Out of the box, yes, Samsung OLED displays look like cartoons. All it takes is a visit to settings and change the display mode to "basic." HIGHLY accurate - actually the best there is according to display mate.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Galaxy S7's 'Best Smartphone Display' Makes Strong Case for Apple to Shift to OLED iPhones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My my 3 year old S4 screen still looks better than my year old iPHone 6 screen so therefore you argument is invalid. So comparing it with my S6 screen...my bad no comparison. I will be retiring my S6 when the S7 come out. I will hold on to my S4 because it is the last phone that I have with a removable battery. Some of you have you heads stuck too far up Apple's @ss. I use both OS's, even though I do have a slight bias towards Android. The ONLY things that I like better on iPhone are the timely updates, and The Weather Channel widget that's it because their screens do suck.
Really, you're little experience is more conclusive than actual science? Are you joking?
You're wrong or a liar. You can pick your poison.
Well, since you're talking through your hat about longevity of your 3 year old phone (goes against actual data on this 3 year old tech), yes you are, absolutely.
My mum is still using her iPhone 4 which she got in 2010. She refuses to upgrade it lol so its almost 6 years old now and still works.
Say what you wand OLED screens currently are the best screens. Overall that's what I was trying to say.
"I Do not argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
My iPhone 4 is an iPod, but it still works perfectly.
[doublepost=1456581813][/doublepost]
Apples gonna do it when the tech is right. Those who think the competition is better jumps ship.
I agree. Apple are not the first but they usually perfect things. They got Apple Pay right. Even bigger screened phones. They were late but they made sure having a large display didn't compromise battery life.
Agreed.
MRs is a website for the peeps interested in technology and we have heated discussions about what we think is important.
But the average person will probably make the same observations as I did today. I walked in a phone shop (my wife's iPhone 6s+ got stolen ) and played with several phones. The screens on Samsung's phones looked great - but the ones one the iPhones are not far behind.
But what was noticeable: despite of benchmarks, processors and other marketing BS: when you open for example the gallery App on a S6/Edge/Note 5, it feels like something is dragging you down.
In comparison, and by no means I feel that iOS is the best thing since sliced bread, iPhones feel much faster.
Even the LG V10 felt *much* faster than a Note 5. So yes, I know the discussion here is about Samsung's display technology, but at the end of the day I feel the average customer gives a flying xxxx about about a slight improved display technology. The overall coherent system and ecosystem will be the detrimental factor for the customer to decide. And no matter how hard MR is trying to push Samsung threads for controversial page hits, Samsung has reached its peak and will go downhill (like they have been going downhill in the flagship segment for a while - expect some butthurt responses ) as other manufacturers in the Android world like Xiaomi will offer similar hardware specs for a less costs. And probably a better and faster UI.
But in the scope of this thread it doesn't matter. Yes, maybe one day Apple will have a different display technology and Samsung will be just one of many Android manufacturers.
Who cares.
At the end of the day it is just about phones, etc. PHONES! For Christ sake.
Apple got Apple Pay right? Really? I don't think so. It can only be used at limited places. Samsung got mobile pay right. Being able to use mobile payment at virtually every single place around the world is "getting it right".
Android phones that initially had big screens got good battery life. They only got worse when they went with 2k screens. LG G2 had one of the best battery life on a big screen phone to this day.
My original galaxy note had poor battery life. Samsung pay is very short sighted. Magnetic strip technology is outdated and we haven't used it in the UK for about a decade now. It's not used in Europe yet. Samsung pay will probably never gain traction world wide. It's only available in Korea, the US and maybe China.
However the prevalence of contactless payments built into cards means that it's literally just as much hassle to pull a card out of your pocket and pay for something as it is for your phone. I don't think that Apple pay, or Samsung pay, or Google Wallet will take off in the UK.
As for battery life, everything is poor these days. You have to have chargers at home, at your desk, sometimes even in your car just to have a usable phone for the full day. As long as the battery lasts for a long enough period of time to not be too far away from a charge for too long, it's now an acceptable battery life. It's not the way it should be, but it is. My iPhone 6 doesn't get anywhere near a day of battery life with moderate usage
I don't doubt there are people who keep their phones for a long time. I just don't think it's an amount that would be affected much by a 5-10 year lifespan of OLED screens.
It's not that they perfect anything, it's that they wait until they know they have no choice but to change. The point where they think consumers may start looking elsewhere to purchase a device. But before then you can be sure they will shake every last nickel out of selling that device, which I don't blame them as a business. I don't see anything more perfect about things like large screened phones or Apple pay versus their equivalents, if anything Apple's phablet is quite inferior next to other phablets out there. This isn't meant as a Samsung versus Apple comment though. I just think that sometimes people think of Apple as this altruistic company there to help the masses with their technological woes. In reality they are a business and they are there to do one thing, and one thing only, get as much money out of you as possible. Once again nothing at all wrong with this.
Many others disagree that Apple basically waits until the cows have left the barn to incorporate new technology. That is the antithesis of innovative.
Apple milks profit margins as long as they can to update hardware.it does not wait for tech to catch up.
Going bigger screens and adding RAM is a prime example and they are 2k IPS screens that they could use but hold back.
Look at the new Apple TV...no 4k so apple can squeeze just a little more out of you this year and give 4k support next year with a new version when the current one can run and support 4k at the hardware level
Basically that is a negative opinion that really can't be proved because there might be another reason than profits for the way Apple releases hardware. And this is a conspiracy theory type of opinion.
Where there's a will, and $200bn in cash reserves, there's a way.
Profits are the only reason Apple, and every other company, exist. If the people running the company aren't looking out for the best interests, i.e. profit either in the short or long term, then they're failing in their fiduciary duty.
Every company pulls stuff like this. The entire ethos is to give the customer something that appears far more valuable than it really is in order to make them pay through the nose for it. I fell for it with the iPhone 6 and will be jumping ship next week
You couldn't be more wrong with the bolded; look up Peter Drucker for some "edumacation". A company exists to provide a service, those who do it well, end up like apple, those who don't end up like Blackberry.
Until CEO TC screws up, if he does, it seems this is course apple has charted.
Company Directors are legally obligated to maximize shareholder value. That means either short term profits or the expectation of longer term returns. They provide goods and services at a price that the customer is willing to pay for. By and large, better services cost more money, which is why historically iPhones and iPads have had significantly higher prices than competitors. Now Apple are in a position where they can offer a product that isn't significantly better than it's competitors, at a higher price, because of goodwill built up in the brand.
I don't need any 'edumacation' when it comes to basic business concepts. I'm a qualified management accountant, and am well aware of Drucker's work. But it's 2016, brand image is king, and customer loyalty gets milked for all its worth
With the bolded? Really? With Drucker profit is not king; but with the statement I quoted, an "edumaction" may be in order. Sorry, I'm only basing my response on your post, where "profit is king".
I'm assuming you're referring to chromaticity and gray scale tracking shifts? Can you show evidence of this?
+1.
This is no different from consumer flat panels. What's even more interesting is that a majority of the people claiming over saturation in this forum pick their TVs based on what they see on a show room floor which is what we call torch mode. It's thge equivalent to what they're complaining about here.
Jobs was right, people want to be told what they want.