imergingenious

I want to know how to access the map tiles in QGIS. Can anyone help?

A test of this theory would be really interesting (and not that hard to do). Just run various phones down to 0%, all the while recording battery % indicator at regular time intervals. Then you can generate a curve to show how far the % deviates from reality for each device.

seanismorris said:

Apple devices loose the last 10% of their battery at an incredible rate.  (First hand experience)

My conclusion is giving a percentage to battery life remaining isn’t accurate at all.  That is probably true for any phone...

franklinjackcon said:

chasm said:

 The conclusions here are mildly interesting,  but the vastly larger size of the battery in the Samsung (nearly a third more capacity) is not counterweighted against the iPhone X, making most of these tests inherently unfair.

It would have made much more sense to compare the iPhone X to the Galaxy S9, and the iPhone 8+ to the Galaxy S9+, with a simple side note saying something along the lines of “comparing the iPhone X to the Galaxy S9+ directly would give the S9+ an advantage due to its much larger battery, which is not really canceled out by it’s larger display.”

I don’t think we needed a set of exhaustive tests to tell us that a much larger phone with a much larger battery is likely to do better than a smaller phone with a smaller battery. Duh.

The X has a bigger screen than the 8+ doesn't it? Why would you compare the smaller Samsung to the bigger iPhone and vice versa? It's flagship vs flagship

Actually, in terms of screen AREA, the 8+ is larger than the X. This is due to the fact that its taller but not as wide. You get more area per diagonal length as the shape gets closer to a square. In terms of device volume, 8+ is very similar to the SG9+ because it is taller and wider but ~10% thinner. The iPhoneX is smaller in every dimension than the GS9+ and much more similar to the GS9. The Geekbench test is specifically designed to bias positive results towards big screen phones with slower processors. Why? because the test greatly dims the screen, mooting the one negative battery aspect of a big screen phone, and then throttles the processor to full speed, no matter it's actual power. This is why Android phablets will come out looking good in those tests but in real world use, many/most don't last as long as iPhones.

So...

Choose the larger Galaxy device vs. medium sized iPhone
the iPhone trounced the Galaxy on standby - we don't believe the results
The Galaxy doesn't have a dark mode on YouTube (a google app) - compare using the standard mode
The iPhone handily beats the Galaxy on graphics intensive gaming
The Galaxy handily beats the iPhone on a nothing-like-real-world-battery-use-case Geekbench test that has the iPhone doing nearly 2x the CPU work since it's twice as fast and the test keeps either CPU at max throttle the whole time (also keep in mind that iPhones CPU/GPUs don't throttle performance over time due to heat nearly as much as most Androids) 

AppleInsider conclusion? Galaxy device has "undoubtedly superior" "battery life, despite the size difference"

Seems really biased. 

First of all, it wouldn't be despite the size difference. If the iPhone were LARGER, it would be despite the size difference. Because it's the smaller of the two, the proper way to phrase that would have been something like "partially due to the size difference". Second of all, I would conclude based on those tests that the iPhone has better standby battery life, better gaming battery life, but also the ability to drain the smaller battery in extreme cases faster than the Samsung, which has a larger capacity battery that is generally used less efficiently but also has a less dynamic power draw capability... true battery life depends on the usage.

While I don't disagree that raw performance in most real world use is now probably close to a wash between these two flagships, I find it interesting that an Apple centric site would come to this conclusion given the raw data (iPhone winning nearly every test, and still dominating in several). The thing that I believe this study misses when comparing graphics is the efficiency/throttling performance under sustained load. Apple's devices have been able to sustain close to peak performance without thermal throttling while competitors have not. This difference doesn't show itself in standard gfx benchmarks that usually don't run long enough to overheat the system. Also, the graphics tests are off-screen measurements of raw computing power, which means when you try to run a game on-screen, the higher resolution on the Galaxy screen will result in even lower frame rate despite not providing much of a perceivable sharpness benefit.