4 and criticize it on the iPhone as being ugly and not innovative.
And you know diehard Apple fans will say it makes perfect sense for Apple and it's beautiful, and everyone else is simply copying for copying sake. So what? Hardcore platform fans are hardly known for their objectivity. They say a lot of stuff, some of it unrealistic or worse irrational. Ignore 'em as a source of information. Opinions are just that and we all have 'em.
Personally I'm interested in the whys, what's the advantage to users like us.
You know Fandroids will praise the square on the Pixel 4 and criticize it on the iPhone as being ugly and not innovative.
And you know diehard Apple fans will say it makes perfect sense for Apple and it's beautiful, and everyone else is simply copying for copying sake. So what? Hardcore platform fans are hardly know for their objectivity. They say a lot of stuff, some of it unrealistic or worse irrational. Ignore 'em as a source of information. Opinions are just that and we all have 'em.
Personally I'm interested in the whys, what's the advantage to users like us.
No, they all said it was ugly right here on AI, but none of this is official.
And yes, history shows the knockoffs will copy for copying sake. Look at the notch!
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Why do iKnockoff users insist Apple invented the notch for notch's sake? lol
Apple invented FaceID and the front camera array and couldn't shrink it any more. Common sense/end of story.
Nice cherry picking as usual!
"Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential."
So is the camera hole a notch or not? If so, then I'm moving the goalposts and will claim my cat is a dog. I've always preferred dogs anyway.
You know Fandroids will praise the square on the Pixel 4 and criticize it on the iPhone as being ugly and not innovative.
And you know diehard Apple fans will say it makes perfect sense for Apple and it's beautiful, and everyone else is simply copying for copying sake. So what? Hardcore platform fans are hardly know for their objectivity. They say a lot of stuff, some of it unrealistic or worse irrational. Ignore 'em as a source of information. Opinions are just that and we all have 'em.
Personally I'm interested in the whys, what's the advantage to users like us.
No, they all said it was ugly right here on AI, but none of this is official.
And yes, history shows the knockoffs will copy for copying sake. Look at the notch!
As I recall it was a few Apple fans saying a camera bump like that on an iPhone would be ugly but it still doesn't matter. Not everyone shares the same tastes.
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Why do iKnockoff users insist Apple invented the notch for notch's sake? lol
Apple invented FaceID and the front camera array and couldn't shrink it any more. Common sense/end of story.
Nice cherry picking as usual!
"Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential."
So is the camera hole a notch or not? If so, then I'm moving the goalposts and will claim my cat is a dog. I've always preferred dogs anyway.
I think you've succeeded in confusing yourself.
A notch is a notch. Now accepted terminology.
A punch hole is a punch hole. Now accepted terminology.
Two different terms for two different solutions. Can you imagine why?
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
Obviously, Apple isn’t the ONLY one inventing. I would never say that. But if you follow Avon for a bit, you’ll see that his entire intent is to minimize Apple’s considerable efforts, which do end up elsewhere, often in sonecinferiour fashion, and maximize others lessor efforts, usually that of Huawei, which has been accused around the world, not just here, of stealing and copying.
because of those continuous efforts on his part to “shill” Huawei, i find his posts just annoying.
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
Obviously, Apple isn’t the ONLY one inventing. I would never say that. But if you follow Avon for a bit, you’ll see that his entire intent is to minimize Apple’s considerable efforts, which do end up elsewhere, often in sonecinferiour fashion, and maximize others lessor efforts, usually that of Huawei, which has been accused around the world, not just here, of stealing and copying.
because of those continuous efforts on his part to “shill” Huawei, i find his posts just annoying.
Well you are very much mistaken but welcome to your opinion.
However, perhaps you could actually expand on your comments that simply state other people are 'wrong' with no other information except for your own 'opinion', which we should supposedly believe is 'right'. I hope you can see that can be annoying too. Or when you go out of your way to actually make a comment but limit yourself to saying it isn't worth replying to the point. That makes for a worthless comment, does it not?
I would suggest you take a closer look at comments that enter the fray before my comments. You would see mine mostly add balance to the discussion, provide information (I support what I say with the necessary links most of the time) and counter misinformation.
In a discussion forum, that is pretty valid. If I speak of Huawei it is because I know a bit about them. There is no shilling. I am able to contrast information because I know a lot about Apple too.
I don't tend to speak about Samsung because I know so little about the company.
You still haven't detailed with any clarity what made another posters comments 'drivel' in this very thread in spite of being asked - politely - to do so.
That is not only 'annoying' but also offensive to the OP.
And comments like 'Apple is the only one inventing' deserve to be taken to task but I let many of those comments go uncountered nevertheless.
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
Obviously, Apple isn’t the ONLY one inventing. I would never say that. But if you follow Avon for a bit, you’ll see that his entire intent is to minimize Apple’s considerable efforts, which do end up elsewhere, often in sonecinferiour fashion, and maximize others lessor efforts, usually that of Huawei, which has been accused around the world, not just here, of stealing and copying.
because of those continuous efforts on his part to “shill” Huawei, i find his posts just annoying.
Well you are very much mistaken but welcome to your opinion.
However, perhaps you could actually expand on your comments that simply state other people are 'wrong' with no other information except for your own 'opinion', which we should supposedly believe is 'right'. I hope you can see that can be annoying too. Or when you go out of your way to actually make a comment but limit yourself to saying it isn't worth replying to the point. That makes for a worthless comment, does it not?
I would suggest you take a closer look at comments that enter the fray before my comments. You would see mine mostly add balance to the discussion, provide information (I support what I say with the necessary links most of the time) and counter misinformation.
In a discussion forum, that is pretty valid. If I speak of Huawei it is because I know a bit about them. There is no shilling. I am able to contrast information because I know a lot about Apple too.
I don't tend to speak about Samsung because I know so little about the company.
You still haven't detailed with any clarity what made another posters comments 'drivel' in this very thread in spite of being asked - politely - to do so.
That is not only 'annoying' but also offensive to the OP.
And comments like 'Apple is the only one inventing' deserve to be taken to task but I let many of those comments go uncountered nevertheless.
I say things the way I do, because often, links are worthless. Many of those you show are nothing more than self serving. Huawei CEO denies getting low cost loans, or denies stealing. A Chinese government official make the same remarks. huawei belongs to organizations around the world. Links like that are useless. Of course they’re going to say those things.
i don’t it difficult to spend the time looking for links, often, that won’t be disputed by someone, so I don’t bother. But we do read a lot of what is goi g one here, as several articles that talked about how Huawei tried to get several Apple suppliers to give up their information on products they were producing for Apple. Again, most of use have read these articles, as they were all over, for a while. I’m not goi g to search them out, because it isn’t necessary, and you’ll just find a link to Huawei where they just deny it, and think that’s valid.
you even try to come up with reasons Huawei does something, such as withdrawing the new foldable model, that even Huawei doesn’t cite. So why bother responding with links? It just gets annoying.
It's the notch all over again. It always amazes me how people are more concerned with how their phone looks rather than how it functions. The notch was born out of necessity and actually allowed Apple to make more efficient use of the screen. Similarly, camera and lens systems need a minimum depth to function. You either make the phone thicker or have a bump. Since the public is hyper-obsessed with thickness, the manufacturers are making a bump. Similarly, if you want to zoom or have multiple focal lengths, you either need a bulky and complex zoom lens mechanism or multiple lenses and a corresponding bump to house them.
Besides, everyone puts a case on their phone anyway, so what does it matter?
The embarassing part is the knockoffs copied the notch minus the function. Same will happen here IF Apple really releases this ugly thing.
Really? What were Sharp and Essential Phone copying?
What function was missing in those designs?
Sorry boy, but there have been numerous articles about how Android manufacturers were copying Apple’s notch even thought they didn’t have the sensors to put there, because, you know, looking like an Apple product helps sales, particularly in China.
But you didn't answer the question!
Notches are not an Apple thing as some people like to claim.
What was missing in the the notches of the phones I mentioned?
Out of an entireindustry you are cherry picking (as are those 'numerous articles') an example and trying to pass it off as representative of Android notched phones.
Not only is that false but you know it is false and Android manufacturers have literally gone out of their way to reduce notch sizes and actively and purposely remove components from them to make them smaller (without leaving empty space in them of course). Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential.
DED even went so far as to make the utterly ridiculous claim that the resulting so called 'teardrop' notch looked like a bunch of 'dead pixels'. He completely ignored the reasons behind the decision and how well that kind of notch has been received by the market. But then again those 'numerous articles' you cite were probably written by DED anyway, right?
Oh, I know that the tiny round notch was there slightly earlier. But numerous phone manufacturers have used large notches for style, where the only thing behind the notch was a camera, or maybe a speaker. Even Huawei made a career out of copying Apple designs. I’m not too ticked off, because, particularly in China, if a phone didn’t look like an iPhone, it didn’t sell. Heck, they even had dozens of fake Apple stores in China that the government closed down. Interviews with employees showed that they actually even thought they were working for Apple, and doing “a good thing”.
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
Obviously, Apple isn’t the ONLY one inventing. I would never say that. But if you follow Avon for a bit, you’ll see that his entire intent is to minimize Apple’s considerable efforts, which do end up elsewhere, often in sonecinferiour fashion, and maximize others lessor efforts, usually that of Huawei, which has been accused around the world, not just here, of stealing and copying.
because of those continuous efforts on his part to “shill” Huawei, i find his posts just annoying.
Well you are very much mistaken but welcome to your opinion.
However, perhaps you could actually expand on your comments that simply state other people are 'wrong' with no other information except for your own 'opinion', which we should supposedly believe is 'right'. I hope you can see that can be annoying too. Or when you go out of your way to actually make a comment but limit yourself to saying it isn't worth replying to the point. That makes for a worthless comment, does it not?
I would suggest you take a closer look at comments that enter the fray before my comments. You would see mine mostly add balance to the discussion, provide information (I support what I say with the necessary links most of the time) and counter misinformation.
In a discussion forum, that is pretty valid. If I speak of Huawei it is because I know a bit about them. There is no shilling. I am able to contrast information because I know a lot about Apple too.
I don't tend to speak about Samsung because I know so little about the company.
You still haven't detailed with any clarity what made another posters comments 'drivel' in this very thread in spite of being asked - politely - to do so.
That is not only 'annoying' but also offensive to the OP.
And comments like 'Apple is the only one inventing' deserve to be taken to task but I let many of those comments go uncountered nevertheless.
I say things the way I do, because often, links are worthless. Many of those you show are nothing more than self serving. Huawei CEO denies getting low cost loans, or denies stealing. A Chinese government official make the same remarks. huawei belongs to organizations around the world. Links like that are useless. Of course they’re going to say those things.
i don’t it difficult to spend the time looking for links, often, that won’t be disputed by someone, so I don’t bother. But we do read a lot of what is goi g one here, as several articles that talked about how Huawei tried to get several Apple suppliers to give up their information on products they were producing for Apple. Again, most of use have read these articles, as they were all over, for a while. I’m not goi g to search them out, because it isn’t necessary, and you’ll just find a link to Huawei where they just deny it, and think that’s valid.
you even try to come up with reasons Huawei does something, such as withdrawing the new foldable model, that even Huawei doesn’t cite. So why bother responding with links? It just gets annoying.
The links are there for you to make up your own mind. They are necessary to drive home points and support the argument. Very few (if any) of the links I post will die in the short term. It is up to the reader to decide if they click through or not and none of them are worthless.
You are not in position to categorically decide for yourself what is 'right' or 'wrong' because you simply don't know. And much less if you don't even bother reading the supporting links (in reality because you have already judged them before reading them).
Writing off something as 'they would say that wouldn't they?' is quite simple a pointless line of rebuttal. And my links are often from the horse's mouth because mostly that is where 'the truth' lies (no pun intended).
Self serving or not, my links are very robust and represent completely relevant parts of the argument. What you are saying is 'I will decide what is true and what is not'. No problem with that per se but often you will be wrong. Completely wrong, and then end up scurrying to re-word your own affirmations when they are called into doubt.
The folding phone subject was pure speculation. When you are speculating it is just that, pure speculation. No more no less. That doesn't mean there is no supporting logic to it. That is what I gave.
Comments
Of course, within that equilateral array configuration, there is a question of how the sensors are aligned, ie, all aligned landscape, or two landscape and one portrait.
As for Google's confirmation, they don't have to worry about the Osborne Effect as they have no existing comparable product to deprecate, and certainly are in a situation in the marketplace where the Pixel 4 will be well received by the media as "Android's iPhone" with a "pure" Google experience.
Edit;
Just wanted to add that Apple has yet to introduce a time of flight sensor on the iPhone's back, and I have heard no rumors to that effect.
Personally I'm interested in the whys, what's the advantage to users like us.
No, they all said it was ugly right here on AI, but none of this is official.
And yes, history shows the knockoffs will copy for copying sake. Look at the notch!
Why do iKnockoff users insist Apple invented the notch for notch's sake? lol
Apple invented FaceID and the front camera array and couldn't shrink it any more. Common sense/end of story.
Nice cherry picking as usual!
"Almost coming full circle with regards to the original idea from Sharp and Essential."
So is the camera hole a notch or not? If so, then I'm moving the goalposts and will claim my cat is a dog. I've always preferred dogs anyway.
A notch is a notch. Now accepted terminology.
A punch hole is a punch hole. Now accepted terminology.
Two different terms for two different solutions. Can you imagine why?
those articles were everywhere on the net, not just here. Only one was here. ArsTechnica mentioned it every time they had an Android phone in for review, or mentioned a new one coming out. The Android Authority noted it. Even Anandrech talked about what they called the Apple notch phenomenon.
i’m not a fan of DED, as you know. You don’t have to bring him up to me.
Mel - As far as I know, you are fairly reasonable/fair person when it comes to arguments. ALL of Avon's comments were aimed at the below comment. Can you please share YOUR opinion on the below post?
because of those continuous efforts on his part to “shill” Huawei, i find his posts just annoying.
However, perhaps you could actually expand on your comments that simply state other people are 'wrong' with no other information except for your own 'opinion', which we should supposedly believe is 'right'. I hope you can see that can be annoying too. Or when you go out of your way to actually make a comment but limit yourself to saying it isn't worth replying to the point. That makes for a worthless comment, does it not?
I would suggest you take a closer look at comments that enter the fray before my comments. You would see mine mostly add balance to the discussion, provide information (I support what I say with the necessary links most of the time) and counter misinformation.
In a discussion forum, that is pretty valid. If I speak of Huawei it is because I know a bit about them. There is no shilling. I am able to contrast information because I know a lot about Apple too.
I don't tend to speak about Samsung because I know so little about the company.
You still haven't detailed with any clarity what made another posters comments 'drivel' in this very thread in spite of being asked - politely - to do so.
That is not only 'annoying' but also offensive to the OP.
And comments like 'Apple is the only one inventing' deserve to be taken to task but I let many of those comments go uncountered nevertheless.
i don’t it difficult to spend the time looking for links, often, that won’t be disputed by someone, so I don’t bother. But we do read a lot of what is goi g one here, as several articles that talked about how Huawei tried to get several Apple suppliers to give up their information on products they were producing for Apple. Again, most of use have read these articles, as they were all over, for a while. I’m not goi g to search them out, because it isn’t necessary, and you’ll just find a link to Huawei where they just deny it, and think that’s valid.
you even try to come up with reasons Huawei does something, such as withdrawing the new foldable model, that even Huawei doesn’t cite. So why bother responding with links? It just gets annoying.
You are not in position to categorically decide for yourself what is 'right' or 'wrong' because you simply don't know. And much less if you don't even bother reading the supporting links (in reality because you have already judged them before reading them).
Writing off something as 'they would say that wouldn't they?' is quite simple a pointless line of rebuttal. And my links are often from the horse's mouth because mostly that is where 'the truth' lies (no pun intended).
Self serving or not, my links are very robust and represent completely relevant parts of the argument. What you are saying is 'I will decide what is true and what is not'. No problem with that per se but often you will be wrong. Completely wrong, and then end up scurrying to re-word your own affirmations when they are called into doubt.
The folding phone subject was pure speculation. When you are speculating it is just that, pure speculation. No more no less. That doesn't mean there is no supporting logic to it. That is what I gave.