Galaxy S8, Galaxy Note 8, Moto Z2 Force, HTC U11, LG V30 and Sony Xperia XZ1 all surpass Apple iPhone X.

iPhone X is equipped with the most advanced technology, especially Face ID face recognition technology. Technology experts have identified that Apple's face detection technology has been ahead of other Android smartphones for years. Actually in the launch event, Apple demonstrated facial recognition in a very impressive way.

However, the super iPhone X is lagging behind other Android smartphones in an important aspect. That's the speed of LTE cellular network connectivity, as high-end Android smartphones now incorporate new technologies.



Most importantly, these are Gigabit LTE modems, which deliver data rates up to 1Gb / s on existing 4G LTE bands. So without the need for 5G technology, the Android smartphone also achieved significant high-speed network connection.

However, only Qualcomm is now able to complete its Gigabit LTE modem chips. While Intel is still struggling to catch up with opponents. Apple is having a bit of a problem working with both Qualcomm and Intel to provide the iPhone's modem chip.

That is why Apple can not use the Gigabite LTE chip on the new iPhone X launch. Instead, the iPhone 8/8 Plus and iPhone X are only equipped with the LTE Advanced chip.

That is not to mention the high-end smartphone Android is also equipped with advanced technologies such as 4 × 4 MIMO, 256 QAM and LTE-U network support. The LTE-U network is the new range of protocols that Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile are testing to adopt new technology that speeds up connectivity and avoids congestion.

What Apple has demonstrated with the iPhone X shows how a smartphone giant can handle both the hardware and the software can do terrible things as long as.

Thus, the most popular technology event has come through. Apple fans have admired the portraiture of the iPhone X. They have started the process of waiting until the end of this month ... until November to touch this piece.

But what really matters is on the sidelines of the event, Apple's biggest rivals are doing. Rumors are that Google is entering the final stage of negotiations to buy HTC, Pixel 2's outsourcing company, and is also the name Google has chosen to launch its first Android smartphone, the HTC G1.



There is a lot of controversy surrounding whether Google should or should not buy HTC. The "should not" say the Motorola scenario is likely to repeat itself, and that Google may be embarrassed by partners like Samsung, LG, and Sony. Voters "should" believe that merging a quality hardware name like HTC can help Google create phones that incorporate more hardware and software. It's clear that Pixel needs to make significant progress to be able to compete with its Android rivals, not to mention the iPhone.

If Google is still hesitant, what Apple has just shown to the iPhone X yesterday will likely make the search giant more and more intestines.



First, with the iPhone X (and also the iPhone 8/8 Plus), Apple has officially ousted the Android leg of every aspect of computing power. The iPhone has always been faster than Android and has a monochrome performance that Qualcomm and Samsung can not keep up with, but with the A11 Bionic, Apple surpassed Snapdragon 835's multi-core performance. actively. The controller's own logic allows Apple to activate a custom multiplier on the Bionic A11 while Snapdragon and Exynos can only activate one of the two big four or LITTLE (or activate all eight to ... benchmark fraud).

The remarkable power, along with other hardware enhancements, allows the iPhone X to offer a host of quality features that Android does not even dream of reaching: 3D image-recognition effects at just the wrong level. 1 / 1,000,000 (KGI Securities said Qualcomm will take two years to reach this milestone). No Android maker can produce Snapchat effects close to real surfaces like the iPhone. The picture is also thanks to the power of the A11, which is significantly denser than before.

Of course, that's just a small part of the future that the Bionic A11 can bring. The great advancement of the iPhone is also the great advancement of iOS: technologies such as BNNS, ARKit, Metal 2 or CoreML promise to help software developers reach the limits of utopia in the future.



At the same time, Google will certainly take a long time to create technological achievements on a par with what Apple has just shown. Google knows very well, Apple is able to do this because Apple has extremely deep control of both hardware and software. Apple does not just control how applications access the hardware (through the driver and operating system), but also on a variety of chips on the phone. In addition to Apple, there is not a company that custom deep into ISP (video processing chip) or create ... motion sensor chip for your phone.

All Android manufacturers have only a few software features that are not very useful to try to be different from the rest. Even Samsung is often deprecated in the garbage software era of Galaxy S3, S4 and recently for Bixby virtual assistant. On the hardware side, the Android race is largely focused around such factors as screen, camera and multiplier / chip clock. The task of catching up on a chip revolution like the A7 64-bit or recently is the 3D recognition on the Bionic A11 is entirely up to Qualcomm, while truly meaningful platforms like ARCore only have Google taking charge.



Stepping into the era of "super technology" like AR and AI, Google can not continue to model the current discrete Android anymore. Breakthroughs in hardware and software need to have a focused vision instead of being split in for partners willing to "steal" each other: Samsung has tweeted Tizen, many companies Android shook hands with Microsoft, Google also has Pixel. Google's technological prowess is certainly not inferior to Apple's, but for that power to shatter, the search giant needs to transform itself into a hardware giant as soon as possible.

Those who do not understand technology deeply can look at Apple's breakthroughs and wipe their hands, "Oh copy from another place." The truth is not so simple.

When Apple debuted a Face ID and when Craig Federighi demonstrated its facial facial expressions at the iPhone event yesterday, I anticipated a little: there are few who value the features. present. The reason is simple: facial authentication is not new technology, facial effects are sure to have ever played the app once.

But that does not mean Apple's performance is not admirable. I would like to say that, perhaps we must know more about technology to see why we should not give such neat suggestions as "This is a copy of Samsung, of LG, of ...." .



First, Apple was not exactly the first company to offer facial recognition. But, at the time of the Face ID announcement yesterday, no tech giant could reach as high a level of accuracy as Apple is: the Face ID ability to identify the wrong person to someone is just 1 / 1,000,000, that is more accurate than fingerprint (Touch ID has a false probability is 1 / 50,000). No company has reached such high levels of precision.

The nature of Face ID is a 3D scanner rather than a regular camera. To reach 1/10 ^ 6, Apple engineers actually had to "train" their AI algorithms - even the Hollywood-style masks did not get through the Face ID. Face ID processing speed is less than 1 second. All done on Apple's mobile hardware.



Those who have made machine learning in general and image recognition in particular understand that to achieve the achievement of apples is not easy. KGI Securities even commented that Qualcomm lost to Apple for two years. That is, Android-powered Qualcomm chips will not catch up with Face ID the following year.

Even the stage performance of Craig Federighi software president is an amazing achievement. Applying facial expressions is not a new proposition, but to apply the effect exactly like that, no company can do it. The Snapchat or Facebook effects are essentially applying a large pattern to the face. Apple's Face ID can apply the "virtual paint" layer to Craig Federighi's face. Clearly speaking, Apple has brought the iPhone closer to Hollywood's full face-sensing technology.



Một lần nữa, tôi dám khẳng định với bạn rằng các chuyên gia AI từng làm nhận diện hình ảnh chắc chắn sẽ không đánh giá thấp năng lực của Apple. Nhất là khi năng lực đó lại được thực hiện trên phần cứng của một chiếc điện thoại.

Còn Samsung thì có công nghệ quét mắt có thể qua mặt bằng những vật dụng thông thường.

Again, I daresay you that AI professionals who do image recognition will certainly not underestimate Apple's ability. Especially when that power is made on the hardware of a phone.

And Samsung has eye-scanning technology that surpasses conventional items.

The way Apple uses technology (and virtual / virtual intelligence) to apply to simple to silly cases is not new. A few years ago, the Touch ID came out and I also remembered the antifan said that Apple was eating the laptop makers. Right now, I'm sitting on a Lenovo ThinkPad notebook "a few years ago". To scan fingerprints on this ThinkPad, I had to scan one-way to several times. With Touch ID, scanning while holding the handle, holding the machine is not a problem. As long as my hands are not too wet, Touch ID often works correctly.

And of course, to prevent the two little grandchildren can arbitrarily open my machine.



A similar example: nothing but the touch screen of the iPhone. There is no one so silly to know that the iPhone is not the first smartphone, not the first touch phone - not even the first capacitive touch phone (that honor belongs to LG). But to create the iPhone, Steve Jobs and his team spent years researching capacious technology completely foreign to a company that specializes in making Macs and iPods.

Next, Apple also has to tweak its "Mac configurations" (according to BlackBerry CEO Mike Lazaridis) into the lightweight iPhone to run optimized touch-optimized software from macOS. Even this stage is not simple: iPhone OS is the first operating system to have optimal interface for finger touch. From Mac OS X, Apple has created a completely different platform but still light enough to run on ARM.

And LG, even launched the first capacitive touch technology, chose to follow Windows Mobile to ... 2001. When LG actually launched the first quality Android product Optimus G, everyone has It can be seen that Optimus G is more like the iPhone than the LG Prada.



The unfairness of Apple is that. Anyone who understands the technology must admirable before Apple's hi-tech ability. But Apple is rarely at the forefront, instead adopting the latter just to ensure it can launch an "acceptable" user experience when it launches new technology. Thanks to the transcendent technology, the "acceptable" level of apples is thousands of times higher than that of competitors - but, by late, people will rush to label Apple as one-sided comparisons. To prove that the apple is really poor.

Last night was the night of the iPhone X, so that people do not even care about the iPhone 8.

Although the introduction of a total of 4 devices during the event last night, the reality is that in all we are likely to have only one iPhone X. The appearance of the iPhone X obscures all products including the phone. Maybe they will buy in a month to come: iPhone 8.



iPhone 8 released the following things that the user does not notice, or even Apple did not publish:

- Wireless charging.

- Fast charger.

- The back of the back is no longer the horizontal antenna line ugly.

Two of the three issues could be made possible by a huge shift from Apple on the next-generation iPhone. That is to throw away the monolithic design.

Why abandon the "monolithic" path?

Monolithic is the design philosophy applied by Apple since the iPhone 5. When the entire body is made of a hollow aluminum block inside, the body is just like a box of body and screen. There is no such thing as iPhone 4.



Writing this monolithic product design will help make the product feel better, eliminating the feeling of "lifting" the phone for a long time.

But that is also the main weakness that makes the technology popular on Android can not appear on the iPhone.

The first is wireless charging, wireless charging is essentially the principle of electrically induced transmission through the coils placed in the charging cradle and in the phone, the simple requirement of this technology is between two coils are not shielded. Because of the metal, therefore, iPhone 5 to iPhone 7, even if Apple wants, can not do wireless charging.



The second is to throw away the ugly antenna fringe. When the iPhone 6 was released, we constantly mocked Apple's design team for having an antenna loop running down the back of the shiny camera. But no one understands that if you do not put that plastic escape in the middle of a metal block, your iPhone will only be used as an iPod.

So it's precisely because of the design of the monolithic body that the iPhone 8 can confidently throw right away the blind lines that go.

Looking back on the structure of the iPhone 8, everyone would find it too much like the iPhone 4: glass back cover, steel frame instead of aluminum easily peeling scratches. Tim Cook has come a long way to finally return to the perfect design of Steve Jobs.

Using clocks, multipliers and RAM to compare performance is like comparing the speed of two cars without knowing which ones are thinner, which tires are sprayed.

The iPhone and the iPhone 8 are not out of the norm for technology: Every smartphone in the market is comparable to a competitor. This year, with the leap of three new iPhone models on a six-core chip, the comparison table between the iPhone X, the iPhone 8 with the Galaxy Note8, the LG V30 or other Android tablet models became even more attractive.

But I have to say straight to you: it is a type of "trick" comparison. The numbers are so misleading that you know very well which smartphone is better than any smartphone. The reality is not so simple.



On top of all, the biggest mistake in comparing the configuration of the iPhone and Android phones is that these comparisons ignore the role of the operating system. Anyone who has read through "basic computer" books probably knows that the operating system (and drivers) is the only software layer that has direct access to the hardware. All application / service layers must go through the operating system: no matter your Word application calls directly to the keyboard or printer.

On mobile, with other types of applications, this principle stays the same. In other words, when you ignore the role of the operating system when comparing performance, you miss the core of the user experience.

In this core battle, Android is forced to lose. Because Android is the operating system for all kinds of hardware. Many types of hardware mean that Android must carry more abstract layers than iOS; Each Android hardware can not have the same level of optimization as the iPhone and iPad.



Internal operation of the components is not simple.

Let's talk about RAM first. The more RAM you have, the more cached it is, that's it. But that does not mean that the RAM parameter is the only thing that determines the speed at which the app loads from memory on the main screen. Load the app from the hard drive / internal memory to the RAM, from the RAM to the cache and into the CPU register, which is a very complex process designed by senior engineers. I assure you that most iOS or Android developers are not knowledgeable enough about this process (despite the fact that they should not know).

Not to mention, no manufacturer has unveiled the flash chip speed on their product. Do you understand RAM is "buffer" memory?

The same chip. If the same CPU is Intel, running Windows in the majority of cases, the more multiplied, the higher the pulse will bring more powerful performance. But the CPU is not a simple part - if it is simple, the chip industry has not been called the harshest industry in the world. Perhaps 90% of users have never heard of the concept of "register", which also understands the mechanism of cache operation, does not analyze the difference between 32bit and 64bit, nor does it explain the role of die size. for chip performance.

But manufacturers and marketing companies pack everything into the numbers ahead of GHz and GB.



Those who are knowledgeable about software engineering will understand that they should not care about the complex mechanics of the hardware. As for what Apple or Google + Samsung / HTC / Xiaomi ... bring to them, they have the only way is ... accept the truth and ensure their work is the best. They can only know and accept that the iPhone's multiplier performance is higher than the Galaxy, that the Galaxy has more than the iPhone. All they can do is optimize the best, test it thoroughly for the applications they write on the platform provided by Apple and Google.

Apple understands this very well, so they choose the best path for developers. The first advantage lies in the limited number of hardware options to ensure optimal operating system and reduced test matrix (application volume test). The second benefit lies in the single core: With the end-user application, single-core performance is more important than multi-core performance. Programmers for end-user applications should not bother about threading or threading priorities - they are confusing and very error prone.

If you have concerns about threading: Objective-C manages the flow better than Java on Android.



This year, Apple suddenly increased its CPU multiplier and also acquired its own GPU design. Apple has a very practical reason to do so: iOS 11 comes with the Core ML platform that caters to device-based applications and ARKit enables the creation of the most popular, great. These are the first personal computer areas that actually require multi-core processing: with traditional AIs, software developers who understand the brain should place them in the cloud rather than "stuff" into the device. fish.

Not to stop there, Apple goes a step further in processing the chip: enabling the activation of any number of cores instead of following the big.LITTLE of ARM, which only activates only one of two cores (real Android manufacturers often ... cheat with big.LITTLE when the benchmark is detected).

When Apple does that, Android has no advantage at all. Leaked Benchmark Geekbench shows the single multiplier effect of the high Bionic A11 ... double the Snapdragon 835 on the Galaxy S8. The multi-core performance of the Bionic A11 also surpassed Snapdragon 835 to 2000 points. This overwhelm is evident by both hardware and software, but developers will simply understand that the Android app can not match the iOS app for performance.



And up to the final and most important experience - the user experience, the iOS app always outpses the Android app in terms of download speed. This is the only kind of "power" that you and I can feel. The debate about chips, about RAM, while we do not really understand them; It is pointless to make excuses.

Technicians know that they will only care about their jobs, not worry about modules, functions ... have packaged by others. Technology users should not compare anything but the speed / quality of the experience they receive.

By comparing the configuration to assign to the actual experience speed between iOS and Android is a false comparison. They contribute to a dishonest and dishonest face for the hi-tech industry: instead of focusing on factors that can really improve a user's quality (for example, improving code, hard drive / software ...), the manufacturer is looking to increase a few hundred MHz or cram a few more CPU to "out" superior to the user.



The price difference between the two mid-range and low-end chips, between 2GB and 4GB, is certainly less than $ 30. Investing in product optimization is different: a few million to several billion dollars, not to mention the management issues, human problems ... Stop being "dazzled" by the configuration board. Get rid of them and go to the store to test your dream phone.

Apple has officially confirmed that iPhone X and iPhone 8 are fast rechargeable, but things are not as simple as what we see in the Android world.

After a long wait, Apple finally equipped its new generation of iPhone X, iPhone 8, and iPhone 8 Plus with wireless charging capabilities. However, that is not the only upgrade on the charging capacity of this smartphone trio.

Although not addressed directly by Apple during the presentation, it was only a small note in the feature summary, but the company has confirmed that the new iPhone will support fast charging. It is known that the machine will be able to charge 50% of the battery within 30 minutes.



That is good news, but now is sad news: The charger that comes with the iPhone box will not support fast charging. Apple has said it has adopted a USB-C adapter with 29W, 61W or 87W output for fast charging. This is the adapter for MacBook laptops, MacBook Pro 13 inch and MacBook Pro 15 inch. With that, users also need to buy a USB-C to Lightning cable to connect the iPhone to the charger (a cable that comes with a traditional USB-A cable).

The problem with owning these adapters and cables is the price. With the cheapest price for a 29W adapter is $ 49, plus a 1m USB-C to Lightning cable is $ 25, users will have to spend at least $ 74 if you want to quickly charge the iPhone mine. Meanwhile, most other smartphone manufacturers are offering fast charger when selling products.



When it comes to the cost of accessories for wireless charging, it can be seen that taking full advantage of the charging capabilities of the iPhone X and the iPhone 8 is not a simple matter for a person's pocketbook. right. In the future, however, it is unlikely that there will be third party accessories makers offering cheaper alternatives.

Not just the 10th to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the iPhone.

In just a few minutes the launch of the new iPhone will take place, and the event will mark the 10th anniversary of the first iPhone launch. The new phone is called iPhone X, and is produced in limited quantities by making it very difficult. That's why the iPhone X will have a symbolic meaning for its owners, and will be a much sought-after product. There will be people who want the iPhone X to show off their wealth, people are looking for this phone because they are Apple fans, and many others want it to own other limited quantity products.



The iPhone X is expected to mark a big step forward in showing the difference with other phones on the market; Like what the first iPhone did. Of course this is not easy, because at present, the mobile phone market is developing very fast, and almost reached the optimal design, making it difficult to make a big change. But, sure enough, the iPhone X will clearly show the direction that Apple is facing in the future.

Perhaps we should consider the iPhone X as a phone version showcasing the latest technology from Apple. According to the leaked images, the design of this handset is probably reaching the limit of what the current technology can meet. For Apple, the X in the iPhone X is meant to experiment with new technologies - something that can only be done with a limited number of products.




And like the high-end phones of today will become popular in the future, so of course the most advanced technology Apple today will most likely also appear in the iPhone of 2018.

With prices forecast to fall to around $ 1,000, Apple is putting the iPhone X on a whole new segment. This is not the first time Apple has implemented this tactic; Previously they did the same with the Retina MacBook Pro. When launched, the Retina MBP is extremely pricey, and only those who are actually eligible can own the product.

For normal customers, perhaps the X in the iPhone X will represent eXclusive. Like the first iPhone of 10 years ago; Owning yourself to an iPhone X will be a great achievement for people who love this product. And it's hard to own that will make the value of the iPhone X much higher - like the limited edition of watches or sports cars expensive.

And perhaps the early launch of a futuristic mobile phone like the iPhone X is the most impressive way for Apple to mark the 10th anniversary of the iPhone.