I was with you till the MP comment, which I read in contexts as meaning 8 is enough (if you didn't mean that we are on the same page). That old '8MP is all you need' meme is getting old. Having spent the weekend cropping down 20.2MP RAW images of wild life taken of a Canon 70D with a Canon 100-400mm L IS USM lens so critters fill the frame and still holding amazing resolution, I can assure anyone holding onto the '8MP Myth' that starting with more than 8MP is very useful.
I completely agree. MP does impact picture quality. All I meant is the average consumer thinks MP is the only unit of measurement for picture quality. Much like they think a 3Ghz processor is always faster than a 2.4Ghz processor, without taking into consideration things like cores, wattage, architecture etc.
In addition if OLED's were as inherently inefficient as you say Apple would not choose one for their Apple Watch would they?
OLEDs can be thinner and lighter, which is perhaps the main reason the technology appears in the Apple Watch.
OLEDs are more efficient when the display is mostly dark. LCDs are more efficient when the display is mostly light. It isn't clear which usage scenario (mostly light/dark) applies to an e-watch, but mostly black (OLED) would allow for claims of longer battery life.
Samsung itself has been marketing Note 4 to less sophisticated buyers as a "for the colorful" device along the lines of Apple's iPhone 5c ads, in a series of "Love Notes" spots.
Anyone else think it's funny that Samsung seems to be courting the hipster demographic that some Android users swear only use Apple products?
That old '8MP is all you need' meme is getting old. Having spent the weekend cropping down 20.2MP RAW images of wild life taken of a Canon 70D with a Canon 100-400mm L IS USM lens so critters fill the frame and still holding amazing resolution, I can assure anyone holding onto the '8MP Myth' that starting with more than 8MP is very useful.
It's not a myth we're holding onto. It's a tiny lens.
But go ahead and retrofit a Galaxy S5 with that Canon lens and knock yerself out.
The user experience of iOS is tied directly to GPU performance because everything on the screen is drawn with hardware acceleration.
On Android, not so much. It's laggy and thin feeling like Windows, and its users generally don't care because they don't appreciate that level of attention to detail. That's why they buy phones with an ASP of $215.
It's like arguing to somebody who buys 20 chicken McNuggets for $5 why food cooked to order by a chef is better, when all they really care about is enough food to make them feel stuffed but costing only $5, with the "choice" of sauce.
When you say iOS devices are fast enough and the real problem is software, are you even aware of how transparent and silly that is? iOS devices should be as fast as apple can manage at an affordable price point, and the software gets much better every year. Neither is true for android. Updates come and users mostly can't avail themselves of them.
When did I ever say iOS devices are fast enough? What I said was Apple's software can't keep up with the hardware improvements. Apple hardware is awesome. Your software needs work. Which is why I would like to see them spend a year polishing what they've got rather than just keep adding and adding and adding new stuff. I'm using I OS 8.0.2 on my iPad air and my iPhone 5s and its buggy. Safari is not a great experience. Apps crash and my 5S. I have Wi-Fi issues. In the iBooks app, the MyBooks interface is sometimes light and sometimes dark (perhaps has something to do with auto night mode) but the rest of the app doesn't follow and all of the bookstore interfaces are light never dark. Apple software needs attention to fix bugs and just bring a level of polish to what currently exists. And just as I was typing this my Safari keyboard froze and the app crashed. I've had this happen to me several times on my iPad Air. That is not an acceptable user experience.
As far as Android goes I don't use their software so can't comment on the user experience but aren't most updates now via the Play store and thus available to everyone? I belive most if not all their apps get updated via the Play store and don't require a major Android release (the opposite of iOS).
OLEDs can be thinner and lighter, which is perhaps the main reason the technology appears in the Apple Watch.
OLEDs are more efficient when the display is mostly dark. LCDs are more efficient when the display is mostly light. It isn't clear which usage scenario (mostly light/dark) applies to an e-watch, but mostly black (OLED) would allow for claims of longer battery life.
?Watch interface is mostly dark which I like. I think it's a good idea to make the bezels fade away as much as possible. A dark interface does that.
DED's basic point that overall the iPhone is a much superior gaming platform is plainly the fact (with iPad update to match coming in a few weeks). of course it's the overall combination of hardware and software that decides that, no single item or spec, and the real-life quality of games that you can actually buy today.
the droid fans here and there clutch at their straws about one detail or another, citing best case examples of a half-dozen different models that might equal Apple's but never come altogehter in any one product. and when you boil their remarks down, they all add up to just a lot of coulda, woulda, shoulda.
does this really matter? do anyone but gamers care? do gamers spend much time with phones or tablets anyway? maybe not. but the same technology underlies all a device's graphics intensive functions, as DED notes, which also accounts for iPhone's exceptional photo/video capabilities and companion apps.
as to gaming, what does matter the most is the franchise games. this is Apple's one great weakness - the dominant Playstation and XBox games have no iOS versions, for obvious reasons. which is why Apple should buy struggling Nintendo - to get the Mario franchise for Mac/iOS.
Check an LG quad HD display then, puts Samsung's efforts to shame.
Basically useless as they are well beyond the point where pixels are discernible in everyday use.
Huh the LG G3 1440p screen is not great at all. Average contrast, relatively low max brightness that throttles down aggressively, high power usage. Besides having a slightly higher ppi (which is meaningless when both are 500+), I'm not sure any person would consider the G3 and Note 4 1440p screens in the same ballpark.
I completely agree. MP does impact picture quality. All I meant is the average consumer thinks MP is the only unit of measurement for picture quality. Much like they think a 3Ghz processor is always faster than a 2.4Ghz processor, without taking into consideration things like cores, wattage, architecture etc.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
It's not a myth we're holding onto. It's a tiny lens.
But go ahead and retrofit a Galaxy S5 with that Canon lens and knock yerself out.
That was my point of view on it. I'm not a photographer, but I only figured the higher megapixels were only beneficial if the camera a large enough lenses that could take in more light. No point in blowing up a picture or zooming in if there's going to be excessive noise.
When the display industry has been abuzz about QD tech for the last couple years and products are available with QD (newest Kindle Fire, some Sony products), I think it's a foregone conclusion.
It's actually too bad the Fire is stuck in Amazon's crappy ecosystem when it has such an impressive display.
Long term, I still think OLEDs are the future - they are thinner (about 1/2 as thick as the iPhone 6 screen), can be flexible, don't need stronger backlights at higher resolution (1440p and above), have infinite contrast, and don't lose nearly as much brightness at angles. For sure in wearables or other form factors that won't be a flat screen directly in front of your face. The major deficiencies they've had as the technology has matured are gone.
This is like reading a George W. Bush review on MSNBC.Com. After reading this you would think that Samsung is ran by idiots but the person who writes this Blog could really show them how to run a business that they don't have. Complete Apple Fan-Boy, Bias BS.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
Rather than asking for examples and then shooting them down over whatever nonsense you can throw up as a defense against the facts, why don't you just run through the top games listed in the iTunes App Store and compile your own list of major games that don't exist on Android and/or aren't playable on android (like the top tile in both iTunes and Google Play: "Five Nights at Freddies," which for some reason doesn't run right on your Nvidia Shield, which nobody else bought.)
Seriously, if iPhone were Playstation and Android were Xbox, this would not even be a challenge and Microsoft would be giving up on its games franchise. Everyone knows Android has little more than IAP garbage-ware, and most of that looks like crap on various Android hardware experiments.
When Metal came out, AnandTech wrote that Metal would be used by 'the kinds of games that don't exist on Android.' What do you think they could have possibly meant?
Seriously, you sound like the curator of the Creation Museum trying to spread the idea that most people want complicated beta crap that works like a PC from the late 1990s. You are wrong, obviously. People with money have spoken, and they're not lining up for Nvidia Shields and Galaxy S5s. You can insist that there is a healthy ecosystem for Android all you want, but who do you think you're fooling? Yourself?
My point has nothing to do with Android, sure I own a Shield or I should say my son now owns one as he is the gamer in the family, my comments are about the current crop of ARM chips and how well games perform on them. If the Samsung Exynos chip found in the Note 4 was also used in the iPhone 6 there wouldn't be a single game it couldn't handle and handle extremely well. I also never talked about a healthy ecosystem in Android, you saw Android in my post and assumed I was rallying around the platform, then jumped in trying to make it look like I was on some sort of Ant-Apple iPhone kick. If FireFox OS had the same games I would have used it as an example, in a previuos posts I talked about Windows Mobile 8 running on top off a Qualcomm chip like an 800, 801 or 805 also being able to run whatever game you throw at it. Like the Xbox and PS it takes 3 to 4 years before games actually start to utilize the hardwares full capabilities. Though its cool to talk about Metal or games programmed to take advantage of Nvdias K1 hardware, gaming on any of the new CPU/GPU's is pretty much the same. There might be settle differences but nothing so apparent that you could with 100% assurance say that any one particular CPU/GPU is just absolutely the best. Now, game selection is another topic, iOS has a better selection, period, we all know that.
Personally I don't like gaming on a phone, not as much as a tablet anyway and for playing games I would defiantly prefer the Shield, not just for the built in HDMI with 4K out, but as I already have an Nvidia K1 development board, just preordered a Lenovo 4K monitor that also has a built in K1 CPU running Android, my son has a Shield and I will defiantly buy a K1 Denver development board plus a Nexus 9, that's five nodes with 960 CUDA cores that I can utilize the power for rendering, encoding and half a dozen other GPU computational projects I'm currently working on.
My iPad is used for music creation and I don't like having anything on it except the apps for that purpose. If I buy another it wouldn't be for gaming.
I've been reading this thread for a few days now, and I have to wonder if this chart will persuade buyers one way or the other. And without testing the Note 4 that most of us will get, what's the point? Or is that even the goal? What is? I've still got a Note 1, (what can I say, money it tight), so won't either of these be faster and better when I upgrade in a couple weeks? I don't game on my phone, I don't game much at all, so will I even notice the benchmark differences?
I must be one of the few who actually like both platforms. When it comes to specs, I gladly give Apple credit for doing more with less, and let's face it, usually smoother and "prettier" as far as operation goes. But then I ask myself if I want to give up my widgets, customization, and all the rest that comes with Android that I'm used to to get it. It may be an overly simple view, but that's the trade off...
Might I ask why? Specifically in relation to OLED.
...have infinite contrast...
Whenever I see a claim like this in matters that don’t regard quantum mechanics, I always take it as a falsehood. It’s the same as the “infinite resolution” claim on vectorized computer graphics.
All displays have infinite contrast by virtue of the fact that there is no legal standard for the measurement thereof. All television manufacturers make up their own scales of contrast, allowing them to market their products as having “10,000,000:1 contrast” meaninglessly and, frankly, disingenuously.
The major deficiencies they've had as the technology has matured are gone.
Short lifespan of blues comes to mind as still being a problem.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
I am an Excel power user who doesn't use a mouse, and I think the fact that an Apple keyboard is so different and the keyboard shortcuts are limited has been an impediment to faster adoption
I can't help chuckle. The first spread sheet from Microcrap with a graphical GUI, Multiplan and shortly thereafter Excel both débuted on the Mac several years prior to it doing so on a PC. So I have to ask why it is the PC keyboard short cuts got changed after the fact? Oh, that's right, after ripping of Mac OS, it probably left Gates thinking it was a good idea to change a few things when they brought out the Windblows version of Excel to help reduce the chances of legal action.
This is a misleading test lol. The Galaxy Note 4 has a qHD display... so lowering the standard to 1080p and then comparing which preforms the best is kinda cheating. Apple fans always try to sway people with Apple's lackluster attempt to maintain hardcore fans. I don't care what a benchmark can tell me... I have held the Iphone 6 plus in one hand and the Note 4 in the other, and I promise you there is a huge difference. On the other hand I don't think it's quite fair comparing AMOLED screens to LCD, but that's Apple's fault though. To sum up... drop the Iphone 6 plus to 480p resolution and then compare it to a phone that already has a 480p resolution and tell me which one looks better.
Comments
I was with you till the MP comment, which I read in contexts as meaning 8 is enough (if you didn't mean that we are on the same page). That old '8MP is all you need' meme is getting old. Having spent the weekend cropping down 20.2MP RAW images of wild life taken of a Canon 70D with a Canon 100-400mm L IS USM lens so critters fill the frame and still holding amazing resolution, I can assure anyone holding onto the '8MP Myth' that starting with more than 8MP is very useful.
I completely agree. MP does impact picture quality. All I meant is the average consumer thinks MP is the only unit of measurement for picture quality. Much like they think a 3Ghz processor is always faster than a 2.4Ghz processor, without taking into consideration things like cores, wattage, architecture etc.
In addition if OLED's were as inherently inefficient as you say Apple would not choose one for their Apple Watch would they?
OLEDs can be thinner and lighter, which is perhaps the main reason the technology appears in the Apple Watch.
OLEDs are more efficient when the display is mostly dark. LCDs are more efficient when the display is mostly light. It isn't clear which usage scenario (mostly light/dark) applies to an e-watch, but mostly black (OLED) would allow for claims of longer battery life.
Samsung itself has been marketing Note 4 to less sophisticated buyers as a "for the colorful" device along the lines of Apple's iPhone 5c ads, in a series of "Love Notes" spots.
Anyone else think it's funny that Samsung seems to be courting the hipster demographic that some Android users swear only use Apple products?
That old '8MP is all you need' meme is getting old. Having spent the weekend cropping down 20.2MP RAW images of wild life taken of a Canon 70D with a Canon 100-400mm L IS USM lens so critters fill the frame and still holding amazing resolution, I can assure anyone holding onto the '8MP Myth' that starting with more than 8MP is very useful.
It's not a myth we're holding onto. It's a tiny lens.
But go ahead and retrofit a Galaxy S5 with that Canon lens and knock yerself out.
When did I ever say iOS devices are fast enough? What I said was Apple's software can't keep up with the hardware improvements. Apple hardware is awesome. Your software needs work. Which is why I would like to see them spend a year polishing what they've got rather than just keep adding and adding and adding new stuff. I'm using I OS 8.0.2 on my iPad air and my iPhone 5s and its buggy. Safari is not a great experience. Apps crash and my 5S. I have Wi-Fi issues. In the iBooks app, the MyBooks interface is sometimes light and sometimes dark (perhaps has something to do with auto night mode) but the rest of the app doesn't follow and all of the bookstore interfaces are light never dark. Apple software needs attention to fix bugs and just bring a level of polish to what currently exists. And just as I was typing this my Safari keyboard froze and the app crashed. I've had this happen to me several times on my iPad Air. That is not an acceptable user experience.
As far as Android goes I don't use their software so can't comment on the user experience but aren't most updates now via the Play store and thus available to everyone? I belive most if not all their apps get updated via the Play store and don't require a major Android release (the opposite of iOS).
?Watch interface is mostly dark which I like. I think it's a good idea to make the bezels fade away as much as possible. A dark interface does that.
DED's basic point that overall the iPhone is a much superior gaming platform is plainly the fact (with iPad update to match coming in a few weeks). of course it's the overall combination of hardware and software that decides that, no single item or spec, and the real-life quality of games that you can actually buy today.
the droid fans here and there clutch at their straws about one detail or another, citing best case examples of a half-dozen different models that might equal Apple's but never come altogehter in any one product. and when you boil their remarks down, they all add up to just a lot of coulda, woulda, shoulda.
does this really matter? do anyone but gamers care? do gamers spend much time with phones or tablets anyway? maybe not. but the same technology underlies all a device's graphics intensive functions, as DED notes, which also accounts for iPhone's exceptional photo/video capabilities and companion apps.
as to gaming, what does matter the most is the franchise games. this is Apple's one great weakness - the dominant Playstation and XBox games have no iOS versions, for obvious reasons. which is why Apple should buy struggling Nintendo - to get the Mario franchise for Mac/iOS.
Check an LG quad HD display then, puts Samsung's efforts to shame.
Basically useless as they are well beyond the point where pixels are discernible in everyday use.
Huh the LG G3 1440p screen is not great at all. Average contrast, relatively low max brightness that throttles down aggressively, high power usage. Besides having a slightly higher ppi (which is meaningless when both are 500+), I'm not sure any person would consider the G3 and Note 4 1440p screens in the same ballpark.
I completely agree. MP does impact picture quality. All I meant is the average consumer thinks MP is the only unit of measurement for picture quality. Much like they think a 3Ghz processor is always faster than a 2.4Ghz processor, without taking into consideration things like cores, wattage, architecture etc.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Apple-iPhone-6-and-6-Plus-review-Bigger-and-better.-Apple-set-gold-standard-for-smartphone-image-quality
It's not a myth we're holding onto. It's a tiny lens.
But go ahead and retrofit a Galaxy S5 with that Canon lens and knock yerself out.
That was my point of view on it. I'm not a photographer, but I only figured the higher megapixels were only beneficial if the camera a large enough lenses that could take in more light. No point in blowing up a picture or zooming in if there's going to be excessive noise.
I’m of the belief that quantum dot displays will be the next mainstream technology. Apple-related link.
When the display industry has been abuzz about QD tech for the last couple years and products are available with QD (newest Kindle Fire, some Sony products), I think it's a foregone conclusion.
It's actually too bad the Fire is stuck in Amazon's crappy ecosystem when it has such an impressive display.
Long term, I still think OLEDs are the future - they are thinner (about 1/2 as thick as the iPhone 6 screen), can be flexible, don't need stronger backlights at higher resolution (1440p and above), have infinite contrast, and don't lose nearly as much brightness at angles. For sure in wearables or other form factors that won't be a flat screen directly in front of your face. The major deficiencies they've had as the technology has matured are gone.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Apple-iPhone-6-and-6-Plus-review-Bigger-and-better.-Apple-set-gold-standard-for-smartphone-image-quality
I'm assuming your previous D800 or D800E ownership. Any noticeable difference in focus speed or dynamic range?
My point has nothing to do with Android, sure I own a Shield or I should say my son now owns one as he is the gamer in the family, my comments are about the current crop of ARM chips and how well games perform on them. If the Samsung Exynos chip found in the Note 4 was also used in the iPhone 6 there wouldn't be a single game it couldn't handle and handle extremely well. I also never talked about a healthy ecosystem in Android, you saw Android in my post and assumed I was rallying around the platform, then jumped in trying to make it look like I was on some sort of Ant-Apple iPhone kick. If FireFox OS had the same games I would have used it as an example, in a previuos posts I talked about Windows Mobile 8 running on top off a Qualcomm chip like an 800, 801 or 805 also being able to run whatever game you throw at it. Like the Xbox and PS it takes 3 to 4 years before games actually start to utilize the hardwares full capabilities. Though its cool to talk about Metal or games programmed to take advantage of Nvdias K1 hardware, gaming on any of the new CPU/GPU's is pretty much the same. There might be settle differences but nothing so apparent that you could with 100% assurance say that any one particular CPU/GPU is just absolutely the best. Now, game selection is another topic, iOS has a better selection, period, we all know that.
Personally I don't like gaming on a phone, not as much as a tablet anyway and for playing games I would defiantly prefer the Shield, not just for the built in HDMI with 4K out, but as I already have an Nvidia K1 development board, just preordered a Lenovo 4K monitor that also has a built in K1 CPU running Android, my son has a Shield and I will defiantly buy a K1 Denver development board plus a Nexus 9, that's five nodes with 960 CUDA cores that I can utilize the power for rendering, encoding and half a dozen other GPU computational projects I'm currently working on.
My iPad is used for music creation and I don't like having anything on it except the apps for that purpose. If I buy another it wouldn't be for gaming.
I've been reading this thread for a few days now, and I have to wonder if this chart will persuade buyers one way or the other. And without testing the Note 4 that most of us will get, what's the point? Or is that even the goal? What is? I've still got a Note 1, (what can I say, money it tight), so won't either of these be faster and better when I upgrade in a couple weeks? I don't game on my phone, I don't game much at all, so will I even notice the benchmark differences?
I must be one of the few who actually like both platforms. When it comes to specs, I gladly give Apple credit for doing more with less, and let's face it, usually smoother and "prettier" as far as operation goes. But then I ask myself if I want to give up my widgets, customization, and all the rest that comes with Android that I'm used to to get it. It may be an overly simple view, but that's the trade off...
Might I ask why? Specifically in relation to OLED.
Whenever I see a claim like this in matters that don’t regard quantum mechanics, I always take it as a falsehood. It’s the same as the “infinite resolution” claim on vectorized computer graphics.
All displays have infinite contrast by virtue of the fact that there is no legal standard for the measurement thereof. All television manufacturers make up their own scales of contrast, allowing them to market their products as having “10,000,000:1 contrast” meaninglessly and, frankly, disingenuously.
Short lifespan of blues comes to mind as still being a problem.
You can agree with him, but you are both wrong. More sensels only gives a better image if they are just as high quality as the less sensels. The remark about a 20mp image taken with a DX size sensor with quality glass is irrelevant. How many square mm's are those pixels spread out over vs a camera phone? I can see mites on a black hawk from 50 yards with my D810 36MP camera using my 800mm f/5.6 VR glass... so frickin' what? It's about pixel density. putting 20MP in the same space that 8mp occupies requires better sensing technology, better glass, better everything to be better. There are only so many photons to collect. Did you notice that each sensel has gotten BIGGER in the last few iPhone releases? Same MP count, but better camera each time. Sensors are getting so dense the glass can't keep up.
A camera on a phone is a much different beast than a DSLR. 20mp will never crop to the quality you see with the real camera. So more (but not as good) sensels is like having 4 cores on a CPU- sounds kool but doesn't mean much when the whole system is considered.
Don't believe me? Go to Dxomark or some other site that knows what image quality actually is and see what they say.
http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Apple-iPhone-6-and-6-Plus-review-Bigger-and-better.-Apple-set-gold-standard-for-smartphone-image-quality
Nokia 1020.
I can't help chuckle. The first spread sheet from Microcrap with a graphical GUI, Multiplan and shortly thereafter Excel both débuted on the Mac several years prior to it doing so on a PC. So I have to ask why it is the PC keyboard short cuts got changed after the fact? Oh, that's right, after ripping of Mac OS, it probably left Gates thinking it was a good idea to change a few things when they brought out the Windblows version of Excel to help reduce the chances of legal action.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan