Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
iPhoneX look
2 views
Skip to first unread message
JF Mezei
Oct 27, 2017, 9:49:26 PM10/27/17
to
Just a comment.
In the past, every iPhone was basically recognizable as iPhone. There
was some unique look/feel to the phone, buttons, earpiece, home button.
(even when wearing a cover that hid the bezel).
There was a Samsung model once that had that loo/feel and it would
remind one of an iPhone. That is how well established the "look/feel" was.
Seeing some images of the iPhoneX today, I realised that there is
nothing "iphone" about it. No home hutton, earpiece hole way up near the
border etc. In many ways, it looks like a vanilla phone that could have
been from any manufacturer.
I guess that was inevitable as all manufacturers converge on a design
where the front of phone is 99.99999% display. (and all move towardss
the sci-fi inspired wet dream of having a phone that is nothing but a
semi transprent flexible ultra thin screen)
Rod Speed
Oct 28, 2017, 12:31:18 AM10/28/17
to
JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote
> Just a comment.
Yeah, sure...
> In the past, every iPhone was basically recognizable as iPhone.
> There was some unique look/feel to the phone, buttons, earpiece,
> home button. (even when wearing a cover that hid the bezel).
And its even more obvious at the home screen, even to you.
> There was a Samsung model once that had that
> loo/feel and it would remind one of an iPhone.
The S8 still looks quite similar if you don’t look too closely.
> That is how well established the "look/feel" was.
> Seeing some images of the iPhoneX today, I realised that
> there is nothing "iphone" about it. No home hutton, earpiece
> hole way up near the border etc. In many ways, it looks like
> a vanilla phone that could have been from any manufacturer.
Only until you unlock it.
> I guess that was inevitable as all manufacturers converge
> on a design where the front of phone is 99.99999% display.
Not with the other stuff like the physical buttons and where they are.
In spades with where the fingerprint sensor is.
> (and all move towardss the sci-fi inspired wet dream of having a
> phone that is nothing but a semi transprent flexible ultra thin screen)
Pity that phones are about more than just the body.
> Just a comment.
Yeah, sure...
> In the past, every iPhone was basically recognizable as iPhone.
> There was some unique look/feel to the phone, buttons, earpiece,
> home button. (even when wearing a cover that hid the bezel).
> There was a Samsung model once that had that
> loo/feel and it would remind one of an iPhone.
> That is how well established the "look/feel" was.
> Seeing some images of the iPhoneX today, I realised that
> there is nothing "iphone" about it. No home hutton, earpiece
> hole way up near the border etc. In many ways, it looks like
> a vanilla phone that could have been from any manufacturer.
> I guess that was inevitable as all manufacturers converge
> on a design where the front of phone is 99.99999% display.
In spades with where the fingerprint sensor is.
> (and all move towardss the sci-fi inspired wet dream of having a
> phone that is nothing but a semi transprent flexible ultra thin screen)
harry newton
Oct 28, 2017, 8:23:10 AM10/28/17
to
He who is Rod Speed said on Sat, 28 Oct 2017 15:24:20 +1100:
> Pity that phones are about more than just the body.
I only speak valid verifiable facts where all facts below are referenced
and all quotes are verbatim from those references.
A dumb blond with a gorgeous body is how Apple advertises the iPhone X.
<https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/>
What's interesting is that I looked for advertised *functionality* at that
page just now, specifically for the data speeds, because I knew that Apple
Marketing Tactic is to "throttle speeds of the Qualcomm modem so that it
has a parity with the slower Intel modem".
That's a direct quote from:
<https://www.techwalls.com/iphone-x-a1865-qualcomm-a1901-intel-modem/>
However, the result of Apple throttling functionality is this direct quote:
"*This puts the iPhone noticeably behind Android flagships*
like the Samsung Galaxy S8 and LG V30 in terms of LTE speeds
and efficiency."
I wanted to see what Apple said about that functionality at this page:
<https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/>
* The *first* thing they talk about in the dumb blonde, is *looks*
"It's all screen."
* Then they say the display "fills the hand and dazzles the eyes"
(just like any dumb but stupendously gorgeous blonde would)
* Then they proclaim beauty "all the way to the elegantly rounded corners"
(OK. We get it. It's a ridiculously gorgeous dumb-as-nails blonde!)
* Then the go on to "the first OLED screen that rises to iPhone standards"
(Huh? Their first iPhone screen that actually meets their own standards?)
* Then they talk about the "tiny space" for the camera (which isn't
functionality since all intelligent people already know iPhones are
traditionally on the bottom of the top-ten in mobile phone camera
functionality, and only recently temporarily in the bottom of the top five)
* And then back to the looks, this time the glass back (which we all know
is ridiculously expensive once it breaks - and it *will* break)
* Then they talk about "familiar gesture's" of the primitive iOS interface,
which, the only claim they can make is that it's "familiar" because it was
designed at the dawn of smartphones, so it's decidedly primitive compared
to a modern launcher.
* Then they talk about face id, which if you wanted it, might be the first
functionality that they speak about in this, the most marketed page in
Appkle's web site.
* But then they fall back into the mundane of "taking selfies" (whoopie
doo), and Animoji(TM) to (and I quote) "reveal your inner pig".
* Then they talk about camera hardware, never once saying that they are
generally in the bottom of the top ten in camera *functionality* and only
recently in the bottom of the top five.
* Then they start discussing *potential* functionality by "introducing the
A11 Bionic" and "efficiency cores" and "performance cores", none of which
do they translate into performance via the competition.
* And then it's back to "face id".
* And then, get this, a "custom battery design" (as if every smartphone
doesn't already have a custom-battery design.
* Then the GPU but all they said is that it's faster than what sucks.
* And then back to the A11 "Bionic powers" (why do they repeat so much)
* And then back to the "wireless charging", none of which is a big deal.
* And lastly, they conclude with pod crap, siri crap, and that horridly
ancient primitive iOS interface that every user is "familiar" with (duh).
Notice there's not one thing about *functionality* of the modem whose
performance was throttled by Apple "so that it has a parity with the slower
Intel modem".
I only speak valid verifiable facts where all facts above are referenced
and all quotes are verbatim from those references.
--
iOS is all Marketing like a dumb but absolutely stunningly gorgeous blonde!
> Pity that phones are about more than just the body.
and all quotes are verbatim from those references.
A dumb blond with a gorgeous body is how Apple advertises the iPhone X.
<https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/>
What's interesting is that I looked for advertised *functionality* at that
page just now, specifically for the data speeds, because I knew that Apple
Marketing Tactic is to "throttle speeds of the Qualcomm modem so that it
has a parity with the slower Intel modem".
That's a direct quote from:
<https://www.techwalls.com/iphone-x-a1865-qualcomm-a1901-intel-modem/>
However, the result of Apple throttling functionality is this direct quote:
"*This puts the iPhone noticeably behind Android flagships*
like the Samsung Galaxy S8 and LG V30 in terms of LTE speeds
and efficiency."
I wanted to see what Apple said about that functionality at this page:
<https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/>
* The *first* thing they talk about in the dumb blonde, is *looks*
"It's all screen."
* Then they say the display "fills the hand and dazzles the eyes"
(just like any dumb but stupendously gorgeous blonde would)
* Then they proclaim beauty "all the way to the elegantly rounded corners"
(OK. We get it. It's a ridiculously gorgeous dumb-as-nails blonde!)
* Then the go on to "the first OLED screen that rises to iPhone standards"
(Huh? Their first iPhone screen that actually meets their own standards?)
* Then they talk about the "tiny space" for the camera (which isn't
functionality since all intelligent people already know iPhones are
traditionally on the bottom of the top-ten in mobile phone camera
functionality, and only recently temporarily in the bottom of the top five)
* And then back to the looks, this time the glass back (which we all know
is ridiculously expensive once it breaks - and it *will* break)
* Then they talk about "familiar gesture's" of the primitive iOS interface,
which, the only claim they can make is that it's "familiar" because it was
designed at the dawn of smartphones, so it's decidedly primitive compared
to a modern launcher.
* Then they talk about face id, which if you wanted it, might be the first
functionality that they speak about in this, the most marketed page in
Appkle's web site.
* But then they fall back into the mundane of "taking selfies" (whoopie
doo), and Animoji(TM) to (and I quote) "reveal your inner pig".
* Then they talk about camera hardware, never once saying that they are
generally in the bottom of the top ten in camera *functionality* and only
recently in the bottom of the top five.
* Then they start discussing *potential* functionality by "introducing the
A11 Bionic" and "efficiency cores" and "performance cores", none of which
do they translate into performance via the competition.
* And then it's back to "face id".
* And then, get this, a "custom battery design" (as if every smartphone
doesn't already have a custom-battery design.
* Then the GPU but all they said is that it's faster than what sucks.
* And then back to the A11 "Bionic powers" (why do they repeat so much)
* And then back to the "wireless charging", none of which is a big deal.
* And lastly, they conclude with pod crap, siri crap, and that horridly
ancient primitive iOS interface that every user is "familiar" with (duh).
Notice there's not one thing about *functionality* of the modem whose
performance was throttled by Apple "so that it has a parity with the slower
Intel modem".
I only speak valid verifiable facts where all facts above are referenced
and all quotes are verbatim from those references.
--
iOS is all Marketing like a dumb but absolutely stunningly gorgeous blonde!
Wade Garrett
Oct 28, 2017, 8:26:23 AM10/28/17
to
super-secret cell phone strategies. The AppleSammy police will be coming
for you soon.
If you don't want them to track you, better turn off your smartphone and
dig out the old StarTAC from the back of your desk drawer ;-)
--
You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more
responsible.
- @ThomasSowell
B...@onramp.net
Oct 28, 2017, 2:21:04 PM10/28/17
to
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 21:49:24 -0400, JF Mezei
<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>Just a comment.
>
>In the past, every iPhone was basically recognizable as iPhone. There
>was some unique look/feel to the phone, buttons, earpiece, home button.
>(even when wearing a cover that hid the bezel).
>There was a Samsung model once that had that loo/feel and it would
>remind one of an iPhone. That is how well established the "look/feel" was.
>
>Seeing some images of the iPhoneX today, I realised that there is
>nothing "iphone" about it. No home hutton, earpiece hole way up near the
>border etc. In many ways, it looks like a vanilla phone that could have
>been from any manufacturer.
An opinion based on little to do with the product. Most users are
<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>Just a comment.
>
>In the past, every iPhone was basically recognizable as iPhone. There
>was some unique look/feel to the phone, buttons, earpiece, home button.
>(even when wearing a cover that hid the bezel).
>There was a Samsung model once that had that loo/feel and it would
>remind one of an iPhone. That is how well established the "look/feel" was.
>
>Seeing some images of the iPhoneX today, I realised that there is
>nothing "iphone" about it. No home hutton, earpiece hole way up near the
>border etc. In many ways, it looks like a vanilla phone that could have
>been from any manufacturer.
firstly concerned with what is inside and how it performs.
As far as looks,since Apple has been so popular and profitable for ten
years I believe that any major change in their product's design will
be seen as an asset. Certainly not vanilla.
>
>I guess that was inevitable as all manufacturers converge on a design
>where the front of phone is 99.99999% display. (and all move towardss
>the sci-fi inspired wet dream of having a phone that is nothing but a
>semi transprent flexible ultra thin screen)
Bad guess. What would just a nothing but ultra thin screen do without
>I guess that was inevitable as all manufacturers converge on a design
>where the front of phone is 99.99999% display. (and all move towardss
>the sci-fi inspired wet dream of having a phone that is nothing but a
>semi transprent flexible ultra thin screen)
fantastic workings inside?
>
Snit
Oct 28, 2017, 2:35:26 PM10/28/17
to
On 10/28/17, 5:23 AM, in article ot1sr9$1r4j$1...@gioia.aioe.org, "harry
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
newton" <ha...@is.invalid> wrote:
> I only speak valid verifiable facts
This is a direct lie on your part.
> I only speak valid verifiable facts
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
JF Mezei
Oct 28, 2017, 2:55:47 PM10/28/17
to
On 2017-10-28 14:21, B...@Onramp.net wrote:
> As far as looks,since Apple has been so popular and profitable for ten
> years I believe that any major change in their product's design will
> be seen as an asset. Certainly not vanilla.
I didn't state it would be a failure. It is just that the physical look
> As far as looks,since Apple has been so popular and profitable for ten
> years I believe that any major change in their product's design will
> be seen as an asset. Certainly not vanilla.
no longer shouts "iPhone" via well recognized design of button, earpiece
etc.
(yeah, when you turn it on, you see IOS look, (but even then, very
different UI due to lack of home button).
It's a major departure from previous design elements that gave an iPhone
its "look" that had been preserved sicne the original iPhone.
houn...@yahoo.co.uk
Oct 30, 2017, 8:46:58 AM10/30/17
to
JF Mezei
Nov 3, 2017, 8:57:23 PM11/3/17
to
BTW, ifixit has done their tear down of the iPhone 10.
The changes are not only on the inside, but major changes inside too.
Battery is split in 2 parts to make an L inside, and the motherboard is
folded onto itsefl to provide increated surface for chips while taking
less area inside.
Front facing cameras/sensors are part of the main bezel, not the screen
assmebly.
So a major rework inside and outside for the 10.
The changes are not only on the inside, but major changes inside too.
Battery is split in 2 parts to make an L inside, and the motherboard is
folded onto itsefl to provide increated surface for chips while taking
less area inside.
Front facing cameras/sensors are part of the main bezel, not the screen
assmebly.
So a major rework inside and outside for the 10.
0 new messages