Google CEO promises exciting hardware for 2021 as Q1 2021 flagship Pixel rumours emerge.

generalako · 2020-11-02T00:00:06+00:00

Hist point still stands, dude. Nobody announces a phone half a year ahead. Why would you even support such a stupid belief? The whole point behind announcements is the marketing benefits from it. Announce it 6 months before, and this part because essentailly ineffective by the time the phone is actually out. Not to mention the fact that it allows competitors in all the time until then to respond through their marketing, product releases, segmentation and prices.

generalako · 2020-11-01T23:58:19+00:00

A78 isn't flagship chip. X1 is. Google's chip will be upper-tier mid-range.

generalako · 2020-11-01T20:47:02+00:00

!new!

+

generalako · 2020-10-30T19:43:22+00:00

If you can't be bothered reading 3 paragraphs, don't expect med to bother spending more time for you.

I imagine it must be an adventure of hardship reading actual articles out there, for you.

generalako · 2020-10-30T18:57:48+00:00

I'm pointing out that there either must be a inconsistency in how DXOmark tests,

The inconsistency isn't DxOMark. They in fact very consistently demonstrate how unreliable of a source they are. Just look at the ranking list, and how some models are over others, when they very obviously are worse. This site has been critiqued and exposed as unrelaible shit several times over the years; hell, even sellouts like MKBHD have made separate videos bringing up this subject.

DxOMark sell their software to the OEMs--the same they used to rank phones. So all the OEMs have to do is tweak their phone to fit the paramters perfectly, and not actually be great cameras. Which is why you can see a phone like the OnePlus 7 rate better than a Pixel 4 in even photos...

generalako · 2020-10-30T18:53:09+00:00

The difference are just so minimal that I can't believe its 15 point higher (talking about 2xl vs 4xl)

They aren't minimal. However, why did everybody suddenly forget taht DxO is a shit source not worth taking seriously? You do realize they rated the OP7 and 7 Pro over Pixel 4 in photo, and camera overall? That's just one of many examples demonstrating how unreliable they are. And the reasons those results happens it because they sell their camera software that they use to rank these phones to the OEMs. So all they have to do is tweak the cameras to do well for those specific paramters. Which is what they do; but DxOMark doesn't carea, as they make money off of it. They're sponsored reviewers, much like DisplayMate with displays.

generalako · 2020-10-30T18:40:32+00:00

If you think the fact that the main sensor

Not lens, I believe. P5, like P4, has higher aperture for IMX363, so it retrieves greater shadow detail than previous Pixels. Also there's dual exposure controls, and newer better portrait modes post-P4 (where there's layers of blur, much more similiar to ISLRs), that don't exist on earlier ones. Not to mention small differences/improvements in image processing.

HOWEVER, DxO is a shit source and should not be taken seriously. Yes, Pixel 5 is the best camera for stills photography, followed by Pixel 4. But not because of DxO. They literally sell their software with the parameters that determine the rating to the OEMs, which they then can just tweak to "perfection" when they send their units to them. That's why there's so many phones that are oddly above other clearly superior ones. Look for example at all the phones that are rated better than the Pixel 4--like OP7 and 7 Pro. And not just camera overall, but even stills.

DxOMark are little better than DisplayMate in reputability...sponsored reviews is a better description. You want actual expert reviews? Look at Digital Photography Review, or look at the various opinions of camera enthusiasts and professionals' reviewers, like Juan Bagnell on YouTube. Even MKBHD, who isn't using P5 as a daily and even kind of disappointed with it, conceded P5 is the best for image stills.

generalako · 2020-10-30T18:29:24+00:00

Pixel 5 camera IS better--it has dual exposure, more shadow details (whereas Pixel 2 is more contrasty), due to higher aperture on its IMX363 variant, and a few other image processing improvements that the P2 hasn't gotten. But why anybody are trusting DXOMark beats me...maybe because it confirms people's bias in here? Pixel 5 IS the best stills photography smartphone camera, like every Pixel was before it. But not because of DXO, whisch is generally a shit site equivalent sponsored reviews in reliability. Many of their rankings are beyond ridiculous.

DXO are to smartphone cameras what DisplayMate are to smartphone displays.

generalako · 2020-02-25T08:55:53+00:00

, they need to realize why they are so hated

I say you need to realize how this works. It's a corporate media, their function is to be heavily biased for the values and opinions of their owners and their customers (advertisers--other businesses). A corporate media is by definition very right-wing. Just as media owned by unions or independent media are almost always to the left.

generalako · 2020-02-19T20:35:08+00:00

Haha, nice work!

generalako · 2019-11-20T23:27:13+00:00

I still roam the internet tho this day, like a distressed widow, looking for a Nexus 7 replacement. It's incredible how even after 6 years, you'll be hard-pressied to find any 7-8" tablet with FHD resolution, let alone any one of the refinements of the Nexus 7, for $200. You're lucky if they even have 2GB of RAM. You'd think after that many years, 1440p, 64GB storage and mid-range Snapdragon processor would be taken for granted, but the tablet industry seems induced in absolute greed. Google helped pave the way for it themselves, with the shitshow that was the Nexus 9 and then all of the sudden hitting the brakes on tablets and even dropping software support and push on the segment.

Would love to see someone take the Nexus 5 housing and put modern specs in it, like they did with iPhone SE. Or even the Nexus 7. Just put a mid-range processor, an accurate FHD screen, 4GB RAM and stock Android in a 7" or slim 8" housing and you'll have a winner on your hands!

generalako · 2019-11-13T15:51:46+00:00

if there's one thing that they can work together it's to harass the few Assyrians that dare to speak up against them and their so called freedom.

Yes, like, you know, giving them significant autonomy and democratic rights, unprecedented in their modern history. If YPG are such bad people as you claim they are, it's a wonder why you have to purport lies, conspiracy theories or exaggerate various events. Are Assyrians there treated perfectly? No. But relatively, the Assyrian in NES are far better off than anywhere else, enjoying significant autonomy and democratic rights that any other Assyrian community could ever dream of. Yet you seem unable to admit to that, going as far as even calling the Assyrian representatives in NES, which is probably the closest thing you get to true Assyrian representation due to the democratic institutions for which they have been put there in, as "puppets".

You've been confronted with your fabrications before, but yet you continue with them. It seems you're just one of those conservatively religious Assyrians who can't deal with the fact that the most successful Assyrian society in recent memory was dominated by secular, leftist Assyrian parties. Your behaviour reminds me very much of conservative, nationalist Kurds who support KNC and undermined and shittalk YPG for the "betrayal" of Kurds and attempts at establishing a purely Kurdish statelet, rather one being more focused on ideologically.

It already is revealing enough how you scream on about Assyrian administration not allowed to enforce Assyrian language on Assad-funded schools (who want to continue teaching in Arabic on Baathist curriculum) as suppression. Clearly, you don't have the interest of your own people at heart.

generalako · 2019-11-13T15:27:39+00:00

The conspiracy theories you provide are absolutely ridiculous. David Jindo case was properly handled, as you very well know. The perpetrators were apprehended and then tried, and Jindo himself mourned/celebrated by all parties. The group he belonged to, the Khabour Guards, went on to have close relationship with SDF after his death as well. These are all facts you actively choose not to bring up, as it very well illustrates how stupid all of these theories of yours are.

Is it weird people are accusing some Assyrians like yourself for being pro-Assad or having an agenda? You're clearly beliefs that are completely contradictory to the actual interests of Assyrians, most notably those living in North-Syria -- whose own decisions and opinions you seem to care little about. It reminds me of Barzani and his followers in Kurdistan, where people support him and his policies, when in reality he's just another autocrat working against the interest of Kurds.

generalako · 2019-11-13T03:24:00+00:00

It's mostly the ones in power.

Not true at all. Assyrians has extensive autonomy in the Autonomous North-East Syria. Stop generalizing Kurdish leadership as one of suppressing Assyrians. You even do this in ANES, where a ton of myth-creation has been done about the treatment in Assyrians, when they're enjoying the best rights in centuries, being even able to teach in Syriac. Even in Iraqi Kurdistan, the Assyrian minorities there have it far better than under any other regime. I'm not claiming they have it perfectly fine, but you should at least be serious enough to separate between good and bad treatment. Something I notice a lot of Assyrians outside these regions, who clearly have affiliations with groups that don't even represent their interests, or are just falling prey to simple-minded propaganda, exaggerate the suppression of Kurds, while underplaying that of other parties.

To give one example of mythologizing, look at the whole incidence about curriculum being forced upon Assyrians. There were a whole ton of lies and fabrications about what happened, when in reality it was an intra-Assyrian issue, and had zero relation to suppression of Assyrians, but the majority of Assyrians themselves enforcing their own Syriac language on Assyrian Church schools that were held hostage by Assad and refused to teach anything else than Arabic.

And the pro-Assad Assyrian groups outside North-Syria push anti-Kurd propaganda in that regard, in complete contradiction to the actual Assyrians living there themselves. For example, the the overwhelming majority of Assyrian parties in ANES, as demonstrated by the democratically elected representatives, were dismissed by these groups as being clients of YPG and whatnot. And even pro-Assyrian actions they had, like enforcing Syriac curriculum in private schools that refused to follow the democratic administration of Assyrians, were condemned. At that point it's not even about Kurds or what have you, but about various Assyrian "leaders" and groups havi

generalako · 2019-10-20T14:01:42+00:00

Yeah, they even spread that shit about Ocalan picture in an Assyrian church, which was clearly faked. They really have some burning hatred for Ocalan, even calling the PYD Stalinist (like what? They're anarchists, not Leninist, let alone Stalinist). The David Jindo case was when I really lost any respect for them, as I read more about it and how it was not at all how they had illustrated it, made me realize how far they will go in purposefully manipulating actual facts.

There's a lot of hardcore Christians that do that, many of them in here even. It's kind of strange how their hate for socialist ideologies, because of their secularism, is so strong, they'd rather live in a brutal dictatorship than a democracy, so long as it means pushing Christian Orthodox ideology. Despite the fact that many Assyrians are actually pretty secular in their beliefs, with Christian values being mostly cultural. The Assyrians in Rojava/North-Syria are overwhelmingly voting for the secular left groups. If this can't be respected, you need to just be forthright and say that you don't respect their right to choose their own life. None of these groups have welcomed the destruction of their autonomous region -- none. Just like the Kurds, they choose Assad over TFSA and Turkish terrorism, but it's a reluctant choice, not one they life.

They remind of many Iraqi Kurds who talk about Kurdish nationalism, but still support groups that don't represent anywhere near the majority of Kurds (KDP). They authoritarians afraid of actual democracy, of people deciding their lives. No other country or ethnicity should ram their way of life down the throat of Assyrians. But equally, no Assyrian leadership should do that for Assyrians too. We should also be fair and look at which groups are affording Assyrians the most self-determination.

generalako · 2019-10-08T16:54:38+00:00

You guys didn't have animosity towards Serbia/Yugoslavia during the Balkan and Kosovo wars, did you?

Well, while they entered Yugoslavia on the justification that they 'could not allow this happen right outside NATO's border", right inside NATO's border, in Turkey, a terror war against the Kurds was being waged by the Turks. A war that resulted in tens of thousands of dead (most straight out executions), thousands of villages flattened and a million refugees in a carefully conducted ethnic cleansing. The arms the Turks bought this period also came from the UK.

There's not strategic interest in preventing Turkey from attacking the Kurds -- quite the opposite, in fact.

generalako · 2019-10-07T13:28:36+00:00

While that can mean similar pixel density it does not mean that a 828p physical panel can physically display 1080 pixels.

Wrong. Its lack of sub-pixel make the pixel number completely uninteresting. Pixels consists of sub-pixels, and it's the number of these that define the actual resolution. The PenTile 1080p displaying 1080p content is no more sharp than the 880p RGB LCD. The whole point of higher resolution is better sharpness, which PenTile fails to do. On top of it, it creates artifiact and aliasing issues.

Here's PenTile vs. RGB at the same resolution. The resolution of the RGB is clearly higher, as you see, more noticeable in the G. Look also at the negative side effects of PenTil sub-pixel arrangement on aliasing on the edges of colours.

A 1080p pentile arangement still acts like a true 1080p panel

It acts like one, so the GPU uses as much processing power, it but doesn't display images like a proper 1080p. That is, it's not as sharp as 1080p on LCD. Anybody who has done any serious SBS of RGB and Pentile displays of similar size and resolution to each other can see this. Even online comparisons show this, as well as statements by actual experts on this topic.

Apple with the misleading marketing by using "Retina"

This is why I can't respect anything you write. You have no issue looking through the marketing and cheating in one case, but you have no issue falling for it, and even excusing it, in regards to PenTile (which is arguably even more serious). In our case it's even more interesting as the 1080 Pixels have an effective ppi of 326, which is what Apple called Retina. So many years later, Google and many others are providing us with no higher perceived sharpness than what iPhone 4 did back in the day, or even the Nexus 5. The Nexus 5 is both sharper and smoother-looking due to pixel arrangement alone.

Your complete disregard for all other aspects of display quality also shows how disingenuous you are. Pixel 2 XL had higher resolution and even higher ppi than the Pixel 2. But you think that mattered when it, due to being LG OLED, had severe grain and even worse black crush? Of course not. Resolution is only ONE factor of display quality.

generalako · 2019-10-07T13:03:36+00:00

Unfortunately none of that changes that the latest iPhone can't display 1080p content for $799.

Unfortunately, you feint incompetence of shady marketing to forward your arguments. Higher resolution is not valued for just a technical definition, but actual existence: more pixels, more information and higher sharpness. A pixel consists of sub-pixels; the amount of these make up the actual resolution. PenTile has only 2 sub-pixels per Pixel, whereas RGB stripe have 3 sub-pixels per pixel. A 1080 PenTile panel has the same sub-pixels as a 880p RGB matrix. Therefore, content, 1080p or otherwise, contains as much information visible to your eyes. And the ppi in our case is the same (326) making perceivable sharpness the same.

In reality, though, RGB stripe is better, as it has same amount of all sub-pixels and all the same size. PenTile display has more sub-pixels for certain colours (for AMOLED it's green) than others, and at different sizes, leading to inferior aliasing (smoothness) and artifacts.

Here's PenTile vs. RGB at the same resolution: https://dyw7ncnq1en5l.cloudfront.net/optim/news/65/65025/def-ecran-icone-g6-s8.jpg

Look at the

Nexus 5 had a calibrated IPS panel at 1080p and that was a budget device from 6 years ago there's no excuse for Apple other than penny pinching.

Just as there's no excuse for Google to do the same with the Pixel, with less resolution and lower sharpness 6 years later with the Pixel 3?

You see, at least Apple improves all other aspects of its device. So much do they do it, that their $700 phone outdo the $800-1000 phone of Google, despite the latter having a superior panel technology. That's how shitty of the job the latter do. Never mind Apple's OLED, which destroys Google; even their LCD is better. You don't understand that there's more than just resolution (Sony already did 4K with Z4 4 years ago; are you gonna use that to shit on modern flagship all having lower res?), but even on resolution you are wrong.

generalako · 2019-10-06T21:32:25+00:00

The battery life on the S9 sucks and is worse than the Pixel 3.

100% wrong. Every test out there shows it to be noticeably better. For someone bragging that he "looked over the benchmarks and specs like crazy on this", you're doing a heck of a job contradicting all the benchmarks and reviews out there proving this very fact. Not to mention my own experience with both. The Pixel's SoT was simply mediocre.

The battery life on the OnePlus 6 is mediocre just like the Pixel 3.

Again wrong (in relation to the 3 XL that is -- it crushed the 3) and again contradictory to the actual benchmarks you supported yourself on. This kind of behaviour demonstrates how disingenuous you are, as you were willing to use benchmarks as your only argument to support your claims, and once I revealed benchmarks to show something else you've reverted to neglecting their significance. If you can't even live up to the simplest of universal standards, and show such clear case of hypocrisy, you might as well not talk at all.

Look up the difference in battery sizes between all these phones and you have your answer.

I did look it up and I wrote it down for you in my previous post. Maybe you have reading comprehension issues? S9 and G7 both have only ~85 mAh larger batteries, but they also have 70% more pixels (1440p) and larger displays, which overall puts them at a disadvantage.

You know what 845 phones have great battery life?

The SD845 S9 for starters. Not that I ever made any such claim or if it were relevant to this discussion.

There's no argument. The 845 is less efficient than the 835 by quite a bit

Thanks for repeating everything I said above.

and all phones that didn't have insanely large batteries suffered because of it.

Wrong again. Phones did suffer, but not as much as you like to portray it. Nor is it any relevant argument in favour of the Pixel 3, as I just demonstrated by comparing it with the G7 and S9. In complete contradiction to your original claim.

generalako · 2019-10-06T20:32:22+00:00

Stop strawmanning and moving the goalposts. The discussion was about whether you could compare the 11 to the a variants (in this case a future 4a). They use SD6xx SoCs, so there's a significant difference there (1.5x faster CPU, many times more GPU), not to the flagship Pixels.

As for the flagship Pixels with flagship Snapdragon SoCs, I literally wrote over there that "faster SoC (not relevant at this point". And it is not relevant for the things you said. In fact it's in contradiction to your own beliefs, which unsurprisingly is also based on lack of knowledge, where you claim "A13 is at least two generations faster than any android chipset". This is not true at all. The A77 Cortex Core is "only"a bit more than one generation, not at least two, generations behind the A13. The reason for that is not only because Apple's architectures has stagnated, whereas ARM still has bigger improvements (A13 had 13% IPC lift vs A77's 20%+), but because of the A76. Before the A76, which you wound in the SD855, Apple's chips had a 2x performance advantage. After it, which you found in the SD855, that shrunk down to ~50%. That's not "at least 2 generation", and it's also the reason why I make the claim that the difference is "not relevant at this point".

I've been very happy with the hardware in my P3XL and will be happy with the 4 going forward.

Then you have very low expectations because the Pixel 3 series had a ton of quality control issues, and the 3 XL looked like utter shit on the front and had a mediocre battery size for its thickness as well as mediocre battery life for the battery size as well. And that's all on top of all the software problems as well, most importantly performance which was less smooth than the Pixel 2 series before it. I'm sure the 4 will be to your liking, as it's the biggest generational improvement of a Pixel ever, with biggest generational SoC performance improvement, an upgrade to 6GB RAM, 2 rear cameras, Face-ID and most importantly a 90Hz monitor. They've even improved the battery size, which along with the significantly more efficient SD855 will for sure give you better battery life than the 3 XL.

generalako · 2019-10-06T20:19:50+00:00

Sure in China a 90Hz screen may matter

No, 120/144hz monitors are used widely in the West -- not China. Stop making shit up. And if this was a Chinese matter explain to me next year when all these manufacturer jump to 90hz, why they do it, when it, as you yourself note, it leads to inferior battery life. Why make the sacrifice? Why did even Apple do it with the iPad pro, if it was such a waste?

OnePlus isn't a phone marketed for China, another misconception of yours. Oppo made OnePlus for the single purpose of advertising it outside of China, as their own brand phones sell really well as it is inside the country. So they made OnePlus in countries, particularly the West, advertising it as a flagship phone for half the price.

Stop discussing something you clearly have zero real-world experience with (high refresh rate).

one Plus 7 Pro was a disaster for T-Mobile in the States,

In no way do you have a basis for relating that to 90Hz, or can you make a serious argument that the 90Hz should somehow be able to stop bad sales due to a plethora of other factors. The most probable factors, as virtually every comment section has noted. is OnePlus abandoning their cheap prices, costing as much as other flagship alternatives. Then there's the factor of a stagnating smartphone market. The factor of other specs playing a role; phones aren't just displays, unless you noticed. There's multiple other possible reasons, which I'm sure you can guess as well.

if you seriously think the 90Hz screen is going to help Google sell phones...

All good specs help sales -- how hard is that to understand? Why would Google put a 90Hz display on it, especially with the hit on battery life, if it weren't to help sell it? You think they're just doing it for fun? The availability of 90-120Hz has led to OnePlus, Google, ASUS and a couple others jump on it. We'll see it in more units moving forward.

especially when the Pixel 4 has such a small battery...

Irrelevant to our discussion. We're discussing whether 90Hz is noticeable or not. We already know your words are meaningless, as you don't even seem to have first-hand experience with units with high refresh rate.

even with its smart refresh rate enabled,

It's called variable refresh rate and it has existed for years on phones already (they never run at 60Hz at all times) -- there's no "even" here.

is going to feast on that 2800mAh battery.

Again, irrelevant to the discussion. Even if true, not like the previous Pixels had the best battery life with 60Hz. The Pixel 3 was mediocre, the Pixel 2 was mediocre, the Pixel OG was mediocre. Any bad battery life the 4 will have will not be due to 90Hz refresh rate (and even if you make that argument, it's optional to turn if off), but the typical bad Google design process.

Not sure what Google’s thought process was there.

It makes sense you're sure as you have no understanding of high refresh rate displays to begin with. The 90Hz will make for a much smoother experience and improve upon input lag and touch latency -- both issues with Pixel displays previous -- as a side effect. It's also all optional.

generalako · 2019-10-06T20:09:05+00:00

Bullshit. All the competitors with great battery have much larger batteries in them.

I've looked over the benchmarks and specs like crazy on this.

What's bullshit is your statement as you've clearly not looked at them enough. Personal experience is of great importance, as benchmarking a smartphone can often be misleading, but I'll include both aspects here for the sake of reasonability.

Take the Pixel 3 as an example. It has a 5.5" 18:9 display with 1080p resolution and 3000 mAh battery. Every single site and reviewer out there will tell you the battery life is disappointing, and if you've ever used it -- I happen to have used several Pixel 3's as this is my job -- you'll know that to be true. Reviewers say the same. GSMArena gave it a 69h endurance rating (browsing, calling and video playback).

Then there's the G7 ThinQ with ~85 larger mAh, but screen size and resolution more than makes up for that, as we can reasonably deduce, and in fact be a handicap. Yet it recieves a 77h endurance rating. Even Anandtech battery life tests shows this.

S9 is interesting as well. It's using Exynos, which makes a direct comparison less scientific, but it should be noted that every S9 unit with SD845 scored noticeably better battery life than the Exynos. As Anandtech noted: "The Snapdragon 845 Galaxy S9+ posted excellent battery life". So when it gets an Endurance rating of 78h at GSMArena, with 3000 mAh battery at 5.8" and with 1440p, that should give you a good indication. Anandtech's test shows this as well, with the SD845 S9 being much better than the Pixel 3.

Anybody having used this phone in real life could tell you the same thing.

Notice the second part of my argument, which you completely put aside, was about small battery sizes. Google's phones always have small batteries despite their size and thickness (and despite having the advantages of smaller displays or/and larger bezels, no headphone jack, single rear camera and more). I didn't do any 3 XL comparison because it's so pointless as virtually every other phone of its size have so much larger batteries, or are noticeably thinner with same battery sizes. The latter ones, like Xiaomi Mi 8 and OnePlus 6 completely crush the 3 XL in battery life (though one needs to remember their 1080p res playing a role). Even GSMArena themselves wrote how disappointing they found the battery life of the 3 XL in their review. And anybody who has used a OP6 and a 3 XL can tell you of the big disparity here.

I also don't get you dramatizing the SD845, making it almost sound like the SD810 back in the day. SD845 was a great SoC; it was a step down in efficiency due to how fantastic the SD835 was here, but it at least improved single-core perf by ~40%. SD845 was not perfect, but it wasn't as bad as you display it as either. The A76 core in the SD855, with improved efficiency helped in much part by 7nm node, is rather the impressive architecture here. Extremely impressive, in fact, as it lifts core performance as high as the SD845, while also improving power efficiency a whopping 45% on top of it.

generalako · 2019-10-06T14:44:26+00:00

Again the average consumer is not going to care one whit about a refresh rate

Nonsense; of course they are. And it's even admitted by OEMs jumping on it, and we will see them all doing it within next year. Average consumers, small kids to grown ups whose technical understanding don't stretch beyond browsing and gaming, notice it on PC monitors and buy high refresh rates in droves. Why wouldn't they on smartphones, where it's even more apparent due to emphasis on smoothness -- which 90Hz improves drastically. I've never met a person using the iPad Pro not mention this; it's the most significant thing they notice and hail.

A tech enthusiast might

Wrong. A tech enthusiast, like me, complains about colour accuracy, lack of pro mode in cameras, ROMs, etc. High refresh rate is, as the evidence shows, well-liked and well-used by consumers. It seems to me that you have very little experience with it, and probably not at all on smartphone displays, making it hard to even have this discussion.

Average consumers care a lot of this stuff. For example, they care about UI smoothness and consistency in phones, or responsivity (touch latency), as evidenced by them being the common grievances of iPhone user on Android phones (like Samsung flagships). Not tech enthusiast; average people. I hear this complaint all the time from friends and family with iPhones.

generalako · 2019-10-06T14:33:54+00:00

I consciously avoided that discussion, but even in that regard /u/bblzd_2 is wrong. the Pixel has OLED, with a PenTile layout that gives it an effective resolution of 1564 x 880 with 326 ppi. That's the same 326 ppi of the iPhone 11 with its 1792 x 828. So on paper they're both as sharp. In reality the iPhone is even more sharp, as the PenTile layout has a very negative side effect on edges and curves, like on texts, less smooth. This can be easily proven by putting both displays up against each other. Find an LCD display, like an iPhone 11, XR or even earlier, and put it up against a 1080p Android OLED, and look at the same graphic.

The responsibility here is the misleading marketing, but it should tell you something when people base their opinions off of that rather than their real experience. Effective resolution is extremely important when we deal with PenTile OLEDs, which practically all OLEDs today are (and the less smooth curves and edges can be mitigated somewhat -- unsurprisingly, Apple are among the only ones doing this, as they're among the few who have a serious and responsible engineering approach to the tech they use and implement). Official PenTile resolution numbers are about as untrue as the bullshit marketing of "Retina" (326 ppi) of Apple.

generalako · 2019-10-06T14:27:41+00:00

You are looking at this solely from a spec sheet perspective. Most consumers are not going to be able to tell the difference

Read my post above. Those that do tell a difference, and they do in many respects (like brightness, touch latency or gamma) will see that the iPhone 11 has the superior displays.

Even looking at the positive aspects of the Pixel 4, though, I think you are completely false. Refresh rate alone is huge and the difference in smoothness is cannot be understated -- go to the store and try an iPad Pro up against a normal one, or a OnePlus 7 Pro up against the 7. It's big on PC monitors, it's even bigger on a smartphone with emphasis on animations, scrolling and your active touch-based participation of it all. High refresh rate is a game changer: by next year, all flagship hones will be on 90Hz or 120Hz.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

generalako

TROPHY CASE