Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017Yet, GSMArean didn't test it (the battery life is tested in 16:9 environments) which is exactl... moreJut another quick clarification. The battery endurance rating comprises of four components: 3G talk time, Wi-Fi browsing, standby and video playback. If there is any point at all to be made here, regarding 16:9 use cases, it would only apply to our standard test video. Indeed, it is 16:9, which we believe is the only way to make results directly comparable. We still measured a 45 minute or so improvement in video playback endurance over the S7 edge.
As per the other "on-screen" test we run, which is browsing, it was done using the full real estate of the screen, in the default Samsung browser at the native QHD+ resolution.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017For phones, 16:9 is good, because phones are small. Phones need more length because it needs s... moreBy narrowing the width, it also made typing in portrait mode more cramped and made the video experience less pleasurable.
My wider Note 3 is better to type on than the more one-handed friendly S7e thanks to it providing a wider keyboard and flat screen. Note 3 doesn't need to do palm rejection and offers me the right ratio.
Face it, the S7 edge was the best phone that Samsung ever made. I actually despise it more than others but their S7e is like what the Z3 was to Sony and M8 was to HTC. They peaked right there.
Unfortunately, Samsung will just milk this bezel-less, G2 copycat design until 2019 once their X is ready. As time goes on, people will laugh at this bezel-less, curved trend and oddball 18.5:9 like they did with HTC M8's extra eyeball and find something more useful.
S8 is a joke just like the jack-less iPhone 7 was last year. With enough whining, they will go back to something more normal and standard. What next for Apple? An Apple car with no steering wheel and wheels. Need to buy them separately?
Tann Hauser, 18 Apr 2017Am I not spot on with my deleted comment in any way?
Battery tested in fhd with half act pix... moreAll GSMArena battery tests are conducted following a very specific procedure, which you can read about in detail here - http://www.gsmarena.com/gsmarena_lab_tests-review-751p6.php The S8+ makes no exception. Furthermore, tests were, in fact, conducted in the native QHD+ resolution. To be fair, this wasn't clearly stated in the text, which has since been corrected.
As for the point regarding the video: Yes, our standard sample is a 16:9 one, which does leave some inactive pixels on the screen. However, running it is the only way we can assure comparability and validity of results. This is, in fact, how we managed to measure a 45 minute or so improvement in video playback endurance on the S8+ compared to the S7 edge. We believe it to be a fair apples to apples comparison.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017Actually movies were always shot wider than 4:3, they just cropped them for TV.
And would y... moreFor phones, 16:9 is good, because phones are small. Phones need more length because it needs space to fit in the hand. For example when holding vertically the phone, too much width would make holding/use the phone in one hand too hard, so you can extend the screen only vertically. When holding horizontally, you need space for the game controls when you play games. (While your thumbs cover the extra width of 16:9, you'll see about the central 4:3 from the game.)
And since it's a small device, it will fit in the human field of view anyway.
Old phones with keyboard had 4:3, but since the screen replaced the keyboard, it could go only vertically.
This future is now getting messy with dongles, different charging standards, and variety of aspect ratios and resolutions everywhere.
The S8+ battery life seems respectable enough but doesn't seem to have the same standby time as its predecessor. The S8 should test worse than it. If I had to choose between the S8 duo, it would be the S8+ because I adapted to 5.5" pretty quickly and typing on the narrower S8 would feel to cramped in portrait mode. Typing is the most thing I do on my phones. S7 edge is terrible at it thanks to the more palm rejection.
Why bother? Smart money is on the heavily discounted S7 edge though or S7 flat. I would trade that 10% improvement of the S8 for a 40-50% discount. Always get the one year old flagship at 50% off. Then you will start missing that physical home button which is another way to wake the screen and no onscreen buttons to kill display space.
With 18.5:9, this Infinity Display is so misleading fooling people you think it will use up the entire screen when watching videos but you won't. Move along. Nothing revolutionary to see here. Just took Samsung four years to copy the LG G2. I also want Samsung to make another beautiful non-black phone. Tired of another smudge magnet black phone already.
Aspros, 18 Apr 2017What matters the most is WiFi browsing and that defintly fully uses the entire screen estate a... moreYet, GSMArean didn't test it (the battery life is tested in 16:9 environments) which is exactly my point. Had they tested it in a typical use case you'd get battery life in mid 70s ... quite far less than last year.
Point is that when one company makes the screen bigger they should also put a bigger battery else battery life suffers. That's exactly what happened with S8+ . Last year with the full screen lit it was 90 hours, this year with 3/4ths lit is 88h ... that's quite a step back, no two ways about it.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017It is happening only in Korea so farNot so: I've seen a pink-tinted S8+ on display in a shop in the UK, and can confirm that I couldn't eliminate it using the colour sliders or display mode, though I could make it less visible.
Just because a report says that customers in Korea are complaining doesn't mean they are the only ones affected, just that they got the devices earlier.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017I don't get why peripheral vision is not useful though. I feel much more immersed in widescree... more4:3 is not a square, it is wider horizontally. And it perfectly fulfills the periphery.
The 16:9 is too wide from the same standpoint, which makes it's edges useless.
The film standard is widescreen mostly because it was inefficient to place seats to fit the 4:3 movie screen, but with widescreen, they can place more seats horizontally.
The 16:9 monitors are nonsense anyway. For example all websites are vertically scrolling. It's much easier to read short line texts aligned vertically than long lines horizontally. That's why the text on A4 documents are vertical, not horizontal.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 20174:3 is much better than 16:9 in every way, because the usable field of view of the human eye i... moreActually movies were always shot wider than 4:3, they just cropped them for TV.
And would you really want to hold a 4:3 phone?
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017The battery is actually quite less. Keep in mind that during the GSMArena test only 3/4th of t... moreWhat matters the most is WiFi browsing and that defintly fully uses the entire screen estate and clearly improved as stated by all sites!
AnonD-39937, 18 Apr 2017So the 835 is 95% the same as 835 in terms of performance and should be more "efficient"...But... moreThe battery is actually quite less. Keep in mind that during the GSMArena test only 3/4th of ths screen was lit.
If they had made their test to have the full screen lit then S8 would get about 10 hours less battery life than S7. A definite step back.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017You're just talking about the peripheral vision. That's why I said that the useful field of vi... moreI don't get why peripheral vision is not useful though. I feel much more immersed in widescreen movies because my periphery is filled too. Sure the action should take place in the central 4:3 frame, but having things happening in the periphery is better than not. I welcome widescreen format for that very reason.
Samsung of course went too far and it's mostly a parody at this point. I think 17:9 is the most you can realistically do before making the screen/scenes way too awkward looking.
AnonD-483897, 18 Apr 2017835 "95%" same as 835?I think he meant
"835 is 95% the same as 820"
So the 835 is 95% the same as 835 in terms of performance and should be more "efficient"...But the battery life is similar to last generation...This sounds like missusage of hardware...A battery which lasted 50% more would have been better than a curved screen with weird too tall screen (which is hard to handle, I used it for a day).
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017Problem is that people have two eyes, which means that our total view is wider than it is tall... moreYou're just talking about the peripheral vision. That's why I said that the useful field of view of the human eye is the closest to the 4:3.
Anonymous, 18 Apr 20174:3 is much better than 16:9 in every way, because the usable field of view of the human eye i... moreDont't give me that "human eye can only see" crap.
The reason why the aspect ratio sucks is black bars.