That does look pretty awesome. I cant wait to get the fascinate!
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Droid X vs Samsung Galaxy S
- Thread starter Darth_Penguin
- Start date
That does look pretty awesome. I cant wait to get the fascinate!
Again, when it comes to the screens, there are pros n cons....
Either regular or full screen, look at the :31-:35 second mark...I didnt even look at anything else after this.
The first thing I noticed on the Vibrant, the yellow border on the floor mixes with the white spotlight. U cant make out the border of the yellow border...
The 2nd thing was the details of Sully's face. (the blue monster...lol) On the Vibrant, the mouth disappears or is very hard to make out.
U can see more detail in the iPhone 4 screen. U can see more details on LCD vs. Amoled.
Again, its all preference and what u want from your screen. I'm a details guy....For what I look for in a screen, I didnt see it destroying the iPhone 4's screen....
Either regular or full screen, look at the :31-:35 second mark...I didnt even look at anything else after this.
The first thing I noticed on the Vibrant, the yellow border on the floor mixes with the white spotlight. U cant make out the border of the yellow border...
The 2nd thing was the details of Sully's face. (the blue monster...lol) On the Vibrant, the mouth disappears or is very hard to make out.
U can see more detail in the iPhone 4 screen. U can see more details on LCD vs. Amoled.
Again, its all preference and what u want from your screen. I'm a details guy....For what I look for in a screen, I didnt see it destroying the iPhone 4's screen....
Idk where you are seeing his mouth disappear i looked specifically where you said and i clearly see a mouth?
BigCiX
Android Expert
Sorry to run your party but the US version of all galaxy S phones do not include flash to the camera or a front facing camera.
Actually the fascinate does have a flash on the camera! Go look and you can see or check out the leaked spec sheets that clearly says it has a led flash!
When he crack his knuckles and tilt his head to the side. Compare both phones. See, now I just noticed something else...
Look at the :23 mark, the blue hair on both phones. Its fuzzy on the Vibrant, like the color is bleeding on the outer edges. Its like someone tried to color and didnt stay in the lines, or put a real thick border around the hair.
I keep seeing stuff...look at the bottom square on the door in the :23 mark. U see the whole square on the iPhone 4.
See....Imma stop looking after this. The :16 mark, the big window in the back, u can see the individual squares on the iPhone 4.
Again, this is not to knock the screen. It just has cons like any other product.
TheAlmightyDrew
Android Enthusiast
It has been confirmed that the Fascinate has flash. Even the Epic 4G has flash dude. I am not sure where you are getting your information from lol.
In addition to both the Epic and the Fascinate having flash like the above posters mentioned. The Epic also does in fact have a front facing camera..
Well we can argue quadrant this or quadrant that, GPU this or GPU that, Amoled this or Lcd that all day long. What it really comes down to is real world performance and perception. I played with a Captivate recently and it seemed slower than the X just moving around the interface. I believe most of that was because of Touchwiz's bloat but it was a little disappointing nonetheless. Some apps started just as quick and others seemed to startup a split second slower. Again this could be just the Touchwiz's fault as I did not load any other launcher to test it. It could also be the demo phone being loaded with crap from everyone playing with it.
The other noticeable issue that stuck out was degraded text clarity due to pixelation. Text on the X just seemed sharper and the pixels were much harder to notice. I'm sure it's me being sensitive to it more than others but it was very noticeable without trying. Also I'm not taken aback by bright oversaturated colors like many people are so to me Amoled tech right now isn't that impressive. At least not yet.
The phone itself was fine and the camera decent although, like the Evo and Incredible, the colors were a little washed out in the pics but they were nice and sharp, probably a little sharper than the X on average. Video performance seemed smooth though but suffered from the same color issues.
Where all the Galaxy phones shine is in gaming and overall smoothness but the X isn't bad pulling a totally playable >40fps in the test game I've seen demoed. So I don't see GPU performance as a huge advantage over the X like others do. As long as the game isn't jittery, I'm happy.
The other noticeable issue that stuck out was degraded text clarity due to pixelation. Text on the X just seemed sharper and the pixels were much harder to notice. I'm sure it's me being sensitive to it more than others but it was very noticeable without trying. Also I'm not taken aback by bright oversaturated colors like many people are so to me Amoled tech right now isn't that impressive. At least not yet.
The phone itself was fine and the camera decent although, like the Evo and Incredible, the colors were a little washed out in the pics but they were nice and sharp, probably a little sharper than the X on average. Video performance seemed smooth though but suffered from the same color issues.
Where all the Galaxy phones shine is in gaming and overall smoothness but the X isn't bad pulling a totally playable >40fps in the test game I've seen demoed. So I don't see GPU performance as a huge advantage over the X like others do. As long as the game isn't jittery, I'm happy.
BigCiX
Android Expert
I never said the Epic didn't have a flash but only the fascinate. I stand corrected!
To me it's like looking at 32-bit vs 16-bit color. I encoded these videos directly from the raw bluray M2TS file, and the color reproduction on the Vibrant is exactly like it looks coming off the bluray. Whether it looks unnatural to you is irrelevant. It's more accurate. Only LED's can do true black. It's what anyone shopping for a high-end flat-panel TV already knows. Steve Jobs knew it. That's why he tried (and failed) to secure SAMOLED's for the iPhone4.
Here's a comparison of some Avatar clips... I only ripped these vids at 1200kbps so they lost a little more detail compared to Monsters, Inc. (2200kbps), but look at the viewing angle comparison at the end. The LED advantage there is incredible.
YouTube - Samsung Vibrant (Galaxy S) vs. iPhone 4: Avatar clips
Here's a comparison of some Avatar clips... I only ripped these vids at 1200kbps so they lost a little more detail compared to Monsters, Inc. (2200kbps), but look at the viewing angle comparison at the end. The LED advantage there is incredible.
YouTube - Samsung Vibrant (Galaxy S) vs. iPhone 4: Avatar clips
They don't put a gun to your head and force you to use Bing instead of Google.
The Fascinate will be out in a week or two. People are weeks into backorders for the Droid X so you can't actually get one right now.
APPLE would NEVER go after SAMSUNG...the reason is something that most people did not know...SAMSUNG is the one who made all the CPU's for all the iphones till now...SASMUNG recently partnered with INTRISITY to design the Hummingbird CPU for the Galaxy S and when APPLE found out how fast that setup was, well, they couldn't beat it so what did they do?
They BOUGHT OUT INTRISITY...LOL....
These are FACTS..do some research and you will see.
Wrong in oh so many ways.
First Apple has sued their suppliers before. There are plenty of suppliers for Mobile CPUs and none have a clear advantage over the other. IOS will run on any of them.
Second, the iPhone 4 and Galaxy CPUs are almost exactly the same.
Third, Apple has under clocked their version to keep battery life high but ios is still snappy on the iPhone 4.
Fourth, Samsung had to over clock their CPU to provide decent performance.
Those are the actual facts.
Compared to the X and Evo, the iPhone 4's display heavily under saturates colors and the amoled over saturates colors - they're both crappy when it comes to true color reproduction. The iPhone 4 only won that comparo because of the obviously pro iPhone bias that's the norm with that mag, however the hard data is interesting nonetheless.
Is The iPhone 4's LCD the Best? | PCMag.com
What's indisputable is the Samsung's GPU is the most powerful right now and the iPhone 4 still has a tiny display, crappy antenna, and an OS that only just caught up to the competition. Besides this thread is supposed to be Droid X vs Samsung. The iPhone 4 is yesterday's news.
Is The iPhone 4's LCD the Best? | PCMag.com
What's indisputable is the Samsung's GPU is the most powerful right now and the iPhone 4 still has a tiny display, crappy antenna, and an OS that only just caught up to the competition. Besides this thread is supposed to be Droid X vs Samsung. The iPhone 4 is yesterday's news.
VegasTouch
Android Enthusiast
And a FFC
VegasTouch
Android Enthusiast
Link? The Hummingbird isnt over clocked. It is clocked at 800. You want to put out "facts", how about a link because i know that one is wrong.
Fair enough.... then again, so are TFT LCD's.
It is very inaccurate to use the results of that article. Samoled is much improved over the regular amoled display tested above. Just ask anyone who has seen a Nexus One and one of the Galaxie S class devices side by side.
LOL, I thought the same thing until I played with the Captivate - it looked no different to the Incredible's Amoled. In all fairness I didn't put them side by side, but the over saturation was still evident.
Which right now is unfortunate. Hopefully the future Amoled screens will be better both in resolution and color accuracy.
You're either watching at 360P, or don't know which phone is which. You've gotta be kidding. LOL
What I saw IN PERSON (without any additional compression added by boobtube) was EQUAL apparent sharpness to my human eyes, but ridiculously higher dynamic range (that's detail in shadows, more color gradations, etc.) from the Samsung, ridiculously higher contrast ratio, and colors that pop when they're supposed to. LCD's just can't do it as a function of their design. I tried to capture it with a camcorder but it just can't do any justice to the ownage.
^I'm glad u said in person......
Cuz you're the one who upped the clip comparing the screens....saying it destroyed the iPhone 4's.
So when I point out what I felt were ways it didnt destroy it....u wanna blame it on the camcorder, compression....
U felt the camcorder captured it enuff to up the clip tho. If it owned it so much, it woulda been apparent in the clip. Your orig post basically said "it destroyed it, here look at this clip as proof"
So I guess u made the clip and didnt look at it online.... Even watching it at 720p, regular size or full screen u can see the differences I pointed out.
That 2nd clip u posted, yea the Amoled screen had the better viewing angle. Again, just looking at the comparison clip u posted. That was it tho. Everything else look alot more similar compared to the first clip.
And with a phone, will viewing angle be as important vs. a TV.....I dont know. Reading the words on a webpage on the phone will be important tho, depending on what u use the phone for the most.
Again, not knocking Amoled, but it has its cons...And Sully's mouth...that was 1 outta 5 things I pointed out. I'll admit the mouth thing u have to really notice, but u do notice it it just happens so quick. But what about the other things I pointed out....they're onscreen longer.....
Cuz you're the one who upped the clip comparing the screens....saying it destroyed the iPhone 4's.
So when I point out what I felt were ways it didnt destroy it....u wanna blame it on the camcorder, compression....
U felt the camcorder captured it enuff to up the clip tho. If it owned it so much, it woulda been apparent in the clip. Your orig post basically said "it destroyed it, here look at this clip as proof"
So I guess u made the clip and didnt look at it online.... Even watching it at 720p, regular size or full screen u can see the differences I pointed out.
That 2nd clip u posted, yea the Amoled screen had the better viewing angle. Again, just looking at the comparison clip u posted. That was it tho. Everything else look alot more similar compared to the first clip.
So, with more detail it showed on the first clip on the iPhone 4 is what u saying. So thats why they looked more similar in the 2nd clip compared to the first clip. Cuz in the 2nd clip only the viewing angle was noticeable.
And with a phone, will viewing angle be as important vs. a TV.....I dont know. Reading the words on a webpage on the phone will be important tho, depending on what u use the phone for the most.
Again, not knocking Amoled, but it has its cons...And Sully's mouth...that was 1 outta 5 things I pointed out. I'll admit the mouth thing u have to really notice, but u do notice it it just happens so quick. But what about the other things I pointed out....they're onscreen longer.....
My quad-core can handle 1080P just fine.