|
此文章由 xjcs88 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 xjcs88 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
sssddt 发表于 2020-3-1 12:05 
太好笑了,复制粘贴了维基百科的词条就可以给我敲黑板了?
1. 开始扯东扯西了嘛,很好。随便谁都可以编辑,那么维基随便谁的编辑都会被认可吗?如果你没读过维基对此的说明,可以给你个链接:https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi ... A%E7%99%BE%E7%A7%91
真是一边自己强调春秋笔法,一边自己不断的实践自己的春秋笔法呢。鼓掌。
再拿你的截图来看,“用笔曲折”一词是习惯性忽略吗?你拿着我说过的“娱乐榜“,”不屑“这些句子去问问你曾经的语文老师,这样的语句是不是”用笔曲折“?
2. 关于DxoMark的付费咨询和排行榜
废话不多说,摘抄三段:
All of the above considered, we should definitely take DxOMark’s scores with a pinch of salt. A company working closely with smartphone manufacturers to improve picture quality is surely a good thing for consumers, and DxO clearly knows what it’s talking about when it comes to camera quality. However, it’s important to recognize the potential for bias from a company that has a need to sell services to camera developers, while also scoring the results from companies that it works closely with against those it doesn’t. More so when the tests aren’t completely comprehensive or evenly weighted for all possible features.
——AndroidAuthority
But there is a big way these overall DxOMark scores aren’t objective: Brownlee points out that how much each aspect of a camera contributes to the overall score is a completely subjective weighing system that DxOMark came up with.
Since different people have different needs when it comes to a camera, looking at the individual scores that matter to you is probably more helpful and informative than comparing cameras simply based on their overall scores.
But there’s also another reason to take the scores with a grain of salt: the fact that DxOMark works with manufacturers (for a fee) to design cameras that score highly on DxOMark’s tests.
“DxO Labs is a consulting company as well as a testing company,” Brownlee says. “For a fee, they will work with smartphone manufacturers before their phone comes out to create a better camera.”
——PetaPixel(文章中引述言论来自Marques Brownlee)
Next, there's the very obvious problem — and potential conflict of interest — of selling testing hardware to phone makers which you eventually use to publicly rate them on their performance. The idea, presumably, is to allow phone makers to make their cameras better by using repeatable, scientific tests around image quality. But this also has the effect of allowing OEMs to "teach to the test."
Like a wily student preparing for a standardized test, manufacturers who partner with DxO, and get access to its hardware and software, can tune their image processing to ace the firm's synthetic tests (within the limits of the hardware, of course). As a result, their review scores are higher when DxO eventually publishes them — because they've had access to the testing hardware all along. Manufacturers who don't partner with DxO are at an automatic disadvantage in terms of their score, even though real-world, outside-of-the-lab image quality might not be substantially worse. When that happens, as it is bound to, consumers who put faith in comparisons between scores from partners and non-partners are potentially misled.
——AndroidCentral
DXO在从Lab分拆前,很早我就有关注过这个排行榜,要和我辩论这个榜单有没有Intentional Bias,欢迎。 |
|