Do you plan to switch from iPhone to Android? (2016)

[epicrayban]

It is, so glad OLED is coming to the iphone.

So am I.

Count me in! OLED has proven itself to not just be better, but more functional, too. I love Always on Display.

More importantly: Apple agrees, as evidenced by their intention to put OLED in their flagship phones for the foreseeable future. Can't wait to see if they come up with any cool new features with OLED tech.

 

[Michael Goff]

I've seen that said a lot of here. I'm one of those people who shrugs their shoulders on this point though as I don't study screen quality with any detail when using a device. When they are dimmed to 30% I can't tell the difference. Not that this matters though to me, I wouldn't argue either way

I talk mainly about colors. HDR tends to blow people away because of contrast and color depth. Watch the same movie on both OLED and LCD to see what I'm talking about.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I talk mainly about colors. HDR tends to blow people away because of contrast and color depth. Watch the same movie on both OLED and LCD to see what I'm talking about.

I'll be honest I've never watched a film on a phone of any type of screen. I've watched plenty on an iPad LCD and that's good. I'm sure OLED is better though, I wouldn't argue either way. Would I buy a phone because it's got an OLED screen? No, not for that reason alone, I'm not at all bothered. The iPhone 8 apparently has this better screen but to me its not £400 better. Their other cheaper flagship will still have an LCD and I'm sure the overall basic experience will be indifferent to many including myself.

 

[Michael Goff]

I'll be honest I've never watched a film on a phone of any type of screen. I've watched plenty on an iPad LCD and that's good. I'm sure OLED is better though, I wouldn't argue either way. Would I buy a phone because it's got an OLED screen? No, not for that reason alone, I'm not at all bothered. The iPhone 8 apparently has this better screen but to me its not £400 better. Their other cheaper flagship will still have an LCD and I'm sure the overall basic experience will be indifferent to many including myself.

If you just look at text, LCD will do just fine. But for me, I'm moving to the phone being the only thing I use.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

If you just look at text, LCD will do just fine. But for me, I'm moving to the phone being the only thing I use.

I think it depends on the individuals mindset too. Both types of screen are pretty good. If it's affecting the perception of what you are viewing then the better option is good for piece of mind. If you're not directly comparing, then it makes little difference. Videos to me look pretty good on an LCD screen.

 

[Michael Goff]

I think it depends on the individuals mindset too. Both types of screen are pretty good. If it's affecting the perception of what you are viewing then the better option is good for piece of mind. If you're not directly comparing, then it makes little difference. Videos to me look pretty good on an LCD screen.

I wasn't arguing they don't look good, just that the vast color difference quickly made me realize why the iPhone went for softer colors instead of deeper ones.

 

[epicrayban]

I think it depends on the individuals mindset too. Both types of screen are pretty good. If it's affecting the perception of what you are viewing then the better option is good for piece of mind. If you're not directly comparing, then it makes little difference. Videos to me look pretty good on an LCD screen.

It goes beyond video, too. If I'm not mistaken, OLED is easier on the battery. It allows for you to light up individual pixels, which can lead to new features (like Always on Display, for example). In fact, iOS lights up the entire iPhone screen when you receive a notification. Imagine if it only lit up the screen partially. Imagine also that certain things can stay on (again, like AoD) so you only have to glance at your phone and not hit the home button to see notifications, which lights up the entire screen again. It's also thinner and easier to manipulate. Apple may not be curving their screens in the near future, but I'm just pointing out what's possible with OLED. It also has better viewing angles.

Not trying to convince you of anything. Just sharing a few examples off the top of my head that go beyond just better video watching.

If you're not directly comparing, then it makes little difference.

As for this specific comment, same can be said to the many posters here that think microseconds of difference in app launching between certain smartphones means the world.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

It goes beyond video, too. If I'm not mistaken, OLED is easier on the battery. It allows for you to light up individual pixels, which can lead to new features (like Always on Display, for example). In fact, iOS lights up the entire iPhone screen when you receive a notification. Imagine if it only lit up the screen partially. It's also thinner and easier to manipulate. Apple may not be curving their screens in the near future, but I'm just pointing out what's possible with OLED. It also has better viewing angles.

Not trying to convince you of anything. Just sharing a few examples off the top of my head that go beyond just better video watching.

I don't need convincing, I already said twice I don't doubt OLED is better, I just wouldn't pay more for it over a phone with a different screen. In Apples case when the difference is rumoured to be £400, then it's not even remotely a consideration for me. I'm pretty happy with the current screens and what they offer for the money.

 

[epicrayban]

I don't need convincing, I already said twice I don't doubt OLED is better, I just wouldn't pay more for it over a phone with a different screen. In Apples case when the difference is rumoured to be £400, then it's not even remotely a consideration for me. I'm pretty happy with the current screens and what they offer for the money.

No doubt. I'm sure LCD will continue to be great for the 7S models.

And honestly, I'm not confident I would invest that much in a first gen iPhone undergoing so many changes and new technology either. Plus, supply constraints could make availability for those who are willing to spend that much a nightmare.

 

[apolloa]

I talk mainly about colors. HDR tends to blow people away because of contrast and color depth. Watch the same movie on both OLED and LCD to see what I'm talking about.

I don't like the colours in OLED screens by default and have to adjust them down from being so over saturated..

LCD still has a few tricks up its sleeve.. but I like the colours in the Apple Watch so...

It's a shame but no one wants to make an OLED TV smaller then 55"

 

[MRU]

It goes beyond video, too. If I'm not mistaken, OLED is easier on the battery. It allows for you to light up individual pixels, which can lead to new features (like Always on Display, for example). In fact, iOS lights up the entire iPhone screen when you receive a notification. Imagine if it only lit up the screen partially. Imagine also that certain things can stay on (again, like AoD) so you only have to glance at your phone and not hit the home button to see notifications, which lights up the entire screen again. It's also thinner and easier to manipulate. Apple may not be curving their screens in the near future, but I'm just pointing out what's possible with OLED. It also has better viewing angles.

Not trying to convince you of anything. Just sharing a few examples off the top of my head that go beyond just better video watching.



As for this specific comment, same can be said to the many posters here that think microseconds of difference in app launching between certain smartphones means the world.

Always on Display works fine on devices with LCD screens too. The G6 has AOD and achieved same battery life as the S8.

So many of the claims and assumptions laboured on AMOLED are often not bore out in actual practice.

I've explained many times about how sub pixel technology works and the benefits of one over the other. At the moment what we have is a lot of people turning subjective preferences into proclamations of definitive fact, whilst ignoring the science and technology behind it which does not coincide with their preferential viewpoint.

Until we have full RGB subpixel OLED and no longer reliant on pentile or diamond matrix then this discussion continues to be based on personal preference.

Yet despite science and engineering these forums continue to essentially follow the same 'the best' is what I prefer methodology and what is ever flavour of the moment.

This year it's all about OLED screens and the presumptions that they are automatically better without understanding how technology works and a focus only on the benefits of the technology and ignoring or overlooking the negatives of the technology.

Likewise 2017 is also the year of the anti-bezel bandwagon.

 

[epicrayban]

Always on Display works fine on devices with LCD screens too. The G6 has AOD and achieved same battery life as the S8.

So many of the claims and assumptions laboured on AMOLED are often not bore out in actual practice.

I've explained many times about how sub pixel technology works and the benefits of one over the other. At the moment what we have is a lot of people turning subjective preferences into proclamations of definitive fact, whilst ignoring the science and technology behind it which does not coincide with their preferential viewpoint.

Until we have full RGB subpixel OLED and no longer reliant on pentile or diamond matrix then this discussion continues to be based on personal preference.

Yet despite science and engineering these forums continue to essentially follow the same 'the best' is what I prefer methodology and what is ever flavour of the moment.

This year it's all about OLED screens and the presumptions that they are automatically better without understanding how technology works and a focus only on the benefits of the technology and ignoring or overlooking the negatives of the technology.

Likewise 2017 is also the year of the anti-bezel bandwagon.

So OLED isn't better than LCD? Please correct me if I'm wrong but the things I've read point to OLED being better. The examples I listed, like battery advantages or being able to light individual pixels or better viewing angles, none of that is accurate? The G6 has a larger battery than the s8. If it had AMOLED and wasn't lighting up the entire screen, it wouldn't save it more battery than if it had LCD and had to light the whole screen to keep AoD on? These are genuine questions.

Besides preferences -- which I made no comment about nor did I ever say LCD was bad -- I thought OLED is better?

Also don't see anything wrong with jumping on the bezel-less bandwagon, as you call it. There are real gains to bezel-less screens, too, no? The G6 itself being a great example.

 

[MRU]

So OLED isn't better than LCD? Please correct me if I'm wrong but the things I've read point to OLED being better. The examples I listed, like battery advantages or being able to light individual pixels, none of that is accurate?

Besides preferences -- which I made no comment about -- i thought OLED is better?

Your asking for a definitive answer, one that simply does not exist. OLED is better in some areas, but not in all and is not currently in a position to be definitively proclaimed as such. The ability to turn off individual pixels is a benefit in theory however in practice because of so many other variables the difference can be nominal. It simply doesn't equate to being a blanket generalised reality.

Again folks should actually focus less on just whether a device has an OLED or LCD screen in general terms and focus on whether that screen regardless of technology is a good panel or not.

There are plenty of examples of poor OLED paneled devices as there are LCD, and vice versa great OLED and great IPS LCD.

But that's not cool to acknowledge, especially in forums such as this.

I posted in this thread only a few days ago about how sub pixel arrays which make up all OLED currently with a couple of variations, are actually at a disadvantage compared to LCD technology.

I'll see if I can find it and paste it as it took more time to write than i have no doubt folks actually took to reading it as it made no difference to the general run of things here discussion wise.

Essentially though there are tangible benefits to both without either having a clear win at this current stage. What we have is a lot of personal preferences.

Re: bezels. Yes the G6 has small bezels, but it doesn't mean I have to hate on every phone that doesn't which again seems to be a trend in forums like this.


-----. Posted a few days ago

Regarding OLED and LCD.

There are benefits to LCD on the way sub pixels are arranged over OLED.

Let's take two QHD Screens, of which a 1440P has a total of 3,686,400 Pixels.

Now when we count how each pixel is arranged, the subpixel arrangement.

On a 1440P OLED screen there are 3,686,400 Green SubPixels, 1,843,200 Red Subpixels, 1,843,200 Blue Subpixels.

This means there are 7,372,800 lighting elements in a 1440P OLED Screen.


An IPS LCD has 3 subpixels per pixel.

This means 11,059,200 lighting elements on a 1440P LCD screen

This means a 1440P OLED Screen only has 67% of the same number of tiny little colored dots which make up detail of a LCD screen of the same resolution.

1080P has 2,073,600 Pixels

OLED has 2,073,600 Green SubPixels, 1,036,800 Red Subpixels, 1,036,800 Blue Subpixels.

There are 4,147200 Lighting Elements on a 1080P OLED Screen

Once again IPS LCD has 3 subpixels per pixel. This means there are 6,220,800 Lighting Elements on a 1080P LCD Screen

(To avoid confusion I need to point out Lighting Elements are not the same thing as NIT Brightness Levels)

So what does this all mean?

A) A 1440p LCD has 11M subpixels, which is 4M more subpixel lighting elements compared to the OLED despite them sharing the same resolution. A 1440P pentile oled (7.3M lighting elements) in terms of image quality, is therefore closer to a 1080P LCD screen (6.2M lighting elements) than 1440p LCD screen.



B) a 1440P OLED screen used in the hand, you might not be able to see the pentile, but in VR where the pixels are magnified, it is still VERY relevant, an IPS 1440P screen has 11M lighting elements where a pentile oled only has 7.3M, therefore an IPS screen will give you much more detail.


Of course there are definite benefits to OLED such as contrast & black levels but currently no 100% percent answer to one being better than the other. A lot of it at the moment boils down to subjective preferences.

The future will change that.

However, where there will be a very definite improvement is when full RGB AMOLED displays finally launch. Where we finally have the benefits of both technologies without the weakness. However it isn't looking like we are closer to market of those screens just yet, despite them 'on the way' for the last number of years. (Super Amoled Plus is closest we have right now).

The take from all this is that there is still room to improve with regards to our displays in the future. That future will be Full RGB AMOLED. Samsung's Super Amoled + tech is getting ever closer to that realisation, hopefully 2018 will finally usher the true next gen.

However ... the automatic presumption and assertion that AMOLED is better than LCD that a number of users perpetuate on this fora is 'currently' based not on any definitive fact but on mere subjective preference and asserted as fact.

There are benefits to a great LCD and a great AMOLED display and equally negatives. Likewise there are plenty of sub-par AMOLED displays as there are LCD.

 

[epicrayban]

That is a benefit in theory however in practice because of so many other variables the difference can be nominal. It simply doesn't equate to being a blanket generalised reality.

Again folks should actually focus less on just whether a device has an OLED or LCD screen in general terms and focus on whether that screen regardless of technology is a good panel or not.

There are plenty of examples of poor OLED paneled devices as there are LCD, and vice versa great OLED and great IPS LCD.

But that's not cool to acknowledge, especially in forums such as this.

I posted in this thread only a few days ago about how sub pixel arrays which make up all OLED currently with a couple of variations, are actually at a disadvantage compared to LCD technology.

I'll see if I can find it and paste it as it took more time to write than i have no doubt folks actually took to reading it as it made no difference to the general run of things here discussion wise.

Essentially though there are tangible benefits to both without either having a clear win at this current stage. What we have is a lot of personal preferences.

Re: bezels. Yes the G6 has small bezels, but it doesn't mean I have to hate on every phone that doesn't which again seems to be a trend in forums like this.


-----. Posted a few days ago

Regarding OLED and LCD.

There are benefits to LCD on the way sub pixels are arranged over OLED.

Let's take two QHD Screens, of which a 1440P has a total of 3,686,400 Pixels.

Now when we count how each pixel is arranged, the subpixel arrangement.

On a 1440P OLED screen there are 3,686,400 Green SubPixels, 1,843,200 Red Subpixels, 1,843,200 Blue Subpixels.

This means there are 7,372,800 lighting elements in a 1440P OLED Screen.


An IPS LCD has 3 subpixels per pixel.

This means 11,059,200 lighting elements on a 1440P LCD screen

This means a 1440P OLED Screen only has 67% of the same number of tiny little colored dots which make up detail of a LCD screen of the same resolution.

1080P has 2,073,600 Pixels

OLED has 2,073,600 Green SubPixels, 1,036,800 Red Subpixels, 1,036,800 Blue Subpixels.

There are 4,147200 Lighting Elements on a 1080P OLED Screen

Once again IPS LCD has 3 subpixels per pixel. This means there are 6,220,800 Lighting Elements on a 1080P LCD Screen

So what does this all mean?

A) A 1440p LCD has 11M subpixels, which is 4M more subpixel lighting elements compared to the OLED despite them sharing the same resolution. A 1440P pentile oled (7.3M lighting elements) in terms of image quality, is therefore closer to a 1080P LCD screen (6.2M lighting elements) than 1440p LCD screen.



B) a 1440P OLED screen used in the hand, you might not be able to see the pentile, but in VR where the pixels are magnified, it is still VERY relevant, an IPS 1440P screen has 11M lighting elements where a pentile oled only has 7.3M, therefore an IPS screen will give you much more detail.


Of course there are definite benefits to OLED such as contrast & black levels but currently no 100% percent answer to one being better than the other. A lot of it at the moment boils down to subjective preferences.

The future will change that.

However, where there will be a very definite improvement is when full RGB AMOLED displays finally launch. Where we finally have the benefits of both technologies without the weakness. However it isn't looking like we are closer to market of those screens just yet, despite them 'on the way' for the last number of years. (Super Amoled Plus is closest we have right now).

The take from all this is that there is still room to improve with regards to our displays in the future. That future will be Full RGB AMOLED. Samsung's Super Amoled + tech is getting ever closer to that realisation, hopefully 2018 will finally usher the true next gen.

However ... the automatic presumption and assertion that AMOLED is better than LCD that a number of users perpetuate on this fora is 'currently' based not on any definitive fact but on mere subjective preference and asserted as fact.

There are benefits to a great LCD and a great AMOLED display and equally negatives. Likewise there are plenty of sub-par AMOLED displays as there are LCD.

This is basically an argument that OLED isn't perfect. And therefore we can't call it the best.

Thanks for sharing detailed info about pixel count (it was insightful), but how does preference play into pixel counting exactly? People prefer LCD cause they can identify the number of pixels versus OLED? I still don't see anything that argues against OLED being better for battery life, viewing angles, ability to light individual pixels for certain features, etc. Like I said, if I am wrong about any of these things I listed, I'd like to be corrected. I'm sure Apple would like to know, too!

And of course there are bad OLED screens. Generally you see that in cheaper handsets. We typically discuss the iPhone 8 and the Note and Galaxy devices, which are all using or expecting to use top quality OLED panels.

Lastly, I've said this before regarding preferences -- it's a boring conversation. One person can say, I prefer this. And another can say, well I prefer the opposite. And that's basically the end of the conversation.

At no point do I say we can't discuss preferences nor do I ever say someone can't prefer what they want to prefer, but there's also an objective conversation that can be had, too. It's ludicrous to think there isn't.

Remember, we had no problems calling out things that were the best years ago when it was the iPhone that had the best screens, the best camera, the best software, the best designs, the best battery life, etc. It was almost universally accepted. People still prefered Android or RIM devices then, too. At no point would we use those preferences to say the iPhone 4's Retina Display didn't have the best screen in a mobile smartphone.

Again, I made no comment about people's preferences. Just that there are objective advantages to OLED vs LCD. Just as there are objective advantages to bezel-less displays.

OLED and a more bezel-less design is literally what Apple will be doing for their flagship.

 

[MRU]

This is basically an argument that OLED isn't perfect. And therefore we can't call it the best.

Thanks for sharing detailed info about pixel count (it was insightful), but how does preference play into pixel counting exactly? People prefer LCD cause they can identify the number of pixels versus OLED? I still don't see anything that argues against OLED being better for battery life, viewing angles, ability to light individual pixels for certain features, etc. Like I said, if I am wrong about this, I'd like to be corrected. I'm sure Apple would like to know, too.

And of course there are bad OLED screens. Generally you see that in cheaper handsets. We typically discuss the iPhone 8 and the Note and Galaxy devices, which are all using or expecting to use top quality OLED panels.

Lastly, I've said this before regarding preferences -- it's a boring conversation. One person can say, I prefer this. And another can say, well I prefer the opposite. And that's basically the end of the conversation.

At no point do I say we can't discuss preferences nor do I ever say someone can't prefer what they want to prefer, but there's also an objective conversation that can be had, too. It's ludicrous to think there isn't.

Remember, we had no problems calling out things that were the best years ago when it was the iPhone that had the best screens, the best camera, the best software, the best designs, the best battery life, etc. It was almost universally accepted. People still prefered Android or RIM devices then, too. At no point would we use those preferences to say the iPhone 4's Retina Display didn't have the best screen in a mobile smartphone.

Again, I made no comment about people's preferences. Just that there are objective advantages to OLED vs LCD.Just as there are objective advantages to bezel-less displays.

OLED and more bezel-less design is literally what Apple will be doing for their flagship.

You seem to have missunderstood my post.

I'm not going to post a full research paper on the pros and cons of both technology, as it will not be read and it won't change anyone's opinion who has already decided one is better than the other, which is perfectly fine with me. But again it doesn't make that a definitive fact.

The argument here and hinges upon what seems to be " well it must be better because Apple are using it. "

Which essentially is ironically comical, because that's verging on the same nonsense that when Apple do something then it's suddenly magical and must be better. Something this particular sub forum used to retaliate against but are now using to assert a personal preference into a definitive fact.

 

[epicrayban]

You've seen to have missunderstood my post.

Apologies then.

The best doesn't have to be perfect. It never was.

Also, just seeing your edit about the G6 bezels. At no point do I call on people to "hate" bezels.

 

[MRU]

Apologies then.

The best doesn't have to be perfect. It never was.

Also, just seeing your edit about the G6 bezels. At no point do I call on people to "hate" bezels.

Not necessarily refering about you, but forum folk in general. It's not all about you you know

 

[epicrayban]

You seem to have missunderstood my post.

I'm not going to post a full research paper on the pros and cons of both technology, as it will not be read and it won't change anyone's opinion who has already decided one is better than the other, which is perfectly fine with me. But again it doesn't make that a definitive fact.

The argument here and hinges upon what seems to be " well it must be better because Apple are using it. "

Which essentially is ironically comical, because that's verging on the same nonsense that when Apple do something then it's suddenly magical and must be better. Something this particular sub forum used to retaliate against but are now using to assert a personal preference into a definitive fact.

C'mon now, you know Apple using OLED isn't what I'm basing "OLED is better than LCD" argument on. OLED was rated best long before the iPhone 8.

It's merely an example of the biggest smartphone maker themselves recognizing OLED is better.

 

[Michael Goff]

Not necessarily refering about you, but forum folk in general. It's not all about you you know

Exactly. It's all about me.

 

[MRU]

It's merely an example of the biggest smartphone maker themselves recognizing OLED is better.

See that's an assumption. We simply do not know apple's reasoning and it could merely be that AMOLED is more suitable for this particular device. It could simply be that AMOLED allows for better even lighting of the panel due to the odd shape of the display, than what a backlit sub panel to an IPS LCD display would allow. Better for a particular device, doesn't necessarily equate to better in general terms.

I have no doubt Apple will use a great quality AMOLED panel (if not one of the best alongside the Note8), but there is still plenty of argument out there for the use of IPS LCD technology.

Until we get to the point where we have a full sub pixel lit AMOLED panel and have found solutions or preventions to some of the technologies weaker areas such as burn in and ghosting and colour tint shifting when lowering brightness, then we just can not say AMOLED is definitively better.

But in the future it's likely that will happen, but at that point we will undoubtedly have a new display technology that we are arguing is definitivly better than AMOLED and the circle will repeat ....

 

[epicrayban]

It's merely an example of the biggest smartphone maker themselves recognizing OLED is better.

See that's an assumption. We simply do not know apple's reasoning and it could merely be that AMOLED is more suitable for this particular device. It could simply be that AMOLED allows for better even lighting of the panel due to the odd shape of the display, than what a backlit sub panel to an IPS LCD display would allow. Better for a particular device, doesn't necessarily equate to better in general terms.

I have no doubt Apple will use a great quality AMOLED panel (if not one of the best alongside the Note8), but there is still plenty of argument out there for the use of IPS LCD technology.

Until we get to the point where we have a full sub pixel lit AMOLED panel and have found solutions or preventions to some of the technologies weaker areas such as burn in and ghosting and colour tint shifting when lowering brightness, then we just can not say AMOLED is definitively better.

But in the future it's likely that will happen, but at that point we will undoubtedly have a new display technology that we are arguing is definitivly better than AMOLED and the circle will repeat ....

I don't think Apple is going with OLED because they've decided it's perfect. Just that it's better.

And for sure, they'll adapt once something even better than OLED comes along.

 

[jesskoh]

See that's an assumption. We simply do not know apple's reasoning and it could merely be that AMOLED is more suitable for this particular device. It could simply be that AMOLED allows for better even lighting of the panel due to the odd shape of the display, than what a backlit sub panel to an IPS LCD display would allow. Better for a particular device, doesn't necessarily equate to better in general terms.

I have no doubt Apple will use a great quality AMOLED panel (if not one of the best alongside the Note8), but there is still plenty of argument out there for the use of IPS LCD technology.

Until we get to the point where we have a full sub pixel lit AMOLED panel and have found solutions or preventions to some of the technologies weaker areas such as burn in and ghosting and colour tint shifting when lowering brightness, then we just can not say AMOLED is definitively better.

But in the future it's likely that will happen, but at that point we will undoubtedly have a new display technology that we are arguing is definitivly better than AMOLED and the circle will repeat ....

I don't think Apple is going with OLED because they've decided it's perfect. Just that it's better.

And for sure, they'll adapt once something even better than OLED comes along.[/QUOTE]
So any idea why Apple removed the 3.5mm headphone jack? To make what better?

 

[Michael Goff]

I don't think Apple is going with OLED because they've decided it's perfect. Just that it's better.

And for sure, they'll adapt once something even better than OLED comes along.

So any idea why Apple removed the 3.5mm headphone jack? To make what better? [/QUOTE]

Because they wanted to make a larger taptic engine. No, seriously, it was internal space.

 

[epicrayban]

And probably to sell airpods.

 

[Michael Goff]

And probably to sell airpods.

Eh, I doubt that has anything to do with it. They likely knee it was going to be a big seller, and hard to produce, regardless.