Last year, I got myself a used ThinkPad X230 (720p 12.5in screen) with Ivybridge i5 CPU, add a 250GB SSD, additional RAM stick, additional 9 cell battery and it ended up costing me around USD400. Sure it's not smallest thing you can carry around, but it's more powerful than anything I can get new for the price. USB 3.0, proper gigabit ethernet and VGA ports.
The great thing about the X230 is that you can get almost any part of its' exterior replaced. IPS screen, fingeprint sensor, WWAN connection, backlit keyboard.
On the other hand, the X230 is stuck with wireless N adapter and 720p screen. But if you're resourceful, there's guide to reflash the bios to eliminate wireless adapter whitelist, and even an upgrade kit for FHD screen
Why does the i7-8809G have only 4 cores? I thought new CPUs had at least 6 cores.
It's 4 cores with hyperthreading, so 8 virtual cores, and not a lot slower performance than 6 cores.
A benefit of fewer cores is that you can generally clock them higher - this one runs at 3.1 GHz before turbo mode or overclocking, which is fairly decent. If you mainly run programs that doesn't scale well to more cores than 4, like most games, that's going to be more beneficial than say a 2.6 GHz 6-core CPU.
He's referring to 8th generation desktop processor (8xxx, 8xxxK Coffee lake) that generally have 6 physical cores on i5 and i7 models (i3 parts have 4, instead of 2 on Kaby Lake). Having 4 physical cores might indicate that this model is based on older Kaby Lake model, which for the 8th generation, has been reserved for Mobile Low Voltage (8xxxU) parts
Which is true for almost all phones today. Otherwise the phone manufacturers would sell a lot less phones. But environmentally it's a disaster.
Like Apple, some of these manufacturer allows to come to the service center and pay to replace the battery. The cost for my S7 is about USD60 including service
It's a bit harder to get the devices of friends and relatives visiting your home to trust the certificate of your private CA so that they can (say) view the videos on your NAS or print to your printer. In addition, Android displays a persistent warning about "Network monitoring" if a private CA certificate is installed.
Allowing friends or relatives on a private network is even more reason to do https. There's no polite way on how to screen whether they are running ARP poisoning to sniff traffics.
Exactly my point. There are so many different, potentially incompatible, and UI discordant ways to adjust things. That's fine, but what's lacking is a unified system. Some of the distros have tried, but they've mostly failed.
The windows control panel (or whatever they call it these days) is a bit of a UI nightmare, but you can configure whatever a regular user is likely to want from there. Ditto with OS X's Preferences. Linux has everything except a nice, consistent, graphical, go-to, built-in place for the point and click crowd to fiddle with settings.
In Ubuntu it is managed under a single UI called "settings". Of course Nvidia and AMD have their own config UI, which is also the case with Windows anyway. I recently moved the wife's notebook to Ubuntu and teach her that she can find applications/functions that she needs by typing keywords after pressing the super button. No complain so far. She has managed to change wallpaper, importing files from usb sticks and her android phone, do light image editing without asking me on how to do it
Below someone complained about the placement of the reload button.
What button do you use on the UI that doesn't have a keyboard shortcut to do the same thing faster?
I took everything out of the toolbar, turned on menus and now you can get to anything from the keyboard.
Even so, all he have to is just open customize mode and drag the reload button to wherever he wants it to be, which is what I actually did, because I like it to be on the right side of the address bar
Linux still isn't ready for any desktop it isn't installed on. It IS installed on lots of desktops in places like research labs, mine included. But if it's going to make it to anybody else's desk it needs some basic things fixed. I don't know if it's possible to do something as simple as configure a graphics driver in Ubuntu's GUI, but it's certainly not easy.
Everything else works perfectly fine, but none of the GUI systems seem to offer a user friendly way for command line averse users to fiddle with their system settings.
Both AMD and Nvidia have their config UI packaged to their binary blob driver on linux.
Since Razer Synapse v2.0, they have started to store devices profiles over the web. You can still use the mice and keyboards out of the box, but gaining access to device settings such as changing DPI steppings and surface configuration will require customers to create a razer account and log into Synapse. They even stopped putting onboard memory inside most of their newer mice
I live in region where interenet is no "always on". Therefore, I use Nintendo Wii (yes, still), iPad, iPod shuffle, Linux and Windows 7 PCs.
However, some stuff is rather useless w/o internet:
- Current Sony playstation, and Microsoft Xbox, practically all PC games within last 10 years or so.
- Microsoft Windows (XP and up require online activation, 10 tend to have unusable parts without internet)
- Cloud based devices (mouse, clocks, IP web cameras (yes, baby monitors too), weather stations, smart TV's and PVR's)
Number of devices have functionality problems - from refrigerators to light switches and dimmers, a/c controllers etc.
Fill in the list!
You can activate XP and 7 via phone calls. Maybe 10 too, I haven't installed it on any of my machine or used it extensively
Since Razer Synapse v2.0, they started to store devices profiles over the web. You can still use the mice and keyboards, but gain access device settings such as changing DPI steppings and surface configuration will require customers to create a razer account and log into Synapse.
I have a Thinkpad through work. A few years ago they upgraded us to the newer versions with the chiclet-style keyboard. I thought I would hate it, but it actually isn't bad at all. Never thought I'd say that about one of those.
Yes, I was ready to hate the *30 series keyboards but turns out I... don't hate it. I even prefer it to my Corsair K70 at home. Haven't tried a more recent models, since I'm sticking to my X230.
The phones are weeks a part. There's no telling about the display.
Which was my point. You can't assert that they different generation of displays. Are you denying you made that assertion?
That is only a reaction to your "Maybe there might have been some improvements made by Apple"
Where did that come from? How did you translate "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." to "Only Samsung has the best display"? Are you projecting your jealousy?
"For years Samsung had the best display on it own phone" precludes that all other manufacturers having the best displays. Including Apple. Including LG.
Then perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension.
The line was referencing on the fact that on DisplayMate, S6, Note5, S7, Note7, S8, and Note8, received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same praise DisplayMate has given to iPhone X.
You do realize there are time function working for something labeled as "the best"? When DisplayMate tested S6, it was the best they have ever tested, nothing was better better than S6 when DisplayMate tested it out. Then come Note 5, S7 which were progressively better than S6, thus also earning "The best smartphone display ever tested". The iPhone 7 came along, but it was not "the best" DisplayMate "ever tested".
Then Note 7, S8, Note 8, and then iPhone X. This is such a simple concept no? If in between Note 5 and S7, LG made a phone with better display than Note 5 and DisplayMate tested it, surely it will give "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" to that LG phone, right? They couldn't have possibly gave the "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" to iPhone X when they were reviewing the Note8, right, because they haven't tested it yet?
Why do I have to explain such simple concept to you?
No, the S6, Note 5, S7, Note 7, S8, and Note 8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same accolade given to iPhone X. The iphone 7 merely received the best mobile LCD.
Again are you ignoring the part that the best OLED display was given to the iPhone X? Did you read the review on the Note 8 vs the iPhone X.
The Note 8 got "Very Good" in a lot of marks whereas the iPhone X got "Excellent". I would say that the iPhone X beat out the Note 8.
The phrase "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" does not have the word "OLED" on it. "DISPLAY", not "OLED DISPLAY" and certainly not "Mobile LCD".
And when did I ignore that? No one is denying IPhone X has a better screen than Note 8. They are responding to your "If it's that easy then why doesn't a Samsung phone have the the best smartphone display according to DisplayMate". Which is not true since S6, Note5 and up to Note8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" by DisplayMate as well, it's just they are no longer the best, since iPhone X "currently" is the best performing smartphone display they have ever tested"
And if you're trying to say DisplayMate only compares OLED to OLED then fun fact: iPhone 5 was one of "the best Smartphone display we have tested" by DisplayMate, and it was an LCD, manufactured by Sharp or Toshiba, and it was compared favorably to S3, which uses OLED.
You are when you assume that since the phone are only weeks apart then the difference in performance are the result of apple implementation.
No I'm specifically countering your assertion that 1) the iPhone X has a newer generation of display. You don't know that. 2) That having a newer generation display automatically translates into better performance. There have been many cases where something newer per
You are speculating that since those phones are released merely weeks a part, then both are using same generation display, while the only fact that you have is that iPhone X is released weeks later than Note 8. However, we do know for a fact that a samsung display managed to score yet another best performance smartphone display on DisplayMate.
No I am pointing out that you are speculating they are in fact different generations. You made the assertion: "What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one." You can't assert that in fact the iPhone X has a newer generation display. It might have an older generation. It might be newer. All we know is that the release date was weeks apart. Not 6 months or a year part.
The phones are weeks a part. There's no telling about the display.
Then why did you bring it up in the first place? . ..
Because I wasn't addressing you. I was addressing another poster who said: "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." His assertion: only Samsung has the best display.
Where did that come from? How did you translate "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." to "Only Samsung has the best display"? Are you projecting your jealousy?
No, Samsung has had good OLED displays. Apple has had some good LCD displays.
No, the S6, Note 5, S7, Note 7, S8, and Note 8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same accolade given to iPhone X. The iphone 7 merely received the best mobile LCD
Maybe? so you're speculating again?
Maybe you're ignoring what DisplayMate said.
Again, you're banking on the assumption that since the phones are released only weeks apart then they are using the same generation display. Samsung Mobile did not make the display, SDI did, you can't speculate what SDI do or have, based on Samsung Mobile release schedule.
I never said that. I am saying specifically that you can't assert that they are different generations especially since they are weeks apart. If they were 6 months apart, they are probably different generations.
You are when you assume that since the phone are only weeks apart then the difference in performance are the result of apple implementation
And you're still thinking that the Samsung that made Note 8 is the same Samsung that manufacture the display.
In the same way that Sony who makes computers is the same the Sony that makes phones. It's the same Sony who makes the PS4.
...They are actually different companies
If you wan't to nitpick that they aren't the same because they are different divisions of Samsung Electronics, then no company should have to answer for anything under their brand.
Then no company should have to answer under their brand? what does this have anything to do with the topic? If we must follow your logic, how come Samsung Electronic is engaging ongoing Iegal battle with apple, and SDI can still comfortably supply their display to Apple?
So if you had a problem with an Apple iPhone you wouldn't immediately take it up with Apple? Or would you hunt down only the Apple phone division?
Yes, because the iPhone is made by Apple Inc. You are comparing Apple phone division, which is only a division in Apple Inc, to wholly stand alone companies with separate organizations and stocks like Samsung Electronics and Samsung SDI.
The release date is a fact. Whether it has anything to do with the difference in performance between Note 8 and iPhone X is speculation on your side.
All of which I never said.
This was what you wrote: "What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one." The iPhone X is only weeks newer than the Note 8. If it was six months or 1 year newer, you might have a point that it is a generation newer. But factually it is only weeks newer. I'm pretty sure that Samsung does not put out a new generation of displays every few weeks.
So you are speculating. Aside from "weeks later" you have nothing.
Please point out the speculation. The iPhone X is only weeks newer. DisplayMate rated it the display better. These are facts.
You are speculating that since those phones are released merely weeks a part, then both are using same generation display, while the only fact that you have is that iPhone X is released weeks later than Note 8. However, we do know for a fact that a samsung display managed to score yet another best performance smartphone display on DisplayMate.
Unfair comparison of what? Look up and you'll find that you posted DisplayMate link to iPhone 7 LCD review to drum apple up, failing to notice that it actually failed to best a 6 month older S7. You brought this up. I'm just playing along.
You mean besides comparing two different display technologies like OLED and LCD in the same category? Besides that?
Then why did you bring it up in the first place? Is it because you didn't know iPhone 7 is using LCD instead OLED? Didn't you know iPhone 7 display is not as good as a 6 month older samsung phone? Did you fail to notice that only recent iPhone that managed to snatch the best performance smartphone display is the only one that has Samsung display? Did you wish you had not bring up iPhone 7 into this discussion?
That a display on an iPhone can only score higher than a Samsung phone when it was made by Samsung
Why didn't the Samsung display score on par or better than the iPhone? They both use tech from Samsung. Maybe Apple had something to do with it.
Maybe? so you're speculating again?
Again, you're banking on the assumption that since the phones are released only weeks apart then they are using the same generation display. Samsung Mobile did not make the display, SDI did, you can't speculate what SDI do or have, based on Samsung Mobile release schedule.
Anyhow, Samsung did score better than Apple, many times. The only time in recent years that an Apple phone managed to score better than Samsung, is when the phone is equipped with samsung display.
The fact is, a Samsung display scores higher than its' previous iteration. Simple.
The point you missed was how is the new display the "next iteration". It was only weeks newer.
The release date of the phone is weeks apart. You are speculating that SDI are supplying the same generation display to Note 8 and iPhone X, you are speculating that both phone has the same development length. That is stupid. For the rest of us, it is business as usual, a samsung display bested older samsung display.
Unless you think Samsung makes new iterations every few weeks.
And you're still thinking that the Samsung that made Note 8 is the same Samsung that manufacture the display.
Are you implying that you know the internal schedule of the development of these phones and the displays by Apple and Samsung?
I know facts. Fact: The Note 8 was released only weeks prior to the iPhone X. This is a fact. Please bring up any relevant facts you have.
The release date is a fact. Whether it has anything to do with the difference in performance between Note 8 and iPhone X is speculation on your side.
My facts? DisplayMate has been rating Samsung display the best performing smartphone for S6, S7, Note 7, S8, Note 8, and Iphone X. The Iphone 6, and 7 were rated the best Mobile LCD, failing to best their Samsung counterpart in recent years. Those rated the best? Made by Samsung
Do share. If you don't, GTFO. You do know that the Samsung that made the Galaxy phones and the Samsung that design and manufacture displays are two separate entities, right?
And yet Apple released a phone with a Samsung display only weeks after Samsung releasing a phone with a Samsung display and beat it. Please present any facts counter to this.
So you are speculating. Aside from "weeks later" you have nothing.
Aside from better black level, LCD used to have advantages over OLED.
So is your answer yes, you are willing to engage in unfair comparisons?
Unfair comparison of what? Look up and you'll find that you posted DisplayMate link to iPhone 7 LCD review to drum apple up, failing to notice that it actually failed to best a 6 month older S7. You brought this up. I'm just playing along.
And yet to failed to acknowledge the basic facts when it doesn't suit you.
Apple used to procure the displays for their high end phones from multiple sources. For iPhone X, they can only go to Samsung (and LG later next year), because only Samsung has the capability and capacity to produce them. The iPhone 7 lackluster display over 6 month older S7 is a testament that Apple software implementation, if there were any, has little to no effect on the quality of the phone display
And how does any of that relevant to the point that Apple was able to score higher with a Samsung display than Samsung?
That a display on an iPhone can only score higher than a Samsung phone when it was made by Samsung
Making OLED display is hard [imore.com], and Samsung get it right. From the day of HTC Nexus one OLED display (by Samsung) which placed last in 2010 to iPhone X at the top, Samsung has been improving their OLED technology, without Apple involvement.
Again how does any of that relevant to the point that Apple was able to score higher with a Samsung display than Samsung?
The fact is, a Samsung display scores higher than its' previous iteration. Simple.
Aren't you ignoring the fact that the Note 8 came out only weeks before the iPhone X? We're not talking six months or a year difference. A few weeks.
Are you implying that you know the internal schedule of the development of these phones and the displays by Apple and Samsung? Do share. If you don't, GTFO. You do know that the Samsung that made the Galaxy phones and the Samsung that design and manufacture displays are two separate entities, right?
If you're going to compare an LCD display with an OLED one, it seems you're willing to partake in unfair comparisons.
Aside from better black level, LCD used to have advantages over OLED.
from DisplayMate:
OLED Display Evolution
What is particularly significant and impressive is that Samsung has been systematically improving OLED display performance with every Galaxy generation since 2010, when we started tracking OLED displays. The first notable OLED Smartphone, the Google Nexus One, came in decidedly last place in our 2010 Smartphone Display Shoot-Out. In a span of just six years OLED display technology is now challenging and even exceeding the performance of the best LCDs. The Galaxy S7 continues this impressive systematic improvement in OLED displays and technology
A fact is a fact. Apple used to procure the displays for their high end phones from multiple sources. For iPhone X, they can only go to Samsung (and LG later next year), because only Samsung has the capability and capacity to produce them. The iPhone 7 lackluster display over 6 month older S7 is a testament that Apple software implementation, if there were any, has little to no effect on the quality of the phone display
Making OLED display is hard, and Samsung get it right. From the day of HTC Nexus one OLED display (by Samsung) which placed last in 2010 to iPhone X at the top, Samsung has been improving their OLED technology, without Apple involvement.
Of course, it's newer than the Note 8, just like Note 8 is better than S8, and S8 is better than S7, and S7 is better than Note 5 and S6. It's a progression of tech. Apple software can't do jack shit when it was paired with LCD display on iPhone 7 and failed to best S7 which was released earlier.
Also to understand that Apple doesn't exactly have an overwhelming advantage when it comes to Samsung components when competing with Samsung. I'm pretty sure Samsung Displays division isn't forced to sell their best displays only to Apple. The question then is why does Apple have the best display (made by Samsung) and why doesn't Samsung smartphones also have the same display.
Now that we have agreed that selling more high end components to apple are more profitable than just only using them on their own product, let see what Displaymate has to say:
Galaxy S7"
" the Galaxy S7 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" iPhone 7
"It is by far the best performing mobile LCD display that we have ever tested". Not the best smartphone display, not even the best LCD Galaxy S8
"So the Galaxy S8 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display, earning DisplayMate’s highest ever A+ grade" Galaxy Note 8
"So the Galaxy Note8 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display" iPhone X
" the iPhone X becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested, earning DisplayMate’s highest ever A+ grade"
Those best performing smartphone displays have one thing in common, Samsung made them. They have consistently improving their display from the S7, S8, Note 8, and the latest of their OLED iteration, iPhone X. So, to answer your question, Samsung has been using the best components available for their top of the line phones. What they don't do is intentionally crippling product that they sell to their competitors. What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one.
Slashdot Mirror
Last year, I got myself a used ThinkPad X230 (720p 12.5in screen) with Ivybridge i5 CPU, add a 250GB SSD, additional RAM stick, additional 9 cell battery and it ended up costing me around USD400. Sure it's not smallest thing you can carry around, but it's more powerful than anything I can get new for the price. USB 3.0, proper gigabit ethernet and VGA ports.
The great thing about the X230 is that you can get almost any part of its' exterior replaced. IPS screen, fingeprint sensor, WWAN connection, backlit keyboard.
On the other hand, the X230 is stuck with wireless N adapter and 720p screen. But if you're resourceful, there's guide to reflash the bios to eliminate wireless adapter whitelist, and even an upgrade kit for FHD screen
Why does the i7-8809G have only 4 cores? I thought new CPUs had at least 6 cores.
It's 4 cores with hyperthreading, so 8 virtual cores, and not a lot slower performance than 6 cores. A benefit of fewer cores is that you can generally clock them higher - this one runs at 3.1 GHz before turbo mode or overclocking, which is fairly decent. If you mainly run programs that doesn't scale well to more cores than 4, like most games, that's going to be more beneficial than say a 2.6 GHz 6-core CPU.
He's referring to 8th generation desktop processor (8xxx, 8xxxK Coffee lake) that generally have 6 physical cores on i5 and i7 models (i3 parts have 4, instead of 2 on Kaby Lake). Having 4 physical cores might indicate that this model is based on older Kaby Lake model, which for the 8th generation, has been reserved for Mobile Low Voltage (8xxxU) parts
of Chrome OS on the desktop?
Well, it does use Linux Kernel...
Which is true for almost all phones today. Otherwise the phone manufacturers would sell a lot less phones. But environmentally it's a disaster.
Like Apple, some of these manufacturer allows to come to the service center and pay to replace the battery. The cost for my S7 is about USD60 including service
Forge a cert for yourself, it's not hard.
It's a bit harder to get the devices of friends and relatives visiting your home to trust the certificate of your private CA so that they can (say) view the videos on your NAS or print to your printer. In addition, Android displays a persistent warning about "Network monitoring" if a private CA certificate is installed.
Allowing friends or relatives on a private network is even more reason to do https. There's no polite way on how to screen whether they are running ARP poisoning to sniff traffics.
It WILL happen again!
Anime Janai!
Nevermind.. move a long..
Name another car maker who is conscious enough to care about creating healthy environment for humans to live in.
Healthy environment" You say? I'm not saying that they don't, but I don't think that is their ultimate goal
Excel is the case in point use of Law of the instrument.
In engineering I've seen Excel used to share images, a database, run a production line with some VBA/oracle black magic integration.
Behold! Oraxcel
Yes, this exist
No need to cut wires, it's barbaric. Light it on fire.
Luckily Samsung Note 7 users have that feature built-in to their phones
To figure out the rest of Minovsky physics
Exactly my point. There are so many different, potentially incompatible, and UI discordant ways to adjust things. That's fine, but what's lacking is a unified system. Some of the distros have tried, but they've mostly failed.
The windows control panel (or whatever they call it these days) is a bit of a UI nightmare, but you can configure whatever a regular user is likely to want from there. Ditto with OS X's Preferences. Linux has everything except a nice, consistent, graphical, go-to, built-in place for the point and click crowd to fiddle with settings.
In Ubuntu it is managed under a single UI called "settings". Of course Nvidia and AMD have their own config UI, which is also the case with Windows anyway. I recently moved the wife's notebook to Ubuntu and teach her that she can find applications/functions that she needs by typing keywords after pressing the super button. No complain so far. She has managed to change wallpaper, importing files from usb sticks and her android phone, do light image editing without asking me on how to do it
Below someone complained about the placement of the reload button.
What button do you use on the UI that doesn't have a keyboard shortcut to do the same thing faster?
I took everything out of the toolbar, turned on menus and now you can get to anything from the keyboard.
Even so, all he have to is just open customize mode and drag the reload button to wherever he wants it to be, which is what I actually did, because I like it to be on the right side of the address bar
Linux still isn't ready for any desktop it isn't installed on. It IS installed on lots of desktops in places like research labs, mine included. But if it's going to make it to anybody else's desk it needs some basic things fixed. I don't know if it's possible to do something as simple as configure a graphics driver in Ubuntu's GUI, but it's certainly not easy.
Everything else works perfectly fine, but none of the GUI systems seem to offer a user friendly way for command line averse users to fiddle with their system settings.
Both AMD and Nvidia have their config UI packaged to their binary blob driver on linux.
Only Linux can topple Linux
Since Razer Synapse v2.0, they have started to store devices profiles over the web. You can still use the mice and keyboards out of the box, but gaining access to device settings such as changing DPI steppings and surface configuration will require customers to create a razer account and log into Synapse. They even stopped putting onboard memory inside most of their newer mice
I live in region where interenet is no "always on". Therefore, I use Nintendo Wii (yes, still), iPad, iPod shuffle, Linux and Windows 7 PCs. However, some stuff is rather useless w/o internet: - Current Sony playstation, and Microsoft Xbox, practically all PC games within last 10 years or so. - Microsoft Windows (XP and up require online activation, 10 tend to have unusable parts without internet) - Cloud based devices (mouse, clocks, IP web cameras (yes, baby monitors too), weather stations, smart TV's and PVR's)
Number of devices have functionality problems - from refrigerators to light switches and dimmers, a/c controllers etc.
Fill in the list!
You can activate XP and 7 via phone calls. Maybe 10 too, I haven't installed it on any of my machine or used it extensively
Since Razer Synapse v2.0, they started to store devices profiles over the web. You can still use the mice and keyboards, but gain access device settings such as changing DPI steppings and surface configuration will require customers to create a razer account and log into Synapse.
I have a Thinkpad through work. A few years ago they upgraded us to the newer versions with the chiclet-style keyboard. I thought I would hate it, but it actually isn't bad at all. Never thought I'd say that about one of those.
Yes, I was ready to hate the *30 series keyboards but turns out I... don't hate it. I even prefer it to my Corsair K70 at home. Haven't tried a more recent models, since I'm sticking to my X230.
The phones are weeks a part. There's no telling about the display.
Which was my point. You can't assert that they different generation of displays. Are you denying you made that assertion?
That is only a reaction to your "Maybe there might have been some improvements made by Apple"
Where did that come from? How did you translate "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." to "Only Samsung has the best display"? Are you projecting your jealousy?
"For years Samsung had the best display on it own phone" precludes that all other manufacturers having the best displays. Including Apple. Including LG.
Then perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension.
The line was referencing on the fact that on DisplayMate, S6, Note5, S7, Note7, S8, and Note8, received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same praise DisplayMate has given to iPhone X.
You do realize there are time function working for something labeled as "the best"? When DisplayMate tested S6, it was the best they have ever tested, nothing was better better than S6 when DisplayMate tested it out. Then come Note 5, S7 which were progressively better than S6, thus also earning "The best smartphone display ever tested". The iPhone 7 came along, but it was not "the best" DisplayMate "ever tested". Then Note 7, S8, Note 8, and then iPhone X. This is such a simple concept no? If in between Note 5 and S7, LG made a phone with better display than Note 5 and DisplayMate tested it, surely it will give "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" to that LG phone, right? They couldn't have possibly gave the "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" to iPhone X when they were reviewing the Note8, right, because they haven't tested it yet?
Why do I have to explain such simple concept to you?
No, the S6, Note 5, S7, Note 7, S8, and Note 8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same accolade given to iPhone X. The iphone 7 merely received the best mobile LCD.
Again are you ignoring the part that the best OLED display was given to the iPhone X? Did you read the review on the Note 8 vs the iPhone X. The Note 8 got "Very Good" in a lot of marks whereas the iPhone X got "Excellent". I would say that the iPhone X beat out the Note 8.
The phrase "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" does not have the word "OLED" on it. "DISPLAY", not "OLED DISPLAY" and certainly not "Mobile LCD".
And when did I ignore that? No one is denying IPhone X has a better screen than Note 8. They are responding to your "If it's that easy then why doesn't a Samsung phone have the the best smartphone display according to DisplayMate". Which is not true since S6, Note5 and up to Note8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested" by DisplayMate as well, it's just they are no longer the best, since iPhone X "currently" is the best performing smartphone display they have ever tested" And if you're trying to say DisplayMate only compares OLED to OLED then fun fact: iPhone 5 was one of "the best Smartphone display we have tested" by DisplayMate, and it was an LCD, manufactured by Sharp or Toshiba, and it was compared favorably to S3, which uses OLED.
You are when you assume that since the phone are only weeks apart then the difference in performance are the result of apple implementation.
No I'm specifically countering your assertion that 1) the iPhone X has a newer generation of display. You don't know that. 2) That having a newer generation display automatically translates into better performance. There have been many cases where something newer per
You are speculating that since those phones are released merely weeks a part, then both are using same generation display, while the only fact that you have is that iPhone X is released weeks later than Note 8. However, we do know for a fact that a samsung display managed to score yet another best performance smartphone display on DisplayMate.
No I am pointing out that you are speculating they are in fact different generations. You made the assertion: "What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one." You can't assert that in fact the iPhone X has a newer generation display. It might have an older generation. It might be newer. All we know is that the release date was weeks apart. Not 6 months or a year part.
The phones are weeks a part. There's no telling about the display.
Then why did you bring it up in the first place? . . .
Because I wasn't addressing you. I was addressing another poster who said: "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." His assertion: only Samsung has the best display.
Where did that come from? How did you translate "They have. For years, Samsung had the best display on its own phone. It just didn't made Slashdot headlines because it wasn't Apple." to "Only Samsung has the best display"? Are you projecting your jealousy?
No, Samsung has had good OLED displays. Apple has had some good LCD displays.
No, the S6, Note 5, S7, Note 7, S8, and Note 8 received "The Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested", the same accolade given to iPhone X. The iphone 7 merely received the best mobile LCD
Maybe? so you're speculating again?
Maybe you're ignoring what DisplayMate said.
Again, you're banking on the assumption that since the phones are released only weeks apart then they are using the same generation display. Samsung Mobile did not make the display, SDI did, you can't speculate what SDI do or have, based on Samsung Mobile release schedule.
I never said that. I am saying specifically that you can't assert that they are different generations especially since they are weeks apart. If they were 6 months apart, they are probably different generations.
You are when you assume that since the phone are only weeks apart then the difference in performance are the result of apple implementation
And you're still thinking that the Samsung that made Note 8 is the same Samsung that manufacture the display.
In the same way that Sony who makes computers is the same the Sony that makes phones. It's the same Sony who makes the PS4.
...They are actually different companies
If you wan't to nitpick that they aren't the same because they are different divisions of Samsung Electronics, then no company should have to answer for anything under their brand.
Then no company should have to answer under their brand? what does this have anything to do with the topic? If we must follow your logic, how come Samsung Electronic is engaging ongoing Iegal battle with apple, and SDI can still comfortably supply their display to Apple?
So if you had a problem with an Apple iPhone you wouldn't immediately take it up with Apple? Or would you hunt down only the Apple phone division?
Yes, because the iPhone is made by Apple Inc. You are comparing Apple phone division, which is only a division in Apple Inc, to wholly stand alone companies with separate organizations and stocks like Samsung Electronics and Samsung SDI.
The release date is a fact. Whether it has anything to do with the difference in performance between Note 8 and iPhone X is speculation on your side.
All of which I never said.
This was what you wrote: "What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one." The iPhone X is only weeks newer than the Note 8. If it was six months or 1 year newer, you might have a point that it is a generation newer. But factually it is only weeks newer. I'm pretty sure that Samsung does not put out a new generation of displays every few weeks.
So you are speculating. Aside from "weeks later" you have nothing.
Please point out the speculation. The iPhone X is only weeks newer. DisplayMate rated it the display better. These are facts.
You are speculating that since those phones are released merely weeks a part, then both are using same generation display, while the only fact that you have is that iPhone X is released weeks later than Note 8. However, we do know for a fact that a samsung display managed to score yet another best performance smartphone display on DisplayMate.
Unfair comparison of what? Look up and you'll find that you posted DisplayMate link to iPhone 7 LCD review to drum apple up, failing to notice that it actually failed to best a 6 month older S7. You brought this up. I'm just playing along.
You mean besides comparing two different display technologies like OLED and LCD in the same category? Besides that?
Then why did you bring it up in the first place? Is it because you didn't know iPhone 7 is using LCD instead OLED? Didn't you know iPhone 7 display is not as good as a 6 month older samsung phone? Did you fail to notice that only recent iPhone that managed to snatch the best performance smartphone display is the only one that has Samsung display? Did you wish you had not bring up iPhone 7 into this discussion?
That a display on an iPhone can only score higher than a Samsung phone when it was made by Samsung
Why didn't the Samsung display score on par or better than the iPhone? They both use tech from Samsung. Maybe Apple had something to do with it.
Maybe? so you're speculating again?
Again, you're banking on the assumption that since the phones are released only weeks apart then they are using the same generation display. Samsung Mobile did not make the display, SDI did, you can't speculate what SDI do or have, based on Samsung Mobile release schedule.
Anyhow, Samsung did score better than Apple, many times. The only time in recent years that an Apple phone managed to score better than Samsung, is when the phone is equipped with samsung display.
The fact is, a Samsung display scores higher than its' previous iteration. Simple.
The point you missed was how is the new display the "next iteration". It was only weeks newer.
The release date of the phone is weeks apart. You are speculating that SDI are supplying the same generation display to Note 8 and iPhone X, you are speculating that both phone has the same development length. That is stupid. For the rest of us, it is business as usual, a samsung display bested older samsung display.
Unless you think Samsung makes new iterations every few weeks.
And you're still thinking that the Samsung that made Note 8 is the same Samsung that manufacture the display.
Are you implying that you know the internal schedule of the development of these phones and the displays by Apple and Samsung?
I know facts. Fact: The Note 8 was released only weeks prior to the iPhone X. This is a fact. Please bring up any relevant facts you have.
The release date is a fact. Whether it has anything to do with the difference in performance between Note 8 and iPhone X is speculation on your side. My facts? DisplayMate has been rating Samsung display the best performing smartphone for S6, S7, Note 7, S8, Note 8, and Iphone X. The Iphone 6, and 7 were rated the best Mobile LCD, failing to best their Samsung counterpart in recent years. Those rated the best? Made by Samsung
Do share. If you don't, GTFO. You do know that the Samsung that made the Galaxy phones and the Samsung that design and manufacture displays are two separate entities, right?
And yet Apple released a phone with a Samsung display only weeks after Samsung releasing a phone with a Samsung display and beat it. Please present any facts counter to this.
So you are speculating. Aside from "weeks later" you have nothing.
Aside from better black level, LCD used to have advantages over OLED.
So is your answer yes, you are willing to engage in unfair comparisons?
Unfair comparison of what? Look up and you'll find that you posted DisplayMate link to iPhone 7 LCD review to drum apple up, failing to notice that it actually failed to best a 6 month older S7. You brought this up. I'm just playing along.
And yet to failed to acknowledge the basic facts when it doesn't suit you.
Apple used to procure the displays for their high end phones from multiple sources. For iPhone X, they can only go to Samsung (and LG later next year), because only Samsung has the capability and capacity to produce them. The iPhone 7 lackluster display over 6 month older S7 is a testament that Apple software implementation, if there were any, has little to no effect on the quality of the phone display
And how does any of that relevant to the point that Apple was able to score higher with a Samsung display than Samsung?
That a display on an iPhone can only score higher than a Samsung phone when it was made by Samsung
Making OLED display is hard [imore.com], and Samsung get it right. From the day of HTC Nexus one OLED display (by Samsung) which placed last in 2010 to iPhone X at the top, Samsung has been improving their OLED technology, without Apple involvement.
Again how does any of that relevant to the point that Apple was able to score higher with a Samsung display than Samsung?
The fact is, a Samsung display scores higher than its' previous iteration. Simple.
Aren't you ignoring the fact that the Note 8 came out only weeks before the iPhone X? We're not talking six months or a year difference. A few weeks.
Are you implying that you know the internal schedule of the development of these phones and the displays by Apple and Samsung? Do share. If you don't, GTFO. You do know that the Samsung that made the Galaxy phones and the Samsung that design and manufacture displays are two separate entities, right?
If you're going to compare an LCD display with an OLED one, it seems you're willing to partake in unfair comparisons.
Aside from better black level, LCD used to have advantages over OLED.
from DisplayMate:
OLED Display Evolution What is particularly significant and impressive is that Samsung has been systematically improving OLED display performance with every Galaxy generation since 2010, when we started tracking OLED displays. The first notable OLED Smartphone, the Google Nexus One, came in decidedly last place in our 2010 Smartphone Display Shoot-Out. In a span of just six years OLED display technology is now challenging and even exceeding the performance of the best LCDs. The Galaxy S7 continues this impressive systematic improvement in OLED displays and technology
A fact is a fact. Apple used to procure the displays for their high end phones from multiple sources. For iPhone X, they can only go to Samsung (and LG later next year), because only Samsung has the capability and capacity to produce them. The iPhone 7 lackluster display over 6 month older S7 is a testament that Apple software implementation, if there were any, has little to no effect on the quality of the phone display
Making OLED display is hard, and Samsung get it right. From the day of HTC Nexus one OLED display (by Samsung) which placed last in 2010 to iPhone X at the top, Samsung has been improving their OLED technology, without Apple involvement.
Of course, it's newer than the Note 8, just like Note 8 is better than S8, and S8 is better than S7, and S7 is better than Note 5 and S6. It's a progression of tech. Apple software can't do jack shit when it was paired with LCD display on iPhone 7 and failed to best S7 which was released earlier.
Also to understand that Apple doesn't exactly have an overwhelming advantage when it comes to Samsung components when competing with Samsung. I'm pretty sure Samsung Displays division isn't forced to sell their best displays only to Apple. The question then is why does Apple have the best display (made by Samsung) and why doesn't Samsung smartphones also have the same display.
Now that we have agreed that selling more high end components to apple are more profitable than just only using them on their own product, let see what Displaymate has to say:
Galaxy S7"
" the Galaxy S7 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested"
iPhone 7
"It is by far the best performing mobile LCD display that we have ever tested". Not the best smartphone display, not even the best LCD
Galaxy S8
"So the Galaxy S8 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display, earning DisplayMate’s highest ever A+ grade"
Galaxy Note 8
"So the Galaxy Note8 becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display"
iPhone X
" the iPhone X becomes the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we have ever tested, earning DisplayMate’s highest ever A+ grade"
Those best performing smartphone displays have one thing in common, Samsung made them. They have consistently improving their display from the S7, S8, Note 8, and the latest of their OLED iteration, iPhone X. So, to answer your question, Samsung has been using the best components available for their top of the line phones. What they don't do is intentionally crippling product that they sell to their competitors. What the iPhone X has is just a natural progression of their constant improvement from one generation to the newer one.