Category: Blog

Home / Category: Blog

Foldable Phone Comparison 

After fading away as cell phones became “smart phones,” the foldable phone is probably to make a comeback.

Mobile phones have been around longer than most people realize. On March 6th, 1983, the DynaTAC 8000X mobile phone launched on the first US 1G network by Ameritech. It cost $100M to develop, and took over a decade to reach the market.[35] The phone had a talk time of just thirty-five minutes and took ten hours to charge. This was the first generation, now called 1G, of cell phone technology. These early phones were primarily installed in vehicles and were referred to as “car phones.” In the 1990s, use of the internet became common and the second generation of mobile phone technology emerged. In the early 21st century, the third generation of technology emerged, along with the “G” reference, or “3G.”


It was during this time that the “flip phone” put the industry on its head. Motorola rolled out the Razor phone as a compact, super-thin flip phone foldable phone that you could easily put in your shirt pocket. It became the most-wanted phone around.

But soon people’s tastes shifted. Apple completely changed the industry with the launch of the iPhone. Samsung quickly followed with its line of Galaxy phones. This brought about phones with much greater capability with regard to function – people began using the phone to watch video, engage on social media (especially Snapchat, YouTube, and Facebook Live), in addition to the more traditional functions of text messaging and internet browsing. Foldable phones took a back seat in this environment, as people wanted larger phones to be able to use them for the more visual functions.

Therefore, phone manufacturers have found a way to combine the large display people want with the folding capability to keep the phone as compact as possible. The first two such phones were revealed recently.

Samsung Galaxy Fold

Two main entrants to the foldable phone arena are the Samsung Galaxy Fold and the Huawei Mate X. Reaction has been more favorable to the Mate X, which has a single large display that wraps around the outside of the device when it’s folded. The Galaxy Fold has a large main display that’s situated on the inside of the phone when it is folded closed. Then there’s a second smaller screen on the outside that lights up when the Galaxy Fold is closed (known as “phone mode”). In other words, the Fold actually folds inward while the Mate X folds outward. The Fold is very thick, and the outside display in phone mode is very small. The Mate X is more prone to scratches with the display on the outside. One major force working against the Mate X is that it will not be available in the United States initially. Huawei and the US government have a very tense relationship, and that complicates the availability of Huawei products.

Samsung Galaxy Fold vs Huawei Mate X

Comparisons and Specs

(Video credit : SuperSaf)

Here is the side-by-side comparison of the phones with the information we have for the 3 most well-known foldable phones. 

How much is Samsung Galaxy Fold?

How much is Huawei Mate X?

Samsung Galaxy Fold

Huawei Mate X

Display size resolution

4.6-inch Super AMOLED

7.3-inch QXGA+ Dynamic AMOLED

6.6-inch (2,480x1,148 pixels)

 6.38-inch (2,480x892 pixels)

8-inch OLED (2,480x2,200 pixels)

Battery Life

4,380 mAh

4,500 mAh

Mobile software

Android 9.0 / Samsung One UI

Android 9.0 


16-megapixel (ultra-wide-angle)

12-megapixel (wide-angle)

 12-megapixel (telephoto)

4 Rear Cameras

Front-facing camera

Two 10-megapixel

 8-megapixel 3D depth

At least one 


Octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 855

Kirin 980 processor







Wireless charging






Fingerprint sensor

Power button

Power button

Price off-contract







Samsung Galaxy Fold Overview

samsung galaxy fold


  • Four cameras
  • Wireless Charging


  • More bulky
  • Prone to scratches

Huawei Mate X Overview

huawei mate x


  • Better display when phone is folded
  • Thinner


  • Not available in the US.
  • More expensive

These are the 2 foldable phones that everyone is talking about, but they are not alone. ZTE is also working on a foldable phone. This company actually went first in the foldable smartphone parade, thanks to the ZTE Axon M (released in December 2017). It failed quickly, as there was a gap between the two screens when the phone was opened. Further, Google provided very little Android support. However, armed with that experience, ZTE has some experience the others do not have, giving them more insight into what customers like and don’t like.

Motorola Razr

Motorola Razr

(Video credit : TechConfigurations)

So what about that new Motorola Razr? It seems to be a foregone conclusion that the Razor is coming back. But Motorola is being very tight-lipped about it. When asked about it by USA TODAY, Motorola responded with a video depicting the "shrug" emoticon, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, and the company's logo.

Sharp Concept Fold Phone

Plus, we have a new twist: It appears Sharp has patented yet another design for a foldable smartphone, as reported by Dutch firm Let's Go Digital. This design has 2 hinges, where the other phones have one. There is one right in the middle, which folds the phone in half, just like the other designs. But there is a second hinge, about an inch below the first one. This lower hinge allows for a small screen to appear at the top of the folded phone, where notifications, calendar entries or the time can be displayed. This essentially replaces the second screen that is on the outside of other models when they are folded.

Xiaomi Mi Fold

Xiaomi Mi Fold

(Video credit : Xiaomishka)

Still another potential entrant is Xiaomi Mi Fold, which is experimenting with a tri-fold foldable phone. Very little is known about it, and it seems to be the furthest from mass production. But that is another option to keep an eye on. As we can see in that video, Xiaomi Mi Fold will be a cup-noodle size when it is folded. Xiaomi Mi Fold might be by far the smallest foldable phone when folded up.

Although information is somewhat hard to come by, it’s becoming clear that Apple will indeed be getting into this game with a foldable iPhone. At least 3 patents have been granted – one in October 2018 for a magnetic latch to keep the phone closed, one in February for a foldable clam shell similar to the Razr, and one this month for a flexible battery that will distribute heat, enabling the phone to better survive cold weather, which phones up to this point have struggled to avoid becoming brittle in cold weather.

Not everyone is on board -

BlackBerry CEO John Chen doesn’t think this concept is particularly revolutionary. “I want something faster with functional upgrades,” Chen told Barron’s in an interview. “There are no breakthroughs on the horizon. We’ve done fingerprints. We’ve done facial recognition. We’ve done iris technology.

“Everyone wants a bigger screen,” he continued, “but they (smartphones) have become bulky.” This isn’t a surprising stance, considering BlackBerry hasn’t made a new phone since 2016, and has shifted its focus to security applications.

There are a number of factors that raise questions beyond what Chen mentions.

Multi-tasking -

The cell phone universe today still operates on the assumption that the user only focuses on one task at a time. If the user does want to multi-task – such as sending an email, then expanding the screen to find a link and insert it into the email – how well will the software of the device handle the tasks? Up to this point, no device has mastered making a split screen easy to use.

Foldable Glass Display– 

There is not yet a type of glass that will bend with a foldable phone, although there is effort underway at Corning (the maker of Gorilla Glass found on iPhones and some other brands). With that limitation, the first foldable phones will have polymers – in other words, plastic. The main issue with plastic is that it is not nearly as scratch-resistant as glass. Plastic is also less pleasant to the touch compared to glass.

Price –​

A big potential downside to both of them is price – The Mate X sells for $2,600 and the Galaxy Fold is $1,980. New technologies are usually extremely expensive when they make their entrance, and drop as the technology develops. But that development hinges on enough people buying the initial roll-out, so that manufacturers have the financial motivation to keep developing. With many phones available for less than $1,000, there is a real concern not enough people will buy the new foldable phones to ensure more production will be financially viable. There is a portion of the population that is always highly-motivated to be the first person to have the newest item available. These companies will likely need a fairly large supply of “But I had it FIRST” people to jump on board.

5G –

 The mobile communication world is seeing a shift away from rectangular boxes (cell phones, laptops) to wearable technologies like the smartwatch and AR glasses. This shift has been slow thanks to worries about battery power and network speed, which 5G will address. If the wearable technologies can provide a better experience, the whole concept of the cellphone – let alone the foldable cellphone – could end up in the scrap bin next to the desktop computer.

So what do we know about foldable screen phone?

 It is very early in the game, and we don’t know for sure if the foldable phone is coming back to stay and will one day have us all waxing nostalgic about the primitive days when we used cell phones that didn’t fold, or if a few years down the road we don’t remember them at all. We do know that a new generation of foldable phones is coming to market this year, and we will certainly be paying attention. We will be updating this article if there are any more news or updates from the builders. If you have any recommendations, suggestions or questions on this article, be sure to gives us a comment down below. 

How to choose a fitness tracker for kids

How to choose a fitness tracker for kids

When choosing a fitness tracker that would suit the use of a child, you should keep in mind a few things that would facilitate their operation of the device. They would probably enjoy something that is interactive and integrates fun into its work. You’d also need a device that’s easily handled and taken care of, as well as being durable and light.

Read more: The Best Fitbit for Children in 2018 - Buyer's Guide

How to Pick a Fitness Tracker for Your Kid?


The display is very important for a child to pay attention to their fitness tracker and interact with it. The Apple Watch Series always have amazing displays with high resolutions and rings that indicate the progress of the user when it comes to moving, standing, and exercising.

They’re a great way to motivate your child to integrate all these actions into their day, and also challenge them to complete the ring on a daily basis.

As for Fitbit devices, the Versa would seem to have the most colorful and interactive screen, but its size might be a little too big for a child’s wrist. Your child could also make use of the attractive display on the new Samsung Galaxy Watch with its high resolution and its colorful screen.


A fitness tracker’s design will make a huge difference to your child. A lightweight, compact design is much preferred as it will be more convenient for them to go about their day with.

The Fitbit Ace does a great job when it comes to being a good fit for a child’s wrist, but it lacks the attractiveness of the display.

The new Apple Watch Series 4 also uses the System in Package technology in a very brilliant way to make the size of the watch very compact relative to what it has to offer. Although it could have too many features that a child might not make use of.

Battery life

The longer the battery life of the fitness tracker you get your child, the better it would be. Some fitness trackers boast a battery life that lasts up to 7 days like the Alta HR.

The Garmin Vivoactive 3 also lasts around 7 days on smartwatch mode (13 hours on GPS mode). One of the longest lasting batteries would be the Fitbit Zip that could function for up to 4 or 6 months.


At the sight of a pool or a sea, children might get too excited to remember to take off their fitness trackers, so it’s best if you get your child a fitness tracker with water-resistance.

Some good choices would be the Fitbit Flex 2, the Garmin Vivoactive 3, or the Apple Watch Series 3. The latter 2 also deliver swim-tracking and display swimming-related data such as types of strokes and distance.


Usually, a fitness tracker will promise to deliver you two major kinds of features: Fitness and smart features. A child would probably make more use of fitness features, that’s why it would make more sense to buy them a device that focuses more on those kinds of features like the Garmin Vivoactive 3 or basically any Fitbit device.

The Fitbit Ace has 2 Fitbit app views: one for the parent and one for the kid. This specific reason qualifies it to be the best candidate for a child’s fitness tracker.

OLED vs LCD vs Plasma

The long story short is that OLED and Plasma screens have each of their pixels produce their own light, while LCD ones depend on a backlight. This makes the former types capable of displaying truly black colors, while those of the latter would seem more like dark gray.

OLED vs LCD vs Plasma

Plasma screens are no longer produced though because LCD ones beat them out of the market with their lower prices (lower cost is required to make them) and their slimmer sizes.

OLED vs LCD vs Plasma Comparison


LED screens definitely take the cake when it comes to brightness as their backlight makes them produce higher levels of brightness than those of OLED and Plasma screens. That doesn’t mean the latter can’t function as well in a sunny room or outdoors though. And the full-screen brightness function is generally not as important these days, so this is a mild victory for LED screens.

Black levels

Because OLED and Plasma displays depend on individual pixels, they can turn them off completely, resulting in a perfectly true black.

A level that an LCD display can never reach, even after the local dimming technology, which only helps in dimming parts of the screen independently of others. Even though some also have full-array local dimming to give you better control over the contrast, they still don’t reach the darkness of the black found on the displays of their rivals.

Contrast ratio

The contrast ratio is basically the difference between the brightest white and the darkest black a display can produce. This makes the OLED and Plasma screens win with no doubts as they have higher contrast ratios. Higher contrast ratios are also related to the picture quality and how lifelike the content looks, so it’s a huge plus in the favor of OLED and Plasma screens over LCD ones.

Viewing angle

A rule of thumb is that the more you curve away from the center facing the screen of your TV, the more distorted the images would appear to you. This is why wide viewing angles are a vital feature you should seek when you’re shopping for a monitor.

Not many LED displays use the in-plane switching panels that have wider viewing angles, but sadly, even the ones that do have the disadvantage of having lower contrast ratios.

Unlike OLED and Plasma displays that spare you the worrying about all of these issues as their images stay consistent no matter the angle that you’re looking at the monitor from.

Read more: Mac Mini Monitors - Buyer's Guide

Energy consumption

Plasma screens have the highest energy consumption relative to the other options.

While LCD screens give you more control over your power consumption as you can adjust the backlight to lower levels without compromising the performance of your screen.

Unlike LCD screens, if you reduce the brightness of an OLED one to save energy, it could mess up with the image and ruin your experience.

The size of the screen

If you can find a Plasma display, you’d be surprised at how big their sizes can go, as hey can reach up to 150 inches.

OLED displays restrict you to screen sizes that are either 55, 65, or 77 inches.

So if you’re looking for a wider variety of sizes that go as low as 20 inches or less, or over 100 inches, it’s the LCD displays that will have your back on that one.


You can probably find very cheap Plasma displays currently as they’re more or less out of use.

LCD screens could be available for 500 dollars at a size of 50-inches, while OLED screens have a much higher price range than that. But if you’re considering the best of the LCD displays, they have similar price tags to those of the more expensive OLED displays’.


The highest resolution you can find on a Plasma display would probably be 1920 x 1080p (HD).

While both OLED and LCD displays can give you Ultra HD 4K (3840 x 2160) resolution.

However, if the 4K resolution doesn’t concern you, or you’re not willing to spend the money on it, you will probably find more choices on the LCD market as only some of the older OLEDs have a 1080p resolution.


Bottom line is, Plasma displays are currently not competing in the market but you can find some old ones for good prices that could give you nice visuals and a satisfactory resolution.

If you are willing to spend some extra money on image quality, then an OLED screen is going to serve you well.

However, if you are looking for something that stands in a middle ground between this and that, that variety of options in the LED market will get you just what you want in terms of size, price, and resolution.

What is the meaning of response time

What is the meaning of response time

Is A Monitor’s Response Time Really Important for You?

Response time is basically the time it takes a pixel to change from either black to white or from one shade of gray to another. The lower the response time, the better the performance of the monitor.

You get 2 options, either a low response time of 1 millisecond on TN panels or 4 milliseconds on IPS or VA panels.

You have to keep in mind though that the monitor’s response time isn’t the same as input lag. The latter is supposed to signify the delay between the click of a key and the resulted action of that click on your screen.

Response time, however, is the performance of each individual pixel independently and not the overall display of the content.

The ability to change from white and black and from one shade of gray to the other indicates the intensity of the appearance of colors on your monitor when using a filter. It also –in a sense- controls how pix-elated the fast-moving objects would look on your screen.

Response times work with refresh rates, so, for example, a monitor with a 60 Hz refresh rate will keep an image on the screen for a little less than 17 seconds. This means the pixels would need to transition faster than that so they can display the next frame or image in time.

Another problem that could be caused by longer response times is that they may result in an effect called “ghosting”.

This is when you can still see the details of the previous frame while the next one is being displayed because the pixels took too long to switch between the different shades of gray.

This may not be a big deal if you’re doing every day computing like browsing the internet, reading an article, or writing an essay.

However, if you’re a hardcore gamer or like to watch fast-paced action movies and series, you will definitely make use of the lower response times typically found on TN (Twisted-nematic) panels. 

Although you may have to be willing to give up on some of the visuals so you’ll get narrower viewing angles, a narrower color gamut coverage, and color reproduction that falls short of that of the IPS panels’.

Related Articles:

What is FreeSync

What is FreeSync

When you’re buying a product and you see that it supports FreeSync, what is this supposed to mean? Does it matter if your monitor supports FreeSync? To know that, you simply need to understand what AMD’s FreeSync is.

When you’re displaying content on your monitor, your GPU renders frames and transfers them to the display.

The display then refreshes those frames a certain number of times (144 times on a 144 Hz monitor and so on) to create the final picture. However, sometimes the GPU can send too many frames to the display before it’s done with the initial refresh cycle, which results in screen tearing.

VSYNC was created to fix this issue by forcing the GPU to wait until the display is done with the refresh cycle to send the next one, but this resulted in input lag and stuttering. So you either had to choose between the tearing or the input lag.

This is where AMD’s FreeSync comes into action. Radeon FreeSync is a technology developed by AMD to eliminate the stuttering and tearing that happens during transitions from one frame to another in a game. This is because it basically syncs the display’s refresh rate to the frame rate of the graphics card, so there is no gap between one and the other.

This is particularly noticeable and effective when it comes to fast-paced and action games, as these are the games that would put the function of AMD’s FreeSync in the best use, making the transitions more seamless, and the overall gameplay smoother and more fluid. This then results in a more immersive experience because it is more lifelike.

The good thing about AMD is that –with the help of VESA (Video Electronics Standard Association)-  it integrated the support for Adaptive Sync into the DisplayPort 1.2a standard (and later on HDMI), and then they used that to utilize their FreeSync technology.

This means that the costs of producing a monitor which is compatible with AMD’s FreeSync technology, some costs are cut, making it more affordable than monitors made to be compatible with Nvidia’s G-Sync technology. It also doesn’t limit manufacturers to certain scalers. Whereas the G-Sync’s options are more limited as they only work with a Nvidia G-Sync scaler, and their monitors have more or less the same on-screen menus and options.

There’s a setback when it comes to FreeSync though, and that is that it works as long as you’re in a certain dynamic refresh rate, and if your FPS (Frames Per Second) falls below that, it stops working altogether. FreeSync monitors usually have narrower dynamic refresh rates (40 to 75 Hz instead of 30 to 75 Hz for example).

A good solution to this is the Low Frame Compensation (LFC) feature which is developed by Radeon and which extends the range of the refresh rates of many Radeon FreeSync displays. This makes the gameplay smooth down to 30 FPS (Frames Per Second) or even less!

Many of  Radeon’s Free-Sync ready monitors also use LFC automatically when you have the Radeon Software Crimson Edition (or later) installed on your device.

So a wise thing to do before you buy a FreeSync monitor would be to check its FreeSync range. And it’s also a great advantage if it supports the LFC feature.

There’s a further upgrade: Radeon FreeSync 2 technology. This is available to Radeon displays owners exclusively though. It’s worth getting a Radeon display to enjoy the enhanced pixel-perfect gaming, large dynamic refresh rate, low latency, and bigger sRGB color space for improved brightness and contrast.

This completely raises the bar for enjoying HDR games, series, and movies.

Read more: