If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 23:01:39 -0700, Alan Baker wrote:
I see. So basically when they say something GOOD about an iPhone: you ignore it. Hi Alan Baker, I spend a lot of energy trying to teach you and nospam to be adults. With adults, analogies sometimes work, where an analogy is Exxon o Who markets "Premium Gasoline" like you can't believe Bear in mind, I'm extremely well educated - which means I know chemistry o Specifically organic chemistry - and the chemistry of "alkanes" ... Specifically the mix of two alkanes which are used for the AKI rating o 2,2,4 tri-methyl pentane & n-heptane Those are the "test fuels" for the "octane rating" on gasoline o Specifically, octane ratings of "Regular" & "Premium" There's a HUGE price difference between those two fuels in general, right? o Why does anyone (with a normal compression engine) pay for the premium? Essentially Exxon lies - but of course - they're clever about it o Where ignorant people "BELIEVE" that Premium is "better gas" (particularly for vehicles that were not designed for premium) (which is most vehicles except high compression performance engines) As you may be aware, I gather data on what people "think" is premium o At the gas pump, I nonchalantly ask people 'what is the difference' Do you know how few people actually know the difference, Alan Baker? o In decades of running this survey, fewer than a score I'd assess Some even say something really stupid, which goes sort of like this: o "1 out of every 5 refills - I put the premium in - to clean the engine". Jesus Christ, Alan Baker. o Do you realize how STUPID people are? They are TREMENDOUSLY INFLUENCED BY (admittedly clever) MARKETING. o Which, essentially, is markets wholly imaginary functionality As an adult, Alan Baker, do you understand the analogy I'm making? Assuming you own an adult mind, not only did TheVerge NOT do a comprehensive review comparing to the top 50 to 100 smartphones, but TheVerge doesn't normally DO comprehensive reviews comparing the top 50 to 100 smartphones against the same metrics for each phone. What they DID do is give their overall opinion of the new iPhones... ...and it was very positive. Rated them 9/10. Alan Baker, What you apologists often do is "guess" at what someone said. As an adult, you need to comprehend what I said, and what I didn't say. o You need to comprehend context and words and sentences, Alan Baker. You must realize the TACTIC nospam used - which I was responding to. At the risk of having to re-state history, essentially what happened was: 1. When I claim Apple iPhones are historically on the bottom of the top 10 2. The apologists brazenly claim otherwise (they parrot Apple marketing) 3. I respond with the simplest test of a purely imaginary belief system Three words (actually two but it's poetic) DESTROY imaginary beliefs: o Name just one As you're likely well aware, apologists like nospam _always_ fail the test o Their belief system is backed up by exactly zero actual facts Given the child he is, nospam tried to pull a fast one on us adults o He knows he can't name even a single comprehensive test site of all smartphone cameras that shows the Apple iPhones anywhere near the top historically - he's not actually as stupid as most apologists are. The fact is nospam KNOWS there are exactly ZERO comprehensive tests sites on this planet that test the hundred or so mobile phone cameras using an apples-to-apples detailed test) that historically puts iPhones anywhere other than in the bottom of the top ten (with rare, temporary, momentary forays into the top five). Let me repeat this fact, Alan, because adults comprehend facts. o Other than Apple marketing o Nobody who tests the top 100 smartphone cameras o Consistently puts an iPhone anywhere near the top The facts are clear to adults, Alan Baker o The most astronomically priced iPhone is historically on the bottom Whenever, temporarily, an iPhone momentarily occupies a top-five slot o The Apple apologists claim a "victory" ... which ... in a way ... it is But it's a fleeting victory. Notice though the utter bull**** nospam tried to pull on me when I asked o Name just one When I asked for a DXO Mark style test to back up nospam's brazen denials o He tried to pull TheVerge on me - which even he must know is different Whenever you apologists pull this childishly ignorant move on me, Alan o I'm gonna point it out There are only two possibilities for what nospam pulled on us: o Either he really doesn't know TheVerge & DXO Mark test completely different things, or... o Maybe nospam is really as stupid as what he says indicates. The facts clearly show NOBODY but Apple Marketing consistently rates iPhones in any other place but in the bottom of the top ten - and - when an iPhone ekes it into the top five - it's always temporary. Those are observations I would expect any adult to comprehend, Alan Baker. o I spend a LOT of energy trying to edify you apologists I hope it isn't wasted. They're at the bottom when you cherry-pick the timing, you mean. Alan Baker, I spend a lot of energy trying to discuss things with you as an adult. If you make that statement, it shows only one of two things about you: o Either you really believe iPhones are consistently above the top 5 o Or you are really as ignorant as that statement shows you to be If either of those two observations are true, Alan Baker o Then it would be clear to all you don't own adult observation skills. No other human on this planet, but Apologists would make the claim you did. o Because you simply made it up. The facts are clear iPhones are historically in the BOTTOM of the top 10. You don't like that fact - but the fact you don't like it doesn't change the fact that it is a fact. And where you arbitrarily decide that being at the bottom of the top ten is somehow relevant. This is a completely different discussion of whether the DXO Mark comprehensive and extremely detailed smartphone tests (of something like the top hundred smartphone camera QOR) is relevant. What do you feel is MORE relevant than the DXOMark comprehensive tests? o Apple Marketing brochures? -- I spend a LOT of energy trying to discuss facs with apologists as if they own an adult comprehensive mind... |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 20:07:54 -0700, Alan Baker wrote:
Did you note the large "9" score they gave the iPhone, "Arlen"? Hi Alan Baker, I'm going to attempt to reason with you as an adult would. o By using a well known very similar example to Apple camera QOR Example: o Exxon markets "premium" fuel & Chevron markets "techron", right? o They "claim" all sorts of "performance" benefits, right? And yet, they're completely imaginary. o They lied (essentially) Fact is, there are ZERO reliable cites that back up what people think o Premium fuel can't possibly benefit a normal car in working order o Polyetheramines (aka, Techron) are in all top tier fuel (e.g, Costco) Notice the dynamic I'm attempting to explain to you: o Exxon & Chevron spend millions of dollars to cleverly market to fools o Who pay more - for what turns out to be wholly imaginary functionality There's not a single reliable cite on this planet o Who could claim that premium is "better" for normal cars in working order o Who could claim Techron is anything other than normal polyetheramines I observe that this same concept of marketing to fools o Is what Apple does with respect to camera quality of output There's not a single reliable comprehensive test site on this planet o Which consistently puts Apple at the top of camera quality of results Not a single one. o I know that - and nospam knows that - but do YOU know that? -- I hope I didn't waste my energy trying to reason with you as an adult. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as ratedby individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On 9/30/19 7:49 AM, Incubus wrote:
snip All the cool kids have nice toys. I don't want to be the one playing with a stick with a bit of **** hanging off it A stick with a bit of **** hanging off it? Luxury! All I had was a stick. And it was broken, too. (Any Monty Python fans?) I wouldn't want to feel left behind. Or even end up right behind everyone else. Whether your behind is left or right it's still just as arse, everyone has one :-D Not everyone is number 1 on the DXO-mark barometer of technological excellence, though. I don't feel sufficiently smug and it is affecting my self esteem. -- Ken Hart |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as ratedby individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On 9/30/2019 1:42 AM, Incubus wrote:
snip Or maybe I should rush out and upgrade. I wouldn't want to feel left behind. Note that these ratings don't include the iPhone 11. "after a few years of being overtaken by rivals including Huawei and Google, many experts agree that the iPhone 11 Pro’s triple-lens rear camera has allowed Apple to retake the mobile camera crown it lost a few years ago." |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
In article , Incubus
wrote: Or maybe I should rush out and upgrade. I wouldn't want to feel left behind. Note that these ratings don't include the iPhone 11. Maybe it's so bad they didn't give it a rating. no, it's because the iphone 11 was released less than two weeks ago and unlike google, apple didn't pay them to have it rated early with a top score. the google pixel had a score *before* the phone shipped to customers. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as ratedby individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On 10/1/2019 4:46 AM, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-10-01, sms wrote: On 9/30/2019 1:42 AM, Incubus wrote: snip Or maybe I should rush out and upgrade. I wouldn't want to feel left behind. Note that these ratings don't include the iPhone 11. Maybe it's so bad they didn't give it a rating. LOL. We've seen this leapfrogging in cameras for many years since new models are not all announced at the same time. DXOMARK has not yet posted a review of the iPhone 11 cameras. The Xs Max just missed being in the top ten by one slot. The 11 Pro and Pro Max will likely be in the top five worldwide, and the top three of phones sold in the U.S.. I guess the tiny difference matter to professional photographers, but it's be hard for most people to tell the difference. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 06:45:59 -0700, sms wrote:
LOL. We've seen this leapfrogging in cameras for many years since new models are not all announced at the same time. DXOMARK has not yet posted a review of the iPhone 11 cameras. Hi Steve, Your assessment of the facts appears to be similar to what mine is, which is that the "leapfrogging" happens continuously, where the latest most horrifically expensive iPhone, at release, occupies a top-five slot, and then falls back, currently just below the top ten, but usually the most horrifically expensive iPhone is within the top ten near the bottom. Having kept abreast of DXOMark scores, my guess is that this same dynamic will happen with the horrifically expensive iPhone 11 series - where facts never bother me - they simply bolster my belief system - and if the facts show otherwise ... I'll change my belief system. What's interesting though, is that people like nospam hate facts, so what they do is deprecate the facts, sans a single reliable reference backing up their belief system (nospam always fails the simple "name just one" test, which means his belief system is, literally, backed up by exactly zero facts). The Xs Max just missed being in the top ten by one slot. The 11 Pro and Pro Max will likely be in the top five worldwide, and the top three of phones sold in the U.S.. This is a prognosis, so we have to wait and see, but I think the horrific price of the top end new iPhones (plus their lack of modern networking technology) will severely hamper sales of the top end iPhone 11. Hence, I predict the bottom end iPhone 11 will be the big seller this year. As in both our predictions, we have rational reasons to make them, where time will tell on both. a. Soon we'll have a DXOMark test of the iPhone 11 series b. Where I predict it will be in the top five for a while (as you do) And... a. Soon we'll have sales indicators for the iPhone 11 series b. Where I predict the lower end will outsell the higher end by a lot. Time will tell - where we have rational reasons for our predictions. I guess the tiny difference matter to professional photographers, but it's be hard for most people to tell the difference. For a few reasons this is a true statement, one of which is that the summary score is an amalgam of lots of individual detailed specific test results, where the professionals may care a lot about a particular result in a specific test. The great thing about reviews such as what DXO Mark perform is that they're apple-to-apples comparisons for all the smartphones ... tested in gory detail - and summarized in the end with a single score - whereas what nospam has been trying to pull on us is that TheVerge article which isn't. The fact is that the new horrifically expensive iPhone 11 series camera QOR "should" be within the top five for a while - at the astronomical price Apple sets for these things (driven by admittedly brilliant marketing). It might even assume the "top slot" for a fleeting point in time. Time will tell. Soon. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
In article , Arlen _ Holder
wrote: The great thing about reviews such as what DXO Mark perform is that they're apple-to-apples comparisons for all the smartphones ... tested in gory detail - and summarized in the end with a single score completely false. dxo's tests are *not* consistent. they claim things that are physically impossible, thereby invalidating their results. worse, they can be bought. see dpreview for endless discussions on why dxo tests are a sham. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as rated by individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:08:39 -0000 (UTC), Incubus wrote:
Furthermore, even were their results consistent and infallible, all they show is how good a lens is at passing a series of specific tests (although their resolution section is entirely subjective). Many armchair quarterbacks cavalierly deprecate the professionals... Simple test for those armchair quarterbacks... o Name a _better_ comprehensive mobile phone apples-to-apples test site. Name just one. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Camera quality of output summary scores for the top 50 as ratedby individually detailed DXO Mark Mobile Reviews
On 10/1/2019 8:08 AM, Incubus wrote:
snip Furthermore, even were their results consistent and infallible, all they show is how good a lens is at passing a series of specific tests (although their resolution section is entirely subjective). It's like those reviews based on taking photos of a brick wall or a bookshelf - possibly useful if I only take photos of walls or bookshelves but giving me no useful information about how a lens functions out in the real world in different circumstances. The "specific tests" have a purpose because they are designed to push the sensor, lenses, and image processing to the max. If a camera does well on these "stress tests" it has a direct correlation to "real world circumstances." An advantage of the "specific tests" is that they do the same tests for all phones so that no phone can gain an unfair advantage by skewing the results by picking and choosing tests where one device has an advantage over another device. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DXOMark Mobile Phone Camera Quality of Results (the best known smarphone camera output QOR known to date) | arlen holder | Digital Photography | 39 | October 26th 20 07:35 PM |
free Mobile Reviews, all mobile reviews nokia all models | princes | Digital Photography | 0 | May 20th 07 11:54 AM |
Detailed camera reviews. | boaz | Digital Photography | 2 | April 29th 07 06:23 PM |
Detailed camera reviews. | boaz | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | April 27th 07 05:07 PM |
Detailed camera reviews. | boaz | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | April 27th 07 05:00 PM |