If they'd just said The World's Most Popular Camera, I'd have agreed with anyone questioning what that was based on.
But as it is, they've clearly qualified that statement. On that basis I don't find it unacceptable.
I asked you in another thread fact it is you seem to think I mistakenly believe with regards retina, but you haven't replied yet.
There's certainly nothing unacceptable that I can think of with Apple defining "retina" as a display with a resolution high enough to render individual pixels invisible to most people with normal eyesight, when used at normal viewing distance.
If you want to go out of your way and pick a hole in that by pointing out that someone with exceptional eyesight, holding the phone at an unusually short distance can still make out pixels, then go for your life.
They do say worlds most popular camera regardless of the fact they base it on flickr they still make the stattment. Not the most popular camera on flickr ....THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA.
how in your world is quoting flickr numbers qualifying THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA .. ?? how does one equate to the other.
As for retina it has clearly been shown to you it it bollocks but as above you clearly accept anything apple tell you as gospel and not to be questioned.
They do say worlds most popular camera regardless of the fact they base it on flickr they still make the stattment. Not the most popular camera on flickr ....THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA.
how in your world is quoting flickr numbers qualifying THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA .. ?? how does one equate to the other.
As for retina it has clearly been shown to you it it bollocks but as above you clearly accept anything apple tell you as gospel and not to be questioned.
What also makes me laugh is that in the small print it reads 'Your experiences may vary'.
Like I said, there's an app allowing uploads because iPhone owners were already uploading their photos, not the other way round. (and that was back on the *original* iphone)
I agree.
There is nothing on the 'Why iPhone' page that is unique.
They do say worlds most popular camera regardless of the fact they base it on flickr they still make the stattment. Not the most popular camera on flickr ....THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA.
how in your world is quoting flickr numbers qualifying THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA .. ?? how does one equate to the other.
As for retina it has clearly been shown to you it it bollocks but as above you clearly accept anything apple tell you as gospel and not to be questioned.
Yes, most popular based on the criteria of uploads to Flickr.
I would agree its not the only, or even the best measure, but its still a measure.
And what has been shown to be bollocks exactly?
That a sufficiently high pixel density will render individual pixels invisible to most users with normal eyesight, when a display is held at a normal viewing distance?
But in this case, it is the criteria that Apple are using.
They shouldn't need to spell it out that it isn't the only criteria.
After all, we've managed to figure it out, so I'm sure other people will be able to.
And again, not that it is a pissing contest, but from the graph on the Flickr site, its interesting that there's such a difference between uploads from Apple phones and Samsung phones, given that they both sell comparable numbers of smartphones with pretty decent cameras and the ability to easily upload photos to Flickr.
I have an S3 but dont have a flicker account. Isn't that interesting.
I dont know anyone with a flicker account either. Android phones auto upload to G+ privately, so a share is a tick away.
May be its highlighting that Apple dont have their own infrastructure for photo sharing?
Please don't criticise the Samsung S4 marketing, you will hurt the phones feelings:). After all, it is "a real life companion" (quoted from the S4 micro site):)
You're overanalysing purposely to find pedantic fault.
I already answered that in post 230.
If you want to over analyse the use of light hearted, throwaway smilies, go right ahead.
But if we're on points being ignored, are we ignoring the point about how Apple don't even suggest exclusivity with regards high res displays, with this text:
"The Retina display on iPhone ushered in the era of super-high-resolution displays."
But they have lied about that as well haven't they? High res displays were an evolution and were always going to happen. Samsung made them so was obvious they were all going to use them!
If they'd just said The World's Most Popular Camera, I'd have agreed with anyone questioning what that was based on.
But as it is, they've clearly qualified that statement. On that basis I don't find it unacceptable.
I asked you in another thread fact it is you seem to think I mistakenly believe with regards retina, but you haven't replied yet.
There's certainly nothing unacceptable that I can think of with Apple defining "retina" as a display with a resolution high enough to render individual pixels invisible to most people with normal eyesight, when used at normal viewing distance.
If you want to go out of your way and pick a hole in that by pointing out that someone with exceptional eyesight, holding the phone at an unusually short distance can still make out pixels, then go for your life.
Do you not see that the only reason no other smartphone has retina is because Apple would sue them and its a trademark by Apple?
Its as stupid as Samsung saying they are the only phone with Direct Call or some other samsung branded feature. Or Apple saying the only phone with Siri, even though google Now is better and more useful.
Its amazing how blinkered you are with regards to how Apple promote their products.
Please don't criticise the Samsung S4 marketing, you will hurt the phones feelings:). After all, it is "a real life companion" (quoted from the S4 micro site):)
"There's iPhone. And then there's everything else". Basically, iPhone is just garbage, and every other phone is better (quoted from the Apple site).
That a sufficiently high pixel density will render individual pixels invisible to most users with normal eyesight, when a display is held at a normal viewing distance?
That certainly isn't bollocks.
Are we on to this again already? Its just a resolution, and iPhones are one of the lowest resolutions in modern smartphones. It just shows what a joke the retina thing is.
Comments
Instagram is likely to be even more iOS skewed. It has only supported Android since April last yea.
Version 1 was September 2009.
did version one have photo editing and quick upload for phone photos?
They do say worlds most popular camera
how in your world is quoting flickr numbers qualifying THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR CAMERA .. ?? how does one equate to the other.
As for retina it has clearly been shown to you it it bollocks but as above you clearly accept anything apple tell you as gospel and not to be questioned.
I'd say the above are more common developing for iOS devices.
Haven't a clue, but version 1.0.2 fixed photo upload issues.
and before v1 was launched, the original iphone was already challenging the Canons for top spot.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/08/iphone-flickr.html
Like I said, there's an app allowing uploads because iPhone owners were already uploading their photos, not the other way round.
What also makes me laugh is that in the small print it reads 'Your experiences may vary'.
I agree.
There is nothing on the 'Why iPhone' page that is unique.
Yes, most popular based on the criteria of uploads to Flickr.
I would agree its not the only, or even the best measure, but its still a measure.
And what has been shown to be bollocks exactly?
That a sufficiently high pixel density will render individual pixels invisible to most users with normal eyesight, when a display is held at a normal viewing distance?
That certainly isn't bollocks.
Just like when i had a mac running windows 7! My mac pals were going mental
Was hilarious
I have an S3 but dont have a flicker account. Isn't that interesting.
I dont know anyone with a flicker account either. Android phones auto upload to G+ privately, so a share is a tick away.
May be its highlighting that Apple dont have their own infrastructure for photo sharing?
Me thinks you have read that wrongly!!
I don't have a Flickr account either (like the vast majority). Therefore it can't be used to measure sales volume.
Notice how they didn't use a real report?
Really. Why do you think that?
But they have lied about that as well haven't they? High res displays were an evolution and were always going to happen. Samsung made them so was obvious they were all going to use them!
Well, in terms of sales it's almost certainly the most popular camera/phone, so what's your point?
Do you not see that the only reason no other smartphone has retina is because Apple would sue them and its a trademark by Apple?
Its as stupid as Samsung saying they are the only phone with Direct Call or some other samsung branded feature. Or Apple saying the only phone with Siri, even though google Now is better and more useful.
Its amazing how blinkered you are with regards to how Apple promote their products.
Its a 'Real Life Companion'....
Hardly likely to be reali life now is it?!
"There's iPhone. And then there's everything else". Basically, iPhone is just garbage, and every other phone is better (quoted from the Apple site).
Can you back that up? The iPhone isn't even the most popular camera on Flickr (even if it was, it still isn't an accurate measurement).
Yes, with sales figures.
Quote some and compare the figures with other cameras and smartphones then...
They're easy to look up. Not that I think it matters. It's marketing. They want you to buy their product. I don't know why it's even an issue.
Are we on to this again already? Its just a resolution, and iPhones are one of the lowest resolutions in modern smartphones. It just shows what a joke the retina thing is.