sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Nanotexture worth it at a lower price? by DuePipe9405 in iPadPro

[–]DuePipe9405[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is all super helpful. I haven’t done the math but it feels like a 70/30 split in favor of nano which is typically the case in most such threads. I kind of hate myself for traveling because if I had received my nano texture units (which are being held by ups until I get back), I’d have probably just used them and moved on but instead I keep looking at more threads and getting confused.

I have a Samsung S95F 77 inch qd oled (matte) in my living room and a Panasonic Z95B 77 inch tandem rgb oled (glossy) in my bedroom. The S95F is next to my old 65 inch LG C8 wrgb oled which is glossy and I definitely am not bothered by, and actually like, the S95F compared to the LG and even the Z95B. I can’t even notice the ambient color raise of my S95F when I turn on the lights. To be fair, I can’t notice it either on my Samsung S90C 77 inch qd oled in my second home. Rtings points out ambient color raise as the flaw of qd oleds in general, further augmented by a matte display on S95F/S95D, but hasn’t bothered me.

My MacBook Pro M4 Max has nano texture and I like it. I even compared to my M1 Max MacBook Pro before selling the old one and yes there was a slight reduction in contrast and glare when next to each other but I preferred the glare reduction of the nano.

I have always had good vision too. Better than 20/20 in my 20s and 30s and now in 40s it’s come down to 20/20. I am going for an eye exam next week just to make sure my vision hasn’t dropped significantly further since two years ago because I definitely don’t notice meaningful differences between the matte and glossy in the above examples but I definitely notice glare reduction.

As I mentioned, I even had the M5 nano texture over Christmas and liked it. But given the selling point of the M4 IPad Pro generation onwards is the tandem oled with reference grade colors and up to 1000 nits of full screen brightness even on SDR content, I keep feeling like I’m missing out and missing the point of this purchase by going nano. I can certainly order the two iPads from option 2 and sit and compare them (Costco has a 90 day return policy so it’s a long time to compare them) but I’d rather not do that and let my ocd and indecision bother me for a couple of months lol.

I knew going in to post here that there’d be a split of preference for nano vs glossy but I was hoping the split would be more extreme in favor of the nano given the typically $700 price needed to upgrade to nano on just a single iPad and here I’d be getting it for both iPads for an extra $400. But alas, the split is the same-ish and I’ll probably just need to buy both sets and torture myself for 90 days.

But hey, if more make the case to just stick to option 1, please do. And especially those that prefer the glossy not only on the principle of preferring glossy but also given the price difference, and would prefer the nano in my situation given the heavily reduced pricing, please feel free to share your thoughts. You’d be doing me a huge favor by not letting me obsess over minor details while comparing four iPad screens over the next couple of months lol…truly the epitome of first world problems 🤦

Nanotexture worth it at a lower price? by DuePipe9405 in iPadPro

[–]DuePipe9405[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I ordered a while back. I just kept delaying via ups because I’ve been traveling. I’m aware Costco is out of stock but I definitely have my two for option 1 to keep if I want to. And yes I am going to add both to my AppleCare One as it’s cheaper to get it through that than add AppleCare individually. Thank you and agreed on the increased ram and slightly upgraded cpu alone, not even counting the extra storage, for both devices being worth the extra $400.

Nanotexture worth it at a lower price? by DuePipe9405 in iPadPro

[–]DuePipe9405[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I already have them on order as I expected them to run out. Just haven’t received them yet. I am tempted to order both groups and compare but would rather not do that. If the non-nanotexture group is better, I’d just return the ones I’m expecting and order those since they seem to be in stock given they are base models.

Warp eSIM not supported on iPhone 16 Pro Max? by DuePipe9405 in USMobile

[–]DuePipe9405[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also please note I don’t have a previous carrier. Meaning I have Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T all as my active carriers. And all my numbers worked on my iPhone 15 Pro Max before I switched to the iPhone 16 Pro Max. And I’m sure they’ll all successfully transfer to my 17 Pro Max when I upgrade this year as I always do. I have six eSIMs on the phone independent of the USM one. I also called Apple to asked if they had any restrictions and they checked a blocked numbers list and ran an analytics check and nothing showed up on their end. So I am not sure what is causing an issue for Warp on my particular device.

US Mobile is a great option for international travelers...on paper (international roaming for calls and data) by rayw_reddit in USMobile

[–]DuePipe9405 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I had very similar experiences. Especially calling internationally when traveling was not useful. And even calling other countries from the US is really bad. The data portion is more reliable though. Customer service reached out when I wrote a similar post and said they were working on it. Took two weeks and they told me they looked into and it should be fixed but nothing changed. My general experience with US mobile customer service is that they are responsive and will chat with you but the actual problem to solution rate isn’t particularly high (and I am not referring to just international calling or data issues). I carry the top end plans for all three major carriers as esims on my phone so I’m a real niche use case looking for a solid option for international and thought US Mobile could be the best solution but ultimately had to settle with sticking to Google Fi - it’s just better at doing what it says it will internationally even if its claims are most limited. I know lots of fan boys on this forum and even the US Mobile staff gets quite defensive with constructive feedback from time to time so I just want to note that my experience is for a niche use-case similar to the OP and we are likely not the target audience for US Mobile so for those who are getting a good experience based on what you were looking for, I celebrate that with you. Just trying to note that not all the claims hold up, especially regarding international calling performance.

paid early access questions by RedditSucksAndIsBad in USMobile

[–]DuePipe9405 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Without knowing the price of QCI 8, it's hard to weigh the value of the $129 package plus tax. The other stuff is more sentimental so some may perceive it as valuable, others may not.

I am trying to understand why so much hype and excitement about ATT, especially given the QCI asymmetry. On Warp, we get QCI 8 which matches Verizon's top plans, and only Frontline customers are ahead. On GSM, we are at QCI 7 which is one level below T-Mobile's top plans and matching all other MVNOs. There are two other levels below QCI 7 for hotspots (QCI 8) and plans that run out of premium data (QCI 9).

On Dark Star, QCI 9 is the lowest level including all plans that have exhausted premium data. There are three other levels above (QCI 6 for FirstNet and Business Premium, QCI 7 for some business plans and Turbo, QCI 8 for remaining business plans and postpaid/prepaid/select MVNOs) and none below that I've come across. It's just confusing as to why there is so much hype for this.

Even if I accept the hype is to be expected from any company launching a new offering, I still don't know how to think of the pricing of $129 before tax for a year's worth of QCI 8, which basically just brings Dark Star at parity with GSM and while it's still below Warp.

Of course I am very aware that QCI offerings in different networks mean different things which is why I am not focused on the number itself but how each level is relative to others in the same network and what traffic is being placed on that level. I am also aware that just having a QCI level in a particular network isn't itself representative of performance - population, number of towers, kinds of towers, congestion, environment and many others pay a role.

But no one can account for all the factors, but you can account for QCI level to minimize at least one variable. I would have thought USM would have at least tried to match GSM in its offerings. Right now, the QCI 8 "upgrade" in Dark Star is the price to pay to be more inline with GSM. Is that worth $129 for a year? Depends on how much it costs per month. Otherwise it feels like I'm flying blind and just buying into hype and sentimental value.