What a mess, both the DisplayMate sales pitch and the AI article based on it.
Raymond Soneira needs an editor in the worst way. He's so hung up on his stupid "shoot out" metaphor that he either gets the biggest whopper in the story wrong, or he buries it in paragraph 17 in his obsession with prickly detail.
Does the iPad Air use an IGZO backplane? If it does, this is the first mention I've seen, and that would be a very big story. It would also be a big story if Mr. Display Expert Soneira got it wrong, so let's hope he's right. If he's right, that would be another big story—Apple said nothing about this momentous detail, but they did mention the relatively less impotant detail that they were using GF/2 technology. (Maybe that's the source for a mistake: another name for GF/2 film is DITO, Dual Indium Tin Oxide.)
"Apple Insider Staff" buries this corker somewhere in a middle paragraph of its story along with an error (?) orginating with Soneira about the iPad mini using IGZO too. And there's an error about the energy efficiency of IGZO in the AI story as well.
There's something fishy about all this. Too much seems wrong or out of place from someone whose business it is to know the hard facts about displays. AI's mistakes are probably due to it being after hours. We'll know more tomorrow, I imagine. Maybe somebody will actually make some phone calls.
My cheap plastic ball point pen significantly outperforms my top of the range Sheaffer Fountain pen, it always runs out of ink first. Any mor bullshit comparisons you'd care to make.
Good for Amazon. Everyone knows that Kindles operate on little to no profit margin, so it makes sense their devices are priced less and have very similar specs to the iPads. They are probably very heavily invested in the screen quality as the stuff Amazon sells really depends on the pop. Movies, TV, books, games are all important.
The problem with Kindle Fires are simply that they act more like content delivery systems and not so much a full powered OS intended for other uses outside of buying and consuming media. Fire OS is a portal to Amazon with the option of downloading other applications. If I were to ever buy a Kindle it would need to be rooted and replaced with Android. At that point i'd rather just get an iPad and use iOS and call it a day.
Emm... This is from a company that focuses on display diagnostic technology, they don't review processors. Most of this measuring is done using specialized test equipment and is not "subjective" at all.
Well, according to the chart above, the two tests where the Kindle beat out the iPad was called "an assessment".
Def: the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
So where's the test equipment that does this if it's not in someones head?
Thanks for highlighting this interesting article by some very credible experts.
I was most taken by the comments that reflect Apple's apparent design philosophy: "iPad Air has mostly incremental but still significant improvements over the excellent 3rd and 4th generation iPad displays" (note "significant", "excellent") and "an impressive 57 percent improvement in display power efficiency from previous Retina Display iPads" (ie less heat, easier on the battery).
?This reflects a balanced approach that leaded to a better product, like the oft-quoted motor car analogy of tuning the engine for much more power so you might like to improve the brakes too. I think this is what makes Apple's products so compelling and best at so many things but kudos to Amazon too for understanding and serving their own priorities.
Well, according to the chart above, the two tests where the Kindle beat out the iPad was called "an assessment".
Def: the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
So where's the test equipment that does this if it's not in someones head?
If you believe the report, it says:
"DisplayMate Technologiesspecializes in proprietary sophisticated scientific display calibration and mathematical display optimization to deliver unsurpassed objective performance, picture quality and accuracy for all types of displays ... . This article is a lite version of our intensive scientific analysis of Smartphone and Smartphone mobile displays" (my emphasis).
Personally, I think they're credible. Some of the words used are because they've tried to simplify (for comprehensibility) some quite technical stuff; if they hadn't, it would probably be pretty dull reading for most of us too.
For the most part what push the Kindle past the ipad were the more subjective things. One example is the fact the Kindle is a bit brighter display, so they running the back light hotter, so yes it is brighter but it costs you in battery life and we know the kindle does not run as long as the ipad doing similar task. Also being too bright is not necessarily a good things since it can wash out colors or make them look over saturated. Personally I tend to turn my brightness down, for two reason increase battery life and I do not like my displays overly bright, even most people who work on display and are doing graphic work where colors are important tend to turn down brightness.
The next thing he dings the Ipad on is color accuracy, I would give him this one, but it actually does not matter most people can not even tell the difference. Again if your a graphic designer this is important, but most graphic designs worth their salt will make sure to calibrate the screen they are working. Here is the other issue with this test, and I am assuming he used some sort of color calibrator to determine if the color is correct. Also he would have to load software on each device to have it display the correct colors, the question here, did his software take in to consideration each devices own built in hue and gama settings and how those are set and were both displays set the same way. In order to properly do this test if to remove each display from its system and hook it up to a drive circuit which will drive each display the exact same way then make the measurement.
Those two items are very subjective to the person who is using the device so one or the other may be technically better but in the overall user experienced it does not matter. The same is true with pixel density, why cram more pixel in if the human eye can not resolve the different. Why make something smaller and spend all the money if it does not translate into something beneficial to the end user.
I think it is great that Amazon pulled this tech off. But a review from DisplayMate on...well.. only displays, is hardly adequate for an informed buying decision. When you buy a car, is 'windshield' your highest category - over performance, engine quality, seating comfort, safety, fuel economy? When you look at their summary chart, IMO there does not seem to be a great deal of difference and the difference between an A and A- seems to be highly subjective. But if you want the Kindle, and it does what you need, go for it. You will even save some dollars. But when you want it do something that is best done on an iPad, which is almost everything, then you will kick yourself. And you will deserve it.
Correct, how disingenuous for a display review from a display company, selling display calibration hardware and software, not to include non display information in their review! How dare they!! /s
We can stomp and scream all we like about how great the iPad is when compared to the competition but it's news like this, when filtered by the mainstream media, that can kill any momentum Apple might have had in this arena.
I'm guessing the HDX will sell really well this season and I'm thinking the Fire will just continue to get better. Two years ago I thought Amazon would throw in the towel about 6 months after Christmas but it looks like it's in it for the long haul.
Good for Amazon. Everyone knows that Kindles operate on little to no profit margin, so it makes sense their devices are priced less and have very similar specs to the iPads.
The Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" is closer in screen size to the Retina Mini than the Air, and (without special offers) it's only $5 cheaper than the Retina Mini. The Fire's memory upgrades are much more reasonably priced, though.
NO camera on the Fire? OK, it lamely boasts a toy front camera with 1.2 mp. That's a camera from 1993, not 2013. Let's count the ways a camera is a massive feature: video, documentation, ocr, purchasing, photostreaming. Folks love using their rear iPads 5 mp cameras for family photos; it's the new Kodak Brownie Box camera for our age. A tablet without a camera is crippled, failed. These devices shouldn't even be compared; it's unfair to Apple and to potential buyers both. Huge red flag!
We can stomp and scream all we like about how great the iPad is when compared to the competition but it's news like this, when filtered by the mainstream media, that can kill any momentum Apple might have had in this arena.
I'm guessing the HDX will sell really well this season and I'm thinking the Fire will just continue to get better. Two years ago I thought Amazon would throw in the towel about 6 months after Christmas but it looks like it's in it for the long haul.
Jeff Bezos is not exactly unknown, but still the real sleeper among the key tech leaders of our time driving the tech revolution, since he was seen as a mere "retailer" for so long.
Amazon has always been a bigger vision in his eyes, though, and is a more impactful player (with its own unique "ecosystem") on a number of levels than most people realize.
Any and all of his competitors (and any of we interested observers in the race to the future) are well advised not to underestimate him.
NO camera on the Fire? OK, it lamely boasts a toy front camera with 1.2 mp. That's a camera from 1993, not 2013. Let's count the ways a camera is a massive feature: video, documentation, ocr, purchasing, photostreaming. Folks love using their rear iPads 5 mp cameras for family photos; it's the new Kodak Brownie Box camera for our age. A tablet without a camera is crippled, failed. These devices shouldn't even be compared; it's unfair to Apple and to potential buyers both. Huge red flag!
Uh... The Fire reviewed in this roundup does have a rear camera. It even has an LED flash.
NO camera on the Fire? OK, it lamely boasts a toy front camera with 1.2 mp. That's a camera from 1993, not 2013. Let's count the ways a camera is a massive feature: video, documentation, ocr, purchasing, photostreaming. Folks love using their rear iPads 5 mp cameras for family photos; it's the new Kodak Brownie Box camera for our age. A tablet without a camera is crippled, failed. These devices shouldn't even be compared; it's unfair to Apple and to potential buyers both. Huge red flag!
You guys are being way too sensitive. DisplayMate is only a video graphics specialist. They are not evaluating the iPad vs. Kindle in any other respect except the screen performance. As many have noted, the devices are completely different in a number of ways and I doubt even Amazon considers the Kindle superior to the iPad. No need to get so defensive.
Fuk Google. All they want is for you to see their ads. They won't even update 18 month old devices with KitKat.
Apple won't ignore their customers after 12-18 months. They still allow iOS7 on 3 year old hardware!
FWIW Kit-Kat will run on 3 year old Android phones, requiring very little overhead/resources. I'm sure you meant one specific 2 year old smartphone, the Galaxy Nexus. Agree that one should have received an update to 4.4 and Google stating a guarantee of only 18 months of updates for Nexus devices isn't anything to brag about.
As for the rant against Amazon are last years Kindle's really not supported anymore? Very poor showing if so.
Comments
Raymond Soneira needs an editor in the worst way. He's so hung up on his stupid "shoot out" metaphor that he either gets the biggest whopper in the story wrong, or he buries it in paragraph 17 in his obsession with prickly detail.
Does the iPad Air use an IGZO backplane? If it does, this is the first mention I've seen, and that would be a very big story. It would also be a big story if Mr. Display Expert Soneira got it wrong, so let's hope he's right. If he's right, that would be another big story—Apple said nothing about this momentous detail, but they did mention the relatively less impotant detail that they were using GF/2 technology. (Maybe that's the source for a mistake: another name for GF/2 film is DITO, Dual Indium Tin Oxide.)
"Apple Insider Staff" buries this corker somewhere in a middle paragraph of its story along with an error (?) orginating with Soneira about the iPad mini using IGZO too. And there's an error about the energy efficiency of IGZO in the AI story as well.
There's something fishy about all this. Too much seems wrong or out of place from someone whose business it is to know the hard facts about displays. AI's mistakes are probably due to it being after hours. We'll know more tomorrow, I imagine. Maybe somebody will actually make some phone calls.
The iPad also has a 27% bigger screen in square inches.
Would that be different in square cm?
Good for Amazon. Everyone knows that Kindles operate on little to no profit margin, so it makes sense their devices are priced less and have very similar specs to the iPads. They are probably very heavily invested in the screen quality as the stuff Amazon sells really depends on the pop. Movies, TV, books, games are all important.
The problem with Kindle Fires are simply that they act more like content delivery systems and not so much a full powered OS intended for other uses outside of buying and consuming media. Fire OS is a portal to Amazon with the option of downloading other applications. If I were to ever buy a Kindle it would need to be rooted and replaced with Android. At that point i'd rather just get an iPad and use iOS and call it a day.
Emm... This is from a company that focuses on display diagnostic technology, they don't review processors. Most of this measuring is done using specialized test equipment and is not "subjective" at all.
Well, according to the chart above, the two tests where the Kindle beat out the iPad was called "an assessment".
Def: the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
So where's the test equipment that does this if it's not in someones head?
Thanks for highlighting this interesting article by some very credible experts.
I was most taken by the comments that reflect Apple's apparent design philosophy: "iPad Air has mostly incremental but still significant improvements over the excellent 3rd and 4th generation iPad displays" (note "significant", "excellent") and "an impressive 57 percent improvement in display power efficiency from previous Retina Display iPads" (ie less heat, easier on the battery).
?This reflects a balanced approach that leaded to a better product, like the oft-quoted motor car analogy of tuning the engine for much more power so you might like to improve the brakes too. I think this is what makes Apple's products so compelling and best at so many things but kudos to Amazon too for understanding and serving their own priorities.
Well, according to the chart above, the two tests where the Kindle beat out the iPad was called "an assessment".
Def: the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
So where's the test equipment that does this if it's not in someones head?
If you believe the report, it says:
"DisplayMate Technologies specializes in proprietary sophisticated scientific display calibration and mathematical display optimization to deliver unsurpassed objective performance, picture quality and accuracy for all types of displays ... . This article is a lite version of our intensive scientific analysis of Smartphone and Smartphone mobile displays" (my emphasis).
Personally, I think they're credible. Some of the words used are because they've tried to simplify (for comprehensibility) some quite technical stuff; if they hadn't, it would probably be pretty dull reading for most of us too.
The Kindle is to a vegetable peeler as the iPad is to a knife. If I can have only one in the kitchen I'll take the knife every time.
I see what this guy has done....
For the most part what push the Kindle past the ipad were the more subjective things. One example is the fact the Kindle is a bit brighter display, so they running the back light hotter, so yes it is brighter but it costs you in battery life and we know the kindle does not run as long as the ipad doing similar task. Also being too bright is not necessarily a good things since it can wash out colors or make them look over saturated. Personally I tend to turn my brightness down, for two reason increase battery life and I do not like my displays overly bright, even most people who work on display and are doing graphic work where colors are important tend to turn down brightness.
The next thing he dings the Ipad on is color accuracy, I would give him this one, but it actually does not matter most people can not even tell the difference. Again if your a graphic designer this is important, but most graphic designs worth their salt will make sure to calibrate the screen they are working. Here is the other issue with this test, and I am assuming he used some sort of color calibrator to determine if the color is correct. Also he would have to load software on each device to have it display the correct colors, the question here, did his software take in to consideration each devices own built in hue and gama settings and how those are set and were both displays set the same way. In order to properly do this test if to remove each display from its system and hook it up to a drive circuit which will drive each display the exact same way then make the measurement.
Those two items are very subjective to the person who is using the device so one or the other may be technically better but in the overall user experienced it does not matter. The same is true with pixel density, why cram more pixel in if the human eye can not resolve the different. Why make something smaller and spend all the money if it does not translate into something beneficial to the end user.
Perhaps the operating system matters too?
On a display test? Um, no!
I think it is great that Amazon pulled this tech off. But a review from DisplayMate on...well.. only displays, is hardly adequate for an informed buying decision. When you buy a car, is 'windshield' your highest category - over performance, engine quality, seating comfort, safety, fuel economy? When you look at their summary chart, IMO there does not seem to be a great deal of difference and the difference between an A and A- seems to be highly subjective. But if you want the Kindle, and it does what you need, go for it. You will even save some dollars. But when you want it do something that is best done on an iPad, which is almost everything, then you will kick yourself. And you will deserve it.
Correct, how disingenuous for a display review from a display company, selling display calibration hardware and software, not to include non display information in their review! How dare they!! /s
We can stomp and scream all we like about how great the iPad is when compared to the competition but it's news like this, when filtered by the mainstream media, that can kill any momentum Apple might have had in this arena.
I'm guessing the HDX will sell really well this season and I'm thinking the Fire will just continue to get better. Two years ago I thought Amazon would throw in the towel about 6 months after Christmas but it looks like it's in it for the long haul.
Quote:
We can stomp and scream all we like about how great the iPad is when compared to the competition but it's news like this, when filtered by the mainstream media, that can kill any momentum Apple might have had in this arena.
I'm guessing the HDX will sell really well this season and I'm thinking the Fire will just continue to get better. Two years ago I thought Amazon would throw in the towel about 6 months after Christmas but it looks like it's in it for the long haul.
Jeff Bezos is not exactly unknown, but still the real sleeper among the key tech leaders of our time driving the tech revolution, since he was seen as a mere "retailer" for so long.
Amazon has always been a bigger vision in his eyes, though, and is a more impactful player (with its own unique "ecosystem") on a number of levels than most people realize.
Any and all of his competitors (and any of we interested observers in the race to the future) are well advised not to underestimate him.
NO camera on the Fire? OK, it lamely boasts a toy front camera with 1.2 mp. That's a camera from 1993, not 2013. Let's count the ways a camera is a massive feature: video, documentation, ocr, purchasing, photostreaming. Folks love using their rear iPads 5 mp cameras for family photos; it's the new Kodak Brownie Box camera for our age. A tablet without a camera is crippled, failed. These devices shouldn't even be compared; it's unfair to Apple and to potential buyers both. Huge red flag!
?????
More like huge red herring!
HDX 8.9: 8MP with LED flash
Lite: 5MP no flash
You guys are being way too sensitive. DisplayMate is only a video graphics specialist. They are not evaluating the iPad vs. Kindle in any other respect except the screen performance. As many have noted, the devices are completely different in a number of ways and I doubt even Amazon considers the Kindle superior to the iPad. No need to get so defensive.
FWIW Kit-Kat will run on 3 year old Android phones, requiring very little overhead/resources. I'm sure you meant one specific 2 year old smartphone, the Galaxy Nexus. Agree that one should have received an update to 4.4 and Google stating a guarantee of only 18 months of updates for Nexus devices isn't anything to brag about.
As for the rant against Amazon are last years Kindle's really not supported anymore? Very poor showing if so.