Wired
Recently, something like this in the mobile phone circle aroused Tony’s interest. Shen Yiren, the former vice president of OPPO, complained on Weibo two days ago that the screen test of the evaluation agency DXOMARK did not talk about martial arts, and scored blindly.
Obviously there are two identical mobile phone screens, but the measured results are a dozen points worse.
The screen mentioned by Shen Yiren here is the same screen on OPPO FindX2 Pro and OnePlus 8 Pro, and there is no difference in parameters. OPPO and OnePlus are as close as brothers. They come out of the same womb, and the food and the food are not bad. Where can such an outsider make irresponsible comments?
When DXOMARK saw something bad, he immediately came out to explain, saying that the OPPO FindX2 Pro in his hand was bought from the French (Four Tones) market, and everyone measured it according to the process. OLED screens will burn screen, accidentally let this OPPO run into, so the score is so low. . .
But this argument is simply untenable. In the OPPO FindX2 Pro evaluation report, DXOMARK believes that the unevenness of the top of the perforated screen is caused by burn-in.
In the evaluation of OnePlus 8 Pro, which scored higher on the screen, this problem was attributed to “uneven screen color.”
If this is not considered a “famous double standard”, it will just treat people as second fools. What is even more puzzling is that when faced with the doubts of major technology bloggers on Weibo, DXOMARK’s official blog basically explained this problem directly, but the textbook became more and more dark. They reiterated that the mobile phone they bought is a new machine, and the protective film was removed during the test, but sharp-eyed netizens found that it did not tear off the factory protective film.
It’s the gray screen of Find X2 Pro above, let’s zoom in.
At the front hollow screen, you can clearly see the traces of the film hollowing out. If this part is not obvious, everyone will understand Tony with a mobile phone without tearing the film.
You start measuring the screen without tearing the film, which is almost the same as tickling through a down jacket. DXOMARK is an independent camera rating company from a French photography company called DxOLabs. Simply put, it evaluates cameras and lenses and provides references for professional photographers. The parent company DxOLabs sells image processing software, similar to the positioning of Lightroom. ▼
At that time, professionals in the photography circle were somewhat dissatisfied with DXOMARK. In traditional camera reviews, netizens will feel that it is more biased towards Zeiss and Nikon lenses, while Canon seems to have become very bad in comparison. . .
Even searching for DXOMARK in Google, the top three are all searches related to its evaluation credibility.
After the rise of smart phones, DXOMARK naturally reached out to the evaluation of mobile phone cameras, because its professional evaluation projects have been favored by many mobile phone manufacturers.
Among them are Huawei and Xiaomi, who like to post DXOMARK scores at the press conference.
I didn’t say that Huawei and Xiaomi are embarrassed here. The imaging system made by a mobile phone manufacturer needs to be recognized by the public. It is understandable to find a professional organization to endorse it and to spend money to send it to a professional organization for testing. But the question is, as a third-party DXOMARK, can it be smooth and give everyone a convincing evaluation result. Obviously it failed.
Take Xiaomi 10Pro and Huawei P40 Pro as examples. In the same set of exposure and contrast tests, DXOMARK made a confusing operation in order to highlight the advantages of the two mobile phones. In the same scene, the color of the sky in the Mi 10 Pro in the Mi 10 Pro evaluation article is quite beautiful and clean.
When it came to the Mi 10 Pro in the P40 Pro evaluation, the sky became a piece of nothing, and the focus was not at a point at all. . .
This is careless. Tony failed the math test when he was a child. It must be careless. Going back to OPPO’s case, DXOMARK did not have a screen measurement business at all. . . The business of screen testing and sound testing was actually just launched in October and November of this year. This is obviously aimed at the needs of mobile phone manufacturers.
What’s good for mobile phone speakers? Isn’t it just listening? . . ▼
But one code is one code. In the evaluation process, the items measured by DXOMARK are still quite detailed, which is of reference significance for people who want to understand the performance of a certain aspect of the mobile phone.
Bittoni’s assessment does not know where to go. ▼
The biggest problem with DXOMARK is that while flaunting independent testing, it also provides profitable consulting services to manufacturers. This is like before the exam, the school publicly sells the scope of the exam, and the students who buy it will not be bad no matter what the exam, and the top students don’t know what to take, and they may be confused in the exam room.
In order to obtain higher scores, mobile phone manufacturers will definitely make adjustments in the direction of the DXO test standard. In this way, the score will go up, but the effect presented may not be the best. What do you think, most consumers see that mobile phone manufacturers have posted a DXOMARK score among the best, and they will definitely think that this mobile phone is super awesome and particularly reliable for taking pictures.
I bought it and found it, eh? How come it is not convenient and easy to take pictures without someone else’s low-ranking mobile phone? Why is the color adjustment, blurring, and dark light performance of the film not the inner taste that I want? This is very embarrassing. The ranking of test results will objectively not only affect consumers, but also influence the weight of media and advertisers on mobile phone companies. Every year, DXOMARK’s number one mobile phone will definitely get more attention, and manufacturers who haven’t sent it to test, no matter how well the camera is adjusted, they can only silently suffer.
Stronger than Samsung, the quality of the camera can only be ranked 15th in DXOMARK. ▼
In the most extreme case, DXOMARK’s evaluation will become a money-smashing game among manufacturers. Whoever spends more will get the first place…
It is true that no one can guarantee absolute fairness and justice, but standing in the middle of everything. For the evaluation agency, it consumes its own credibility and professionalism. With the advent of the era of smart phones, DXOMARK was held to a high position and established a benchmark in the mobile phone circle.
It became popular because of smart phones, and naturally wanted to reach out to evaluate smart phones. This is an extremely correct business logic. . . It’s just that this time I took a bit bigger step, and one didn’t stand firm and was a little wobbly: Since the scores and rankings were originally chosen by others, they must be prepared to be picked by others.
.