EE Times was saying that samsung will have hard time to get a hands on enough 16MP camera modules for S5 due to very low yield. I didn't read the whole article but that is basically what head line is saying. It seems like very reasonable concern.
Thanks.
Though that hardly seems like something Samsung could sue over.
Speaking of the Galaxy S5, AnandTech has posted their review. I would have thought that a brand new, 2.45GHz Snapdragon 801 processor arriving more than 6 months after the iPhone 5S launched would have faired better with raw performance tests. They also seems to be making it bigger and heavier despite the display size being effectively static.
Interesting how the 5S wipes the floor with it on quite a few tests, with half the cores and half the RAM, and having been released 6 months earlier, when mobile CPUs are improving so quickly. Says alot about the A7 chip. The A8 is going to be ridiculous.
EE Times was saying that samsung will have hard time to get a hands on enough 16MP camera modules for S5 due to very low yield. I didn't read the whole article but that is basically what head line is saying. It seems like very reasonable concern.
Interesting how the 5S wipes the floor with it on quite a few tests, with half the cores and half the RAM.
1) And nearly 1/2 the CPU speed. At least it beats the iPhone in most of the battery tests but that's expected with the size (and increase size YoY) of the battery. I did find a couple things impressive on their review. One, the Galaxy S5 uses much less power than the Galaxy S4 for comparable tests. Two, the charging time has been significantly reduced (under 2 hours) which is better than the iPhone despite the Galaxy G5 having a huge battery that even grow in size over the Galaxy S4. That said, I do wonder if that 5.3V/2A charger will burn out any components over time or cause the device to get very hot when charging.
2) If Apple releases a larger screened iPhone I have doubt that it will be able to wipe the floor with any of these Android devices and increase its lead in performance even more as they advance their A-chips and other HW.
Benchmark tests conducted by UK consumer magazine <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Which?" style="background-image:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);" target="_blank" title="Which?">Which?</a> in June 2013, comparing the iPhone 5 and other smart phones in the same class such as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_(2013)" style="background-image:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);" target="_blank" title="HTC One (2013)">HTC One</a> , <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_S_4" style="background-image:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);" target="_blank" title="Samsung Galaxy S 4">Samsung Galaxy S 4</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Nexus_4" style="background-image:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);" target="_blank" title="LG Nexus 4">LG Nexus 4</a> have consistently found the iPhone to be the slowest
Would those results be with Samsung over locking the CPU during benchmark tests or not?
Back on the subject of bad press, what about Samsung employing students to post negative reviews about HTC. Samsung is an unethical company and my two biggest regrets are that I own a Samsung net book and a Galaxy Tab 2 7. These are the last Samsung branded products I will ever own.
Would those results be with Samsung over locking the CPU during benchmark tests or not?
Back on the subject of bad press, what about Samsung employing students to post negative results about HTC. Samsung is an unethical company and my two biggest regrets are that I own a Samsung net book and a Galaxy Tab 2 7. These are the last Samsung branded products I will ever own.
The doping for the benchmark tests adds very little improvement to the overall performance but says a lot about the vendor's moral fiber which, to me, makes it illogical that they would have 1) ever thought the pros outweigh the cons, and 2) that they are still doing it (although I don't recall any mention of it for the Galaxy S5 in AnandTech's review).
The doping for the benchmark tests adds very little improvement to the overall performance but says a lot about the vendor's moral fiber which, to me, makes it illogical that they would have 1) ever thought the pros outweigh the cons, and 2) that they are still doing it (although I don't recall any mention of it for the Galaxy S5 in AnandTech's review).
Someone mentioned they didn't do it with the S5 and thought it was Anandtech.
The doping for the benchmark tests adds very little improvement to the overall performance but says a lot about the vendor's moral fiber which, to me, makes it illogical that they would have 1) ever thought the pros outweigh the cons, and 2) that they are still doing it (although I don't recall any mention of it for the Galaxy S5 in AnandTech's review).
I got into a big discussion with the late jragosta over this. He insisted that cheating would lead to more sales, my contention was that increased sales would be minimal, and sale losses would be greater if they were ever caught.
So, Samsung is OK with free speech when they want to ruin someone else's reputation, but not when it's about them? Not just content with stealing Apple's intellectual property, they also seem to have no regard for the truth either. They like to give it but they can't take it.
Says a lot about the personalities controlling Samsung.
I got into a big discussion with the late jragosta over this. He insisted that cheating would lead to more sales, my contention was that increased sales would be minimal, and sale losses would be greater if they were ever caught.
I tend to agree. If you buy a phone because of benchmarks, you'll probably know about the cheating (it was widely reported by the benchmarking sites), but unless the lab that does the benchmark adjusts for it (or punishes by delisting), what will probably happen is that a sound bite will emerge: "Samsung = fastest" because people have an annoying tendency to lose details and keep only a snippet--a conclusion--from those data-heavy benchmark article. That is, some people will literally glance at a bar chart showing Samsung with the best score and come away with that, out of context.
So, Samsung is OK with free speech when they want to ruin someone else's reputation, but not when it's about them? Not just content with stealing Apple's intellectual property, they also seem to have no regard for the truth either. They like to give it but they can't take it.
Says a lot about the personalities controlling Samsung.
Apple sues over right and wrong.
Samsung sues to manipulate public perception.
I tend to agree. If you buy a phone because of benchmarks, you'll probably know about the cheating (it was widely reported by the benchmarking sites), but unless the lab that does the benchmark adjusts for it (or punishes by delisting), what will probably happen is that a sound bite will emerge: "Samsung = fastest" because people have an annoying tendency to lose details and keep only a snippet--a conclusion--from those data-heavy benchmark article. That is, some people will literally glance at a bar chart showing Samsung with the best score and come away with that, out of context.
I agree with that, but my thing is how many people will choose a phone because it's 'faster' than another? A few hundred thousand at best. It'll be taken into a consideration, but not a deciding factor.
Comments
Just an advice for Samsung:
"Innovate don't litigate!!"
EE Times was saying that samsung will have hard time to get a hands on enough 16MP camera modules for S5 due to very low yield. I didn't read the whole article but that is basically what head line is saying. It seems like very reasonable concern.
Thanks.
Though that hardly seems like something Samsung could sue over.
http://www.cnet.com/videos/reasons-not-to-buy-the-galaxy-s5/
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/41430/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
Speaking of the Galaxy S5, AnandTech has posted their review. I would have thought that a brand new, 2.45GHz Snapdragon 801 processor arriving more than 6 months after the iPhone 5S launched would have faired better with raw performance tests. They also seems to be making it bigger and heavier despite the display size being effectively static.
Interesting how the 5S wipes the floor with it on quite a few tests, with half the cores and half the RAM, and having been released 6 months earlier, when mobile CPUs are improving so quickly. Says alot about the A7 chip. The A8 is going to be ridiculous.
They're sueing … for that? Wow.
1) And nearly 1/2 the CPU speed. At least it beats the iPhone in most of the battery tests but that's expected with the size (and increase size YoY) of the battery. I did find a couple things impressive on their review. One, the Galaxy S5 uses much less power than the Galaxy S4 for comparable tests. Two, the charging time has been significantly reduced (under 2 hours) which is better than the iPhone despite the Galaxy G5 having a huge battery that even grow in size over the Galaxy S4. That said, I do wonder if that 5.3V/2A charger will burn out any components over time or cause the device to get very hot when charging.
2) If Apple releases a larger screened iPhone I have doubt that it will be able to wipe the floor with any of these Android devices and increase its lead in performance even more as they advance their A-chips and other HW.
They're sueing … for that? Wow.
Wow indeed. That's nowhere NEAR the negative tone of most Apple hit-pieces that are published daily. Fucking Samsung, despicable.
Would those results be with Samsung over locking the CPU during benchmark tests or not?
Back on the subject of bad press, what about Samsung employing students to post negative reviews about HTC. Samsung is an unethical company and my two biggest regrets are that I own a Samsung net book and a Galaxy Tab 2 7. These are the last Samsung branded products I will ever own.
The doping for the benchmark tests adds very little improvement to the overall performance but says a lot about the vendor's moral fiber which, to me, makes it illogical that they would have 1) ever thought the pros outweigh the cons, and 2) that they are still doing it (although I don't recall any mention of it for the Galaxy S5 in AnandTech's review).
NSA.
They absolutely do. Saw the ad on TV last night. I'm guessing it's to compete with the BOGO offer for the new HTC One.
The pro-Apple bias here is more annoying than usual for you, Apple Insider.
Someone mentioned they didn't do it with the S5 and thought it was Anandtech.
EDIT: Can't find reference to it immediately.
EDIT2: It was Ars that discovered it
http://www.ibtimes.com/samsung-will-play-fair-galaxy-benchmarks-android-44-kitkat-update-1559960
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/03/samsungs-kitkat-update-seems-to-remove-benchmark-boosting-shenanigans/2/
I got into a big discussion with the late jragosta over this. He insisted that cheating would lead to more sales, my contention was that increased sales would be minimal, and sale losses would be greater if they were ever caught.
Says a lot about the personalities controlling Samsung.
I tend to agree. If you buy a phone because of benchmarks, you'll probably know about the cheating (it was widely reported by the benchmarking sites), but unless the lab that does the benchmark adjusts for it (or punishes by delisting), what will probably happen is that a sound bite will emerge: "Samsung = fastest" because people have an annoying tendency to lose details and keep only a snippet--a conclusion--from those data-heavy benchmark article. That is, some people will literally glance at a bar chart showing Samsung with the best score and come away with that, out of context.
Apple sues over right and wrong.
Samsung sues to manipulate public perception.
I agree with that, but my thing is how many people will choose a phone because it's 'faster' than another? A few hundred thousand at best. It'll be taken into a consideration, but not a deciding factor.