EnemiesInTheEnd
Banned
- Dec 26, 2013
- 1,027
- 0
- 0
There's that absolutism again. 2:1 is the best... then why didn't Samsung do it? They did 2.055555:1. Also, what other aspect ratios have we tested? Has every aspect ratio been evaluated? By what criteria would it be evaluated? What would make it the "best" aspect ratio?
Again, we could have said, "They're following Samsung's lead because it was well received by the press. I also think that 2:1 is the best ratio for a phone with on-screen buttons". Now, the first part would still be incorrect, because the decisions on the iPhone 8, Pixel 2 XL, LG G6, LG V30, etc, etc. for that type of design were already complete prior to the release of the S8, so they're not following in terms of "oh, Samsung did it, let's do it too". But, it is likely Samsung was the first to bring it to the table and there was a general consensus to bring this idea to the market.
And a counter point to the "ergonomic" edges, luckily almost no one is copying that fad, because it's so far been very poorly executed and a lot of users absolutely hate it. From what I've read in the forums, it seems to me that more people would rather have a flat, possibly 16:9 Note 8 than a Note 8 with a removable battery. Given the level of fanaticism we see on removable batteries in the Note crowd, that's significant for this community.
LG isn't a very popular company. They are innovative and they are faster to adopt many standards than Samsung is. They're also much better at writing software. Samsung is terrible at software, which is a big reason that almost all of their flash and pizzazz is centered on hardware. That's why they make gaudy looking devices, rather than muted or subdued designs that focus on user experience. They want you to see a phone and think, "that's a Galaxy". That doesn't make it good or bad, but it's only one of many approaches being taken in the market. Lately LG is jumping on the Samsung design because LG's original designs, something Samsung almost never tries, have basically been flops. LG is trying and failing to make big changes while Samsung is relatively successful at making small, incremental changes to an old idea.
Finally, the last two sentence are also just opinions, but leveled as if they are accepted fact. Adding, "I think" to the beginning of each would reduce the conflict there.
My point is that 2:1 is better than 16:9. Fact. Why? Because people use their phones primarily for phone calls, texting, social media, and web browsing. 2:1 is objectively better for texting, social media, and web browsing. It means that the on-screen navigation buttons and keyboards take up a smaller portion of your display and gives you more area for reading while still being ergonomically sound. Samsung has been pushing smaller bezels for years now. There is no fanaticism for removable Note batteries. LG is not better than Samsung at software nor are they more innovative than Samsung. They don't make gaudy looking devices. Samsung phones have been considered the best looking phones for several years now. Their UI is the best looking UI on Android and their apps are excellent. LG has the gaudiest UI on Android. Samsung phones have always emphasized software since they began implementing app split screen forever ago. Samsung has had a ton of original designs. LG designs have flopped because they were bad. The last two sentences I said were a fact.