misa
About
- Username
- misa
- Joined
- Visits
- 34
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 270
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 827
Reactions
-
Samsung's fix for red-tinted Galaxy S8 screens forces users to self-calibrate
bigmac2 said:AppleInsider said:
"In the past, we have received feedback that consumers wanted the ability to customize the color setting of their Galaxy devices due to natural variations in displays"
Samsung got it all wrong, people doesn't wanted the ability to messed up with color settings, they want accurate color. If Galaxy devices have "natural variation" inherent to OLED technologies, It is up to Samsung to calibrate their display during manufacturing process to fix it.
Giving the user the burden of calibrating their phone display is only an acknowledged from Samsung there is no color conformity across their products.
No monitor is ever calibrated from the factory. There are a few that are pre-calibrated to Adobe RGB for photoshop users, but everything else is supposed to "just work" at sRGB settings. Your lighting affects that calibration. The age of the backlight affects that calibration.
But there is no reason for Samsung to have released a product this much out of calibration. This sounds more like one batch of screens was released with the wrong driver (not software driver, but the actual screen hardware driver) and the work-around is to force the calibration to a level that makes it look more correct. You'll probably find that it has a reduced color gamut.
-
Samsung's fix for red-tinted Galaxy S8 screens forces users to self-calibrate
sog35 said:It baffles me why millions of people buy Samdung phones that cost just as much an iPhone.
I understand those who buy cheap phones and can't afford an iPhone.
This is like spending $100k on a Hyundai instead of a BMW. Makes zero sense.
To be fair, Android phones are interchangeable to Linux nerds. They want whatever has the most bells and whistles even if those features don't work correctly, they're just going to jail break the device and futz with it anyway. Wireless carriers push Android phones because they are more profitable, like grossly more profitable. If the wholesale price was required to be listed (and you can get the wholesale price of any phone in California through some math, because the tax charged is based on the greater of wholesale price or retail price. So a $0 free phone will still be taxed at the wholesale cost of the phone) you'd find that carriers make maybe $50 on an iPhone, and $300 on an Android phone.
People who actually understand what the specs mean, would never buy an Android phone. If you're buying a smartphone phone for a family member, you certainly want to avoid giving Android phones to people who don't know how to use a web browser.
-
Apple Park tree quota leaves local contractors scrambling for foliage
That is not how it works at all.EsquireCats said:All those trees will provide a lot of natural air conditioning for the campus.
Unless Apple plans to harvest that fruit before the bugs and birds get to it, the ground will be littered with rotten fruit over the course of a month and the primary complaint will be the smell of rotting fruit.
Like I actually think it's rather creative that they choose fruit trees, but anyone who has lived with fruit trees on their property will tell you that you have to prune them to get fruit, and you have to pick the fruit before it falls otherwise the ground will be absolutely disgusting in a matter of days.
Also it takes about 10 years for a tree to grow fruit (most commercial fruit growing trees are actually chimera's.) So it's also very likely that under the right conditions those trees will actually grow fruit, but I somehow doubt California is going to be wet enough to ever produce good fruit unless they are taken care of.
-
Breaking the trend: why Apple is likely to release both an 'iPhone 7s' and 'iPhone 8' this...
Keep in mind that under synthetic benchmarks, the Samsung device will look better than it really is because a synthetic benchmark can be cheated, and Android devices are notorous for doing so.jkichline said:
Not sure where you got your information, but it looks like last year's iPhone 7 trounces the recently released S8 - https://www.google.com/amp/bgr.com/2017/04/10/galaxy-s8-vs-iphone-7-plus-speed-test-youtube/amp/1983 said:The S8 multi-core performance is actually very slightly better than the iPhone 7, even though the difference is tiny, so you could say they're on equal footing there. Its single core performance where the iPhone 7 is still the king by quite a considerable margin.
https://www.xda-developers.com/benchmark-cheating-strikes-back-how-oneplus-and-others-got-caught-red-handed-and-what-theyve-done-about-it/
Even though they may claim not to be cheating now, you will never know unless the benchmark changes it's benching algorithm process with every version.
Which brings me to the other half of the performance claim. iOS software is 100% C/C++/OBJC/Swift. They are compiled to native code. Android devices are a mixture of Java and native code. Even if you could run Android on an iOS device, it would perform worse than iOS with the same software because there is this entire Java problem to deal with.
You can see this with games developed in Unity. The game on iOS, works like a charm, low loading time, etc. Same game on Android on equivalent hardware, long loading times, lots of render stutter, OS native UI stuff is slow and ugly, etc.
Like, there is no way in hell I would buy an Android device for that reason alone. You need 20% more "phone" just to make up for Android inefficiency, and that is reflected in synthetic benchmarks which perform non-UI computations. If you were to actually test the responsiveness of a phone on the same software, the iOS software actually is responsive, where as Android is sluggish. There is just no getting around this. I've never seen a game perform identically on an iOS phone and a Samsung phone. The Samsung phone is always kneecapped by Android.
-
Apple ditching Imagination Technologies GPU technology, moving design in-house
All this really says is that GPU tech has plateaued. Apple made their own ARM chips because CPU tech plateaued (yes they got faster, but that is a consequence of die shrinks, nothing else. A CPU you bought in 2007 is the same as one you bought in 2017, only faster due to die shrinks.) And we've reached the end of what can be accomplished with die shinks. Any further die shrinks will come with a much larger increase in per chip costs. So don't expect sub 10nm processes in anything for a while. You'll just see multiple refinements of the previous die process with a larger chip that takes more power.AppleInsider said:...
The move away from Imagination may be part of an attempt by Apple to take more control over the design of its hardware. Apple was said to be in talks to acquire Imagination early last year, though ultimately no such deal was made.
Apple has also taken time to poach a number of Imagination's staff over the last two years, including GPU architects and designers. These employees could help Apple to produce its own graphics architecture, potentially saving it from having to pay royalty fees to Imagination for using its intellectual property.
According to Imagination's statement, Apple has asserted that it has been "working on a separate, independent graphics design in order to control its products."
Imagination is also seemingly suggesting there could be a legal fight in the future over the in-house graphics architecture move, declaring Apple has not presented any evidence to substantiate its assertion that it will no longer require Imagination's technology, without violating Imagination's patents, intellectual property, and confidential information. While evidence has been requested by Imagination, Apple has declined to provide any to the company.
Imagination believes that it would be extremely challenging to design a brand new GPU architecture from basics without infringing its intellectual property rights, so in the statement about the matter, Imagination does not accept Apple's assertions. The company has also attempted to discuss potential alternative commercial arrangements with Apple for the current license and royalty agreement.
And yes, pretty much GPU tech has plateaued for mobile designs. If you want more GPU power you need to move up to the iPad/Tablet platform and have a much larger battery. There's probably still some more innovation left in the GPU pipe, but like the CPU tech, they're going to be refinements, not leaps.
Hence, Apple will probably just go with their own IP core for the GPU of the mobile devices. Don't expect to see this in Laptops or Desktops where Apple can just buy CPU and GPU's that are suitable. Apple's end-game appears to be to eliminate the desktop/laptop space entirely by making the iphone/ipad your one-and-only computer, and you just drop the iphone into a docking station to get the full iMac/Mac Pro experience *shudder*
I just don't see how neglecting their professional users has done anything but push Mac Users away from the Apple Ecosystem.
