Because it’s sucks to put more. That’s why we have desktops laptops and tablets where it’s actually doable and useful.Putting a 4gb RAM in xs max which can only run one app at a time seems like overkill. Then again iOS is pretty inefficient..
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.
Huawei Unveils $2,600 Foldable 'Mate X' Smartphone to Rival Samsung's Galaxy Fold
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But the tablet HAS replaced tv and computer for many people. Even I watch a lot of tv on my iPad instead of firing up the projector or flat screen. We are considering cancelling dish and just going with our Apple TV because we so rarely use the TV nowadays. And my computer is now used only for work or for coding for my iPhone or iPad.
There’s no reason why a good foldable can’t similarly succeed by doing the job of an iPhone plus an iPad.
[doublepost=1551098370][/doublepost]
Apple Watch was after iPad. AirPods were after iPad. Both have been hugely successful.
iOS is many things, but inefficient isn’t one of them.Putting a 4gb RAM in xs max which can only run one app at a time seems like overkill. Then again iOS is pretty inefficient..
You sure? I saw many speed test videos pitching xs max to note9 or s9. Xs max with CPU that's 2x faster lost out in opening apps.
I am an iPhone user. But Samsung phones are overall more value for your money if you compare Note 9 to iPhone XS. It a pretty large comment you made about samsung being a 'joke'.
Atleast they are pushing the future, and how does it affect you? If you don't like it, don't buy it. There is a margin of people (especially business) that would purchase a product like this. Just like people purchase iPhones, because they enjoy the experience and like the product.
Apple Watch was not an innovative product like iPad or iPhone, industry leading innovation, though it may be leading the sales. I have Airpod(minor innovation, true) and one side the battery is gone after using it for an year that too very sparingly...whereas Sony Bluetooth headset still working after 4 years of bit moderate use.
I don’t bother with these videos. It doesn’t matter which phone opens an app a millisecond faster. It’s about the overall experience and feature set of the phone.
What do you mean "it sucks to do more".
that comment makes no sense. having more resources available for a computer device, whether handheld or the largest systems in the world, having more resources is NEVER a bad thing.
[doublepost=1551100805][/doublepost]
These posts, regardless of who comes out on top (cause hey, there are some out there putting Note9 too) are absolutely meaningless benchmarks as they do not accurately reflect real world usage.
they're drag races. that's it. it's like putting a Vette against a Silverado on a 1/4 mile and declaring that the Vette is a better vehicle all around because it does the quarter mile the fastest.
flaws in these tests: Nobody uses their phone where they're cycling through 2 dozen apps one after aonthoer in set order. most users use 2-5 apps.
it also doesn't take into account each phones strengths. For example, try opening and running 2 apps on the same display on an iPhone vs note 9. the note 9 migth not load the apps as fast as the iPhone, but will run both apps fluidly. Performance isn't just straight line how fast an app loads, it's also how well the app performs.
Not all apps are created equal. So a sequential drag race may skew towards one device or another depending on the App list created for this benchmark. The iPhone for example, due to it's lower core count, but faster cores will load things thar are larger off storage faster. Like a large game. So throwing large games into the mix skews the metrics as well. For example, as someone who doesn't have a single game installed and uses mostly bank and other small apps day to day, the Note 9 and iPhone showcased similar load time performances on those apps. Those games heavily skew these sorts of tests.
I don't think anyone of us here discounts Apple's silicon and it's ability to be extremely performant. But these sorts of testse don't really showcase that and only really are being made for bragging rights on a very nonsensicle style testing.
anytime I see one of those posted as proof towards ANY phones performance I immediately discount it, and the person posting it as they clearly don't understand what is being showcased.
What argument? We already established that Apple can get foldable screens if they wanted to. Or that the Huawei version is better? I would say the lack of a screen gap and a full screen front is a better solution than what Samsung is offering. Yes, we'll see how the reviews shake out from the few that decide to buy these. Correct, Apple will instead focus on improving their products instead of bringing out something to market just to be new with such obvious flaws like a screen crease.. The hypocrisy from people like you is pretty apparent here. If Apple came out with a product that had a screen crease, no doubt you would be calling it junk. Android manufacturers do it, and it's totally fine, the next best thing. My preferences for tech don't necessarily need to have an Apple logo on it. I actually think the new S10 is pretty nice from a hardware perspective, but I wouldn't buy it because I look for the best overall combination of performance, privacy, security, ecosystem, apps, and support. Right now Apple still hits the mark in all of those areas.
Quite frankly I place security, privacy at the top of my list, and nobody comes close to Apple in my opinion. Then I get the added benefit of top performance, the most polished apps, support for years, and excellent hardware.
What makes you think people who buy these $2000+ phones are dumb?
Most people who buy these have financial security where $2000 means nothing to them. My millionaire uncle thinks nothing of treating my kids to $500 ice cream at some chic place in Manhattan, just to say he did it. He will buy the latest gadgets - and use them for a week to see how they are, then put them in a drawer never to be seen again if he doesn't find them useful. It's a different world for these people.
If you're making minimum wage or are a poor college student and buying one of these, then yes, I would think you're foolish with your money.
Dumb may be a bit harsh, I admit, but I just don't know why anyone would spend $2,000 on a product with no real advantages to what we have today. They would be better off buying a phone and a tablet, without the compromises, which would provide a better experience. Dropping $2,000 for a device with a crease down the middle of the screen just feels kind of silly to me.
This is a really interesting product. I have to admit this is what looks like innovation. I suppose the obvious worry is how a foldable screen holds up to regular use. But let’s assume it does- having a quick smaller phone-sized screen to use is nice when paired with the fold-out larger screen. I’m still a little skeptical of the ergonomics but this is a really interesting product.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Researchers should be mapping the signalling of the optic nerve so we can:
1) Cure blindness (if they have an optic nerve) - longer topic (and shouldn't be discussed here as the mods will squash)
2) Have overlays / displays (ie Google Glass) without the glasses - once we have the coding for the signalling, we can put whatever content we want on there.
And, no, not a fan of extensive cybernetic interfaces directly into the human brain. Having people hacked is less than desirable.
(you could have the interface to the optic nerve put in place with nanites).
Just think...no-one looking down anymore (running into each other, poles, trees, etc). Actually looking people in the eye again.
1) Cure blindness (if they have an optic nerve) - longer topic (and shouldn't be discussed here as the mods will squash)
2) Have overlays / displays (ie Google Glass) without the glasses - once we have the coding for the signalling, we can put whatever content we want on there.
And, no, not a fan of extensive cybernetic interfaces directly into the human brain. Having people hacked is less than desirable.
(you could have the interface to the optic nerve put in place with nanites).
Just think...no-one looking down anymore (running into each other, poles, trees, etc).
Actually looking people in the eye again.
I think the price is pretty nuts but, then again, for a new form factor and novelty I think you will see a lot of people trying it for that very reason. As a professional UXD, I’m interested in the ergonomics and impact to application and web design.
I do, and anyone who's ever studied business or worked for a corporation that collects even millions (let alone billions) in annual revenue knows that too. It's common freaking sense. Good grief.
You seem to be woefully unaware of two things:
1) large the device market is and what current sales look like. "Millions" isn't a bold claim at all. If I'd said 10MM+ for Samsung and Huawei, that'd be different (although still probably not unrealistic, especially if we factor iterations on these designs in). But I didn't.
2) the amount of forecasting that goes into product line decisions, and how high those forecasts — influenced by market research — have to be to justify such significant R&D expenses that then have to be amortized.
You're continuing to double down in places where you shouldn't. For your own sake, just stop. Stick to what you know, which is what devices you like, and leave the business side to those of us who are skilled at it.
Last edited:
Yea I am definitely in the camp that doesn't need bleeding edge features year after year. I just need my tools to work well, reliably, and provide all of the things I mentioned. Those acting like they are going to buy one of these foldable phones and all of a sudden be using them for business and being productive, just seems pretty short sighted to me. These are prototypes with obvious shortcomings. The concept is definitely cool, but they should have waited to release until the kinks were smoothed out.
[doublepost=1551102599][/doublepost]
It's an interesting concept for sure, I just think it's half baked and not really bringing any significant value to market. A few years from now, maybe the tech is ready, or maybe it goes the way of other gimmicks.
[doublepost=1551102733][/doublepost]
Your example doesn't really correlate. The XS Max doesn't have any obvious compromises like a crease down the middle of the screen. If this device wasn't full of compromises, I wouldn't necessarily balk at the price. Sure though, for examples sake - anyone would be better off buying a low end Android phone and tablet than spending money on one of these foldables.
LoL your claim was they can get them from Samsung(and Samsung can't refuse them). That's what we were talking about.
Really?
So you are calling me a hypocrite based on something you assume I would say or do? LoL
Last edited: