In article <tpekmf$3s4fg$
1@dont-email.me>, sms
<
scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
What would have been the advantage, other than cost, of an SE4 versus an iPhone 12, 13, or 14?
that depends on what features it ultimately will have and how it
compares to the 12, 13 or 14, all of which is unknown at this time.
The SE4 was not predicted to be a rehash of the 4.7" screen iPhone 6,
that's a rumour, not a given. sometimes rumours are correct and
sometimes they are not.
it's also the same screen as the *current* iphone se 2022, as well as
the se 2020, 8, 7, 6s and 6. trying to paint it as an old obsolete
screen isn't going to fly.
The idea of using the SE4 essentially as a beta test platform for the
Apple 5G modem was not a good one.
who said anything about a beta test? that's not how apple works.
first of all, that's only a rumour and could easily be wrong.
second, if their 5g modem is not available in sufficient quantities to
put it in all iphone models, then it's likely to be in an ipad first,
this is further supported by apple moving to 5g across the entire
lineup at the same time, including mmw, versus what other device makers
did, which is only partial support and only on certain models.
An extremely complex chip like a
modem is guaranteed to not be up to the competition in the first rev and
a repeat of the Intel modem fiasco would not be a good start.
guaranteed??
right, just like the various pundits who guaranteed that apple's m1
chip, which is also 'extremely complex', would not be able to match
intel and amd processors, except that not only did the m1 match them,
but far surpassed them and at a fraction of power consumption. and then
came the m1 pro, max and ultra, which are far more complex and took
that much further.
going back to before the iphone was released, the various pundits also guaranteed that apple could never compete with longtime mobile phone manufacturers such as rim/blackberry, nokia, motorola, etc. they were
wrong about that too.
so much for guarantees.
Perhaps
building a million or so iPhone 16 devices with the Apple 5G modem and distributing them free to developers and iOS beta testers to use would
be a better way to work out any issues.
that's not how any of this works.
you're trolling (not that it wasn't already obvious).
The other issue is that a 60Hz LCD screen on a phone that would likely
start at $450 is pretty hard to justify when the competition has 120Hz
AMOLED screens in $200 devices.
the difference is only visible in specific scenarios, such as games,
which is not what a typical low end phone buyer would be doing.
for looking at photos, it's a waste because there is no motion. for
email, web surfing, etc., there is minimal, if any difference.
also, the 120hz screen in a $200 android device will not be at full
resolution because the rest of the hardware can't handle that.
further, a fixed 120hz will also have higher battery consumption,
especially when it's wasted on content that isn't moving, such as
photos.
apple solved the battery consumption problem by using a variable
refresh rate based on content, which is *not* going to be found on a
low end android device.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)