Technology Android

[dilla]

I might do the beta update after all. If Android 10 fucks my battery life up for some reason, like every progressive update on my S7, just remember I was at least happy with SOT and such before the update. And I'd have myself to blame lol.

The beta posts on the S10 sub look too good to ignore despite people mentioning some minor problems.

 

[dilla]

https://www.checkmarx.com/blog/how-attackers-could-hijack-your-android-camera

 

[dilla]

Masta, you know all about TVs. Does Sony and LG both use the same panel on their TVs but just a different processor?

I was just browsing the lineups and saw people debating between the C9 models and the Sony equivalent. The AG9? I can't remember exactly what it was, but same size screens. Then I jumped down the rabbithole trying to see the difference between the C8 and C9. And there's apparently a W9. A B8? B9? lol so confusing. But who is considered the top brand between them? All these Black Friday 'sales' are peddling some Vizio's and TCL TVs as best deals but they all seem to be inferior models being sold for just slight discounts, after some research.

 

[masta247]

Masta, you know all about TVs. Does Sony and LG both use the same panel on their TVs but just a different processor?

I was just browsing the lineups and saw people debating between the C9 models and the Sony equivalent. The AG9? I can't remember exactly what it was, but same size screens. Then I jumped down the rabbithole trying to see the difference between the C8 and C9. And there's apparently a W9. A B8? B9? lol so confusing. But who is considered the top brand between them? All these Black Friday 'sales' are peddling some Vizio's and TCL TVs as best deals but they all seem to be inferior models being sold for just slight discounts, after some research.

If you mean OLED, then LG makes the best TVs you can buy, and Sony uses the same "panels".
Essentially, LG Display makes almost all current large OLEDs. Sony buys them, and LG Technology uses them to make their OLED TVs. Electronics, electrics, software, and audio will be the differences. Since both companies use different chips and image tuning/calibration, there will be some differences in image characteristics, but generally, they'll be very comparable in terms of what they're capable of displaying.

Now for LCDs, LG sucks since they use IPS panels which aren't good for typical TV viewing. Sony TVs use VA panels.
Now the interesting part about LCD is that TCL typically use the best panels there are, many of which Sony uses in their highest range TVs. TCL also offer excellent electronics and Roku, which might be the best Smart TV platform if you like simplicity and ease of use. There are some amazing deals to be had there. The TCL R615 is pretty much on par with the best Sony LCD TVs, and one of the best LCD TVs ever made, yet it costs around $700 in 65 inch even before any discounts, which is probably the best deal on any TV in the history of TVs:
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tcl-65...roku-tv/6204551.p?skuId=6204551&intl=nosplash

 

[dilla]

If you mean OLED, then LG makes the best TVs you can buy, and Sony uses the same "panels".
Essentially, LG Display makes almost all current large OLEDs. Sony buys them, and LG Technology uses them to make their OLED TVs. Electronics, electrics, software, and audio will be the differences. Since both companies use different chips and image tuning/calibration, there will be some differences in image characteristics, but generally, they'll be very comparable in terms of what they're capable of displaying.

Now for LCDs, LG sucks since they use IPS panels which aren't good for typical TV viewing. Sony TVs use VA panels.
Now the interesting part about LCD is that TCL typically use the best panels there are, many of which Sony uses in their highest range TVs. TCL also offer excellent electronics and Roku, which might be the best Smart TV platform if you like simplicity and ease of use. There are some amazing deals to be had there. The TCL R615 is pretty much on par with the best Sony LCD TVs, and one of the best LCD TVs ever made, yet it costs around $700 in 65 inch even before any discounts, which is probably the best deal on any TV in the history of TVs:
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tcl-65...roku-tv/6204551.p?skuId=6204551&intl=nosplash

Yeah, I was talking about OLED, which was important to distinguish, which I didn't. My parents are looking to replace their aging Sharp Aquos (lol) 65" and knowing my dad, he'd just associate price with quality. Which probably holds some truth but LG has different levels to their TVs, too, like the B/C/E/W models and then there's the previous iterations within those models with the 7/8/9 too. lol I did some more research after asking and it seems like one would move further up in the range with the more different types of media they consume. For example, one of those models uses a more recent/advanced version of HDMI? Which probably only benefits those that have a Blu-Ray player and watch a lot of movies. Some of the other models have more powerful speakers, which are important unless all you watch is the news, but even then you want to have something decent and that doesn't sound tiny and broadcasts the sound well in a large room.

Since I watch mostly sports and my parents watch the news and some movies here and there, I think the B series may be the best for our needs. I think the B8 or B9 is on sale at Costco or Sam's so I might look there for them. I have just read from other users on Reddit, who also claim to be moderate consumers of TV and don't need all the bells and whistles that the C8/9 is still a better buy.

We'll see but I may just tell my dad to get a solid TV in the B series and then use the savings for a good sound bar/sound system instead. That just makes the internal speakers irrelevant when comparing between the Bs and Cs, if I'm not wrong, as I'm sure there is a better processor in the C and the image may technically be better, but I doubt we'd notice it that much.

About the TV OS, LG uses webOS, right? I thought it came with most of the popular streaming services and apps installed on it. I figured all smart TVs, more or less, came with the major apps installed on it. LG using webOS and Sony, I think, has been including Android TV since day-one (2011). I haven't used Roku but I know it's a big enough deal like Android and Apple TV, but Roku being better than the others in some way? Never heard that. I thought it just came down to preference at that point, which TV OS one preferred.

And you mentioned TCL; I've been seeing that brand more and more on deals sites and assumed it was some cheap Chinese company just fucking around. I haven't paid attention to TV reviews until recently but I thought it was always a 4 way race with Vizio, Sony, LG, and Samsung for TVs. Guess I was wrong. But TCL, you said, is LCD, which is "old" tech and with the switch to OLED for Sony and LG and Samsung's QLED, it might not be worth getting an LCD TV as a main, big purchase since the tech is shifting away from that, right? Maybe as a guest room TV or something, although they too are getting pretty cheap, as you linked to above.

I see a C8PUa for $1300 and I'm thinking that would be the deal to get. But there's no rush to buy right now since our TV is doing just fine for now but I do think it's 10 years old now and behind the times on quality. Plus, it sits on its built-in stand on top of another stand/table and I think my parents would appreciate finally just getting it mounted and getting rid of the stand altogether. Might as well get a new TV out of it lol

And any thoughts on a mesh network? I think I might not do the more expensive Synology or Ubiquiti thing for the clinic and stick to the simple mesh networks out there. I think the Eero Pro is the one to beat, according to several sites, and the Linksys Velop tri band is next after that. I need to upgrade my parents' modem too since they're getting 200+ mbps but they pay for a shitty modem/router combo monthly via the Comcast leasing plan. I was hoping BF was going to bring out the deals on the modems too but it's tougher when they use an eMTA for voice and most modems don't support that

 

[Jokerman]

The TCL R615 is pretty much on par with the best Sony LCD TVs, and one of the best LCD TVs ever made, yet it costs around $700 in 65 inch even before any discounts, which is probably the best deal on any TV in the history of TVs:

Absolutely. The updated TCL R625 is a better TV with QLED and Dolby Atmos, but right now it's $70 more than the R615, which makes that the better bargain.

 

[masta247]

I haven't used Roku but I know it's a big enough deal like Android and Apple TV, but Roku being better than the others in some way? Never heard that. I thought it just came down to preference at that point, which TV OS one preferred.

Roku is excellent because of its simplicity, tidiness and imho software quality, which is why I said it's probably the best if you care about ease of use. I find it takes the least time to start watching stuff, requires the least button clicks, and there is absolutely nothing you have to think/worry about or do after you set it up, which takes maybe a minute. You still have access to pretty much the same apps (they call them "channels") though, and buttons on your remote to 1-click access them. There isn't much to explore other than settings for your TV and some themes, but that's the beauty of it to me, as I wouldn't want my TV to feel like a Smartphone. I agree it's about personal preference, but to me, or if I was buying a TV for a family member, it just feels like it's the closest to what I'd want from a Smart TV OS.
I really like Roku, but one of the reasons is because I also don't like how bloated and messy Android TV feels. I feel like while Roku offers you an easy way to navigate to what you want to watch, Android TV bombards you with all sorts of random stuff from different apps and dozens of video recommendations as soon as you turn it on, and I don't like feeling like that on my sofa as soon as I turn on the TV.

And you mentioned TCL; I've been seeing that brand more and more on deals sites and assumed it was some cheap Chinese company just fucking around. I haven't paid attention to TV reviews until recently but I thought it was always a 4 way race with Vizio, Sony, LG, and Samsung for TVs. Guess I was wrong. But TCL, you said, is LCD, which is "old" tech and with the switch to OLED for Sony and LG and Samsung's QLED, it might not be worth getting an LCD TV as a main, big purchase since the tech is shifting away from that, right?

It has never been a 4-way race. As a matter of Fact, Vizio is not a major TV maker - they are US-only, and generally, that's because they were traditionally too bad to even sell in other countries (or US Walmarts to be specific). The first time I HEARD of them was when I traveled to the states a couple of years ago.
There are many brands coming and going. Just a decade ago, Panasonic and Pioneer were the best TV makers. The market changes constantly.

TCL is a Chinese company for sure, but it's making incredible TVs that Visio or LG can't hold a candle to (in LCD terms, LG's OLEDs are a category of its own) and Sony and Samsung's best are generally competitive with (in terms of image quality, definitely not price).

Sure, LCD isn't as amazing as OLED, but the R615 does FALD well, the color reproduction and contrast are excellent too, not to mention that it does HDR very well - it's as close as LCD has gotten to OLED and I was very pleasantly surprised by those TVs. Basically, it's either that for $700, or an OLED if you can drop 2k, with pretty much nothing worth the money in between. Heck, you can drop $1500 on a Sony 950 series and you'd be essentially getting a R615-ish image quality.

While OLED is definitely better, image retention is still the largest problem. I didn't go for OLED for my TV just because of that discomforting feeling that the image deteriorates with every hour I have it on, and you can't stop it. That said, differences between individual models are often academic, with $4k models rarely being worth the money over $2k models, unless you absolutely have all the money to burn on a TV that might last you 3-4 years, as it's still unlikely an OLED TV will last you as long as a good LCD would. As in, that $700 LCD will most likely look better in 3 or 4 years.

And any thoughts on a mesh network?

The thought is that I'd definitely prefer not having to use it. If you have to due to range constraints, I am not in the loop about which one is the most reliable. I have no idea how their mesh solution is, but I trust Netgear stuff as a rule of thumb and get them whenever ordering blind and never been disappointed. Speed tests and reviews aside, I had three of their routers over the years working 24/7 as my main routers and never in my life had one drop a connection, not to mention never needing to restart one.
That said, mesh networks introduce difficult technological challenges so I'd do my research on the specific product before getting one.

edit: oh, it looks like they're the best at mesh too, and I'd wager an uneducated guess the most reliable too:
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/netgear-orbi,review-4263.html

 

[dilla]

Roku is excellent because of its simplicity, tidiness and imho software quality, which is why I said it's probably the best if you care about ease of use. I find it takes the least time to start watching stuff, requires the least button clicks, and there is absolutely nothing you have to think/worry about or do after you set it up, which takes maybe a minute. You still have access to pretty much the same apps (they call them "channels") though, and buttons on your remote to 1-click access them. There isn't much to explore other than settings for your TV and some themes, but that's the beauty of it to me, as I wouldn't want my TV to feel like a Smartphone. I agree it's about personal preference, but to me, or if I was buying a TV for a family member, it just feels like it's the closest to what I'd want from a Smart TV OS.
I really like Roku, but one of the reasons is because I also don't like how bloated and messy Android TV feels. I feel like while Roku offers you an easy way to navigate to what you want to watch, Android TV bombards you with all sorts of random stuff from different apps and dozens of video recommendations as soon as you turn it on, and I don't like feeling like that on my sofa as soon as I turn on the TV.



It has never been a 4-way race. As a matter of Fact, Vizio is not a major TV maker - they are US-only, and generally, that's because they were traditionally too bad to even sell in other countries (or US Walmarts to be specific). The first time I HEARD of them was when I traveled to the states a couple of years ago.
There are many brands coming and going. Just a decade ago, Panasonic and Pioneer were the best TV makers. The market changes constantly.

TCL is a Chinese company for sure, but it's making incredible TVs that Visio or LG can't hold a candle to (in LCD terms, LG's OLEDs are a category of its own) and Sony and Samsung's best are generally competitive with (in terms of image quality, definitely not price).

Sure, LCD isn't as amazing as OLED, but the R615 does FALD well, the color reproduction and contrast are excellent too, not to mention that it does HDR very well - it's as close as LCD has gotten to OLED and I was very pleasantly surprised by those TVs. Basically, it's either that for $700, or an OLED if you can drop 2k, with pretty much nothing worth the money in between. Heck, you can drop $1500 on a Sony 950 series and you'd be essentially getting a R615-ish image quality.

While OLED is definitely better, image retention is still the largest problem. I didn't go for OLED for my TV just because of that discomforting feeling that the image deteriorates with every hour I have it on, and you can't stop it. That said, differences between individual models are often academic, with $4k models rarely being worth the money over $2k models, unless you absolutely have all the money to burn on a TV that might last you 3-4 years, as it's still unlikely an OLED TV will last you as long as a good LCD would. As in, that $700 LCD will most likely look better in 3 or 4 years.



The thought is that I'd definitely prefer not having to use it. If you have to due to range constraints, I am not in the loop about which one is the most reliable. I have no idea how their mesh solution is, but I trust Netgear stuff as a rule of thumb and get them whenever ordering blind and never been disappointed. Speed tests and reviews aside, I had three of their routers over the years working 24/7 as my main routers and never in my life had one drop a connection, not to mention never needing to restart one.
That said, mesh networks introduce difficult technological challenges so I'd do my research on the specific product before getting one.

edit: oh, it looks like they're the best at mesh too, and I'd wager an uneducated guess the most reliable too:
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/netgear-orbi,review-4263.html

About Vizio, that's interesting that I didn't notice I didn't come across many recommendations of their TVs while doing research. They are still pretty popular in the US but I also didn't realize they were basically US-only. I think I just saw deals posted on Vizio products a lot, be it TVs or their sound bars. But after looking through some reviews and Consumer Reports, no Vizio TV seems to be recommended and the highest scoring one got a 68 on CR. Scratch what I said earlier, then. I guess they're popular for price but mediocre quality.

I've never used a Roku and only one of my friends had a Roku a few years ago and he liked it. But I never used it myself and only used Android TV via my Nexus Player, and never one integrated in to a TV. I think the other people I know use a Chromecast (or used to) or an Apple TV so I never heard things, one way or another, about their experiences with them, but certainly nothing negative.

For burn-in, doesn't LG have some software thing that dims inactive or static pixels over time? And if the TV is used for more than 4 hours at a time, it runs that software, and maybe something more complex, to help stave off burn-in? And I didn't know the lifespan of these TVs were just 3-4 years. I think the Aquos is LCD but I also haven't seen Sharp make a TV in a while either lol. Not a whole lot on these deal sites promoting Sharp TVs and I'm not sure they even make TVs on a large scale anymore. But like I said, our Sharp is probably close to ten years old now and I was thinking modern TVs were more or less the same.

 

[masta247]

Not a whole lot on these deal sites promoting Sharp TVs and I'm not sure they even make TVs on a large scale anymore. But like I said, our Sharp is probably close to ten years old now and I was thinking modern TVs were more or less the same.

Sharp used to make good TVs. It's a sad story of this company, since they were purchased by Foxconn. It used to be a Japanese brand associated with great quality almost exclusively. Foxconn disbanded their TV division and sold the brand to Hisense so.. the remainder of Sharp is owned by Foxconn, while Hisense makes TVs branded as Sharp, despite them not having anything to do with actual Sharp - it's just fooling people. Hisense TVs obviously aren't any good.

Sure, there are many tools and gimmicks that OLED TVs use in an attempt to slow-down "burn-in" itself, but, degradation is a physical phenomenon that simply occurs on the actual OLED panel. The longer a given subpixel is lit, the more it will degrade. Burn-in is simply the phenomenon in which one area of the display degrades faster than the rest because it's constantly taxing the same subpixel, to the point you can see the degraded area vs the less degraded one. You can even out the degradation by moving images around so subpixels degrade somewhat more evenly and thus you see less "burn-in" (simply because the entire display is "burning-in" instead, and you don't have any non-burnt in parts of the screen to see the difference) but the screen is gradually dying no matter what you do. 3 or 4 years was just my guesswork - they degrade in a linear fashion with use. The longer the TV is on, the more it degrades. If you use it 24/7 it'll look bleak faster. If you only watch it for an hour or two per week then you will probably be good for a really, really long time, unless the TV otherwise fails of course.

Think of the AMOLED panel on your phone - if you use the screen a lot, even if there is zero burn-in, the whites and grayscales might be a bit off, and the colors might not pop as much as when the phone was brand new, or you need to crank up the brightness just a bit more to achieve the same level of actual brightness as when the phone was new. And it's not as much of a big deal with phones since you typically replace them every 2-3 years and don't leave the screen on when you aren't looking at it.

LCDs don't suffer from that to any perceivable degree because their pixels aren't organic - they are made of liquid crystals that behave in a very predictable pattern and maintain their properties pretty much without fail - they don't emit energy too - traditional LED backlight does, and that one is much more durable too. It's the main reason people are waiting for MicroLED, which replaces organic LED subpixels with miniaturized traditional diodes. It's still long years away to hit mass market. Current LCDs definitely don't look as good out of the box, but they pretty much remain the way they were until the device they are in fails.

 

[dilla]

Sharp used to make good TVs. It's a sad story of this company, since they were purchased by Foxconn. It used to be a Japanese brand associated with great quality almost exclusively. Foxconn disbanded their TV division and sold the brand to Hisense so.. the remainder of Sharp is owned by Foxconn, while Hisense makes TVs branded as Sharp, despite them not having anything to do with actual Sharp - it's just fooling people. Hisense TVs obviously aren't any good.

Sure, there are many tools and gimmicks that OLED TVs use in an attempt to slow-down "burn-in" itself, but, degradation is a physical phenomenon that simply occurs on the actual OLED panel. The longer a given subpixel is lit, the more it will degrade. Burn-in is simply the phenomenon in which one area of the display degrades faster than the rest because it's constantly taxing the same subpixel, to the point you can see the degraded area vs the less degraded one. You can even out the degradation by moving images around so subpixels degrade somewhat more evenly and thus you see less "burn-in" (simply because the entire display is "burning-in" instead, and you don't have any non-burnt in parts of the screen to see the difference) but the screen is gradually dying no matter what you do. 3 or 4 years was just my guesswork - they degrade in a linear fashion with use. The longer the TV is on, the more it degrades. If you use it 24/7 it'll look bleak faster. If you only watch it for an hour or two per week then you will probably be good for a really, really long time, unless the TV otherwise fails of course.

Think of the AMOLED panel on your phone - if you use the screen a lot, even if there is zero burn-in, the whites and grayscales might be a bit off, and the colors might not pop as much as when the phone was brand new, or you need to crank up the brightness just a bit more to achieve the same level of actual brightness as when the phone was new. And it's not as much of a big deal with phones since you typically replace them every 2-3 years and don't leave the screen on when you aren't looking at it.

LCDs don't suffer from that to any perceivable degree because their pixels aren't organic - they are made of liquid crystals that behave in a very predictable pattern and maintain their properties pretty much without fail - they don't emit energy too - traditional LED backlight does, and that one is much more durable too. It's the main reason people are waiting for MicroLED, which replaces organic LED subpixels with miniaturized traditional diodes. It's still long years away to hit mass market. Current LCDs definitely don't look as good out of the box, but they pretty much remain the way they were until the device they are in fails.

I see. As I was reading what you were saying, I was going to ask about the AMOLEDs on our Galaxies. I'm not sure I noticed the degradation but that's probably a result of it happening slowly over time and adapting to it as I use it. I don't think my S7 had burn in at any point and I'd say my usage varied from social media to streaming media and occasional browsing. Is this why a dark mode is so sought after? Does using a dark mode preserve many of the pixels by turning them off?

It sucks that such a big deal is made about OLED screens but there's this glaring issue of gradual degradation. For people who keep their TVs for a long time, and my family is one of those people, then it'll always be a constant worry, even if it's set to happen further down the line.

I'd say my parents watch more TV than I do. Like the actual TV and not just programs in general. I use my phone or MBP for media, but my parents still run the TV for 3+ hours a day for the morning and evening news and then just browsing the channels for a few shows they record on the DVR. So maybe it's closer to 5 hours a day. I don't want to sit there and do the math but if it's going to look like shit, noticeably, after even five years of use, then it may be worth looking at an LCD as an alternative. I know LCD screens can get pretty big whereas I think OLED screens stop at 65"? Or there might a $5K+ 77" option I may have seen mentioned somewhere. These are already huge screens but maybe the compromise on OLED picture can be made with a larger, but still top-notch LCD.

I'm not waiting on MicroLED lol. I know nothing about it but I know whether my parents go the OLED or the LCD route, they're not planning on upgrading their TV until it dies. OLED prices now aren't too outrageous. I think some ridiculous sales from reputable sellers online had the 65" LG C9 for about $1500. And even if it's not too outrageous of a price in relation to other, solid TVs near the $1000 range, it's different when $1500 OLED takes you five or six years with noticeable degradation over time but a $1000ish LCD can go 10 years plus with minimal degradation.

Sounds like for their viewing habits, an LCD might be the best choice after all. But the Sony 950G seems to be a popular pick at just a few hundred bucks less than an LG OLED.

 

[dilla]

lol look at what just popped up for $1299 on Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/TCL-75R617-7...Q825&qid=1575162495&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&sr=8-1

 

[dilla]

I was debating getting the Galaxy Buds for my mom. They are $100 but a cash back offer could bring it down to $80. But with the possibility for the Buds 2 coming out in a few months for the S11, I feel the price would go even lower.

I hear call quality on the Buds isn't that great as compared to the AirPods, though

 

[masta247]

Is this why a dark mode is so sought after? Does using a dark mode preserve many of the pixels by turning them off?

Not sure why people love dark modes so much, but in terms of OLEDs it does increase their longevity and reduce energy consumption.

As for the rest of your post, LCDs are indeed more durable, but I'd rather get an OLED rather than the 950G. The 950G is a great LCD, but it's not that much better than the R625, or R615 if you can find it on a Cyber Monday deal - I don't think you'd tell a difference, even having them side by side, without looking for those differences, as the 950G is a very small step up for a lot of money - you get it pretty much only if you're an AV geek and can appreciate the subtle improvements.
OLEDs definitely do look better and the difference is substantial even to a casual viewer, which is why I said it makes sense to either get a $700-$1000 LCD or a $2K OLED, with the latter offering definitely the best image, except you have to live with the concept of slow but steady image degradation and some risk of burn-in.

I was debating getting the Galaxy Buds for my mom. They are $100 but a cash back offer could bring it down to $80. But with the possibility for the Buds 2 coming out in a few months for the S11, I feel the price would go even lower.

I hear call quality on the Buds isn't that great as compared to the AirPods, though

This is the funny things, because the Galaxy Buds actually score above the AirPods on most reviews, and lower on some mainly mainstream ones. I actually have the Galaxy Buds, and I noticed that some reviewers said they are lacking in bass. The thing is the Buds have a punchier base, amplified by the fact the sound isolation makes the oomph hit harder, unless your silicon tips are a loose fit - which is where I suspected those reviewers failed by using the default ones as opposed to replacing them with the larger ones that come in the box.

Most of the pro headphone reviewers rank the Buds as better or at least similar to the Airpods. The way I see it the biggest difference is that the buds are proper in ear with isolation, while the AirPods are just hanging there. Also, the Buds are smaller, while the Airpods have a larger battery. The Buds are super convenient with Samsung phones, while the AirPods are super convenient with the iPhones.

 

[dilla]

Not sure why people love dark modes so much, but in terms of OLEDs it does increase their longevity and reduce energy consumption.

As for the rest of your post, LCDs are indeed more durable, but I'd rather get an OLED rather than the 950G. The 950G is a great LCD, but it's not that much better than the R625, or R615 if you can find it on a Cyber Monday deal - I don't think you'd tell a difference, even having them side by side, without looking for those differences, as the 950G is a very small step up for a lot of money - you get it pretty much only if you're an AV geek and can appreciate the subtle improvements.
OLEDs definitely do look better and the difference is substantial even to a casual viewer, which is why I said it makes sense to either get a $700-$1000 LCD or a $2K OLED, with the latter offering definitely the best image, except you have to live with the concept of slow but steady image degradation and some risk of burn-in.



This is the funny things, because the Galaxy Buds actually score above the AirPods on most reviews, and lower on some mainly mainstream ones. I actually have the Galaxy Buds, and I noticed that some reviewers said they are lacking in bass. The thing is the Buds have a punchier base, amplified by the fact the sound isolation makes the oomph hit harder, unless your silicon tips are a loose fit - which is where I suspected those reviewers failed by using the default ones as opposed to replacing them with the larger ones that come in the box.

Most of the pro headphone reviewers rank the Buds as better or at least similar to the Airpods. The way I see it the biggest difference is that the buds are proper in ear with isolation, while the AirPods are just hanging there. Also, the Buds are smaller, while the Airpods have a larger battery. The Buds are super convenient with Samsung phones, while the AirPods are super convenient with the iPhones.

lol I think you answered your question about why people like dark modes so much. It's not just Samsung owners but all of r/Android looks for apps to add a dark mode and waited for so long for Google to add one natively to the OS. It might be a bit exaggerated just how much battery it saves or how much slower it prevents burn-in but some people are absolutely obsessed with battery life on their phones that they turn off all features to get the same battery life as someone else. It's one of the more annoying things about phone forums or subreddits when people become neurotic about getting the same SOT or battery life as someone else. Don't even get started on Android OS updates, like when the betas for Android 10 were out and people were planning on boycotting Samsung for their next phone because they didn't get an invite on day-one.

Anyway, I might just wait on the TV then. Although the deals for OLEDs and LCDs were pretty good this BF. You got me to reconsider an LCD for my parents even another one for myself. TCL was a new brand to me but I didn't know it was new and on the rise. I just wrote it off as some dumbo brand Walmart carried, kind of like Westinghouse.

Still not sold on the benefits of a Roku TV though. I have no problem with it and have obviously never owned a smart TV before to be able to compare Android TV and Roku, but I feel like a lot of the apps that come to the Android app store for the TV might not make it to the Roku. I don't have any examples of such apps and Android is pretty bad with getting proper apps for streaming services on the platform and support seems to be lacking when a lot of users complain of a bug that doesn't get fixed for months on Android TV, like in HBO or Showtime.

But that's not the big selling point for me; it's simply the reliability of the TV and the performance/quality of the components and it seems that TCL isn't just some no-name garbage.

It's still not rated too highly on Consumer Reports and a lot of other review sites but I can imagine it gets points for value given its pricing and its performance compared to the big name guys like Samsung and LG.

As for the earbuds, even my sister passed on the AirPods when her BeatsX died on her shortly after two years of owning them. Of course she went the Beats route again and got the Powerbeats Pro and she's happy with that over the AirPods. She had a pair of Beats many years ago, too, but they were the wired earbuds and that had the same issue as her BeatsX which had one side die. The X took much longer to get the issue but it happened nevertheless.

My wireless earbuds from Samsung, the Level U Pro, also took a shit recently. Those barely lasted two years as well so I'm thinking these wireless earbuds are not meant to last. I think I got weakness on the left side but even before that, I had the neck band snap on one side, the left side funny enough, and I wonder if that has something to do with it if it impinged on the wire.

So I'm about to chuck those away but when I got the Level U Pros there was a sale on Samsung for BOGO free. So I snagged two and used a $50 Samsung GC that I got from Pay Rewards and it was just $8 after that lol. I hope these ones didn't just kill themselves in the box, though. It's been 2.5 years of them just sitting in there and my mom didn't want them when I got them, so I don't know if they're still good. Or really, if the warranty is still good in case they did die in box. Then I'd have to go back to wired headphones hell and use the AKGs that came with my S10+

Did you get your Buds for free in a promotion or did you shell out the money for them? Did none of the less expensive options from Anker or other brands entice you over the $100+ for the Galaxy Buds?

 

[dilla]

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/12/04/bmw-free-apple-carplay/

This has been happening for a few years now and BMW just recently stopped doing it but I wondered the whole time they did this if this was the future for smart integration. Sort of how Netflix's success encouraged networks and their parent companies to start their own services in response to Netflix. Like we have Disney+, HBO Max, CBS, etc.

Right now, it seems like the fragmentation is not as big of an issue with smart home stuff. Some stuff may or may not work with Alexa but it seems most services do, as well as with Home. I think Apple Homekit gets the shaft though since I rarely see Homekit support unless it's from a very large company. I'm also not entirely sure how Homekit functions without having an iOS device near and Siri activated. I think I read a convoluted setup process involving the Home Pod, but I'm not sure.

But back to the point, I don't know if services know better than to charge for access to their ecosytem or if it's something they're planning for the future and we just don't see it. Google has done something similar in walling off services from playing nice with its Nest ecosystem; one can no longer have conditions triggered via Nest to perform an action with another service, like WeMo. Google is asking others to migrate their Nest accounts to Google Nest accounts and it break support for services. I don't know if that means you can't use your voice to change the thermostat with a non-Google Home device like Alexa, though.

But that sort of gatekeeping, even though there is no money involved in getting that access back is what I'm worried about. BMW stopped charging for using Car Play, so thats...great, I guess. MyQ also dropped their $10 a year subscription to sync with Google Assistant so now you can open your garage door with your voice for free lol. But I'm sure it comes back in the future somehow. These companies will justify a free to use certain services with certain ecosystems. Sort of what net neutrality laws sought out to do to prevent discriminating between traffic from certain sites or services.

Anyway, that Blink camera I set up outside my parents' house? We found out there was a raccoon couple living underneath our deck lol. You can't make that shit up. So my parents were planning on getting the deck repaired anyway for some time and they just got to work on it today but it was a coincidence they were caught on camera just before their house went to shit.

Finally, VPNs. I've been using a free account with Windscribe occasionally for accessing regionally-locked stuff. I didn't hear too much about them all this time but you did mention them being a Canadian company a few months back and I didn't know you were familiar with them. Is Windscribe a shady VPN, like many of them are? I know they are a paid VPN and I was able to get a promotional account from them, probably when they first started a few years back so I get 50GB free per month, of which I use maybe 1 GB. Barely.

 

[dilla]

Apple's XDR Pro is ridiculous lol

https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/10/21009928/apples-pro-display-xdr-nano-texture-cloth-clean

I'd love to try it in store, though, just to see what it's like

 

[dilla]

I guess Qualcomm can be bastards because they make the superior chipsets out there? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...65-is-a-step-backwards-for-smartphone-design/

 

[masta247]

Did you get your Buds for free in a promotion or did you shell out the money for them? Did none of the less expensive options from Anker or other brands entice you over the $100+ for the Galaxy Buds?

I paid for them, as I didn't need to upgrade to the S10, but wanted to check them out considering how much better they work with Samsung phones compared to any other wireless headphones. My girlfriend has the Anker headphones, which are more like the Airpods, but the experience is completely different on the Buds. I can't imagine it being any more convenient or seamless. Plus wireless charging is critical to me at this point, since I wouldn't be able to go back to carrying or messing with the cables to charge something daily anymore.

Is Windscribe a shady VPN, like many of them are?

Windscribe is excellent, as far as VPN located in the western world (and thus surveillance-heavy countries) can be. It's definitely nothing like the crappy free VPN services.

I guess Qualcomm can be bastards because they make the superior chipsets out there? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...65-is-a-step-backwards-for-smartphone-design/

The point is spot on, except there are some mistakes in the text. Apple does chipset + modem, so not all flagship chips are all in one package. Sure, the separate Intel modem is exactly the Achilles heel of their hardware, but still it exists. Also, we don't know how much better the X55 chip is in terms of efficiency compared to the power-hungry X50. It definitely will use much more power than an all-in-one solution and is a huge step back, but the battery hit might still be somewhat smaller depending on the implementation, so history might not exactly repeat itself as the author is speculating, expecially since OEMs are brancing themselves and putting huge batteries in their upcoming phones.. which will increase the size and weight of those phones, but still.

That said, the fact the 865 does not come with a built-in 4G modem so the entire chip housing just the X55 5G modem could be shut off when not in use is despicable. If you're only ever going to use 4G, you have two chips powered on instead of one, and the entire bus communicating between those two chips draining energy at all times. Integrating a 4G modem in the 865 would also enable OEMs to make smaller and cheaper 4G phones with the 865, but I guess Qualcomm would rather use this opportunity to make money on selling twice as much silicon instead, no matter how much of a dick move this is.

The problem for the user is that 5G currently significantly increases cost, complexity and power drain while it is unlikely to add any value for 99% of users for the lifetime of the 865 and phones like the S11. This is almost entirely just a huge liability in terms of practical use, just so Qualcomm can sell more chips and so they can say that they are amongst the first ones to implement 5G, which looks good literally only on paper and fucks the OEMs and users alike.

 

[dilla]

I paid for them, as I didn't need to upgrade to the S10, but wanted to check them out considering how much better they work with Samsung phones compared to any other wireless headphones. My girlfriend has the Anker headphones, which are more like the Airpods, but the experience is completely different on the Buds. I can't imagine it being any more convenient or seamless. Plus wireless charging is critical to me at this point, since I wouldn't be able to go back to carrying or messing with the cables to charge something daily anymore.



Windscribe is excellent, as far as VPN located in the western world (and thus surveillance-heavy countries) can be. It's definitely nothing like the crappy free VPN services.




The point is spot on, except there are some mistakes in the text. Apple does chipset + modem, so not all flagship chips are all in one package. Sure, the separate Intel modem is exactly the Achilles heel of their hardware, but still it exists. Also, we don't know how much better the X55 chip is in terms of efficiency compared to the power-hungry X50. It definitely will use much more power than an all-in-one solution and is a huge step back, but the battery hit might still be somewhat smaller depending on the implementation, so history might not exactly repeat itself as the author is speculating, expecially since OEMs are brancing themselves and putting huge batteries in their upcoming phones.. which will increase the size and weight of those phones, but still.

That said, the fact the 865 does not come with a built-in 4G modem so the entire chip housing just the X55 5G modem could be shut off when not in use is despicable. If you're only ever going to use 4G, you have two chips powered on instead of one, and the entire bus communicating between those two chips draining energy at all times. Integrating a 4G modem in the 865 would also enable OEMs to make smaller and cheaper 4G phones with the 865, but I guess Qualcomm would rather use this opportunity to make money on selling twice as much silicon instead, no matter how much of a dick move this is.

The problem for the user is that 5G currently significantly increases cost, complexity and power drain while it is unlikely to add any value for 99% of users for the lifetime of the 865 and phones like the S11. This is almost entirely just a huge liability in terms of practical use, just so Qualcomm can sell more chips and so they can say that they are amongst the first ones to implement 5G, which looks good literally only on paper and fucks the OEMs and users alike.

I see. The wireless charging is a unique and sick feature, especially with Wireless Power Share on the Galaxy devices. I got my mom the Jabra 65ts since they were still half the price of the Buds but that is probably one feature she'd appreciate because the concept of the case charging the buds and the case being the unit that gets charged is foreign to her. It's going to be a steep learning curve for her lol. At least it auto-connects to her phone when taken out of the case, which is still a basic bluetooth feature most things have. But that's one less step for her to forget and mess up when she wants to use them.

I ended up getting Windscribe through that bundle. It was a bundle of several Mac apps for $50ish bucks but it had one big app for macOS that I had been pirating for years lol. PDF Expert is basically the go-to app for PDFs viewing and editing. I don't know what the Windows equivalent is, but I think it's Acrobat Reader Pro, or something. But all the Macs in our family were using the pirated version, courtesy of me, but I got sick of manually updating whenever a new version came out and keeping tabs on it for my dad and sister. Plus, we all use it so much, it was worth paying for. A few years back, it seemed ridiculous to have to pay to edit a PDF but it's a new age now where players like Adobe nickel and dime for everything so this one time purchase was nothing, considering it was a license for 5 devices.

Windscribe Pro came in that bundle too, so I have it for 2 years which, I think, $50 is about how much that costs alone for two years.

Everything else is just fluff that I may or may not use. There was an app called DreamWeaver which is for web design. Thought it was a simple enough UI that a dum dum like me could pick up and play with and make a site for the practice, but it looks like it's a tad more complex than that. I'll have to delete the abortion of a sample website I made while experimenting with the features. Looks worse than a 2004 Angelfire webpage.

About the 5G stuff, I'm in no rush. I got the OG Moto Droid 10 years ago (wow) and I remember hearing about 4G back then. I was on Verizon at the time and the HTC Thunderbolt, I believe, was the first Verizon LTE device. I could be wrong but it was around that time. And Sprint had WiMax lol. The 4G EVO from HTC. But I was in no rush for 4G because the same rumblings I'm hearing now about 5G were the same ones I heard back then about 4G. That it wasn't "true" 4G and that it would take time for it to roll out on a noticeable scale. I think from 2010 until Fall 2012, there was LTE in my area from some of the carriers but I didn't get it and use it until around Winter of 2012 on my Galaxy S3. And that's when I had switched to Sprint. So I had given it two years to flesh out before getting my LTE compatible phone.

5G looks to be more of the same thing. The S10 already has a 5G variant and I don't know how their users feel about the 5G aspect of it and its performance in their area with it. But I can't imagine it to be full speed and worth the premium paid for a 5G phone. Depending on the carrier, 5G may also be an add-on to the bill. I know Wi-Max was for Sprint and if you bought a Wi-Max phone at the time, you had to pay $10 a month extra, even if you didn't want to use WiMax. I think they did the same thing shortly after 4G LTE was more widespread and LTE was a $10 add on. That's after Sprint realized they fucked themselves by going the WiMax route instead of LTE, or whatever that whole debacle was. Blu Ray vs HD DVD thing Sony won over Microsoft.

So 5G seems like it will be great in the future but I already have my S10 on LTE. The 5G was available shortly after but for the reasons I said above, I didn't return the phone and upgrade to it. With 4G, did we ever hit "true" 4G speeds? I think I remember hearing or reading that there were theoretical standards for 3G, 4G, 5G, etc. but carriers either didn't deploy it to that level or the tech simply could not get there. Or maybe I'm wrong, but LTE is stable enough and widespread enough in the US that it's no longer a novelty, nor has it been for a few years now since all the hype in 2012 when Sprint unveiled theirs. VZW, I'm sure, was already ahead in deployment at that point. I think they were also the first to get VoLTE off the ground and widespread too. I plan on keeping my S10+ for the same three years I kept my S7 and the 4 years I had my S3. Maybe 5G will be stable and cheaper by then. There might not even be a Sprint by then, either lol.

 

[Jokerman]

Best Buy now has the TLC 65" R615 for $499. What a steal.