Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by conception 3155 days ago
The X is Apple playing catch up feature wise, but they seem to be catching up the way they always do; being a leader in the pack. Fastest phone by far, arguably the best camera (really comes down to preference vs Pixel), but what I'm excited about is for stuff I've dreamed of from Apple - OLED (dark themes matter now!), thicker phone for more battery life and Plus features without the ShoePhone size from a company that is actively trying to protect my privacy.

If they complete the whole package and make it all work great, then like the iPod, it doesn't need to be first to market to be revolutionary. Just be better than all the other implementations and UX thus far. Though iOS 11 doesn't seem like that's all coming together super great but their pros still seem to outweigh all their competitors cons for what I want from a device. And of course, marketing is marketing.

1 comments

Apparently the OLED display is a 1st generation(older) OLED from Samsung...It really felt to me they made a big deal just like they did with 4K on Apple TV.... same technology like the competition, one year later. The camera on Samsung seems to be better too. The only thing that keeps me on Apple ecosystem is iOS and MacOS...
Citation? I cannot imagine that my years old Nexus 6 has a more recent display than the new iPhone X.
Check the specs. It's AMOLED vs OLED. Also check the ppi, brightness etc. It was so embarrassing to watch the keynote when Phil was explaining that it took longer to upgrade to OLED because they had to perfect the technology. I guess that's why they haven't upgrade Mac Pro line for so long either...same with Mac Mini and 4K on Apple TV..they are perfecting it... The truth is that the old LCD was cheaper and now after they upgraded to OLED they bumped the price as well.
The issue is/was that Samsung effectively is the only company that makes OLED phone displays, so they'd charge out the ass for one and could always just sell last gen displays to make their new phone more attractive.

Iirc Apple and some other companies threw a bunch of money at LG so they can get in the game as well, which will be nice in the future but atm obviously screen quality is worse and costs are higher due to R&D cost.

Your citation is that Apple’s marketing group thinks OLED is a better term than AMOLED?

PPI is not a fixed number determined by generation and isn’t relevant. Brightness is an interesting point but my Nexus 6 was AMOLED (oh my) and <400 nits so significantly dimmer than the iPhone X.

It’s very possible, even likely, that Samsung’s latest flagship phones use newer display tech than the iPhone X. It is exceedingly unlikely that the iPhone X is using first generation tech.

The camera "seems" better in your subjective opinion, or is better as measured by professionals?

In the tests I've seen the iPhone comes out on top in almost all situations vs. the Pixel, as a representative example here of a very good Android camera, with the notable exception of extreme low light conditions.

Well, I don't take photos very often but recently at a campfire I took few shoots(with my Iphone 6s) and for some reasons my photos were rubbish while Samsung (note 7)'s were awesome. There was no question that my beloved iPhone's camera was inferior and I think Samsung's display was better too(i.e. OLED). Now I'm convinced Apple is selling inferior hardware at inflated prices. It's OK though but I don't upgrade that often anymore as I used to do. When they launched the 4K Apple TV and made such a big deal that it supports 4K it was clear to me they have no shame in pushing old stuff or on par with the competition(1 year later) as it's a revolutionary technology.
Sounds like the very low-light problem I was talking about. That's a very specific situation, and you must admit 99.9% of the time most people aren't next to campfires so you're testing with an edge-case here.