Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple won't use any technology if other companies are using it. They just have to be different even if it means idiotic design choices.

Here are some examples:
No right click mouse ever produced
Blu-Ray
HDMI
OLED
Copy/Paste
Flash
User swappable batteries
 
I have the Galaxy S 2 and while the blacks are really nice, the colors are way too saturated. It might be a software calibration issue but on most of my pictures especially the skin tones look horrible. It reminds me a but if the old Canon compact cameras, where pictures were way too vibrant and saturated to give (or better: to fool) the impression of a "great" picture.

And in sunlight the screen is as useless as any other. Too be fair here: in Hong Kong you get a very decent amount of sunlight, so it will be a tad hard on any equipment.

Really, My experience has been that the S2 has a very nice picture, even in direct sunlight (By that, I mean the phone is still very much useable compared to other non-OLED phones). I don't operate it at full brightness all the time because, like you said, it can be a little too saturated, but when at an appropriate brightness for the surrounding, it looks great. The only place I have issues with brightness is in a completely dark room at full brightness.

Id rather see 300+ DPI on the iPad 3, with a decent anti-glare coating. New tech standards are wonderful, when fully realized and implemented well...

No, you don't want anti-glare coating, at least not at current standards. Why? Take a look at most of the IPS monitors out at the moment. They all have issue with grainy images and poor colours due to heavy AG coatings.
 
Apple won't use any technology if other companies are using it. They just have to be different even if it means idiotic design choices.

Here are some examples:
No right click mouse ever produced
Blu-Ray
HDMI
OLED
Copy/Paste
Flash
User swappable batteries

The only problems with that are,

1. You can right click on every Apple mouse/trackpad of the last 5 years.
2. HDMI is built right in to the Apple TV.
3. OLED isn't that good.
4. Copy/Paste? Built in to OS X since day 1, and on iOS for ages now
5. Flash is available on every Mac sold.
6. Swappable batteries? Why add unnecessary bulk? They were abandoned for a reason. This improves the design, so it is by no means 'idiotic'.

The only thing you have a slight point with is Blu-ray.

It's not a case of Apple trying to be different, regardless of functionality. It's a case of Apple adding features to certain products that they feel are necessary to the user experience.

That doesn't equate to throwing every feature into every device.
 
Which 2 statements were completely false?

Sharp's Elite series TV panels most likely does not use the same Sharp panels as they do with the mainstream panels they sell.

Additionally, the Elite brand was acquired by Sharp just recently.

by and large, Sharp panels are not reviewed as well as their counterparts, namely Samsung.

You claimed the philips tv's use Samsung/LG panels - incorrect

You claimed they make the crapiest displays - incorrect

I never said they used the same panels as on the Elite, but they are by no means crap, I can assure you.

I don't have the funds to buy an Aston Martin, which is why I'd go for the Ford. Your analogy doesn't make sense.

Again, they have no act to clean up. Sales show this.

it makes perfect sense. Trying to portray sales figures as the one and only definitive proof that a product is satisfactory or great is laughable. Which is why the Aston Martin comparison to ford is a valid one seeing as most would opt for the aston and not the ford despite the disparity in price and of course sales.

I love how you conveniently circumvent around the light bleed issue. I get it, because it's selling so well light bleed is not an issue. Try and explain how that works.
 
Last edited:
oh, i'm not saying that Apple would control the way the panels are built. I'm just saying that, like previous rumors have stated, Apple would partner with an existing panel supplier, (Sharp, LG, Samsung) and supply them with AppleTV inside their TV's a la GoogleTV with Sony.

But you're totally right, why would Apple go into a low margin business.

oh, i see what you are saying. In that case, I would think they might do something like they have done with AirPlay - license the Apple TV technology to Panasonic, Samsung, etc. for them to integrate into their TVs(?)

That would make more sense to me than an Apple-branded television.
 
As a Beta owner, I clearly disagree.

In addition to the well supported superiority of Beta picture quality, the mechanisms were very different.

If you hit "play reverse" on your Beta deck - the picture would pause for an instant, then start playing in reverse.

Hitting "play reverse" on a VHS deck, however, stopped the video, made some loud clunking noises, then after a while started to play the video in reverse.

However, when I got my first Sony VHS deck - it could reverse as smoothly as a Sony Beta deck. Sent all the other decks to the toxic waste site.
So, your last paragraph proves my point, and disagrees with everything else you said. Beta came out in testing with higher video quality, but by the time both actually hit the streets, they had comparable video quality. The tech was comparable, but lots of **** was made for consumer use (VHS) while nicer machines were made for commercial use (Beta), as is always the case. That skews people's perceptions. Perhaps even especially those who worked in the industry on quality equipment, going home to ****.

You're not...still using Beta? "As" is present tense.
 
You claimed the philips tv's use Samsung/LG panels - incorrect

You claimed they make the crapiest displays - incorrect
IME, Philips makes crappy products, including TVs. Whether the panels themselves are an 8 or a 3 (scale of 1-10) hardly matters since overall they do not make a quality product. PQ is my first consideration, but not the only one.


it makes perfect sense. Trying to portray sales figures as the one and only definitive proof that a product is satisfactory or great is laughable. Which is why the Aston Martin comparison to ford is a valid one seeing as most would opt for the aston and not the ford despite the disparity in price and of course sales.
I'm no expert, but I thought Aston was not exactly high on the reliability list. And a niche product that most people would hardly know about if it weren't for James Bond. Even in England. Maybe y'all should stop with silly car analogies.

It's also kinda funny you'd compare these 2, since Ford owned Aston for some time.

Personally, I'd probably opt for a Toyota.
 
IME, Philips makes crappy products, including TVs. Whether the panels themselves are an 8 or a 3 (scale of 1-10) hardly matters since overall they do not make a quality product. PQ is my first consideration, but not the only one.

All large electronic companies will have crappy products in their stable. Philips
9000 and 21:9 series are an exception and as matter of fact I don't believe they are available in the US Market so perhaps that could explain you're scepticism but I'm sure the 21:9 is the nicest looking and built tv out there (only beaten by B&O and the Elite series just released, I'd imagine).

I'm no expert, but I thought Aston was not exactly high on the reliability list. And a niche product that most people would hardly know about if it weren't for James Bond. Even in England. Maybe y'all should stop with silly car analogies.

It's also kinda funny you'd compare these 2, since Ford owned Aston for some time.

Personally, I'd probably opt for a Toyota.

Irrespective of james bond I'm sure most knew what an Aston Martin was knowing how crazy people in the UK are over cars. Anyway, I'd never for one minute consider Toyota after their brake issues resulting in millions of vehicles recalled

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2011_Toyota_vehicle_recalls
 
All large electronic companies will have crappy products in their stable. Philips
9000 and 21:9 series are an exception and as matter of fact I don't believe they are available in the US Market so perhaps that could explain you're scepticism but I'm sure the 21:9 is the nicest looking and built tv out there (only beaten by B&O and the Elite series just released, I'd imagine).
That could be it.


Irrespective of james bond I'm sure most knew what an Aston Martin was knowing how crazy people in the UK are over cars. Anyway, I'd never for one minute consider Toyota after their brake issues resulting in millions of vehicles recalled

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2011_Toyota_vehicle_recalls
You've been brainwashed. It's not even a brake issue, and it's been fixed. Every car has recalls, this one was very serious, but it was worked on pretty quickly and efficiently by Toyota. In fact, they took it so seriously they stopped production for a week or so, I've never heard of another company doing that. The media blew it up to be far more than it ever was, and has dragged it out much longer than it should have been. Maybe you should actually read that article you linked.
 
You've been brainwashed. It's not even a brake issue, and it's been fixed. Every car has recalls, this one was very serious, but it was worked on pretty quickly and efficiently by Toyota. In fact, they took it so seriously they stopped production for a week or so, I've never heard of another company doing that. The media blew it up to be far more than it ever was, and has dragged it out much longer than it should have been. Maybe you should actually read that article you linked.

I'm not sure what the problem is. They recalled millions of vehicles pertaining to various issues, and yes there was a brake issue if you actually read the article as I indeed have. Sure, it was hyped up by the media but don't let that get in the way of the facts. I do not remember another company having to recall as many vehicles as Toyota were forced to maybe you could provide some insight on that.
 
The only problems with that are,


3. OLED isn't that good.

I'm interested.

Why do you say OLED isn't that good?

I thought it was thinner, used less power, and has superb black levels and colour quality than old LCD screens with backlights


I'm of course talking about Super AMOLED which is what Samsung has to use in some devices: http://youtu.be/aQkLMG3SBQ4
 
You claimed the philips tv's use Samsung/LG panels - incorrect

You claimed they make the crapiest displays - incorrect

I never said they used the same panels as on the Elite, but they are by no means crap, I can assure you.


i never said that Philips uses Samsung/LG panels. I was asking if they do. It was a question.

Philips makes the crappiest displays. on that note, do they even make their own displays or do they get it from the usual crowd; Samsung/LG.
Theres a difference...

Sharps LCD panels are generally crap. They used to have a ton of banding issues. Some years back they were of quality, but Samsung/LG/Panasonic/Sony surpassed them in terms of PQ.

Please, if you feel that Sharp/Philips makes the best panels go make that trip to avsforum and tell them Philips is a premiere TV brand to buy. They'll laugh at you.
 
i never said that Philips uses Samsung/LG panels. I was asking if they do. It was a question.


Theres a difference....

At least you've accepted your other comment as being downright wrong.

Sharps LCD panels are generally crap. They used to have a ton of banding issues. Some years back they were of quality, but Samsung/LG/Panasonic/Sony surpassed them in terms of PQ.

Please, if you feel that Sharp/Philips makes the best panels go make that trip to avsforum and tell them Philips is a premiere TV brand to buy. They'll laugh at you.

Obviously we're stepping into subjective territory, but i disagree with your assertion on Sharp's displays.

Show where I said Sharp/philips makes the best panels. In any case, I don't think I'd be able to compete with this:

Philips makes the crappiest displays.

Here it is in its full glory...
 
At least you've accepted your other comment as being downright wrong.



Obviously we're stepping into subjective territory, but i disagree with your assertion on Sharp's displays.

Show where I said Sharp/philips makes the best panels. In any case, I don't think I'd be able to compete with this:



Here it is in its full glory...

you're wrong claiming that I said Philips get their panels from Samsung/LG.

this is evident as I provided the original source of what I stated.

there is no right or wrong. I asked a question.

Sharp makes subpar panels compared to its competitors.
 
you're wrong claiming that I said Philips get their panels from Samsung/LG.

this is evident as I provided the original source of what I stated.

there is no right or wrong. I asked a question.

Sharp makes subpar panels compared to its competitors.

You're wrong claiming I said Philips/Sharp makes the best panels. Looks like it works both ways.

This is evident as i never made such a claim word for word if you look at my posts throughout this thread.

You made a bold statement coupled with a question. The former was clearly wrong.

Have fun with your Panny while I enjoy the reputed 21:9 monster in the living room.
 
You're wrong claiming I said Philips/Sharp makes the best panels. Looks like it works both ways.

This is evident as i never made such a claim word for word if you look at my posts throughout this thread.

You made a bold statement coupled with a question. The former was clearly wrong.

Have fun with your Panny while I enjoy the reputed 21:9 monster in the living room.

You're ok with artificial BBC Docudrama-like motion ?

I never understood why LCD enthusiasts prefer 120hz/240hz/400hz. Most folks in the movie industry prefer Plasma, as they can offer better color reproduction and deeper blacks, without the artificial motion blur. Heck, Netflix HQ uses all Pioneer Kuro plasmas in their building.

I looked at the 21:9 cinema display. I like the form factor. But I'd have to take a look at the PQ. It looks as though its not sold stateside.
 
I just want a 55" LED. No 3D, no Netflix, Pandra, etc built in. What if half of that stuff becomes obsolete in a year or so?
 
I just want a 55" LED. No 3D, no Netflix, Pandra, etc built in. What if half of that stuff becomes obsolete in a year or so?

why go for an LED thats pricier than its Plasma counterpart?

you get better PQ, better black levels, better colors, and more accurate motion than any comparable LED at its price range.

You can grab a 50 inch plasma for ~$1000 shipped

when plasmas on sale 50 inch sets can dip as low as $800.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Title could of simply read:


"Apple Reportedly Still Uninterested in Modern Technology"
 
"But" said family says, "we don't want the unsightly little box on display where anyone can see it". Salesperson says, "well, I can sell you that Apple TV for twice the price OR we could include this bracket which will hide the little :apple:TV box behind the TV."

Given the aggressive pricing of Macbook Air, Apple TV, and the iPad ... and consumer willingness to buy iPods and Macbook Pros and iMacs ...

What is the basis of your conclusion that (a) the price will have an exorbitant premium and (b) consumers won't pay?

Can you give a recent example where Apple has made this mistake?

----------

Apple won't use any technology if other companies are using it. They just have to be different even if it means idiotic design choices.

Here are some examples:
No right click mouse ever produced
Blu-Ray
HDMI
OLED
Copy/Paste
Flash
User swappable batteries

Except that recent mouses and touch devices have gestures equivalent to right click (and more), Blu-ray isn't really needed on most devices (and is probably better as a separate component), HDMI is way less flexible than Thuderbolt (and relatively cheap adapters are available if you want to downgrade the connection), OLED is overpriced burns out and is over saturated, copy paste was slow but it's been here for years, Flash is finally dying (good riddance), and greatly improved battery life/form factor is a reasonable trade-off for user replaceable batteries.

It seems you're mostly criticizing Apple for failing to use outdated and inferior technologies. In my opinion.
 
I'm not sure what the problem is. They recalled millions of vehicles pertaining to various issues, and yes there was a brake issue if you actually read the article as I indeed have. Sure, it was hyped up by the media but don't let that get in the way of the facts. I do not remember another company having to recall as many vehicles as Toyota were forced to maybe you could provide some insight on that.

Simple. The media doesn't hype every recall. But you can find them if you want, plenty are dangerous like brakes or transmissions that can fail. We are way off topic, though. Neither Toyota nor the NHTSA can find anything wrong in their electronics, although Woz disagrees.

That brake issue was barely anything in the Toyota mess. Don't be whiny.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.