iPhone 8 and X officially announced

[Doobeedoo]

1 hour ago, mynameisjuan said:

This logic still makes no sense to me. The fact that all phones going bezel less are literally just filling in parts that were once bezels. If its a different aspect ratio well so....who the f cares. Also a taller screen is still more useful you are scrolling 99% of the time. If you have black bars on videos, well so, it would of just been bezels anyway.

What's not to understand? Yes filling parts that were bezels, or just "scissor cut" bezels from existing 16:9 and you get same display size but more compact form factor. Also you can just make such phone with bigger display and form factor anyway. It's just better. Also makes sliding notifications annoying being so tall. And I'm not scrolling 99% of time and extra height wouldn't benefit me for it like they advertise. But just as said, make pulling down notification center with one hand harder and more far and having issues with videos. 

 

This is like Note 8 compared to 16:9 5.6" which would be same width minus the extra height on Note. Yet it would still be large, but compact enough that it could be placed in 5" form factor that usually haves bezels easily.
http://www.displaywars.com/5,6-inch-16x9-vs-6,3-inch-d{18,5x9}

Edit:
Or if Note 8 was 16:9 with same 6.3"
http://www.displaywars.com/6,3-inch-16x9-vs-6,3-inch-d{18,5x9}

[mynameisjuan]

1 minute ago, Doobeedoo said:

What's not to understand? Yes filling parts that were bezels, or just "scissor cut" bezels from existing 16:9 and you get same display size but more compact form factor. Also you can just make such phone with bigger display and form factor anyway. It's just better. Also makes sliding notifications annoying being so tall. And I'm not scrolling 99% of time and extra height wouldn't benefit me for it like they advertise. But just as said, make pulling down notification center with one hand harder and more far and having issues with videos. 

 

This is like Note 8 compared to 16:9 5.6" which would be same width minus the extra height on Note. Yet it would still be large, but compact enough that it could be placed in 5" form factor that usually haves bezels easily.
http://www.displaywars.com/5,6-inch-16x9-vs-6,3-inch-d{18,5x9}

But you are missing the point that the phones are the same size just with less bezels. People dont have issues with the size of phones and ever since the iphone caught up to the big screen everyone now just wants a big screen as form factor is not an issue. So why not keep the same form factor with just a bigger screen. 

 

And I am sorry that 18:9 is not good enough for you and you dont scroll much but I can tell you that I almost never see people holding their phone sideways. 

[Doobeedoo]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

But you are missing the point that the phones are the same size just with less bezels. People dont have issues with the size of phones and ever since the iphone caught up to the big screen everyone now just wants a big screen as form factor is not an issue. So why not keep the same form factor with just a bigger screen. 

 

And I am sorry that 18:9 is not good enough for you and you dont scroll much but I can tell you that I almost never see people holding their phone sideways. 

How am I missing the point here. You can still have the phones of same size with less bezels on 16:9. And then you say people don't have issues with the size of phones (which many do and would prefer smaller ones) but then anyway you could extend further that 16:9 to have same height as 18.5:9 with more width. So what's the problem? I gave you links.

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, ScootsMcgoots said:

My biggest issue with the X is it totally omits the fingerprint sensor.  Also I thought they would just replace the home button with android style software buttons,  I'm kinda skeptical of how reliable and intuitive the whole swiping  up from the bottom  bar is. 

Swipe up is very intuitive on the S8 for the app drawer, and if it's like Windows Charms or some OSX gestures, you'll have to start from the bezel and it'll be hard to accidentally do it.

[mynameisjuan]

2 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

How am I missing the point here. You can still have the phones of same size with less bezels on 16:9. And then you say people don't have issues with the size of phones (which many do and would prefer smaller ones) but then anyway you could extend further that 16:9 to have same height as 18.5:9 with more width. So what's the problem? I gave you links.

I am not saying you cant have a phone of the same size with less bezel on 16:9. I am saying they took existing form factors which people were already fine with and added more screen and less bezels and in the end it happened to be 18:9. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

I just dont see why you are so butt hurt about phone not having 16:9 ratios when VIDEOS are the only thing affected, like really thats it. 

[Dylanc1500]

4 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

I am not saying you cant have a phone of the same size with less bezel on 16:9. I am saying they took existing form factors which people were already fine with and added more screen and less bezels and in the end it happened to be 18:9. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

I just dont see why you are so butt hurt about phone not having 16:9 ratios when VIDEOS are the only thing affected, like really thats it. 

Even movies will leave bars on 16:9 as most movies are shot at 1.85:1 or 2.35:1. So it would mainly be online videos like YouTube and such.

[Doobeedoo]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

I am not saying you cant have a phone of the same size with less bezel on 16:9. I am saying they took existing form factors which people were already fine with and added more screen and less bezels and in the end it happened to be 18:9. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

I just dont see why you are so butt hurt about phone not having 16:9 ratios when VIDEOS are the only thing affected, like really thats it. 

It's unnecessary added height they're advertising "you can view more while you scroll" like wow I can view few lines of text more that I already passed to upper screen... As I said, it makes harder for using phone with one hand for pulling notification down, or using back or either gear icons in apps whatever.

And I can say they could take existing form factor and do with no bezels, but having bigger 16:9 display, with some extra small width in phone no one would care, but, you would have shorter phone which is a bigger benefit. How is that hard to understand, even with imagery comparisons.

[Doobeedoo]

2 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Even movies will leave bars on 16:9 as most movies are shot at 1.85:1 or 2.35:1. So it would mainly be online videos like YouTube and such.

Yeah, that's what people mainly watch on phones YT really. And while some are starting to make 21:9 content, that still won't fit good anyway. 

[mynameisjuan]

23 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Even movies will leave bars on 16:9 as most movies are shot at 1.85:1 or 2.35:1. So it would mainly be online videos like YouTube and such.

And a plus is on 18:9 screens with fit to screen actually make the viewing so much better. Ex...stranger things.

 

On my S8+ I do watch a youtube and with the autofit it work great. Having black bars on the sides is not bad either. 

[Dylanc1500]

 

20 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Yeah, that's what people mainly watch on phones YT really. And while some are starting to make 21:9 content, that still won't fit good anyway. 

That's true but they design the screen for multiple use cases and watching movies or videos aren't going to the main functions so it won't be the main player design for the screen. Like me I would prefer a screen with a ratio of 8:5. But it's not realistic with multiple use case scenarios like games, productivity, movies, videos, browsing, and so on.

[Dylanc1500]

9 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

And a plus is on 18:9 screens with fit to screen actually make the viewing so much better. Ex...stranger things.

 

On my S8+ I do watch a youtube and with the autofit it work great. Having black bars on the sides is not bad either. 

I want Canon, Nikon, Kodak or heck even Red or someone to make a phone that displays native IMAX resolution. (I don't care if the battery lasts 15 minutes, I have a 25ft USB extender..)

[Doobeedoo]

15 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

 

That's true but they design the screen for multiple use cases and watching movies or videos aren't going to the main functions so it won't be the main player design for the screen. Like me I would prefer a screen with a ratio of 8:5. But it's not realistic with multiple use case scenarios like games, productivity, movies, videos, browsing, and so on.

Yeah i get that, standards hard to keep in check. 16:10 was better though like monitors.

[Mr Bacon]

Going to be shorter because I lost my original reply. Extremely irritating. Should've told me that you researched it on your own. I would've taken your response more seriously. Although I would be curious to see what article you read that lead you to your own conclusion.

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Hi-fi portability - Their argument that you need an external DAC is absurd. Just put a good DAC inside the phone and you're done.

Phone manufacturers HAVEN'T been putting good DACs in and seemingly won't. This seems like a invalid argument to me. Either way, we now have the choice. You can buy cheap if you don't care or buy higher and get good quality sound. The latter was restricted before due to the internal DAC.

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

More power - Fair point, although a decent amp would solve this too. I don't think "it's straight up bad for your hearing" is a very positive thing though.

More power doesn't necessarily mean just higher volume. It means that headphone manufacturers can design with better materials or more power hungry designs that provide better bass and/or better sound quality all around.

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Better sound - This is the same as argument 1 but worded differently. Again, put a good DAC in the phone and it will sound good. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a lot of placebo going on here. I doubt iVerge did a double-blind test for this, right?

The two points above would suggest otherwise. That said, reading the article they seemed to notice a very obvious difference. Do you really need a double-blind if the difference is so obvious?

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Better EQ - Portable EQ is a benefit, but better EQ? No... There is nothing that makes an EQ better because it is over Lighting.

EQ is EQ, there's no arguing that. That's not what the point is though. You can load a custom EQ for that particular headphone instead of having one EQ set on your phone that would apply to every headphone. That's a big benefit imo and one that aux can't do. It also suggests that more settings or features could be added or controlled with the abilities that lightning has. Things like controllable RGB headphones perhaps. Admittedly that is just speculation on my part.

 

Edit: Actually after some thought I really bet that'd be possible considered lightning can already send information to things. Such as radios in cars with apple carplay or even in my own car with an aftermarket radio it allows me to interact with my phone strictly through the radio to pick music. Controlling RGB or other features wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility by any means.

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Digital potential - This is not a benefit. It's a statement that there might be benefits in the future.

It is a benefit now. Digital output allows the use of an external DAC which is one of the main benefits lightning brings. That said if there are more benefits in the future they will be ones that aux can not utilize.

 

 

I will say, there's an argument to be made as to whether the new benefits of lightning outweigh the removal of Aux, but I think with a little time it'll grow on everyone and aux will be lost to the history books.

[AnonymousGuy]

3 hours ago, shermantanker said:

i guess that a new feature in ios11 is being able to hit a button a few times, and lock out bio-metric access and require a pass code. But I do have the final build of the ios11 beta on my 7, and don't know how to enable that as of yet.

 

I could see this helping in several cases, but it still requires you to do it before giving your phone up to an interested party. But not perfect by any means.

I think it's always-enabled.  Hit the power button 5 times and it goes into SOS mode where you can swipe to immediately dial 911 (I accidentally discovered this, I thought it was going to be some type of lame siren and flashing light...oops) and it also requires passcode to unlock.

[mynameisjuan]

7 minutes ago, Mr Bacon said:

Phone manufacturers HAVEN'T been putting good DACs in and seemingly won't.

Ummm....HTC..

[Mr Bacon]

6 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Ummm....HTC..

I don't know enough about HTCs' DACs to argue with you. I was basing my statement off the article where it said, "As good as the iPhone's integrated audio circuitry is — and it is indeed among the best on the market — it simply lacks the power to drive Audeze's EL-8 to their full potential."

 

But I'm glad that at least one out of the 10 or so phone manufacturers seems to take it seriously. I would suspect that it still wouldn't have as high a power output as an external DAC would, but I could be wrong.

[Drak3]

21 minutes ago, Mr Bacon said:

Phone manufacturers HAVEN'T been putting good DACs in and seemingly won't. This seems like a invalid argument to me. Either way, we now have the choice. You can buy cheap if you don't care or buy higher and get good quality sound. The latter was restricted before due to the internal DAC.

Yeah you're not really going to benefit from a DAC that is higher quality than what Apple has been putting in their phones for years, as far as soubd quality goes. Same for the internal DACs of most flagship phones made in the past few years. The only thing to benefit is the possibility of an amp being built into the headset.

Thing is, most users don't care. Modern phones are more than good enough for their expectations.

[mynameisjuan]

4 minutes ago, Mr Bacon said:

I don't know enough about HTCs' DACs to argue with you. I was basing my statement off the article where it said, "As good as the iPhone's integrated audio circuitry is — and it is indeed among the best on the market — it simply lacks the power to drive Audeze's EL-8 to their full potential."

 

But I'm glad that at least one out of the 10 or so phone manufacturers seems to take it seriously. I would suspect that it still wouldn't have as high a power output as an external DAC would, but I could be wrong.

HTCs quad DACs are actual damn good. Externals DACs are still hard to beat and thats why I had one for my 6P but at least I still had a back up jack

[Mr Bacon]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

Yeah you're not really going to benefit from a DAC that is higher quality than what Apple has been putting in their phones for years, as far as soubd quality goes. Same for the internal DACs of most flagship phones made in the past few years. The only thing to benefit is the possibility of an amp being built into the headset.

Thing is, most users don't care. Modern phones are more than good enough for their expectations.

pyo* annoyed me you didn't do it for this post. Yes I noticed lol

 

Thinking about it, I agree with you. I doubt sound quality itself would be that noticeable either. It's all about how much power can be delivered. The power is what would have a very noticeable impact. That would allow the headphones to better utilize the high quality of sound being sent to them. If that makes sense?

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Mr Bacon said:

pyo* annoyed me you didn't do it for this post. Yes I noticed lol

 

Thinking about it, I agree with you. I doubt sound quality itself would be that noticeable either. It's all about how much power can be delivered. The power is what would have a very noticeable impact. That would allow the headphones to better utilize the high quality of sound being sent to them. If that makes sense?

It makes sense for high end cans and buds, but let us be honest, pyo. The majority of consumers don't have those, pyo. Some that do, also have a set that a phone can comfortably drive, pyo. For the rest, things like the V-Moda Verza exist, pyo.

[Mr Bacon]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

It makes sense for high end cans and buds, but let us be honest, pyo. The majority of consumers don't have those, pyo. Some that do, also have a set that a phone can comfortably drive, pyo. For the rest, things like the V-Moda Verza exist, pyo.

You can't miss what you don't know  . With the way things are right now, I agree with you. In the near future I foresee more devices going strictly to lightning/usb connection only. To a time where higher audio quality will be enjoyed by all. Maybe not appreciated, but it would bring the base level of sound quality to a higher standard. Everyone expectations of what good or bad sound quality would change.

 

Probably just a pipe dream, but it seems plausibly to me. I fully understand what you're saying though. We're in that transition stage of technology where the old tech seems like it's fine and it's irritating to change, but once it becomes the norm no one will bat an eye and wonder why we ever used aux in the first place. Or I'm dead wrong and the whole thing goes down as the next FireWire

[Scruffy90]

On 9/12/2017 at 2:49 PM, RKRiley said:

Finally a waterproof(rather, resistant) iPhone  

The iPhone 7 was ip67 or 68. Don't exactly remember

[Dissitesuxba11s]

The iPhone X is flawed and this my reason why:

[mynameisjuan]

44 minutes ago, Mr Bacon said:

why we ever used aux in the first place

We used it because it fucking worked and still works great. I dont get why you are arguing we need to get rid of it. Both give good audio quality but one is far superior in terms of availability

[Mr Bacon]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

We used it because it fucking worked and still works great. I dont get why you are arguing we need to get rid of it. Both give good audio quality but one is far superior in terms of availability

So we should just stick to Aux until the end of time just because it's more available? I thought this was a tech forum where we advocate for the latest and greatest??

 

Everyone makes aux because it's widely available, but if a major player stops using it. What do you think happens? The shift of focus starts to be pulled away and suddenly it's no longer more available than the other. Other manufacturers are already following Apple's lead with it. They wouldn't if they didn't see a benefit to doing so.