Top notch? Or worst ever? Why is no one discussing the fact

>>62451815
Apple didn't fabricate that screen, they had some other manufacturer produce it for them.

the display is made by Samsung, isn't it?

They sure did hon. Now go back to sleep or no more chicken tendies for you!

>>62451815
>buy samsung screens
>put fruity toddler toy logo on it

woooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwww

>>62451914
I thought Sharp was the manufacturer of their screens.

>>62451964
Was. They switched to Samsung oleds anon

>>62451815
You mean they've done the impossible and bought Samsung's last year display tech instead of pretending OLED isn't superior?
Galaxy fags have known this for over half a decade.

File: 1494722773953.jpg (171KB, 556x544px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 556x544px

>>62451815
>buys samsung's leftovers from last year
>market it to iBrainlets as "new and innovative"
>iDiots eat it up

LMAO

>>62451832
>>62452054
so why doesn't Samsung have these displays in their phones this year?

>>62451815

Apple may have purchased the screen from Samsung, but they get ones that are even better than the ones Samsung is allowed to use in their phones.

>>62452596

What did he mean by this?

>>62452596
This is what iToddlers actually believe.

>>62452635
>iToddlers know what's quite literally true
>Let me harass them

Is it 120hz?

Don't expect anyone here to understand how Apple does anything. People here are literally at 14 year old on YouTube comments level of intelligence. They think Samsung did all the actual work. They're really that dumb. God why do I even come here anymore, everyone on this board is dumb as fuck and poor to boot.

>>62451815
>mitigates every known drawback to OLED
post source that it mitigates both uneven wear and wear in general.
I've love to see this.

>>62452670

There's no refresh rate data for it yet. At least, I haven't been able to find any. If it were a ProMotion display, which implies adaptive refresh rate down to 24Hz, it would have been discussed at the keynote.

File: 1482048921948.webm (1MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x360px

>>62452678
>t. anally annihilated iToddler

Go back to your /r/eddit fruity toddler toy hugbox.

>>62452680

Because it's Apple, duh. Please educate yourself before commenting samcuck

>>62452692
What is happening in this motion picture?

>>62452664
>>62452596
>iToddlers think samsung isn't "allowed" to use their own screens in their phones
lmao

>>62452705
huh, I'm not a samcuck.
I really want to know about this.
If Apple really has solved uneven wear and possibly even wear in general across OLED displays, I want a big one.
I don't care if it's $6000-8000 for a 32" - gimme.

I'm not here to bash Apple or iPhone.
Only to verify if such an outrageous (awesome if true!) claim about OLED is now true.

>>62452738
Apple gets to dictate the terms of screen tech that THEY fund. It's not tough to see how this makes sense.

>>62452741
Big if true

>>62452692
Did he died?

File: 1456543422815.png (245KB, 473x474px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 473x474px

>>62452596

Jesus christ...

A "technology" board

>>62451815
Don't worry... they'll all love The Notch when it is poorly implemented (copied) on an Android phone, but not before.

>>62451815

We'll see...the data hasn't come out yet.

I mean, there's a good chance it will be head and shoulders above the competition, like most Retina displays, but let's wait until at least DisplayMate gets a hold of it.

>>62451815
True tone is really sexy tech. I do hope the iPhoneXs gets a ProMotion display. The adaptive frame rate actually IS revolutionary, but all normies care about is 'muh pictures', so they didn't talk too much about it when it daybyood.

>>62452803
I take it you don't think this is true?

Why don't you provide some evidence that it isn't then you fucking shill

>>62452803
>Technology board
>/g/

Oh I'm laffin'

This is a consumerist board. Haven't you seen all the Generals?

>>62452945
>I made a claim and others need to prove it wrong
Burden of proof is on you
>muh shillz
niggerfaggot

>>62452945

>Demands someone prove a negative proposition.

The absolute state of Apple fans after this disaster

>>62452967
>using a period in greentext with no reasonable addition of effect thereby
>

>>62452596
>Apple may have purchased the screen from Samsung, but they get ones that are even better than the ones Samsung is allowed to use in their phones.
>>62452945
>Why don't you provide some evidence that it isn't

He can't be serious.

File: 1485295107671.jpg (9KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 320x320px

>>62452985

Whom are you quoting?

File: tumblr_mcvf40EUfe1rqqedro1_1280[1].jpg (139KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 800x531px

>>62452994

It's an obvious troll. Apple fanboys can't be this stupid...
Can they?...

File: 1496813220593.gif (2MB, 400x174px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x174px

>>62453017
We just don't know anymore

>>62451815
>creating an OLED screen that mitigates every known drawback to OLED while preserving its advantages
Oh yeah as if that was apple tech.
They bought that fucking technology, apple doesnt do R&D. They that other peoples technology and market it.

>>62452470
they do

File: What_0bd70f_2202704.jpg (31KB, 400x472px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 400x472px

>>62453051

>Apple doesn't do R&D

>>62451914
>THIS JUST IN; APPLE DOESN'T MAKE EVERY SINGLE PART OF THE IPHONE IN-HOUSE
APPLE IS BANKRUPT AND FINISHED FOREVSSS!!!11!

Companies do this, anon. Samsung has been making parts for the iPhone since the beginning. Even Samsung doesn't manufacture every single little part of the S8 in-house.

>>62453089
They most certainly do not

You'll see when the numbers come out for the screens in this year's phones.

Color Accuracy is also one of Apple's strong suits

>>62452079
>iBrainlets
>iDiots

You need to go back.

>>62452470
they do, and have since like the s5. Well I think they've had oled screens since the first galaxy, but they got really good with the s5

File: BACK TO REDDIT.png (2KB, 314x54px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 314x54px

>>62452079
>look at all these buzzwerds!

>top notch
I see what you did there

File: https-%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F567344%2F8d1c3768-f38b-419f-8eec-718ea752ddb9.jpg (167KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1200x1600px

>>62452887
to late iSheep

File: 18193688_1905948302764342_4736881827710244207_n.jpg (81KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 600x600px

>>62453179
APPLE BTFO!

>>62453179
>on-screen navbar
>Bottom bezel serving no purpose

FUCKING WHY

I think the panel updates its color temperature with the true tone thingy, so its software based. Samsung and others purposefully make their displays more neon. As for burn in we dont know that this problem is 100% solved

>>62451815
>HDR
>Dolby Vision and HDR10
redundant
>one million-to-one contrast ratio
missing hyphen makes it read like it has "one contrast ratio"
>color accuracy
how accurate? according to what? red resembles red?

File: 1498836326393.png (28KB, 356x170px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 356x170px

>>62452692
Kek

if the iphone x has an hdr display then what the heck was is the wide color gamut screen on the iphone 7?

I always assumed that meant HDR but apple used a different name to not confuse people with the HDR setting on the camera

>>62453102
But it literally proves OP wrong.

>>62452680
They said so in the keynote
It's a lie though

>>62454462
Search on youtube for "apple store autist"

What drawbacks does oled have? I don't see a single one on my OP3T except seeing the matrix when the screen gets wet

>>62454537
Burn in, wear over time
Less bright than lcd
Colors might be unnatural
Pentile displays
Visible refresh rate

>>62454537
Burn-in
Color shift over time due to blue wearing out faster than other colors

>>62454552
>>62454567
>Burn-in
I've never seen this happen on any of my oled phones. Even Galaxy S7, S7 edge and a* series phones that are on display at my workplace don't have that problem even though they're constantly on for 12 hours a day

>>62454612
My S4 had it after very normal use
Modern ones are probably better

>>62454612
I have a Galaxy S4 and you can literally SEE the notification bar if you're watching a video full screen.
Also, the display has a very noticeable green tint to it.

>>62452678
? Are you legitimately this retarded? When does the iNoose drop

>>62452470
Because samsung's ones are better

>>62453118
Yes they do. They consistently had the best displays in years.
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note8_ShootOut_100.htm

Don't expect Apple to outperform everything like they do with their cpu. Samsung supplying the screens will likely mean the gap is small. Just like Camera specs, Sony sensors that gives to Apple aren't better then Sony Phones.

>>62455447
Thank you for the information. I'm tired of all these low info cacks taking up board space.

Colour management is largely up to the software isn't it? Apple designs their own controllers for the screen.

>>62454929
my S4 doesn't have those issues

File: iphonex.png (281KB, 666x666px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 666x666px

>>62451815
There's nothing to talk about. Yet another limited piece of crap for Apple groupies.

>>62453179
Could have been a dope phone if he moved that bezel from bottom to top.

>>62452079
Holy fuck, it's real:
https://twitter.com/gabzydiana/status/900351353570168832
HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: works on my machine certificate.png (30KB, 200x193px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 200x193px

>>62455633
Good to know.l

>>62455675
you're welcome
(ps. your comment was equally as useful as mine)

>>62451815
>10 bit panel.

It's 8 with dithering but most people don't care about this. It's promoting numbers for the sake of numbers not because the average consumer needs it.
Make people believe their mobile phones can compete with high end computers and actually accurate displays.

People will buy it tho so no need to bitch beyond what I just said.

>>62451815
This is about ergonomics, not aesthetics, you fucking moron.

>>62452079
people who support iphone are telling YOU that you need to go back

holy fuck reddit is the cancer that ended up killing 4chan

>>62453102
the point is that apple didn't invent the tech, its just their marketing that fools idiots like OP. the screen should be about on par with the samsung flagships.

>>62453179
That's much better than apples, at least it doesn't take up 3/4 of the screen. Still pretty gross though.

>>62454552
Lcd is way to bright though. It washes everything out. Also lcd can't handle blacks

>>62453179
ahahahahahahahahah apple copied not just samsung but essential phone!!!!!!

But will it unlock?

>>62451815
can someone tell that sanitation guy to tuck in his shirt and get off the stage

Wow literally the richest company in the world made a screen for a phone that adds nothing in real value

>>62456071
"apple copied samsung" samsung manufactures apple's screens tho :/

>>62455849
nah, mkbhd made a review of the essential phone, he said that at first he was bothered with the screen but after a while he got used to it and started to like it. the same will probably happen with the iphone X

>>62451815
Yes, apple did put a top notch on it, with the cameras and stuff.

File: safe-areas-iphone-x-800x536.jpg (23KB, 800x536px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 800x536px

>When you sell a bezelless phone, but you fuck it up so bad you wind up with larger bezels than regular phones

>>62451815
iPhone X display is made by Samsung.

It's actually shitbins that didn't make it into Galaxy Note that goes into iPhone X.

File: iphone x.jpg (412KB, 2920x1400px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 2920x1400px

>>62456480
>>62456501

Are people seriously bitching about the 5 pixels that are taken away by the speaker grille?

File: 1503854591779.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>>62456528
>masking buyer's remorse

Should've just bought the iphone 7s. it's the same shit.

>>62456480
dafaq? that happens to every bezel less phone though, but that only happens to apps that aren't compatible with the weird aspect ratio of the phone

>>62456569
Has nothing to do with aspect ratio. Has to do with viewable regions on the screen.

File: 5.png (53KB, 430x430px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 430x430px

>>62451815
>Why is no one discussing the fact that Apple has pulled off the impossible yet again

Because they haven't pulled of anything. Samsung has made all technological progress in Oled screens and Apple just purchased it from them. The screens are also most likely worse than what Samsung has in it's own top phones because giving your best screens to your competitor is retarded.

Also the Apple screen looks ugly as fuck, because of the crop out in the top it's asymmetrical.

Just look how beautiful the screen of the s8 looks because it does have capable engineers who understand the importance of symmetry

>>62452079
>that manbrow
ew

>>62451815
>Top notch

>>62456575
yeah but you can't blame apple for that, that only happens to some apps that aren't compatible with the screens. And that happens to all phones with bezel less screens, we just have to wait for apps to adapt to the screens viewable regions

>>62452720
It's a live feed of the iAnon

>>62451815
>Why is no one discussing the fact that Apple has pulled off the impossible yet again

You mean the face ID live fail on stage?

File: 1493419253947.png (115KB, 456x356px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 456x356px

>>62456721
Most bezelless phones have consistently rectangular viewable areas. Apple has decided that rectangular viewable areas is no longer relevant. Just like they decided corded headphones were no longer relevant.

This will go poorly.

>>62456729
apple actually responded to that saying that a lot of people actually tried the face id before the ceo did on stage that's why it didn't work and said "use passcode". you know like how it works on touch id, when you have multiple failures on the sensor, when you do it right it won't open and ask for your password.

>>62456754
Or the reasonable explanation
>Facial recognition software works like shit in low light

>>62456745
oh yeah, you're right

>>62456754
> a lot of people actually tried the face id before the ceo
Then it would ask for a passcode right away.

File: dim screen.jpg (234KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1280x720px

>>62451815
>only 625 nits

Why couldn't they just put a more fucking powerful backlight in?

>>62456764
i don't know if the face id works in low light, apple says that it works even when it's dark and the iphone X hasn't released yet so no one can actually confirm it until it's released.

>>62456774
no in the iphone X there's 2 steps, you look at the sensor then you swipe up. it's different from the s8

File: 1455069214106.jpg (34KB, 654x639px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 654x639px

>>62456780
Unless it's somehow capable of extracting a face from black pixels and random noise; it's probably going to work like shit in low light.

Light sensitivity on cell phone camera sensors is shit and has always been shit. They don't capture enough light because they're just too small and the lenses are usually sub-par.

>>62456802
>it's probably going to work like shit in low light

It'll probably work worse on black people, and then there will be another shitshow about racist programming.

File: samsung store.png (1MB, 1242x746px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1242x746px

>>62452692
you won't see this at the samsung store because noone visits them

>>62456889
>stock photos of stores are indicative of their patronage

Did you intentionally stay logged into your gmail?

>no 120hz
lol

>>62456941
Have you been on a Samsung Store?

>>62453102
You seem pretty gay, gayer than OP

>>62452692
Legitimate autism

>>62452720
He's probably throwing a bitch fit because his mommy won't get him that toy that all the rich cool kids have.

top notch
literally

>>62456823
hahahha, i can already see the sjw's calling apple racist for that

>>62456778

>OLED
>Backlight

| The state of this board |

>>62456643

And nothing else

>>62457189
He's talking about the iPhone 8 Plus you nerd.

>>62455761
It has to be 10 bit capable to support Dolby Vision, but go ahead and continue to spread misinformation retart

>>62457205
Whatevs my dude

>>62451914
Does Apple make ANY hardware in house? Not that it really matters, just curious.

>>62457205
How do you know?

File: 6cf7151b01fff961e9d3dad1a3d32eb122fd9d1a-400x400.jpg (31KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 400x400px

>>62457223
Holy shit what are you doing here

>>62452596
>tfw you have to share a board with these kind of people
/g/ is fucking dead.

>>62455932
adjust the brightness retard

good lcds have like 1000-2000 contrast ratio the blacks are fine you probably just have the brightness setting too high

>>62457223
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_mobile_application_processors

Why are people that don't use iphones constantly butthurt about iphones even though historically they are the strongest trendsetter in the market?

>>62457344
>one of the last manufacturers to use oled displays
>strongest trendsetter in the market
it's mainly this memeing fanboy faggotry that pisses people off. and the phones are overpriced but that isn't really rage-inducing it just makes financially responsible people not buy the phones

>>62456802
It illuminates your face with a grid of IR dots, look up how kinect works, that should give you a pretty good idea of how they've implemented it.

>>62456643
/thread

>>62456754
Which is more likely?

That Apple forgot how their own phones work at a billion dollar launch?

Or

Face ID failed on stage

>>62456778
1240 nits is way fucking overkill, kill yourself fucking retard
625 nits is as bright as iPhone 7/7+ and brighter than most other phones

>Per the spec sheet, the iPhone X screen maxes out at 625 nits, which is pretty freakin' bright (300 nits is considered very good for most screens). But it's nowhere near as bright as the display on the Samsung Galaxy Note 8. A recent test by DisplayMate found the Note 8 had a maximum brightness of 1,240 nits, which, in the words of DisplayMate analyst Raymond Soneria, was "the brightest smartphone display that we have ever measured." Maybe next year, Apple.
APPLEL BTFO

>>62457862
It's way too little to see anything in broad daylight. Get out of here shill of subpar technology.

>>62457862
Try using your phone in a bright location instead of your mum's basement.

>>62457920
>>62457928
t. retards who stare into the sun

>>62457936
t. mole people

File: Capture.png (145KB, 660x1576px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 660x1576px

>>62457940
t. samsung shill

>>62457936
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwQzTKHIkb4

>>62451815
>anon what is super amoled ?

>>62456643
Then let's take a look at the back of the Samshits. Only people allowed to criticize iPhone without looking like a moronic shill are non-samshit users

>>62457862
This. My iPhone 7 works all fine in sunlight

>>62452470
not only does note 8 have but note 8 display is literally twice as bright as the one on iPhone X

both displays are made by samsung

>>62456643
>Samsung has made all technological progress in Oled screens
Except, they haven't. The research in OLED technology happened all over the world. Samsung is just putting it all together and mass-manufacturing the screens.

>it's asymmetrical.
It is not asymmetrical. It has just less symmetry. But it still has some symmetry.

>giving your best screens to your competitor is retarded
Not if you make a load of money with it. And you use worse screens that are cheaper to produce which will end up profiting you more because your customers buy it anyway. Not saying this is how it is.

>>62459212
>yah, I need muh +1000 nips to radiate muh skin so I get tan

Samsung is literally the Apple of Android. With their fanboys, superiority complex and everything. The Galaxy phones are shit. Ugly, bloated with useless software. As result despite the newest most powerful hardware it still lags and falls behind last-year flagships from other manufacturers.

>>62457972
Didn't know my sony was that far up top. Time to rub it in pixelfags faces

>>62459610
>It is not asymmetrical. It has just less symmetry. But it still has some symmetry.
Nigga.

symmetrical
made up of exactly similar parts facing each other or around an axis; showing symmetry.

It either is or it isn't and in iPhone case it ain't.

>>62459693
But you can change software. Realistically speaking you can't change hardware. Samsung phones are the best when it comes to hardware in Android phones and this isn't debatable. Other's simply can't compete.

>>62451815
yes, there is a notch on the top

>>62452596
man never know apple people were this nutz. might as well be bible thumpers now

oled patents are from LG and Samsung
two years alog oled became cheaper to manufacture than ips
>THIS IS THE SOLE REASON APPLE SWITCHED

>>62459986
best hardware how? they have the best amoled screens sure, but high end lcd displays can be great too. s8, s8 plus and note 8 are so fragile that a protective case which ruins the "aesthetics" is almost mandatory. xiaomi mi 6, mi mix and mi note 3 are great for half the price.

>>62452596
>allowed

what the fuck are you on about. you think samsung are cucks?

>>62454929
got a galaxy s advanced, 5 years old, OLED still as beautiful as ever

File: ixs.png (8KB, 452x421px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 452x421px

>>62459815
Stop talking shit about stuff you have no clue about. The iPhone X's screen IS symmetrical. You can mirror it along a vertical axis in the middle. It just has no horizontal mirror axis. Which most screens do have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_symmetry

Also, the symmetry of Samsung Galaxy S8's screen can be easily improved by making the screen square. That will add a few symmetry elements. A hexagonal screen would have even more symmetry elements. And a disc-shaped screen would have the highest possible (2D). But that isn't useful.

>>62457329
man even Apples chips are made by Samsung or TSMC, UMC

Apple builds nothing that's why they push the whole designed in cuckfornia meme

>>62452596
jesus, just kill yourself

>>62460971
>this argument
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s664NsLeFM

File: 1499227250341.png (114KB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 500x700px

>>62451815
>by creating an OLED screen that mitigates every known drawback to OLED while preserving its advantages
Just watch as all of the Apple fags cry when their phones get burn in when they leave them on.

>>62452678
All of what work? We've had OLED displays on other stuff for years and years. This isn't anything new or innovative.

>>62453179
>still more screen than an iShit

>>62456778
AHAHAHAHAHA it gets better every fucking time I scroll down.

>>62457862
1240 nits? What do you mean you want 950 nits? What the hell are you going to to with 700 nits? You'll get along just fine with 625 nits, goy!

>>62456480
Why that are with a line for the home "button"? No one on Apple ever heard of the "swipe concept"? WebOS and Meego didn't needed this, BBOS10 didn't need this, and they all worked flawlessly. Why remove the physical button and waste screen space this way? Insane.

File: 1499980164029.gif (2MB, 431x216px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 431x216px

It's almost as bad as the wireless earbuds.

File: homer_simpson_-_fight_fight.webm (246KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 320x240px

>Anon vs. Anon
Fight Fight Fight Fight!

>>62461588
1240 nits is eye burning, people use much "dimmer" phones just fine, you wouldn't pay out of the ass for a samshit just for the screen brightness, it's just a spec that looks good on paper to foolish normies or to people who are nearly blind or something

File: 16438437373.jpg (65KB, 640x594px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 640x594px

>>62461985
>1240 nits is eye burning
Leave the basement every once in a while, iVirgin.

>it's just a spec that looks good on paper to foolish normies
Sort of like a toddler toy OS running on powerful ARM chips in iTurds? It's totally wasted when you can't even do anything with it outside of playing angry birds or browsing some facebook garbage.

>>62459638
>ah iphone has a better screen
>no it doesn't
>w-who care anyway?

>>62456778
OLED panels don't have backlights, retarded monkey.

>>62462199
>What is burn in?
The lower brightness is going to prolong the life of the displays significantly you mong.

>>62457310
1000~2000 contrast ratio is absolutely garbage.

>>62462289
>The lower brightness is going to prolong the life of the displays significantly you mong.
Can Apple fags not be trusted to control their own screen brightness? That's like making phones waterproof because you can't trust people not to dunk them in the toilet.

>>62462343
not at all

>>62452720
>>62457009
>>62456727

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1QEIu6jgkk

the clip is from this video :D

>>62462485
>:D
>>>/reddit/

>>62462583
whats wrong with that ? owo

>>62451815
Honestly I want to switch to Apple because I've realized they've been smug trolls all along
>Apple you can't do X, that would be suicide!
>Apple does X, because fuck you
They have the entire market in their control. They can do the dumbest thing in the world and every app and piece of software HAS to conform to it. It's really hilarious.

File: IMG_4568_0.jpg (54KB, 627x512px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 627x512px

>>62451815
Literally worst phone as of 2017. V30 is literally the only phone worth getting if you wanna blow ~$1,000 on one.

>>62462706
eh, seems to me like iphone x has gotten a pretty lukewarm response, and iphone 8 looks like pretty much a sidegrade compared to iphone 7, even has a lower battery capacity

>>62462740
Literally who?

>>62462325
Even the relative attractiveness of the two is accurate.

>>62451815
Nice screen. Shame they ruined it by chopping parts of it off.

>>62457982
Big if true

>>62457911
This whole brightness argument neatly epitomizes the Android fixation with meaningless numbers.

>>62454552
>visible refresh rate

Explain this

>>62451815
lol u tk him 2da bar|?

File: IMG_0533.png (724KB, 728x878px) Image search: [Google]

724KB, 728x878px

>>62464302

>>62453118
Samsung literally makes the screens that are going into the new iPhone. Its just apple blatantly lying like always.

That screen is probably worse than one on S8. I don't think that Samsung will sell its flagship panels.

>>62464677
You can get B& for that, anon.

>>62457972
The yellowed part is plain bullshit.

>>62459638
Screens don't emit any wavelength that would make you tan or cause cancer.

>>62462740

I'm sure it won't bootloop like every other LG smartphone ever.

>>62464302
hah gay

>>62459638
well it's nice to see your phone display in the sunlight

>>62451815

I'm not an apple hater. I like apple.

but the AMOLED screens on Android are not shitty. I have used AMOLED since 2014 and never had an issue. so giving Apple credit for an OLED screen is pretty meh.

>>62462199
Holy shit what I implied is that 600+ nips is overkill

>>62464860
>being this autistic

>>62465068
My iPhone 6's brightness works all fine in sunlight

>>62465815
and the note 8 works amazingly

not only that but it can display way better HDR,

>>62465815
with 1000 nips you can have proper HDR, like imagine the display showing an image with 600 nips except for some explosion which it shows at 1000 nips

>>62465938
there is very little hdr content available. at best it will start to be used in desktop pc gaming next year

>>62465961
well apple sure seems to be advertising support for it

File: 02F22B0A-A50C-4E93-B99F-B59498A7E0D2-8324-00000535D364092F.png (45KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 240x240px

>>62461588
>>62462133
>"haha! That really showed the iT-toddler who the real man is!"

>>62465938
>except for some explosion which it shows at 1000 nips

Perfect ISIS phone along with its explosive capabilities no fuck off samshill, you can atleast admit that 1200 is not really a necessity

>>62465961
movies are using it

>>62455447
>Sony sensors that gives to Apple aren't better then Sony Phones.
not sure about the sensors, they might be the same or maybe slightly worse in applels but sony picture quality by far is the worst. I have owed several sony phones over the years (currently xperia xz) and they all suck cock compared samsung and apple picture quality

>>62465938

I don't understand HDR and I can't find any tech articles (even on the sites that are usually good with explanations) that read like the writer actually knows what they're talking about. I'm not looking for "punchier, brighter, more vibrant", that's audiophile-tier subjective garbage. I'm looking for how the innards work. I know it requires support for wide color gamut (10-bit depth?) and requires that "local" dimming be possible (requirement only pertinent to LCD displays, as OLED is naturally able to dim per-pixel), but what is the allowed area in which backlight can spill out into the surrounding pixels, beyond which it isn't considered HDR? And are those values different for HDR10 and DolbyVision?

>>62459638
Some of us like to go outside, anon

>>62466512

Also, I read that 1000 nits is required for HDR, but that can't be true; the iDick is certified as DolbyVision-capable but has typical luminance of 625 nits. I don't know if the "typical" measurement is taken while the entire screen is white, or while showing a uniform test pattern. Maybe if only a smaller area of the screen is instructed to be bright, it can get brighter than a whole-screen white could get, but I just have a feeling that's not how it works. So many mysteries...

>>62466512
>>62466604

Anyone know a good site for researching this?

>>62462485
good for him. Im glad he was happy.

>>62466512
SDR screens are 8bit being able to display only 256 shades of a color, or in the case of 4K screens 10bit with 1024 shades of color. HDR screens have a much higher level of contrast displaying 4096 shades of a color being 12bit, minimum. For this it requites a high nit capability (minimum 1,1000, desirable 10,000), something that not every screens was capable and didn't need to be. Today LCD screens struggle with black levels while OLED struggle with white levels, so pick your poison.

HDR10 is the industry standard.
Dolby Vision is just Dolby "jewing" with standards a bit more rigorous that you have to pay to be certified. Ok, it's better than HDR10, is the logical future, but we're still in the present, even if a manufacturer says that their screen is DV compatible is not exactly what the standard meant to be. It's good to have both, but don't bother.

>>62467440
how does iPhone X reach this with 600 nits?

>>62467567
Almost no screen (television) today works with the standard of +1000nits. It's not better nor worse than any competitor (still Samsung's screens have an edge with their absurd max brightness).

>>62467440
there's also HDR10+, royalty-free alternative by samsung

>>62467440

Low information stuff like this is all I can find online :(

File: 168434229974.png (405KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 1280x720px

>>62466111
>"haha! this poorfag $25/month niggerphone10+ really showed those tech enthusiasts! Oooh retina display and remote controlled bluetooth buttplugs!"
Some of us aren't homosexual cucks and we like to have control over our software, not the other way around.

>>62468420
What more you want/need to know?
HDR screens have higher brightness, higher color space, much higher contrast, allowing to view content encoded at 12bits.
Before you could only what 8bits or 10bit at 4K screens. As a consumer you need to know no more.

>>62468489
LeL

These posts get progressively less coherent, while containing the same amount of information.

>>62468489
Read my post you insufferable cuck

>>62466512
>I'm looking for how the innards work.

>>62468698
>>I'm looking for how the innards work.
like the circuitry? or what

>>62451815
It's just Apple lying as always. The screen technology is basically the same thing Samsung have been using in their phones since the S5.

>>62468916
Like the questions I wrote about in my post sweet child. Bedtime now.

>>62452470
Worse than S7 screen.

>>62469298

By what metric?

>>62469353
Brightness, resolution, ppi. Apple ordered old tech.

>>62469373

Resolution is dependent on size of phone viewport, which is dependent on Apple's design.

pixels per inch is density; higher is not always better, so, once again: could be a design choice.

Brightness is the way S7 is better?

That might be an okay argument. The rest, no.

>>62469373
gotta keep those margins up

>>62469451
Stop defending Apple. OLED brightness is indicator of generation. GS6 era got 610 nits. iPhone X gets 625 nits. GS7 gets 850 nits. GS8 gets 1000 nits. Those nits are important because there's this thing called the sun.

>>62468465
Congrats you aren't an idiot. Bet you don't like shrts with logos either

>>62469492

Hold on, are we not agreeing on that?

>>62469523
It's not an "okay argument"
Higher nits = newer tech. Apple bought old tech. Capish?

>>62469535

It's not okay? What did you think of that made you reconsider your argument?

File: 084.png (298KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 600x512px

>>62469535
Are you arguing with yourself?

>>62469492

>There are "generations" of OLED screens like there are per-year car models

Okay, kid

>>62469593
>>62469583
see
>>62469451
>That might be an okay argument
>might
>okay
It is fact.
>>62469612
Yes dumbass

>>62457787
*facepalm* dude, when someone uses your fingerprint scanner and tries it for 5 times, and when you use it, it won't work and would ask for your passcode

>>62469492

Apple can also control brightness beyond what the physical panel can do. They may have throttled the brightness to deal with image burn-in issues. Obviously they purchased panels that are bright enough to meet the existing DolbyVision specification.

>>62469637
Says you and no one else that I've seen.

Not convincing.

>>62469672
look up "oled generations" dumbass

>>62469682
Did I not send you to bed my child?

>>62469700
>my child
Kill yourself dumbass

>>62469682
I did, can't find any reliable vendor independent ranking of panels in that way

>>62469682
I don't see any report that apple bought old tech; all we know is that the screen in the iphone is at 625 nits, as installed in their system

>>62469672
>iToddler brainlet has no facts
>just makes up facts in favor of apple

This is why iToddler subhumans are universally regarded as technology illiterate morons.

>>62469805

>Also has no facts
>Ad hominems everywhere

Please, you need your sleep! You have a big day of low-information posting tomorrow!

>>62451815
>Be Samsung
>Dominate the market with AMOLED screens
>Shit the bed and have a phone that turned into a bomb and still sell $1000USD phones no problemo
>Your competitor has to come to you to get screens for their top-flagship phone
>Every time someone buys an iphone you make money too

Samsung smart

>>62451815
Tell me if this could play HEVC videos or not.

>>62469962
Yes. But for your future edification:

https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/specs/

Can iPhone already play webms?

>>62452470
I think they had similar specs in s6 two years back, it only got better with s7 and 8 since

>>62452596
what the fuck am i reading

>>62470420

Holy shit, I now think I get why android users are so obsessed with the specs of individual components. Android phones are always an amalgam of parts without a strong cohesion between them. Apple is able to provide cohesion because of their vertical integration of software and hardware. They can do more with less, and the specs themselves don't matter as much. People who use android, on the other hand, cling to the specs of every different component because it might actually make or break their experience.

>>62470436
The truth my man, let anon preach his gospel

>>62470420
For some definition of better (apparently, just brighter)

>>62452596
Big if true

>>62451815
Thy bought a cheaper pentile oled from Samsung? Yay

>>62470739
I really hope it isn't pentile...

>>62470815
Won't know for sure until it out but I've seen several hands on reviews that said they thought it was a pentile screen. Samsung certainly isn't going to give them a screen that is better than the one on their flagship phone, plus Apple likes cheap shit so they can squeeze more profits.

ITT: Apple fanbois claiming their Samsung screen is the best. Turns out it's 2 generation old technology.

Life as usually on /g/ I suppose.

>>62470903
Apple is anything before they are a company that uses cheap hardware

>>62471591

terveisin iTard

>>62466294
Software makes all the difference

>>62451815

Appletini's WILL defend this notch. It's unreal...

>>62451815
If it wasn't for normies they could ditch the selfie-cam.

File: 1493334361357.jpg (13KB, 278x278px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 278x278px

>>62452945
>why don't you provide some evidence that it isn't
t. IQ 80