You know the headphones that come with the iPhone 4S have a control button that lets you pause, skip to the next track, adjust the volume and let you make/receive phone calls without having to take the phone out of your pocket. Not to mention, it works with voice commands, which I haven't tried using yet...
The genius of Apple
- Thread starter Serial Midget
- Start date
Yeah I've got an Android phone, everything an Apple can do can be copied by the lads at Google so the Android phone works almost the same in that regard.
Just found out my MP3 player accepts a 64GB card, nice.
That has been on the market with other phones before. Hell if you look around kickstarter there probably are tens of projects of making something like that universal.
A bit like making a smart tv out of your non smart tv.
True I suppose, my Discman from 2001 had a backlit inline remote with skip(FF) random and volume on it even back then it was standard issue from mid range gear upwards. That thing did spend a bit of time in my Camelback and you could skip tracks with gloves on, gotta love stuff that is designed to be functional.
My new Cowon has fiddly buttons and doesn't have enough output to drive full sized headphones which an iProduct does but the quality of sound that comes out of the thing is retarded, re-ripping all my CD's as FLAC.
Since I'm talking oldscool crap I have a couple of old Japanese made Toshiba MP3 players that transmit audio on the FM band, sure it sounds crap going through an FM modulator but they cost the same as an iTrip on it's own.
Last edited:
Are you sure? Old Cowons had pretty powerfull amps for mp3 players. I remember considering one for that reason.
btw. There are some full size headphones will low impedance. You won't get the same quality as with a dedicated headphone amp but it's still above and beyond anything you've tried. ATH-A900 are good but they are enormous so I only use them in my home.
Try Shure or Ultimate ears in ear headphones. Pretty good quality/portability.
So apple won their lawsuit? Apple good, samsung bad......
No.....Apple is a big mean corporation just picking on everyone.
Yeah it is pretty disappointing, even with my in ear headphones it still runs at three quarters volume to get a decent level. With all of my other players I can use my over ear phones at full volume and the sound quality is good, not very loud but still clear. With the Cowon it must start to clip as the sound starts to sound a bit weak and then distorts if pushed any harder.
As it will only really be used on the bike I'm not too worried, you look silly if you walk the streets in over ear phones that aren't the Beats brand.
I have had a pair of Shure's but I'll try something different, would love to find some that aren't made in China.
On the iPhone yes vs certain older smartphones on design patents [that is aesthetics, not technological innovation], on the iPad no: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3266439/samsung-apple-verdict
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3266382/apple-vs-samsung-design-patent-infringment/in/3030480
The iPad verdict is the same as the UK case where the judge wanted Apple to do free ads for Samsung saying they didn't copy but Apple and Samsung decided on some other settlement later on.
In South Korea they were both judged to be infringing on each other and each had certain older devices banned:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/apple-samsung-infringed-on-each-others-patents-south-korean-court-rules-thecircuit/2012/08/24/b2659e40-ee28-11e1-b0eb-dac6b50187ad_blog.html
There are still lots of on going cases with Motorola, Kodak, etc. The patent system needs reform as seen in both IT and the cycling industry. The losers are the consumers and the winners are the lawyers. These have no effect on the current market other than to drive up prices on current non-infringing Samsung devices and limit consumer choice on cheap/free last generation devices on their way out. They will be appealed as big verdicts always are...
Last edited:
Get some custom in ears. Some of the are us made. Can't remember a company but a friend made them on license in Poland. You will need to visit and audiologist but supposedly that's awesome.
btw. what Cowon model do you have? You can probably how many mW per channel it produces. I'm really curious because even 16 is enough to drive most low impedance phones.
29mWx2 at 16Ohms, pretty sure my over ears are rated at 200mW max a side.
The player is a Z2, just ordered some cheap new phones, paid about $55US delivered after entering a code- http://www.xears.com/experience-xe200pro-bambus-maya-edition-2012
Sorry guys, now back to Apple talk......
If it's 29mW x2 it should easily drive low impedance headphones. My old 18mW player did quite well with IEMs and it was decent with my big can though low imp. ATH. I'm near deaf and I was listening at 80%
UE does custom inner ear headphones..but youll pay $450-2000
Yeah but there are cheaper custom inner ear companies.
http://www.alclair.com/products/
A good example of customs starting at 250$
They are further along in Germany:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/28/apple-strikes-licensing-deal-with-motorola-in-germany/
So many things are better in germany. Just try to find color-rado mix or a good dunkel here.
Just remember One billion dollars
Just remember, not at all likely according to legal experts:
http://m.gizmodo.com/5938219/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up
Not really sure if this is the place but I've gone further OT in previous posts.
Samsung have announced that they can make an OLED screen that boasts a higher resolution than the LCD screens they make for Apple.
It seems the LCD maintains it's brightness longer than an OLED screen, must admit the Retina display does look amazing.
http://avorah.com/samsungs-new-series-9-laptops-match-apples-retina-with-13-inch-2560-x-1440-pixel-display/
Samsung have announced that they can make an OLED screen that boasts a higher resolution than the LCD screens they make for Apple.
It seems the LCD maintains it's brightness longer than an OLED screen, must admit the Retina display does look amazing.
http://avorah.com/samsungs-new-series-9-laptops-match-apples-retina-with-13-inch-2560-x-1440-pixel-display/
Last edited:
The fact they talk about resolution is hilarious. At that size you won't even notice the differance between hd ready and full hd, so higher res = bs. Contrast and other non resolution parameters have much bigger importance in <80'' than going over 1080p.
Just for Josh:
That's why the whole 4k push and even the 8k push some companies speak about is idiotic! I remember there was a blind test where they took tech journalists to blind test one 720p panasonic plasma known for it's superb picture quality and 3 other high quality 1080p. None did find out it was 720p.
4k should be a home projector standard 8k should be cinema since it would be a great alternative to very big imax 70mm cameras.
Nah subpixel rendering is more in regards to people saying they need high resolution displays for nice looking text or icons - it only matters for very small text which is hard to read even if its print media rather than computer displays.
But you are right that for video unless you have a huge display it doesn't matter either.
For touchscreen phones it certainly better to go for 4.8" screen vs a 4" for things like an onscreen keyboard or being easier to read at similar resolutions and lose pixel density though obviously larger screens eat more battery.
Its rumored that Apple will probably offer a larger display than 4" in about a year...
But you are right that for video unless you have a huge display it doesn't matter either.
For touchscreen phones it certainly better to go for 4.8" screen vs a 4" for things like an onscreen keyboard or being easier to read at similar resolutions and lose pixel density though obviously larger screens eat more battery.
Its rumored that Apple will probably offer a larger display than 4" in about a year...
Last edited:
4k and 8k is far from idiotic. especially if youve ever seen it before. the images are absolutely stunning even on a 42". it also slowly making its way into "prosumer" fpj's.
what size screen what this test done on? on a fairly small screen, i can see where it would be hard (but not impossible,) but on large screens, the difference is very noticeable.
The size was 40''
As for 4 and 8k the quality is higher because of other factors. From your normal viewing distance, hell even if you go closer to the TV your eye resolution will prevent you from noticing the distance. So unless you are superhuman the differance you saw was either very close or the screens you saw were better in a number of other ways.
there was no other "factor" other then a different screen (obviously.)
have you seen a 4k or 8k fpj or tv? i have. i spent 3 years looking at 2 4k tv's that never came out and 2 years looking at a 4k fpj that is just now hitting the market.
So contrast, balanace and that other crap is made up? Also placebo. Seriously. Your eye has finite resolution and below certain pixel size it cannot differentiate between pixels - they will become too small to notice. Up close - yeah you see the differance but in real use? Nope.
I'd like to know where you can get 4k content too...
who said anything about contrast being a placebo? "balance" you put it, has little effect on image quality/resolution. your eye also has a much higher "megapixel" capability then any screen can reproduce.
the whole point is that the pixels are smaller giving you the feeling that there are no pixels.
there is such things as 4k cameras ya know
edit: as well as the fpj's or tv's scalers, albeit no as good as a native format
Last edited:
Yes your eye has higher megapixel quality but you do not put the screen inside your eyes. For eye resolution I will direct you to some interesting internerdz math
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57366319-221/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid/
4k Cameras are awesome but for big screens. 80''+ or as pointed out for stereoscopic full hd in lower sizes. I love high resolution imax images but on my 40'' I see no differance between 720p and 1080p. Though it may be upscalling.
Also 4k cameras doesn't mean 4k content or 4k players.
BTW. I'm not against 4k for home use. If I had the cash I'd buy a 80 or a 100'' 4k TV if it was available right away.
Last edited:
Sure but it not like you can watch 4K live TV, streaming internet content, or grab an optical disc at the local store, its rare and not relevant for the average home viewer.
Last edited:
Given that a cinema quality digital copy is a couple hundred gb it will be some time before it hits the mainstream.
Hell the first 4K movie hit this year and Hobbit will be 5K. Mainstream streaming 4K and especially 8K are so far away barring some huge breakthrough in bandwidth or compression.
But I would agree its certainly more important than trying to bring back BS 3D content...
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57467138-221/first-4k-movie-available-for-sale/
Last edited:
There was some player with 4k upconverting but that's not the same.
A bit of reality on iPhone 5 PR day from the former Apple head of product development and worldwide marketing, Jean-Louis Gassée (BeOS ruled):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/sep/03/apple-invented-anything
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/sep/03/apple-invented-anything
Last edited: