iPhone's screen is embarrassing next to Galaxy's

[tbayrgs]

I would love to see a 2K display on the IP7. They need to upgrade over the 1080 on the 6s+

Unless it's being used for VR, higher than 1080 is unnecessary, IMO. Our ability to differentiate pixels at a typical viewing distance for this resolution is debatable at best--not worth the extra energy needed. The reason Samsung's displays are garnering such high accolades have very little to due with the actual number of pixels. I'd personally rather see Apple use displays that can match all of the other elements (contract, brightness, etc) and stick with 1080 for the time being.

 

[jamezr]

Unless it's being used for VR, higher than 1080 is unnecessary, IMO. Our ability to differentiate pixels at a typical viewing distance for this resolution is debatable at best--not worth the extra energy needed. The reason Samsung's displays are garnering such high accolades have very little to due with the actual number of pixels. I'd personally rather see Apple use displays that can match all of the other elements (contract, brightness, etc) and stick with 1080 for the time being.

I can see the difference in clarity and color between my S7e and 6s+. Don't want to get into the which one is better debate. But I do find one better for casual viewing. I don't really use VR myself. So I don't want to see a 4K display for that reason and the power consumption. So if they can get the color vibrancy and clarity without going 2K....I'm all for that as well.

 

[nj-morris]

Unless it's being used for VR, higher than 1080 is unnecessary, IMO. Our ability to differentiate pixels at a typical viewing distance for this resolution is debatable at best--not worth the extra energy needed. The reason Samsung's displays are garnering such high accolades have very little to due with the actual number of pixels. I'd personally rather see Apple use displays that can match all of the other elements (contract, brightness, etc) and stick with 1080 for the time being.

Agreed. If there is a visual difference between FHD and QHD, its miniscule and doesn't make a difference in usage whatsoever.

I can see the difference in clarity and color between my S7e and 6s+. Don't want to get into the which one is better debate. But I do find one better for casual viewing. I don't really use VR myself. So I don't want to see a 4K display for that reason and the power consumption. So if they can get the color vibrancy and clarity without going 2K....I'm all for that as well.

We'll probably end up with ultra-high resolutions on phones for the purpose of VR, but for normal phone mode everything will be downscales to standard resolutions. I'd personally like to see this happening.

 

[epicrayban]

AMOLED is great, and I personally love the saturated colors and viewing angles and all the advantages that AMOLED brings, including being able to light up only parts of the screen for Always On Display-like features. Plus, the Edge panel is a thing of beauty in more ways than one.

But -- just like with the camera -- while the Galaxy's are the best, the iPhone's screen (and camera) are still very good.

Isn't Apple starting to show interest in AMOLED panels? And curved screens? Or am I remembering that rumor wrong?

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Here you go.

View attachment 624266

I've just saved this wallpaper only to then realise it's the one I've been using for the past 2 weeks! lol

It must be good, I've got it twice

 

[MRU]

I've just saved this wallpaper only to then realise it's the one I've been using for the past 2 weeks! lol

It must be good, I've got it twice

LMAO

 

[nfl46]

Don't really agree. Or at least don't think the 6S Plus is so much poorer to get all over dramatic about it.

I have very similar experience on both my S7E (basic mode) and my 6S+

Both get very bright, both look good outdoors and I can't see pixels on either. Colour accuracy (after changing to full rgb basic mode) is near identical too.

So see no reason to belittle either.

One has the best LCD panel on a mobile and the other the best Amoled panel on a device.


View attachment 624236

View attachment 624237

View attachment 624238

View attachment 624239

View attachment 624240

Finally! I said the SAME thing the other day and someone nearly took my head off about this. I didn't find it to be a drastic "omg" difference at all.

 

[MRU]

Finally! I said the SAME thing the other day and someone nearly took my head off about this. I didn't find it to be a drastic "omg" difference at all.

The Samsung devices when in adaptive display have very exaggerated saturated colours and in this mode there is a vibrancy difference, however as soon as you turn on the 'RGB accurate' Basic mode in display settings the difference between them is negligible both colour wise and accuracy of whites.

Whether you prefer over saturated mode or the more accurate RGB is subjective, personally I go for colour accuracy all the time (I'm a graphic designer, I stare at 100% SRGB & Adobe RGB calibrated screens).

So whilst I can understand people preferring the vibrancy / colour pop modes - that doesn't mean by any stretch the Apple iPhone displays are poor. They are likely the best LCD panels on a smart phone and stick close to the SRGB calibration than over saturating colours.

I honestly can not see the pixels on my 6S+ or my S7e. I am routinely working on 300 dpi material for the printers every day of the week. So 400+ ppi on my devices, I'm happy out.

I wouldn't say no to the iPhone 7 going to 2k especially if it does go Amoled. But at the same time I suspect Apple will still calibrate it's screens more akin to Samsungs (SRGB accurate) Basic mode as they do tend to favor colour accuracy over vibrancy. And if they do people will still complain because a lot of consumers perceive high saturation as better. Plus people complain on the Internet regardless of whatever any company puts out.

If they do go 2k on iphone 7+, I hope it's not at the expense of battery. We already know it's meant to be a thinner device this year (whereas Samsung took the wise move and went fractionally thicker for more battery), in which case if I had to choose battery life over 2k, I would choose battery. It's one of the current 6s+'s greatest strengths.

 

[cynics]

Not sure how that is relevant considering the burn in only occurs under non-real world conditions (i.e. leaving the screen on for 12+ hrs every day).

This is the on screen control, hard to see but still visible. My Moto X was similar to this in my real world use (who defines that btw?).



That image is pulled from google but I gave the phone to a friend who still uses it if you want a real pic.

Relevant? Maybe not because they make a few apps designed to get rid of it...

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.gilonm.burnfix

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=info.taqanori.android.bic&hl=en

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tinyroar.amoledburninfix

The reason I used the image in my first post was because it was the screen tech in question. A lot of people like to say "that was just a problem with first gen AMOLED (like the Moto X even though it wasn't first gen)".

By and large it wouldn't effect my buying decision however it would be something I kept in the back of my mind.

 

[jamesrick80]

Don't get me wrong I love Apple, and can't ever see myself ditching my iPhone (although I've considered it here and there).

But seeing my iPhone 6s Plus' screen in comparison to my friend's Galaxy S6 is borderline embarrassing. The screen on Samsung's phones are beautiful. You would think Apple would've stepped up their game by now. I can't believe how much nicer the Galaxy displays are.

Anyone else agree?

Only screen that doesn't embarrass me in comparison to Samsung is the large iPad Pro's screen.....

 

[Truefan31]

The Samsung devices when in adaptive display have very exaggerated saturated colours and in this mode there is a vibrancy difference, however as soon as you turn on the 'RGB accurate' Basic mode in display settings the difference between them is negligible both colour wise and accuracy of whites.

Whether you prefer over saturated mode or the more accurate RGB is subjective, personally I go for colour accuracy all the time (I'm a graphic designer, I stare at 100% SRGB & Adobe RGB calibrated screens).

So whilst I can understand people preferring the vibrancy / colour pop modes - that doesn't mean by any stretch the Apple iPhone displays are poor. They are likely the best LCD panels on a smart phone and stick close to the SRGB calibration than over saturating colours.

I honestly can not see the pixels on my 6S+ or my S7e. I am routinely working on 300 dpi material for the printers every day of the week. So 400+ ppi on my devices, I'm happy out.

I wouldn't say no to the iPhone 7 going to 2k especially if it does go Amoled. But at the same time I suspect Apple will still calibrate it's screens more akin to Samsungs (SRGB accurate) Basic mode as they do tend to favor colour accuracy over vibrancy. And if they do people will still complain because a lot of consumers perceive high saturation as better. Plus people complain on the Internet regardless of whatever any company puts out.

If they do go 2k on iphone 7+, I hope it's not at the expense of battery. We already know it's meant to be a thinner device this year (whereas Samsung took the wise move and went fractionally thicker for more battery), in which case if I had to choose battery life over 2k, I would choose battery. It's one of the current 6s+'s greatest strengths.

It's not a deal breaker but if the 7 goes to 1080 then maybe the 7+ could go native then 1242x2208.

I'd like to see the mled tech. I know it'll be a while.

 

[macfacts]

I agree, looking at the screen retention/burn in for the display model makes me envious...

View attachment 624232

It's embarrassing my iPhone isn't reminiscent for a 80's tube TV... /s

No normal user has their screen on 24/7 like a display model. Also, don't pretend like Apple devices don't do the same.

https://www.macrumors.com/2013/11/15/some-retina-ipad-minis-showing-image-retention-issues/

 

[cynics]

No normal user has their screen on 24/7 like a display model. Also, don't pretend like Apple devices don't do the same.

https://www.macrumors.com/2013/11/15/some-retina-ipad-minis-showing-image-retention-issues/

They shut them off at night so there is no 24/7 screen on time there.

And you linked a defective run of products from 2 and half years ago...

I'm not sure the point of your post but you don't need to waste time defending their product to me. I went to the store, I check out their examples for the public, and I took a pic and linked it. Personally I wasn't impressed, if you like it then have at it.

 

[Lloydbm41]

Unless it's being used for VR, higher than 1080 is unnecessary, IMO. Our ability to differentiate pixels at a typical viewing distance for this resolution is debatable at best--not worth the extra energy needed. The reason Samsung's displays are garnering such high accolades have very little to due with the actual number of pixels. I'd personally rather see Apple use displays that can match all of the other elements (contract, brightness, etc) and stick with 1080 for the time being.

I distinctly remember hearing an argument almost exactly like this years ago about how the "retina" 720p display and 326ppi was all that was needed and anything more was a waste. Apple then goes out and makes iPhones with 1080p and 400+ppi displays. Now it appears that 1080p screens are "enough" and anything more is a waste. And this is why Apple fans are labeled as hypocrits.

You should "demand" the best displays period, regardless of who makes them. The S7Edge has a smaller footprint than the 6S+, better camera, more RAM, same size display and yet is able to fit a bigger battery inside. So why can't Apple fit a bigger battery in the 6S+, give you a minimum 2k resolution screen AND still produce better battery life? Things that make you go, "hmmmm?"
[doublepost=1459490474][/doublepost]

They shut them off at night so there is no 24/7 screen on time there.

And you linked a defective run of products from 2 and half years ago...

I'm not sure the point of your post but you don't need to waste time defending their product to me. I went to the store, I check out their examples for the public, and I took a pic and linked it. Personally I wasn't impressed, if you like it then have at it.

To be fair, you gave us a screen shot of a Galaxy phone from 3+ years ago with "ghosting"! No such thing as "burn-in" on AMOLED.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

They shut them off at night so there is no 24/7 screen on time there.

And you linked a defective run of products from 2 and half years ago...

I'm not sure the point of your post but you don't need to waste time defending their product to me. I went to the store, I check out their examples for the public, and I took a pic and linked it. Personally I wasn't impressed, if you like it then have at it.

The picture of the Samsung phone you linked doesn't look like a recent device neither. That picture is an extremely rare occurrence, if it actually happened naturally. Looks equivalent to the same effect that happens when you put a lighter/fire to the screen.

 

[Klyster]

I had burn/retention on my Note 4, it took nearly a year to develop but started to rapidly get worse.
I took it back and had it repaired free of charge, the phone had the same serial but everything looked new

Opera browser and status bar were the culprits, coupled with me, using the screen at max brightness.
I switched to a full screen browser (UC Browser) and set status bar to transparent.
I sold it as soon as the Note 5 came out.

I had screen burn on my S2 also, after a year and a bit.

These issues do exist but can be avoided.

My Note 5 is showing not a hint of these issues.

 

[tbayrgs]

I distinctly remember hearing an argument almost exactly like this years ago about how the "retina" 720p display and 326ppi was all that was needed and anything more was a waste. Apple then goes out and makes iPhones with 1080p and 400+ppi displays. Now it appears that 1080p screens are "enough" and anything more is a waste. And this is why Apple fans are labeled as hypocrits.

You should "demand" the best displays period, regardless of who makes them. The S7Edge has a smaller footprint than the 6S+, better camera, more RAM, same size display and yet is able to fit a bigger battery inside. So why can't Apple fit a bigger battery in the 6S+, give you a minimum 2k resolution screen AND still produce better battery life? Things that make you go, "hmmmm?"
[doublepost=1459490474][/doublepost]
To be fair, you gave us a screen shot of a Galaxy phone from 3+ years ago with "ghosting"! No such thing as "burn-in" on AMOLED.

First, nice sweeping generalization in your first paragraph--classic Lloydbm41 snarky response to anyone who has any degree of support for anything Apple. Especially useless when in no way was the point being made that what Apple is doing is fine but rather me expressing my own personal preferences, regardless of device. These type of comments are exactly why threads here breakdown into bitter pissing matches.

If you have something to call me out on, as in saying I made the exact argument in the past (which I didn't), have some balls to call me out on it directly rather than lay down this oh so typical of you passive aggressive comment. Otherwise, keep this drivel to yourself. Proof it's completely unnecessary---take it out and start with the second paragraph your point is still perfectly clear and much more concise.

To speak to your second paragraph---the Galaxy and Note phones have a very specific use for VR in addition to their regular smartphone duties so as I mentioned in my first post, higher resolution has clear benefit in this regard. Otherwise, I still stand by my opinion. The ability to discern pixels at typical viewing distance IS debatable and I find the downside of having the higher resolution not worth it. Imagine the battery life in the S7 at that slightly lower resolution with the existing capacity battery, or that the phone could be even smaller while maintaining the same battery life using less battery capacity. I personally value performance/battery life over some extra pixels that don't add value to MY personal use case. When battery performance and power management see much more significant performance improvements, I'll welcome the higher resolution.

 

[jamezr]

in my experience owning a 6s+ and S7 edge and switching between the two on a regular basis, the difference in the display quality is quite noticeable. I know we can't count pixels past a certain point. But there is no denying that cumulative effect of the added pixels makes a huge difference in the overall visual experience between 1080 and 2k displays.
For me personally i want 2 k displays in my phones. I want tech companies to get better at power optimizations and improvements. I want to have great battery life and great displays. I don't think we should give a company like Apple a pass for having a 1080 screen in the iPhone. The tech and optimizations have been available for a couple of years now.
Samsung did it with the S7\edge. i see no reason why apple can't do the same for the IP7.

 

[BlueGoldAce]

I agree, looking at the screen retention/burn in for the display model makes me envious...

View attachment 624232

It's embarrassing my iPhone isn't reminiscent for a 80's tube TV... /s

Nice posting of store model burn-in, that is in no way indicative of real-life.

Will you be posting this same thing when Apple goes to this type of screen technology? What about the Apple watch, do you see it there? No? Alright....

The Galaxy S7 and Note 5 have the best screens out there, as judged by tech websites. This doesn't account for one's personal taste, and never will. Its Ford or Chevy argument all over again, one may be superior in certain areas, but people buy what they prefer.

The Lg G5, iPhone 6s plus all have great screens too.

Ford or Chevy?

 

[gotluck]

I'm fine with 1080p phone screens, I'm glad to give apple a pass on it! I'd rather they improved other areas, unless there really is no perfomance or battery cost for upping the res (doubtful!) or if it is very slight I guess that's fine.

I just bought a 1080p laptop in 2016 so maybe im weird The battery life is way better than the hires variant though (xps 13)

 

[lowendlinux]

I'm fine with 1080p phone screens, I'm glad to give apple a pass on it! I'd rather they improved other areas, unless there really is no perfomance or battery cost for upping the res (doubtful!) or if it is very slight I guess that's fine.

I just bought a 1080p laptop in 2016 so maybe im weird The battery life is way better than the hires variant though (xps 13)

I'm with you on the phone but the high res XPS is awesome that is something I wouldn't have passed up

 

[gotluck]

I'm with you on the phone but the high res XPS is awesome that is something I wouldn't have passed up

battery life and portability were my main purchase factors, if I want screen res I'll dock and use an external monitor

i couldnt do it!

 

[cynics]

To be fair, you gave us a screen shot of a Galaxy phone from 3+ years ago with "ghosting"! No such thing as "burn-in" on AMOLED.

That is an S6... 3 years ago what are you trying to pull?
[doublepost=1459550942][/doublepost]

Nice posting of store model burn-in, that is in no way indicative of real-life.

Will you be posting this same thing when Apple goes to this type of screen technology? What about the Apple watch, do you see it there? No? Alright....

The Galaxy S7 and Note 5 have the best screens out there, as judged by tech websites. This doesn't account for one's personal taste, and never will. Its Ford or Chevy argument all over again, one may be superior in certain areas, but people buy what they prefer.

The Lg G5, iPhone 6s plus all have great screens too.

Ford or Chevy?

Of course I'll be posting that if an Apple device does that, you clearly are typing for effect and don't actually follow my post (not that I would expect you too). The Apple Watch uses AMOLED and as soon as I see one with a screen burned in I'll post it. I'm WAY more critical of Apple products (I think many members here will annoyingly agree with that) than any other manufacturer.

Much like I was first to post a bent iPhone 6 I found at the Apple Store.



I just call it like I see it. Exactly like the picture above, if Apple claims there is no problem then the display model shouldn't exhibit that problem. So if AMOLED screens can't get burn in then I shouldn't be able to find examples of burn in so easily.

Also keep in mind this thread was originally in the iPhone section than moved here. I don't usually come into this section because I know most of you guys prefer the competitions devices for a lot of very good reasons. So for that reason I'm going to bow out of this conversation....

Cheers

 

[Lloydbm41]

That is an S6... 3 years ago what are you trying to pull?

Sorry. The photo looked like one of the older plastic Galaxy S models. My bad.

 

[Atomic Walrus]

If you think these panels look good now, imagine how they'll look if we can ever get Samsung to produce a REAL 2560x1440 panel (full RGB instead of pentile). Would also like to see them drop the PWM (flicker dimming) in favor of proper dimming, which OLED is more than capable of.

There must be something forcing them to stick with pentile (diamond) because both Occulus and HTC wanted full RGB panels for their VR systems to minimize screen door effect and couldn't get them. The blue OLED subpixels have a faster degradation rate and my guess has always been that they're more stable if they're larger.

I don't think the use of PWM is a property of the panel so much as it's the method Samsung chooses to use to control brightness. Probably saving power or reducing burn-in potential here.

I can tolerate the burn-in potential considering the average lifespan (before resale) of these devices. YMMV; I still see 1 year devices with mild burn-in, but it's really not my main concern.