Ser ut som kursen gÄr vidre opp i dag, markedet har trua.
Nettopp. Var kinesisk spec jeg sÄ pÄ da jeg sa det ikke stod noe om ultralyd for prox
De skiller noen ganger mellom lokal og Global vel
honor 400 review
det trengs en app, men ikke en fra tredjepart sÄ stemmer bra med det de har sagt ( side 4)
gsm arena er fortsattt ikke helt happy med virtual sensors ( side 2)
Note how they donât actually say that they had a problem with it during testing, just that itâs been known to have some problems before. Based on the text itâs weird that they even put it as a con in their conclusions. Is it not probable that the software sensor has been improving over the years? So many OEMs are adopting the Elabs proximity sensor for more and more models at an increased pace that I would argue itâs the one Elabs product that is proven to be good enough for users and useful for OEMs.
This is an interesting find. Had to some some searching about this. Looking at the results Samsung phones have had issues (âvirtual proximity sensorâ) and then phones using HW IR sensors have had also issues.
There are three types of proximity sensing commonly used:
So from Elabs perspective:
-
IR can be apparantly messed by ambient light sources, non-compliant screen protectors, etc. This is logical as itâs about infrared light.
-
Quickly looking âvirtual proximity sensorsâ have been implemented by Samsung to some extend and these seem to have had some problems over the few years. Implementing motion sensors, gyroscope etc. seems to have a reliability problem.
-
As per the link below, US should be more reliable than IR sensors and âvirtual proximity sensorsâ.
source: Mastering Android proximity sensor: A guide to optimal performance
This raises some questions:
-
Why does the manufacturer state the phone has ânon-physical ultrasonic sensorâ, which would refer to Elabs technology (no other players providing this) whereas GSMArena states this would be a âvirtual proximity sensorâ which is a different thing?
-
Has GSM arena actually tested the proximity sensor, or have they just read through the specs and mistaken between two sensors stated above? Because they refer to âproven to be unreliableâ, and looking at internet search results these seem to be an issue for the actual âvirtual proximity sensorâ (Samsung etc.) and not so much for ânon-physical ultrasonic sensorâ (Elabs)? After first look, I believe they maybe got mistaken.
-
Elabs has been implemented in over 500mil devices, why there are no complaints about âultrasonic software sensorâ reliability? What âunreliable track-recordâ is GSMArena referring to? I canât find it (except for actual âvirtual proximity sensorsâ and âIR sensorsâ). Or perhaps I need to do even more searching.
-
If Elabs would have significant reliability problems, why do they keep getting new contracts and phone models at an accelerating phase? This seems unlogical compared to what GSMArena writes.
Oh, and one final interesting bit - Honor has made cross-device share easier with the Honor Share app - if installed on an iPhone you can AirDrop different files easily.
Honestly not sure if I would download an Honor app on my iPhone to share w/my Honor friends, download a Xiaomi app to share w/my Xiaomi using friends, and so on ⊠Sounds like a PITA, to be honest - and not very seamless.
In regards to the proximity sensor stuff - there could be some confusion in regards to the difference in sensors for China version vs ROW version. Also, if I was a reviewer - and had already tested the Chinese version, and then received the ROW one, I would likely just read the specs and make note of the major differences, like battery capacity - but base my review on the first edition tested. Not to rag on reviewers, but based on experience, speed-to-publish might at times come at the cost of precision (due to lack of time).
