'iPhone XI' and 'iPhone XI Max' case manufacturing dummies pop up on Chinese social media

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 82
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,526moderator
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    You always make me laugh!

    Seriously, Apple's configuration is likely not "cosmetic", but developed around an optimum placement of the three imagining sensors, for images, video and AR. We won't know until after it is delivered, but I'd bet that configuration will soon be copied by many of the Android OS device makers.

    Over time, I've come to the realization that you are really shallow.

    History would tell you that Apple doesn't spend a lot of time hiding function.
    Is that optimum in the sense of the hockey puck mouse?

    Please explain why this placement is more 'optimum' than the Mate 20 Pro placement? Even if it is only 'likely'.

    Or why not forget 'optimum' altogether and give your opinion on the cosmetic angle. You know, just in case 'optimum' doesn't eventually factor into anything.

    By the way, it should be clear that I am referring to the camera grouping and not the distribution within the grouping!
    Well, since you asked...

    Having 3 lenses in a line isn't going to give you much spatial information in the axis perpendicular to that line.

    Apple has one sensor that is off axis that will give very good spatial information. Actually, the primary imager could be any of the three, without issue.

    This would be the preferred configuration for obtaining depth information, ie, range finding, even if you have a TOF sensor.

    The real question will be how well it enables computation of up to three overlapping images or videos.

    Seems pretty obvious. 

    I'd argue that three in a row is easier to package.

    My guess is that Apple will be very particular about the alignment of those three imagining modules in the manufacturing process.


    Cool, but if that is true wouldn't 4 sensors be more useful in that regard ?
    There is a fourth sensor.  It’s the clock. 
  • Reply 42 of 82
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,526moderator

    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    You always make me laugh!

    Seriously, Apple's configuration is likely not "cosmetic", but developed around an optimum placement of the three imagining sensors, for images, video and AR. We won't know until after it is delivered, but I'd bet that configuration will soon be copied by many of the Android OS device makers.

    Over time, I've come to the realization that you are really shallow.

    History would tell you that Apple doesn't spend a lot of time hiding function.
    Is that optimum in the sense of the hockey puck mouse?

    Please explain why this placement is more 'optimum' than the Mate 20 Pro placement? Even if it is only 'likely'.

    Or why not forget 'optimum' altogether and give your opinion on the cosmetic angle. You know, just in case 'optimum' doesn't eventually factor into anything.

    By the way, it should be clear that I am referring to the camera grouping and not the distribution within the grouping!
    Well, since you asked...

    Having 3 lenses in a line isn't going to give you much spatial information in the axis perpendicular to that line.

    Apple has one sensor that is off axis that will give very good spatial information. Actually, the primary imager could be any of the three, without issue.

    This would be the preferred configuration for obtaining depth information, ie, range finding, even if you have a TOF sensor.

    The real question will be how well it enables computation of up to three overlapping images or videos.

    Seems pretty obvious. 

    I'd argue that three in a row is easier to package.

    My guess is that Apple will be very particular about the alignment of those three imagining modules in the manufacturing process.


    Cool, but if that is true wouldn't 4 sensors be more useful in that regard ?
    Yep, but each added sensor is giving you diminishing returns, ie, bang for the buck, increasing the device cost and reducing sales volume. That doesn't mean that I don't agree with you, just that Apple seems to be on a roadmap that makes sense for them by moving from two to three imagers for two of their upcoming devices. 

    I'm on record as being an early buyer of the Max version of this when they arrive.
    I see, But personally don't you think it would be worth the cost to Apple, just to justify or compensate for the esthetics, most people won't appreciate the technicalities, all they'll see is an affront at the back of their iPhones, 4 cameras just seem like a simpler idea to sell
    Affront at the back.  Gotta remember that.  I like.
    superkloton
  • Reply 43 of 82
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,526moderator

    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    You always make me laugh!

    Seriously, Apple's configuration is likely not "cosmetic", but developed around an optimum placement of the three imagining sensors, for images, video and AR. We won't know until after it is delivered, but I'd bet that configuration will soon be copied by many of the Android OS device makers.

    Over time, I've come to the realization that you are really shallow.

    History would tell you that Apple doesn't spend a lot of time hiding function.
    Is that optimum in the sense of the hockey puck mouse?

    Please explain why this placement is more 'optimum' than the Mate 20 Pro placement? Even if it is only 'likely'.

    Or why not forget 'optimum' altogether and give your opinion on the cosmetic angle. You know, just in case 'optimum' doesn't eventually factor into anything.

    By the way, it should be clear that I am referring to the camera grouping and not the distribution within the grouping!
    Well, since you asked...

    Having 3 lenses in a line isn't going to give you much spatial information in the axis perpendicular to that line.

    Apple has one sensor that is off axis that will give very good spatial information. Actually, the primary imager could be any of the three, without issue.

    This would be the preferred configuration for obtaining depth information, ie, range finding, even if you have a TOF sensor.

    The real question will be how well it enables computation of up to three overlapping images or videos.

    Seems pretty obvious. 

    I'd argue that three in a row is easier to package.

    My guess is that Apple will be very particular about the alignment of those three imagining modules in the manufacturing process.


    Cool, but if that is true wouldn't 4 sensors be more useful in that regard ?
    Yep, but each added sensor is giving you diminishing returns, ie, bang for the buck, increasing the device cost and reducing sales volume. That doesn't mean that I don't agree with you, just that Apple seems to be on a roadmap that makes sense for them by moving from two to three imagers for two of their upcoming devices. 

    I'm on record as being an early buyer of the Max version of this when they arrive.
    I see, But personally don't you think it would be worth the cost to Apple, just to justify or compensate for the esthetics, most people won't appreciate the technicalities, all they'll see is an affront at the back of their iPhones, 4 cameras just seem like a simpler idea to sell
    Most people didn't initially appreciate the ascetics of AirPods, the Notch, or removal of the headphone jack, but Apple actually came out better than fine on those. Perhaps best to wait and see the result in the flesh.
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    You always make me laugh!

    Seriously, Apple's configuration is likely not "cosmetic", but developed around an optimum placement of the three imagining sensors, for images, video and AR. We won't know until after it is delivered, but I'd bet that configuration will soon be copied by many of the Android OS device makers.

    Over time, I've come to the realization that you are really shallow.

    History would tell you that Apple doesn't spend a lot of time hiding function.
    Is that optimum in the sense of the hockey puck mouse?

    Please explain why this placement is more 'optimum' than the Mate 20 Pro placement? Even if it is only 'likely'.

    Or why not forget 'optimum' altogether and give your opinion on the cosmetic angle. You know, just in case 'optimum' doesn't eventually factor into anything.

    By the way, it should be clear that I am referring to the camera grouping and not the distribution within the grouping!
    Well, since you asked...

    Having 3 lenses in a line isn't going to give you much spatial information in the axis perpendicular to that line.

    Apple has one sensor that is off axis that will give very good spatial information. Actually, the primary imager could be any of the three, without issue.

    This would be the preferred configuration for obtaining depth information, ie, range finding, even if you have a TOF sensor.

    The real question will be how well it enables computation of up to three overlapping images or videos.

    Seems pretty obvious. 

    I'd argue that three in a row is easier to package.

    My guess is that Apple will be very particular about the alignment of those three imagining modules in the manufacturing process.


    Cool, but if that is true wouldn't 4 sensors be more useful in that regard ?
    Yep, but each added sensor is giving you diminishing returns, ie, bang for the buck, increasing the device cost and reducing sales volume. That doesn't mean that I don't agree with you, just that Apple seems to be on a roadmap that makes sense for them by moving from two to three imagers for two of their upcoming devices. 

    I'm on record as being an early buyer of the Max version of this when they arrive.
    I see, But personally don't you think it would be worth the cost to Apple, just to justify or compensate for the esthetics, most people won't appreciate the technicalities, all they'll see is an affront at the back of their iPhones, 4 cameras just seem like a simpler idea to sell
    Most people didn't initially appreciate the ascetics of AirPods, the Notch, or removal of the headphone jack, but Apple actually came out better than fine on those. Perhaps best to wait and see the result in the flesh.
    Good point, lets see what Jony's got for us.
    So here's the question that I would want to have answered.

    Three imagers, all aligned more or less with the width/length orientation of the iPhone,  or two in that orientation, and one rotated 90 degree so that people can shoot wide format while still holding the iPhone vertically. Not sure of the positives/negatives of computational photography with that configuration. I'm sure that Apple has considered this.
    That’s a question I always had.  Keenest are round, couldn’t we shoot landscape when holding the phone vertically already?  They’d just need to enable that.  The image appearing on the display while you’re shooting would be smaller, cropped top and bottom, but then no reason a phone couldn’t shoot landscape while holding the phone vertically.  Just a setting for that would be all that’s needed.  

    Reason I bring this up is that a lot of folks shoot portrait not really thinking that’s what they want, but because that’s how they hold a phone.  Plus, it may be both more comfortable to hold a phone in portrait mode, and safer, because your grip is usually better, meaning you’re less likely to drop it and less likely a run-by thief will be able to snatch it.  And finally, because it’s a more natural holding method, you might reduce shaking as you walk along shooting video.  

    Hey Apple, are you listening?  
  • Reply 44 of 82
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    mike54muthuk_vanalingamchemengin
  • Reply 45 of 82
    Am I the only one who would like sharper edges and USB-C like in the newest (so elegant) iPad? I never likes the round edges. :)
    tmayAI_lias
  • Reply 46 of 82
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    edited April 2019 mdriftmeyerroundaboutnow
  • Reply 47 of 82
    holyoneholyone Posts: 398member
    Am I the only one who would like sharper edges and USB-C like in the newest (so elegant) iPad? I never likes the round edges. :)
    That design seems to be well liked, Youtube's "Everything Apple Pro" is obsessed with it, but I suspect that the flat side of the new iPads are primarily so that the magnitopencil can stick to them nicely. I do think they will revisit that design at some point though, personally I like the round edge's asthetics, but yeah the 4-5 iP series felt great in the hand.
    cornchip
  • Reply 48 of 82
    holyoneholyone Posts: 398member

    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    holyone said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    You always make me laugh!

    Seriously, Apple's configuration is likely not "cosmetic", but developed around an optimum placement of the three imagining sensors, for images, video and AR. We won't know until after it is delivered, but I'd bet that configuration will soon be copied by many of the Android OS device makers.

    Over time, I've come to the realization that you are really shallow.

    History would tell you that Apple doesn't spend a lot of time hiding function.
    Is that optimum in the sense of the hockey puck mouse?

    Please explain why this placement is more 'optimum' than the Mate 20 Pro placement? Even if it is only 'likely'.

    Or why not forget 'optimum' altogether and give your opinion on the cosmetic angle. You know, just in case 'optimum' doesn't eventually factor into anything.

    By the way, it should be clear that I am referring to the camera grouping and not the distribution within the grouping!
    Well, since you asked...

    Having 3 lenses in a line isn't going to give you much spatial information in the axis perpendicular to that line.

    Apple has one sensor that is off axis that will give very good spatial information. Actually, the primary imager could be any of the three, without issue.

    This would be the preferred configuration for obtaining depth information, ie, range finding, even if you have a TOF sensor.

    The real question will be how well it enables computation of up to three overlapping images or videos.

    Seems pretty obvious. 

    I'd argue that three in a row is easier to package.

    My guess is that Apple will be very particular about the alignment of those three imagining modules in the manufacturing process.


    Cool, but if that is true wouldn't 4 sensors be more useful in that regard ?
    Yep, but each added sensor is giving you diminishing returns, ie, bang for the buck, increasing the device cost and reducing sales volume. That doesn't mean that I don't agree with you, just that Apple seems to be on a roadmap that makes sense for them by moving from two to three imagers for two of their upcoming devices. 

    I'm on record as being an early buyer of the Max version of this when they arrive.
    I see, But personally don't you think it would be worth the cost to Apple, just to justify or compensate for the esthetics, most people won't appreciate the technicalities, all they'll see is an affront at the back of their iPhones, 4 cameras just seem like a simpler idea to sell
    Affront at the back.  Gotta remember that.  I like.
    Yeah its of one of my favorite scenes in "The Shape Of Water" and it just kinda stuck.
  • Reply 49 of 82
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 2,101member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    MP3 players too were first brought to market by other brands but that didn’t prevent iPods to dominate. So being first is not a criterion and never a sign of some kind of “leadership”. Being a “competitor” in saturated market conditions is not an achievement, either. You can also read that as Huawei could become an Apple competitor only after the market is fully saturated. Apple holds the keys to several “growth paths”, as in the iPads, Macs, wearables and Home products. Adding a third camera to an already fully exploited and exhausted form factor will not bring growth, even Huawei knows that and they really and sincerely try to sell their 5G modem stock to Apple before the 5G market fully proliferates in a few years and that initial modem stock explodes in their hands.


    tmay
  • Reply 50 of 82
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
  • Reply 51 of 82
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
    There's the array configuration, which isn't in fact identical to anything from Huawei, and there's the array placement, which you call the "grouping" placement.

    I get that you aren't happy with the placement on the back of the iPhone mockups, but as I noted, it is where the iPhone camera's have been since day one.

    You can critique all you want, and I can comment on that, and I did.

    As for "Apple being quite a way behind", as I've stated in the past, they aren't. Android OS devices have always had features before the iPhone. What you are attempting to state, is that Apple is at a disadvantage because they aren't feature comparable at the same time with Huawei. Apple isn't at a disadvantage and if they were, then you would see a huge amount of sales of the Huawei P30 Pro going to previous iPhone owners. That isn't happening in any numbers at all, and there isn't any anecdotal evidence of that.

    More to the point, and frankly due to Apple entering a mature market, iPhone owners have the luxury of waiting to upgrade until they get that feature(s) that they want, all the while enjoying the benefits of the longest life cycle support in the smartphone business, the best ecosystem, and by far, the best resale value.

    The reality is that persons as yourself that are hawking Huawei aren't even upgrading to these devices; they are simply too expensive for most of the market. Huawei produced about 5 million P30 Pro's, which is about the equivalent to the pre sales for one of Apple's new iPhones. It's terrific for Huawei, but it isn't moving the needle all that much even against Samsung. 

    That's just what the data shows. 

    edited April 2019 muthuk_vanalingamroundaboutnow
  • Reply 52 of 82
    WLeeWLee Posts: 16unconfirmed, member
    This looks vile! The cameras on the back, if they are not flush...ugly as. 

    That argument that they take better photos? Come on guys! All smart phones take good photos these days and most manage to do so without making the back of the phone minging. 
    superkloton
  • Reply 53 of 82
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
     ...

    The reality is that persons as yourself that are hawking Huawei aren't even upgrading to these devices; they are simply too expensive for most of the market. Huawei produced about 5 million P30 Pro's, which is about the equivalent to the pre sales for one of Apple's new iPhones. It's terrific for Huawei, but it isn't moving the needle all that much even against Samsung. 

    That's just what the data shows. 

    The data actually shows far more than you are presenting:

    https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/04/08/huawei-6-million-units-p30-series-initial-production/

    What I buy is irrelevant. We won't know how the final numbers play out until next year but those projections are huge and only for two models. Add on to those two the Mate 20 series, the Honor flagships and the future Mate 30 series - all of which will go up against the X series iPhones in 2019 - and it is anything but 'not moving the needle'.

    If you add on the other flagship phones from other vendors, you are looking at a fair sized slice of the premium pie. Is that Apple Premium Pie?

    The folding phones will no doubt create a new niche all of their own and skim even more off the highest end of the market.

    IIRC, the other day you admitted for the first time that iPhone sales were in decline from a trend perspective as opposed to a blip.

    It seems you are slowly coming round to market realities. Where we differ is that I see room for growth in iPhone sales, not an inevitable decline. Of course, to achieve that it would require changes, the first being getting competitive. Last year's refresh was largely swept aside on many levels by competitors. That needs to change radically this year.




    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 54 of 82
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
     ...

    The reality is that persons as yourself that are hawking Huawei aren't even upgrading to these devices; they are simply too expensive for most of the market. Huawei produced about 5 million P30 Pro's, which is about the equivalent to the pre sales for one of Apple's new iPhones. It's terrific for Huawei, but it isn't moving the needle all that much even against Samsung. 

    That's just what the data shows. 

    The data actually shows far more than you are presenting:

    https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/04/08/huawei-6-million-units-p30-series-initial-production/

    What I buy is irrelevant. We won't know how the final numbers play out until next year but those projections are huge and only for two models. Add on to those two the Mate 20 series, the Honor flagships and the future Mate 30 series - all of which will go up against the X series iPhones in 2019 - and it is anything but 'not moving the needle'.

    If you add on the other flagship phones from other vendors, you are looking at a fair sized slice of the premium pie. Is that Apple Premium Pie?

    The folding phones will no doubt create a new niche all of their own and skim even more off the highest end of the market.

    IIRC, the other day you admitted for the first time that iPhone sales were in decline from a trend perspective as opposed to a blip.

    It seems you are slowly coming round to market realities. Where we differ is that I see room for growth in iPhone sales, not an inevitable decline. Of course, to achieve that it would require changes, the first being getting competitive. Last year's refresh was largely swept aside on many levels by competitors. That needs to change radically this year.




    Apple is likely selling 180 to 200 million units a year consistently, and indefinitely, driven by an expanding user base greater than 900 million, and all of the models are "premium". I'm not seeing Huawei flagships even being an issue for Apple. More to the point, I'm not seeing Samsung at any disadvantage to Huawei either. If you recall the data I had on the Premium Market, above $400, Apple had 52 percent, Samsung 17, and Huawei at 10, a growth of two. Notably, Oppo had the greatest gain of all.

    You probably aren't even aware of what Apple's share at $600, $800, or $1000 and up, but it would be expected that Apple would have the lion's share at all those price points.

    Your advice on marketing for Apple is flawed, to say the least. Would also note that Apple is rapidly shifting its business model such that iPhone sales will likely be less that 60% of revenue for this quarter.

    BTW, that 6 million would be the entire series, not just the P30 Pro, which will likely be the smallest share.
    edited April 2019 roundaboutnow
  • Reply 55 of 82
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member

    WLee said:
    This looks vile! The cameras on the back, if they are not flush...ugly as. 

    That argument that they take better photos? Come on guys! All smart phones take good photos these days and most manage to do so without making the back of the phone minging. 
    I would guess that you won't be a buyer, or else, will actually change your mind.

    I am so prescient.
    roundaboutnow
  • Reply 56 of 82
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
     ...

    The reality is that persons as yourself that are hawking Huawei aren't even upgrading to these devices; they are simply too expensive for most of the market. Huawei produced about 5 million P30 Pro's, which is about the equivalent to the pre sales for one of Apple's new iPhones. It's terrific for Huawei, but it isn't moving the needle all that much even against Samsung. 

    That's just what the data shows. 

    The data actually shows far more than you are presenting:

    https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/04/08/huawei-6-million-units-p30-series-initial-production/

    What I buy is irrelevant. We won't know how the final numbers play out until next year but those projections are huge and only for two models. Add on to those two the Mate 20 series, the Honor flagships and the future Mate 30 series - all of which will go up against the X series iPhones in 2019 - and it is anything but 'not moving the needle'.

    If you add on the other flagship phones from other vendors, you are looking at a fair sized slice of the premium pie. Is that Apple Premium Pie?

    The folding phones will no doubt create a new niche all of their own and skim even more off the highest end of the market.

    IIRC, the other day you admitted for the first time that iPhone sales were in decline from a trend perspective as opposed to a blip.

    It seems you are slowly coming round to market realities. Where we differ is that I see room for growth in iPhone sales, not an inevitable decline. Of course, to achieve that it would require changes, the first being getting competitive. Last year's refresh was largely swept aside on many levels by competitors. That needs to change radically this year.




    Apple is likely selling 180 to 200 million units a year consistently, and indefinitely, driven by an expanding user base greater than 900 million, and all of the models are "premium". I'm not seeing Huawei flagships even being an issue for Apple. More to the point, I'm not seeing Samsung at any disadvantage to Huawei either. If you recall the data I had on the Premium Market, above $400, Apple had 52 percent, Samsung 17, and Huawei at 10, a growth of two. Notably, Oppo had the greatest gain of all.

    You probably aren't even aware of what Apple's share at $600, $800, or $1000 and up, but it would be expected that Apple would have the lion's share at all those price points.

    Your advice on marketing for Apple is flawed, to say the least. Would also note that Apple is rapidly shifting its business model such that iPhone sales will likely be less that 60% of revenue for this quarter.
    I bring that last point up fairly regularly in my posts. It's important to remember and comprehend that one perspective is Apple as a company 'in its entirety' and another is Apple from an 'iPhone business' perspective.

    I mostly tackle the latter as iPhone still represents Apple's biggest revenue earner and, rightly or wrongly, is what the markets react to.
  • Reply 57 of 82
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    At first, and depending on the render, I wasn't sure if I liked the camera placement setup.

    Over time I've reached the conclusion that something seems wrong. It seems lopsided.

    There was talk of making them less visible in the final product. I hope that's the case.
    Take an Engineering Physics course on Optics then come back and comment. You'll realize the reason for this array once you understand the laws of optics. They are attempting to create a DSLR capable lens array inside a phone.
    Are you suggesting that the Mate 20 Pro was designed by people who don't understand engineering physics? Huawei's imaging division is currently setting the pace in this area, but you never know, someone up there in Finland might know something about this subject.

    You have no idea what Apple is 'trying to create'. The phone doesn't exist yet and all you have is rumour to play off.

    And I will restate what I said above. I am talking about the square and its placement - not how the cameras are placed within it.
    Do you work for Huawei or something? You seem to do a lot of advertising for them here.
    No affiliation with any company. Simply that Huawei has now become one of Apple's biggest competitors and is appearing (both directly and indirectly) in a lot of Apple related news.

    As I happen to know a bit about Huawei I can give an opinion and correct much of the misinformation that some people here put out.

    Also, a lot of the rumours on new Apple products for 2019 are relative to ideas Huawei has already brought to market.

    In this thread it is imaging and tri-camera setups. In fact these rumours paint the picture of the exact same 'square but with rounded corners' grouping as used by Huawei last year. So when someone made the sarcastic comment on engineering physics, the easiest way to nip that in the bud was to point out what Huawei had done - but with a different placement.

    Most of the Apple rumours of late like reverse charging, Night Mode, 5G modems etc were first brought to market by Huawei so there is an immediate connection there.

    However, I rarely, if ever, jump in with a Huawei reference just for the sake of it. More often than not, it is to correct something that appears in the comments.

    If these advances were on Samsung products I would have little to add as I have no experience with Samsung phones.

    Unfortunately some people here don't do the same when it comes to Huawei.
    So, your original gripe was the Apple didn't place the array as the Mate 20 did, hence why I stated you were shallow for your aesthetic concerns over function.

    When you asked me to elaborate, I gave you reasoning as to why I thought Apple's array was likely more optically efficient than that of the (P20, P30) linear array, and your retort was that Huawei has experts, in Finland no less, but you couldn't elaborate. Apple's placement of that array looks to follow all of its camera layouts from the past.

    In essence, Huawei maintains its P series as a linear array, from the P20 Pro to the P30 Pro, and the Mate 20 with an "L" configuration, and the Honor with a linear configuration, all for reasons more likely to do with engineering convenience over corporate branding, but possibly aesthetics.

    Meanwhile, Apple, at a usual leisurely pace, looks to standardize on the triangular placement of its imagers for its two models, and I stated that I thought that would be copied by a great number of competitors after release, due to its efficiency for computational imaging.

    News, being first is great for Huawei competing in the Android OS space, but it's really not the competition to Apple that you keep touting, which is actually quite annoying for its inaccuracy.

    I will finally note that adding additional lenses brings diminishing returns. While I'm no fan of DXOmark, I provide that ranking;

    112 Huawei P30 Pro,
    112 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G
    109 Huawei Mate 20 Pro
    109 Huawei P20 Pro
    109 Samsung Galaxy s10 Plus
    107 Xiaomi Mi 9
     
    105 Apple iPhone XS Max

    101 iPhone XR
    101 Google Pixel 3

    All are triple cameras excepting the iPhone XS Max, which is dual, and the iPhone XR and Google Pixel 3, which are single camera. You can see the diminishing benefit of additional cameras on DXOmark. Photography isn't actually that big an advantage for Huawei today, though they market it as that.

    Extrapolating, I could make a good case that Apple will be right back in the competition with the release of the next iPhone, hence why I am quite happy to wait, and with the release of iOS 13, even more so.

    You seem unable to understand, and I surely have mentioned this many times, that features are not the only nor primary driver for sales. Apple's large ecosystem, and a growing user base of increasing loyalty, are not actually being impacted by Huawei, even as Apple has found itself in a mature market.
    You are barking up the wrong tree.

    I was talking about the placement from a design perspective. The placement of the grouping itself, not the cameras within it.

    You should understand that more cameras bring versatility. That is where the ball is now (along with imaging improvements of course).

    You are happy to wait. Fine. It will have been a long wait but that is your decision. It doesn't change the fact that Apple is quite a way behind.

    That leisurely pace is doing Apple no good at all.
     ...

    The reality is that persons as yourself that are hawking Huawei aren't even upgrading to these devices; they are simply too expensive for most of the market. Huawei produced about 5 million P30 Pro's, which is about the equivalent to the pre sales for one of Apple's new iPhones. It's terrific for Huawei, but it isn't moving the needle all that much even against Samsung. 

    That's just what the data shows. 

    The data actually shows far more than you are presenting:

    https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/04/08/huawei-6-million-units-p30-series-initial-production/

    What I buy is irrelevant. We won't know how the final numbers play out until next year but those projections are huge and only for two models. Add on to those two the Mate 20 series, the Honor flagships and the future Mate 30 series - all of which will go up against the X series iPhones in 2019 - and it is anything but 'not moving the needle'.

    If you add on the other flagship phones from other vendors, you are looking at a fair sized slice of the premium pie. Is that Apple Premium Pie?

    The folding phones will no doubt create a new niche all of their own and skim even more off the highest end of the market.

    IIRC, the other day you admitted for the first time that iPhone sales were in decline from a trend perspective as opposed to a blip.

    It seems you are slowly coming round to market realities. Where we differ is that I see room for growth in iPhone sales, not an inevitable decline. Of course, to achieve that it would require changes, the first being getting competitive. Last year's refresh was largely swept aside on many levels by competitors. That needs to change radically this year.




    Apple is likely selling 180 to 200 million units a year consistently, and indefinitely, driven by an expanding user base greater than 900 million, and all of the models are "premium". I'm not seeing Huawei flagships even being an issue for Apple. More to the point, I'm not seeing Samsung at any disadvantage to Huawei either. If you recall the data I had on the Premium Market, above $400, Apple had 52 percent, Samsung 17, and Huawei at 10, a growth of two. Notably, Oppo had the greatest gain of all.

    You probably aren't even aware of what Apple's share at $600, $800, or $1000 and up, but it would be expected that Apple would have the lion's share at all those price points.

    Your advice on marketing for Apple is flawed, to say the least. Would also note that Apple is rapidly shifting its business model such that iPhone sales will likely be less that 60% of revenue for this quarter.
    I bring that last point up fairly regularly in my posts. It's important to remember and comprehend that one perspective is Apple as a company 'in its entirety' and another is Apple from an 'iPhone business' perspective.

    I mostly tackle the latter as iPhone still represents Apple's biggest revenue earner and, rightly or wrongly, is what the markets react to.
    Fair enough, but Apple's iPhone business is still many multiple times larger than Huawei's phone business. 

    I would note that Huawei still has a reckoning ahead of it in the near future. I can't predict when, but there will be a time when the world economy goes into recession, it is overdue now, and all of those Android OS device makers will have to compete on price in a buyer's market, not just on features. Worse, the Android OS market is also mature, which will lead to a declining market.

    Of course, Apple will have to deal with that as well. As Apple has a wealthier customer base, and a broad ecosystem, I would surmise that Apple will have less of an issue weathering any recession.
    muthuk_vanalingamroundaboutnow
  • Reply 58 of 82
    supadav03supadav03 Posts: 503member
    lkrupp said:
    supadav03 said:
    It’s straight ugly. No other way around it. Would it keep me from buying the next iPhone, no, but I am not a fan of that look at all. 
    Does it matter that you wouldn’t buy it? Uh, nope, not one tiny bit.
    Huh? Did you read my comment or just relish at the chance to jump on someone?  I said I WOULD buy it. That was my whole point. Even though I find the design ugly as can be, it wouldn’t keep me from upgrading my XS Max to whatever this new model will be called. 
    muthuk_vanalingamchemengin
  • Reply 59 of 82
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    As long as Apple puts in .18 cent speakers into their $1500 phones, I’ll stay with my 6... or eventually switch to something that sounds better than a 1983 Sanyo answering machine.
  • Reply 60 of 82
    lkrupp said:
    supadav03 said:
    It’s straight ugly. No other way around it. Would it keep me from buying the next iPhone, no, but I am not a fan of that look at all. 
    Does it matter that you wouldn’t buy it? Uh, nope, not one tiny bit.
    He said he would buy it nevertheless.


    muthuk_vanalingamavon b7chemengin
Sign In or Register to comment.