Sources: Agawi, VentureBeat
quote: Not that we've noticed much, if any, motion blur on our handsets while scrolling or watching movies, but Nokia claims your average mobile display pixel response rate is 23ms, while a rendered frame lasts 16.7ms, i.e. the pixels don't have time to go with the flow, resulting in blur and artifacts with fast moving objects on the screen, for example.The way Nokia is overcoming this is applying temporary high voltage to speed up the individual pixels, essentially putting the whole panel in overdrive mode. Lab results show pixel transition taking sub-9ms this way, i.e. plenty of time to do one frame and get ready for another without any lag and blur. This way smooth 60fps rendering is achieved, Nokia says, regardless of how speedy the action is on the Lumia 920 display. Good stuff, but we have to again check with a final unit how much of a difference this makes in reality.
quote: but Dietz stated that it was only a research object and a device which Microsoft would like to see becoming available over the next decade
quote: What? 50 ms is actually a huge amount of time
quote: I can tell you for a fact that a jump in ping from 50ms to 100ms changes some applications
quote: But you are completely wrong in assuming that people can't notice these latency levels.
quote: It's not an assumption. It's provable science!
quote: The reason he is arguing this is because he is an Android apologist.
quote: I'm sorry, but how is network latency not related?
quote: You're trying to compare cloud gaming to how fast an OS processes an input. And you ask me why it's not particularly useful to compare the two for the purposes of this topic?
quote: The reason you "feel" a difference between 50ms gaming and 100ms gaming isn't because that's a huge amount of time difference. I can't put it more simply than that without a huge TLDNR about how the Internet and networking works.
quote: What matters to me more is the fact that Android phones seems to crash more often and gets random hangs here and there that's annoying.
quote: That's fifty thousandths of a second. In no context is this a "huge" amount of time. The average median human reaction time is 215 milliseconds.
quote: I seem to remember having lost races for swimming in highschool over less time than that.
quote: p.s. not even Olympic races come down to milliseconds, the closest finishes in history have been in hundredths of a second. They don't even USE milliseconds!
quote: The difference in response times here are on such a minute scale, it's impossible for a human being to "feel" the difference
quote: The methods used in that video are specifically designed to lend a VISUAL AID for observing input delay. Something that, in normal use, WOULDN'T BE APPARENT!!!
quote: How in the hell have you convinced yourself that applies to using a smartphone in the wild?? Do you drag around a mouse cursor super-fast on your smartphone or something?
quote: Not worth it. People assume you mean that miliseconds don't matter in everything rather than understand it doesn't matter in a touch screen. It's a lost cause. I mean you just got a comparison to F1... F1 and a smartphone are the exact same thing pretty much, except not at all...
quote: Exactly. I mean, it's really sad. F1, swimming races, network lag and everything else is being thrown at this topic and it's just comically poor "bro science".
quote: Windows Phone is on this list too! Hello? How come everyone universally praises Windows Phone for being smooth and snappy? According to these numbers, Windows Phone is no better off than Android. Yet Windows Phone proponents will say Windows Phone is smooth, but Android "feel" laggy.
quote: Clearly these tiny amounts of time do not equate to an OS "feeling" twice as fast or slow as another. Perception is everything when it comes to how humans view time. Something else is going on here.
quote: I'm being called biased or treated like I have an agenda? I'm one of the few here who ISN'T shoveling something!
quote: I'm running Jelly Bean, fair enough. But when I touch an icon for an app, it's highlighted instantly. Meaning the OS nearly instantly processes that input. I honestly cannot detect any perceptible delay between the touch, and the reaction to that touch input. Yet everyone here is trying to tell me that is a "massive" amount of time, they're so pro they can detect small millisecond delays, etc etc. It's getting absurd!
quote: This is not the only experience in a UI. In fact it's among one of the least common use case. Swiping and gestures are far more common in touch environment (panning, zooming, rotating, etc), and this is where the noticeable delay is.
quote: you are referring to the difference between you touching something and seeing a result from it. This is where you would get less of an impact due to the brain needing to process electrical impulses and responding to the actual touch of your finger.
quote: To be honest I'm not really sure why this has come up either. Nothing you've stated really hinted at any level of bias towards a particular device, at least not in this discussion. Probably just the assumption that claiming you can't tell the difference is an attempt to defend the claim that Apple's device is superior in touch responsiveness is all. An illogical conclusion.
quote: I wouldn't buy an Apple product if my life depended on it
quote: So in order to be right, you've thrown out use-scenarios that bolster my argument by claiming they aren't relevant, and focus on use-scenarios that highlight your side of the argument? Okay cool...
quote: And you know what TakinYourPoints, it's frankly embarrassing how much of my life I've pissed away playing games. If I don't strike you as a "gamer", then I don't know who does.
quote: That's fifty thousandths of a second. In no context is this a "huge" amount of time. The average median human reaction time is 215 milliseconds. In real world use, sorry, this is simply not a perceptible difference in UI response time.
quote: 50ms isn't huge. Not at all in fact. If you're a particularly tall person it takes nearly half that long for a nerve impulse to travel from your foot to you brain. The visual cortex takes significantly longer than that to process an image from the eye. 50ms is well, well below the time that the brain is capable of "editing out" of your awareness.
quote: It is astonishing that you act like you know everything
quote: The visual cortex takes significantly longer than that to process an image from the eye. 50ms is well, well below the time that the brain is capable of "editing out" of your awareness.
quote: The difference in response times here are on such a minute scale,
quote: Often times I feel he actually is right
quote: Tony can never be right. He doesn't worship at the Google altar and is therefore a HEATHEN!!!!
quote: Another possibility is that while the Android and WP8 code are running on runtimes (Dalvik and CLR respectively), the iPhone code is written in closer-to-the-metal Objective-C, which may reduce some latency. In future TouchMarks, we’ll compare C/C++-based Android apps to Java based apps to determine if this is the case.
quote: The difference in response times here are on such a minute scale, it's impossible for a human being to "feel" the difference.
quote: But nobody can honestly claim to "feel" the difference of ~20 milliseconds, or that it could make a UI feel faster or slower overall.
quote: Seriously, I'm surrounded by idiots. What does any of this have to do with the article? The average human response time is between 150 and 300 milliseconds. Scientific studies have proved most humans don't even perceive a change in time of 100 milliseconds. These are indisputable facts.
quote: Your first has nothing to do with the topic, and everything to do with visual acuity.
quote: You honestly believe that humans cannot perceive moment to moment differences of roughly a quarter of a second, or even a tenth of a second?
quote: In a phone in the wild, you might notice that difference, you might not. But it's hardly an issue. But go ahead and proclaim it's more supreme dominance by Apple.