nolamacguy

Haibane said:

nolamacguy said:

Haibane said:

nolamacguy said:

koop said:

I think people here aren't going to like this, but iOS/Siri is more of a liability for Apple than it's ever been since the first iPhone. Pixel is basically trying to sell itself on software and artificial intelligence. They are selling this as their A.I. phone. You can giggle about the spec wars, but you're missing the big picture that Google has surpassed Apple in software years ago, and Google is going to drive their "information" advantage into a hardware war that wont be about who has the faster CPU or most RAM. 

I can only imagine in 2030 it's really about what company has the bigger server farms, artificial neural networking and machine learning algorithms that determines which product makes consumers lives the easiest. Not some display resolution or wide color gamut. 

Google has the long game here. We're still figuring out what Apple has besides their phone at this point.

uhh what does google have besides ads? apple's non-iphone revenue is larger than many industry players. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Alphabet this for starters... Nest, Waze, Youtube, Boston Dynamics... or to break it down...

Google home
Google cast
Pixel
Nest Thermostat
Nest Smoke detector
Nest Cameras
Waze- Arguably the best mapping service for traffic
Youtube- Arguably the most watched streaming platform
Boston Dynamics- Robotics

Basically hitting some highlights here. Tons of other products though.

apple's non-iphone revenue is much greater than all of those*. that was my point -- the bogus troll meme that apple is a one-trick pony isn't served by the reality of their product lines revenue. 

* but how how does Google Home or Waze or robotics bring in revenue? and isn't Youtube paid for by ads?

Youtube has a paid service as well as an ad based. Similar to Spotify, but with videos too. Boston Dynamics is known as the leaders in their robotics division based in (duh) Boston. The internet mostly knows them for a reindeer they made that got hit. Obviously, Apple isn't a one trick pony. The Macbook is still arguably the best computer on the market, and people still buy ipod touches over other devices. Plenty of other good products by Apple are out there. I am not sure about Apple's non-iphone revenue being greater than Google's non-ad revenue, but I also don't have those stats.

Haibane said:

nolamacguy said:

koop said:

I think people here aren't going to like this, but iOS/Siri is more of a liability for Apple than it's ever been since the first iPhone. Pixel is basically trying to sell itself on software and artificial intelligence. They are selling this as their A.I. phone. You can giggle about the spec wars, but you're missing the big picture that Google has surpassed Apple in software years ago, and Google is going to drive their "information" advantage into a hardware war that wont be about who has the faster CPU or most RAM. 

I can only imagine in 2030 it's really about what company has the bigger server farms, artificial neural networking and machine learning algorithms that determines which product makes consumers lives the easiest. Not some display resolution or wide color gamut. 

Google has the long game here. We're still figuring out what Apple has besides their phone at this point.

uhh what does google have besides ads? apple's non-iphone revenue is larger than many industry players. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Alphabet this for starters... Nest, Waze, Youtube, Boston Dynamics... or to break it down...

Google home
Google cast
Pixel
Nest Thermostat
Nest Smoke detector
Nest Cameras
Waze- Arguably the best mapping service for traffic
Youtube- Arguably the most watched streaming platform
Boston Dynamics- Robotics

Basically hitting some highlights here. Tons of other products though.

sonic2hide said:

anton zuykov said:

sonic2hide said:

An article written by a true Apple fanboy.   

Wide color gamut is not a feature - If the screen is beautiful, the screen is beautiful.  Nobody cares about wide color gamut.

Actually, the end result (lack of result, that is) is in the fact that Android doesn't know how to handle color management...without which a "beautiful screen" isn't gonna help, sadly. 
In the absense of the aforementioned CM, sRGB colors, placed in P3 color space will be oversaturated and incorrect.
And, despite what you said, wide gamut along with high contrast and enought color bit depth should bring more realistic colors to PEDs, hence it is not a gimmick.

I was actually surprized when I tried to snap a picture of a flower with my iPhone. The flower had petals of that purple-blueish color, which normally gets displayed wrongly even on a professional level of equipment (like Nikon DXXX level cameras). But because CM was followed through and through, the color of the actual flower and its image were quite close. Calibrated devices, along with a working CM pipeline, is what really allows you to use a screen to its full potential.

I get it.  For purists, accurate color is very important.  For the majority of phone owners, I would suspect though, are more interested in colors that pop and are vivid.   People love the iPhone screens because it looks nice.  Never once have I heard people say "wow those colors look really accurate!". Usually it's more along the lines of "that's a GORGEOUS screen."  Gorgeous typically means vivid, bright, and poppy.  Also, do you really think that in a world in which Instagram users are posting photos that are filtered to oblivion that they would care about real world color accuracy?

Mark22 said:

sog35 said:

RedPanda said:

As noted, the Pixel has 4GB of RAM. It also doesn't have a weak processor. It may or may not be weaker than the A10 Fusion, but it's just about the best mobile processor available outside that (at least on paper). The issue from what I understand is more that Android requires more power and doesn't have the same unity between hardware and software as iOS. Though anyone who's used both high end Apple and Android phones should be able to tell you that there's no real discernible difference. Benchmarking scores are all well and good, but when a phone instantly does everything you want it to the differences are irrelevant. It also has some features the iPhone 7 doesn't have. That said, it is over-priced. The iPhone 7 / 7 Plus are too, but the Apple brand is big enough to support the pricing, I'm not sure Google (as a hardware brand) is.

This is not true.

The current king of Android speed S7 got absolutely demolished by the iPhone7 in real world tests.

It took the S7 3 minutes and 14 seconds.
It took the Iphone7 only 1 minute and 40 seconds.



Those are significant real world differences.

That benchmark mostly seems to measure starting up a lot of applications. That's certainly not a CPU benchmark. Android generally launches apps slower, but it's not clear that that matters, given how rarely people start up apps on Android.

Mark22 said:

The decision between the iPhone 7 and the Pixel really comes down to software. I just ordered a Pixel XL because I prefer Android, because I like the VR support, and because I prefer Google's online services to Apple's. I also like the USB C support and the standard headphone jack. Whether one phone is a bit faster than the other doesn't really matter to me.