- avon b7
- Last Active
corrections said:avon b7 said:tenthousandthings said:gregjaehn3 said:This may be thr most hypocritical article I've ever read. On 8/28 the same author posted this about night sight on Android phones:
What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around 6 seconds
14 days ago that was posted to discount the value of the night sight feature. Now in this article he praises the new iPhone for taking a night sight photo in around 5 seconds.
So when Apple introduces this capability, it uses an image of a person. iPhone does it better. This is pretty much exactly the point of DED's prediction article from August 28 -- the iPhone 11 will advance Apple's lead in mobile imaging. True to form, Apple now does night mode better than the competition.
You have highlighted a good example and you are rehashing what was said in that article but what was claimed wasn't presented correctly. In fact the claims you are making (that came from that article) are incorrect as a result.
Please read the comments on that piece where I specifically quoted the article he linked to.
There is no twisting, and repeatedly implying that I'm lying to confuse people is just reprehensible. You should apologize and stop doing this. It's really ugly.
I stated that Dark Mode was overblown as a feature because 1) it requires special conditions and holding the camera still for several seconds (~6 sec, I linked to an Android blog as the source of that comment) 2) it's not a feature people use frequently, because in low lighting it often makes more sense to use a flash than hold the camera still 3) it's clearly not a feature that singularly sold Pixel cameras- despite massive MASSIVE hype, Pixel sales were an inconsequential rounding error, and sales decreased this year from a super low starting point. Google wasn't building up a base over time based on all this camera hype, despite lying to investors in its conference call that Pixel just needed a year to two to gain traction.
On iPhone 11, while I haven't really tested it in detail, the feature looks like its doing less overprocessing. Pixel renders its effects, like single lens Portrait, using ML algos that often result in fake-looking shots. That's not my original, exclusive opinion. Again it's what android fan bloggers write.
You can lie up and down that I'm twisting facts but there's nothing to twist. Here I only stated that Apple erased what had been an exclusive feature on Pixel and Honor phones, and that's absolutely correct. And it appears Apple's version of this is better, which is to be expected because Apple has better ISP silicon, more and better lenses, and wasn't rushing out a feature to have some exclusive to use against a competitor with an all-around better photography experience, which includes video.
You also misrepresented tenthousandthings' comments, which were accurate. Stop being like this and just admit you are wrong and making false accusations.
First off, some perspective. I mostly don't even read your articles. You lost credibility in my book too long ago and they are also too lengthy for my limited time. When I do read one I am often astounded by the skewed, twisted or just plain wrong information contained in them. Occasionally I will pick out a couple of examples and take issue with them the vast majority I just let go. Sometimes I comment on the comments.
When people start calling you a bitter fanboy and attacking you, you rarely see me jumping in. I understand an editorial gives writers a lot of slack and I honour that right to a personal opinion. Fair game, fair play and all that.
However, that said, you twist things to deliberately fit your own narrative. Yes, so much criticism of people's narratives and calling them 'pundits' when you yourself are a pundit (like all of us if you want to use that word) but you very much have a narrative.
The other day I simply pointed out via copy/paste what you had done. Your words against the words of the author you were referencing (and completely misrepresenting).
I largely left it for the reader to form their own opinion. Quite fair IMO.
No one accused you of lying.
For clarity here is what I put in that thread:
This is from this article:
"What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around six seconds, and then often ultimately results in a fake-looking picture anyway, as noted by Joshua Swingle, writing up a comparison of the Huawei P30 Pro and iPhone XS Max for Phone Arena."
And this is from the linked article:"The iPhone XS Max suddenly struggles to produce consistently good photos and the P30 Pro excels by combining four pixels into one, therefore producing a higher-quality 10-megapixel photo. It’s worth pointing out that the shots produced by Huawei’s phone can sometimes appear artificial but it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do.
If the Huawei P30 Pro’s standard night shots aren’t good enough, there’s also a dedicated Night Mode. This drastically increases the amount of light captured and can ultimately produce some incredible pictures that blow the iPhone out of the water. The only downside to this feature is that you need to hold the phone steady for around six seconds."
See the difference?
Ok. So let's look at where you twisted things to fit your own narrative which is sitting in the title of that article (and I let pass). Here it is:
Editorial: 'iPhone 11' design will advance Apple's mobile imaging lead
'Apple's mobile imaging lead'?
What lead? Optical zoom? No. Camera sensor and size? No. AI camera tech. No. Low light. No. Motion blur reduction? No. Noise reduction? No. Overall imaging versatility? No.
If Huawei and more recently Google and Samsung have stood out for anything it is the imaging advances and Apple hasn't made the same strides but suddenly you paint a picture of Apple already having a lead and not only that but extending it on a phone that hadn't even been released.
Did you ever admit that competitors were leading Apple in many areas regarding imaging?
So, onto what you said in the piece:
"What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around six seconds"
False. It only requires you to hold the
camera still to capture the scene if you choose to enter Night Mode. Why? Because it is a long exposure mode that can be done handheld. This was literally impossible on an iPhone without a tripod. Huawei Night Mode uses the NPU based AIIS to all but eliminate handheld camera shake.
What seems to have gone completely over your head is that low light photography on phones like the P30 Pro is now so good that you don't have to enter Night Mode in the first place! That means that to get the shot, you are NOT required to hold the phone still for up to six seconds to capture the scene. For that to occur you would have chosen to enter Night Mode. Believe me, users without good low light capable cameras spend more than six seconds repeatedly trying to get a decent photo! But the actual seconds involved are totally irrelevant when the choices are getting the shot or not getting the shot. You should be able to grasp that. In that context the whole time situation is moot. And Night Mode can also be used to great effect in daylight!
To make this crystal clear to you:
"The beauty of P30 Pro is that everything happens in auto-mode. Users don’t need to switch to a dedicated mode (they rarely do). Also, P30 Pro can capture better photos than the Pixel 3’s night sight in a much shorter time (sub-second vs. 4-6 seconds), making it that much more natural as a point and shoot."
"then often ultimately results in a fake-looking picture anyway"
Really? 'Often'? 'fake-looking'? 'Anyway'?
No. He said 'sometimes' (not often), artificial (not fake) and 'anyway' doesn't even have a place here because he said (and very, very clearly):
"sometimes appear artificial but it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do."
So let's try to fit 'anyway' in there somehow, just for the heck of it.
"sometimes appear artificial but anyway it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do."
Yes, sometimes the results can look artificial, just like heaps of HDR photos can look artificial! But the reality is that this is personal preference and many actually prefer it that way. Like the Instagram crowd!
You deliberately twisted what was being said through omission and substitution. On top of being factually incorrect with the low light processing claims. You could have avoided that error by dedicating a little more effort to understand what you were trying to leave in poor light.
You are free to read my - very limited - criticism as unfair. That's your (and everybody else's call) but there is nothing reprehensible there.
If I post response to one of your articles (I often don't) it is to correct points and inject some balance into the discussion. In the past you have claimed you don't write to be balanced but accurate. Lately you haven't even been accurate but I let those pass as oversights (you got the iPhone 11 pricing wrong, you claimed Dark Mode instead of Night Mode here, errors in titles etc) unless there is something incorrect that isn't a
I think you have been overstretched with all the news lately.
StrangeDays said:thrang said:Phil and Craig occasionally interject a little more unique personality into their delivery, and with some unscripted asides - but mostly, its sounds very repetitive.
I used to be in community theater and know how bad nerves are, so my hat's off to them.
You missed the point. The same criticisms are aimed at professional speakers too (politicians for example when in presentation mode).
Rehearsal isn't the problem. The script, structure and delivery are the problem.
thrang said:The problem is the script writing is becoming clichéd, and often relies on similar voicing and phrasing for various speakers. If I hear one more person say "We're sure you'll love it as much as we do," or "We can't wait to get it in your hands..." I may throw my crappy Apple Remote into my screen.Phil and Craig occasionally interject a little more unique personality into their delivery, and with some unscripted asides - but mostly, its sounds very repetitive.This does a disservice to the the products and services being introduced.So Apple needs to change up the copy writers, or enforce a mandate of varied voices, vocabulary, and styles, and cut way back on repetitive/clichéd phrasesThey also often talk exhaustively about a feature, and then show you a commercial, which can be a bit anti-climactic. Perhaps show the commercial first to delight, and then present it in greater detail. (Slofies for example)More "real people" stories where appropriate would be great, as those are often very powerful.
Sometimes it reminds me of Wayne's World when the show gets taken over and then goes 'corporate'.
It's not only Apple, but the 'problem' is there and you described it very well.
moxom said:Viewing this on my iPhone 5.
I was hoping for a new small iPhone like a lot if people but I have now accepted that it's not going to happen.
Unfortunately, I have to change my phone now as many apps I use (including banking apps) no longer run which is a real shame as my phone is working great.
I may now consider getting a second hand iPhone SE or just go for an iPhone 8 which is at an attractive price now.
First World problems indeed...
5G Network slicing will also be involved at some point for enhancing security.
melgross said:avon b7 said:There's no getting away from it. This is cutting edge technology and it doesn't matter how it plays out - today - from a technology perspective. This is first generation. A necessary first step. If there are to be more steps in this area, it will be thanks to these phones, both in terms of technology improvements and for price.
Lessons will be learnt and we will all benefit.
Right now, these phones are only for those who have $2,000 of readily disposable income and I mean truly disposable. I very much doubt that any of the first gen Fold buyers are looking at a two year upgrade. They will upgrade as soon as there is a new one.
Many of the people in this thread are almost willing it to fail. I prefer to at least give the thing a chance. I think we all should.
If indeed these “fixes” improve the reliability and performance of this phone, it just shows that Samsung should have waited before attempting the first release. If, after some time, they do begin to fail again, it will show that they shouldn’t have released it at all, and should instead have continued R&D until these problems were completely resolved. If they found that they couldn’t completely resolve the issues, then they could have just not released the phone at all, and not embarrassed themselves for a second time since the first major blunder with the Note 7.
while you continue to say that Huawei didn’t hold back their introduction in order to redesign some aspects of their phone, you’re just wrong. You’re not even thinking clearly on this. If their phone was spic and span, as you keep saying it is, without holding, or using one, of course, then Huawei would have had no reason to back out of their launch. But they did. They had the chance to be second, since another phone was at least shown, by, who was it again, Xiaomi? It doesn’t matter really, as all of them will fail in the marketplace, if not in your hand.
and it’s not a matter of us giving it a chance. None of us here will be buying one, and that includes you. Giving it a chance means buying one.
maybe some time from now, someone will get it right.
"you’re just wrong. You’re not even thinking clearly on this"
With hindsight we learn.
The Mate X was delayed for these reasons:
5G carrier calibration.
Internal upgrades (as a result of the delay).
Try as you might you cannot ignore these facts as they are straight from Huawei at an executive level.
Also from an executive level was the affirmation that the time resulting from the delay would be used to improve some aspects of the initial model (mostly software related). The internal hardware upgrade was simply due to the model being released on a different point of the roadmap. Not due to 'problems'.
On another level, Trump's interference also probably played a part.
Now, I have already broken down your previous (completely unsubstantiated) claims in a previous thread where you went out on a limb to mention 'all' the problems the phone had had.
How could you even possibly back that claim up for a phone that:
1. Wasn't on the market
2. Had had been subject to numerous hands on with zero problems reported.
3. Has been the daily driver for numerous executives and engineers for the whole year.
4. Has been in development for years.
5. For which Richard Yu went on record as saying was market ready (if the market had been ready as planned - it wasn't due to carrier issues)
I provided links for everything I said.
You provided nothing.
From 'all' the problems to zero problems. There's a big gap between those two.
Huawei has no pressing desire to be first or second or third. It has a roadmap.
The original roadmap was for an MWC reveal and a summer release. That couldn't happen as the carrier side wasn't ready. Then Trump waded in (some carriers weren't sure they would even be able to sell the phone) and with the resulting delay Huawei decided to majorly upgrade the internals of the phone (hence the tentative November release).
I hope you can see that it is you who is wrong and not just a little wrong but utterly and soundly wrong.
The Kirin 990 (the chip the phone will carry) will be presented tomorrow. At least one version of that chip will have an on-SoC 5G modem. This is major news. If all versions of the Kirin 990 have an on-board Balong 5G chip it will be even bigger news. We already know that the Huawei sub brand Honor will be launching a Kirin 990 5G chip before year end. That is going to represent A LOT of 5G equipped phones before year end from just one company. TSMC's 7mn/EUV output (Kirin 980/990/Ascend 910 etc plus A12/13 etc) may be a little stretched for a time.
QC, MediaTek and Samsung will also be providing their own 5G solutions (QC has an IFA presentation just after Huawei) very soon (year end or shortly after).
Right around these numerous 5G announcements Apple will present the iPhone 11 which (according to rumours) will not have a 5G capacity in any variant.
There are going to be a lot of marketing headwinds for Apple this year end and having not one but two foldable 5G phones released around the iPhone launch will simply serve to highlight Apple's lack of 5G options (if true, of course). Now if you were a regular iPhone purchaser on a three year upgrade cycle, looking at phones this Christmas, you would legitimately have some doubts. Just knowing that Apple is going to have an on SoC 5G in twelve of those 36 months (it is unthinkable they won't) will surely curb your desire to upgrade.
I've said it before and will repeat it here. You can expect a marketing blitz for 5G that will make even the most fervent '5G meh!' proclaimers doubt. If the area where you live is earmarked for 5G, many will simply skip this upgrade.
'Giving them a chance' has nothing to do with me or you in a market sense. On the hand and in a criticism sense it has everything to do with literally everyone. It means waiting for the phones to actually ship before proclaiming them "massive failures".
That's just common sense. They mail fail or they may succeed but we just don't (can't) know until they hit the market.