Thanks, I saw that, but I never can make heads or tails of just MP. Feel like some phones have much lower MP but the quality of the photo is much higher.
> Thanks, I saw that, but I never can make heads or tails of just MP. Feel like some phones have much lower MP but the quality of the photo is much higher.
It does not merely feel that way; it often is. That is because megapixels measure the dimensions of the files the camera generates (this is not the same as resolution) and as such are almost the worst measure of camera quality.
Boring tech websites like comparing megapixels, because that is a number, and that allows people who do not know how cameras work to review products and have opinions without actually using them. Truth is that pixels, a measure of resolution, have been irrelevant for years when one is not printing them huge or looking at them full-size on gigantic computer monitors. More or less nobody is doing that these days; they're looking at them a few inches wide on their phones or tablets, usually via [insert social app] that downsizes and compresses the shit out of them to save on bandwidth & storage.
Things like
* colour rendition
* contrast rendition
* low-light ability
* speed of operation (allows you to get a photo in the first place)
* and more things I could name
...are all far more important to what makes a good camera on a phone. If more people were like you and actually LOOKED AT THE PHOTOS we might have ended up with much better cameras than we have now.
If pictures are important to the buyer, they should get a high end Samsung, iPhone or specialty Huawei/Vivo models. Every other phone will have a generic camera lens and imaging algorithm. Source: I have purchased a lot of phones. A 4 year old Galaxy S22 will take better pictures than a 2025 Motorola or any other Tier 2 Android brand.
Funny how you are missing Oppo and Xiaomi which are heavily focused on photography with their collaborations on Hasselblad color science and Leica respectively
You can tell the experience level of a designer by the number of unnecessary animations and transitions they put into an experience. The two are often inversely correlated.
This funding round is less about securing long-term profitability and more about long-term partnerships and scaling their portfolio of products[1] deeper into other third-parties such as Salesforce (and beyond):
> “The problem we’re tying to solve is likely multigenerational. It can take the rest of our lives and we need to pass it on to the generation that comes after to continue to work on it. Hopefully for the rest of humanity because I can’t imagine a time when humanity cannot benefit from an open, free, connected web,” Mullenweg told me.
> When it comes to today’s funding round, Salesforce Ventures isn’t your traditional investor — and Mullenweg is well aware of that. There could be some partnerships and integrations between Salesforce and Automattic in the future.
Without looking heavily into it, it seems like given Wix is trading $6B in public markets, why not try and IPO unless you believe there is a large business synergy with Salesforce?
> The man, Philip Arps, had pleaded guilty in April to charges of distributing objectionable content. In addition to sharing the gunman’s video online, Mr. Arps sent a copy of it to be doctored to look like a first-person-shooter video game, featuring cross hairs and a body count.
> Mr. Arps had told the police that he thought the Christchurch massacre was “awesome,” and he had likened himself to Rudolf Hess, the Nazi deputy to Hitler who tried to negotiate peace, reported Christchurch Court News.
21 Months well earned if you ask me. I hope he loses the appeal.
> Cameras
> Rear: 50MP OIS
> Front: 24MP
Honestly, this sounds like a great deal
reply