Jamesschwarz987, 09 Aug 2018Not really. The module itself shouldn't be at that pricey.Im mean clearly still a good phone and camera. Just way over priced for how little it brings compared to others.
But they are all sadly getting there
Jamesschwarz987, 09 Aug 2018Google lowered it because there's no one developed 1/2.3" sensor with Dual Pixel right now...Still no excuse. Especially with the price hike that made it the most over priced android phone until Sony came with the xz2p
Anonymous, 09 Aug 2018You are correct. And Samsung had stated about that 1/1.7 inch sensor 2 or 3 years ago now and ... moreGoogle lowered it because there's no one developed 1/2.3" sensor with Dual Pixel right now...
Jamesschwarz987, 08 Aug 2018Evenmore that this year flagships are sticking on 1/2.55 inchies to save space for another ext... moreYou are correct. And Samsung had stated about that 1/1.7 inch sensor 2 or 3 years ago now and we still have not seen anything close to.
Just 12mp 1/2.55.... And dual set up.
A waist of money that downgrades the quality of the single.
But sadly even ones that stuck to single sensors didn't up the quality. Google in fact lowered it. I don't care if they improved the lens and boosted sharpening. There was excuse to shrink sensor size and up the price....
Anonymous, 08 Aug 2018And that alone is sad for all other phones for the past few years. Many high end phones have b... moreEvenmore that this year flagships are sticking on 1/2.55 inchies to save space for another extra camera gimmick, while the last 2 years most flagships were already on 1/2.3".
Jamesschwarz987, 07 Aug 2018Sheesh, i think i'm already said this in another article... Because it's the best phone, it s... moreAnd that alone is sad for all other phones for the past few years. Many high end phones have been between 8 and 9mm and have such tiny sensors and low resolutions.
Geric.770, 06 Aug 2018Stop whining on sensor sizes.
Just buy a DSLR.Sheesh, i think i'm already said this in another article...
Because it's the best phone, it should need the best components for it. P20 Pro could fit 1/1.7" on its 8mm body, so why not?
Anonymous, 06 Aug 2018That is funny, I have an iPhone 5 and an iPhone 7 and my non-tech or camera savvy friends can ... moreno, even nowadays iPhone X is 1/2.9" (yes, just 0.0115 inch bigger than 1/3")
Geric.770, 07 Aug 2018Well, ok. I'm picking the budget one IF I have the money to spend and experience the world of... moreI really hope it cost that much and can beat oneplus 6 in speed test. But I doubt it will happen. Lol!
Anonymous, 07 Aug 2018Ming Chi Kuo said that the budget phone might cost $550. https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/... moreWell, ok.
I'm picking the budget one IF I have the money to spend and experience the world of iPhones and iOS.
Geric.770, 06 Aug 2018I'm expecting that huge camera to be low light capable and has all flagship camera tricks. ... moreMing Chi Kuo said that the budget phone might cost $550. https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/04/18/kuo-budget-61-inch-lcd-iphone-lineup-could-start-at-550
nik.007, 07 Aug 20181. Here the chipset & devices are manufactured by different brands. The devices with SD 84... moreWhile you are clearly the one on the right track... Yes s845 was announced 2017. But released 2018. Most chips and phone models are announced or mostly ready months prior to release.
But it doesn't matter because they are blowing smoke out their rears.
A chip might be a lot more powerful but it easily throttles a lot more heavily and quicker. S845 is a much more efficient chip and way more than powerful enough.
Also 1gb of ram on ios was not more efficient. Low ram count was one of the big culprits to ios exceeding all other smart systems in app crashes for years. That and the crashes just clearly showed that it was not as optimized as claimed.
News article is just about new iPhone having a larger single camera, yet here the comment section is full of sad haters talking about nonsense that’s has nothing to do with the article. You guys need friends.
FinnishInquisition, 06 Aug 20181) SD845 was indeed announced in December 2017, but not launched until 2018.
2) AnTuTu test... more1. Here the chipset & devices are manufactured by different brands. The devices with SD 845 launched in 2018 but the chip was launched in 2017.
Even this year, tge rumoured Razrphone 2 is expected to launch in December with SD 855.
There are two ways to see this. My point being, QC readied the SD 845 in Dec 2017, using the resourced available in 2017. It's not that come 2018, they upgraded it so that it could somehow beat 2017 iPhones. The same chip they prepared in 2017 is matching or even beating the A11.
2. So earlier when Apple's devices had a gig of RAM, still had better RAM management than 4 GB RAM Androids, you people said "why need more RAM when 1 GB is enough". The same applies here. "Why need a faster processor, when a 'slower' processor like the SD 845 is giving better results".
3. The same answer as above. What's the use of a faster chip when a slower chip gives better performance than the faster chip, be it because of animation, programming, or storage type, or in general, better optimisation.
Also, I started this discussion as "iPhone vs Android flagship" and not "A11 vs SD845".
To conclude, just like 1 GB RAM was fine at the times of 4GB RAM, today a 'slower' processor is fine if it gives better performance.
4. Google has promised 3 major Android updates, and I am sure, looking at how Google works, they will provide security updates and optimisation even after that. Also, as I said previously, even Sammy is supporting it's 4 year old Note 4 in 2018.
Still, I accept my defeat here, as I also accepted in my very first comment. Apple does provide better support, but it's nowhere close to worth the price they ask for, considering so many major shortcomings in their products.
5. Well, HTC used saphhire on it's U Ultra, and it indeed scratched at Level 9 on Mohs scale.
Ok, Apple uses sapphire. I accept that. But a sapphire that scratches. Sapphire on iPhone is like, say, a gold plated iPhone. It doesn't provide the scratch resistant property of sapphire, it's sapphire just for the purpose of claiming it is sapphire. Well, other brands' "non-sapphire" lenses are doing better than Apple's proprietary "sapphire" lens.
Just like Apple's proprietary "lightning" port, which neither gives faster charging speed, nor quicker transfer speeds, still is better because Apple calls it "lightning" port.
Also, it IS COST CUTTING. Apple used to do well with less RAM previously, but this time, it is quite evident that thet iPhone X did need more RAM, it's unable to hold half the apps it used to hold, only because Apple doesn't want to put more RAM. I don't know how you would not call it cost cutting. They have the worst selfie camera in the flagship segment, which they can improve by using a better module, but they did not. Again, cost cutting. Their cable qualities are the worst, again cost cutting. They removed a "cheap", but much convenient component from their 1000+ dollar flagship, again cost cutting. Their low res display, not including even a Quick Charge 1 equivalent charger, again cost cutting. There are a lot of other small and major things.
6. See, Apple also used to have a business of providing "fastest" phones. The same was busted when it came to light that they are down clocking their processors. Again, Apple execs did not come forward, like saints you are making them to be, that they were doing this. Instead, they were caught red handed and they had to accept it because they did not have any other way.
Now, again here I am forced to accept defeat. But rest assured, the people at Apple won't be coming and telling you "we are sharing your data" until they are caught red handed. Facebook issue earlier, came to light 2 years after the US elections. That too, they WERE FORCED TO ACCEPT THAT, because they were caught red handed. Now I am not saying Apple does misuse user data, but in today's times, like I said, where your personal info is with 100 different corporations, your data is not any more "safer" in an Apple device than an Android device.