Develop Bugs

Secrets of the N1's/Desire's screen: science, color, and hacks

An article about AMOLED screen of N1 is here, should be applicable to Desire as well.

The jist of the article is that the true resolution of the N1/Desire screen is 392x653 and not 480x800, since each pixel only has two of the three RGB colours.
AMOLED isn't all it's cracked up to be, especially if sharp text is important to you.

Moandal said:
The jist of the article is that the true resolution of the N1/Desire screen is 392x653 and not 480x800, since each pixel only has two of the three RGB colours.
AMOLED isn't all it's cracked up to be, especially if sharp text is important to you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not quite fare, the N1 has 480 lines of independently addressable pixels per row and 800 rows. It does have an 800x480 res it's just that there are only 2 channels per pixel. The images are manipulated and diliberatly out of focus otherwise, and I quote from the authors subsequent comment...
"The shot of the screen that is blurry is intentionally blurrier than what the screen actually looks like, it's the only way to get rid of the moire effect of the camera's CCD interfering with the pixel grid of the N1 screen. It's not as bad as it looks, just worse than the Droid's screen."
What he is saying is that if they didn't blur the image the camera would have seen the optical illusion you are supposed to see. Having a mixture of RG and BG Pixels is not really an issue and most certainly doesn't mean the resolution is lower.
He also says that stippled images are where you see it and only in certain circumstances... Once commenter noted that if you zoom by 1% the effect on his example images vanishes, the example images where designed to look wrong on a N1 screen, as comenter points out, if images designed to look wrong on a N1 do infact look wrong on an N1, does it matter, I can't see too many people designing images specifically to trip up the N1!
If you read the comments, all the users of N1 who posted said it is stupid to say it's a poor screen, they unanimously agree that it is the best screen they have ever seen on a phone, including some ex Droid users!
Also this a feature of the N1, and possibly the desire not AMOLED screens in general. actually, your entire post is totally inaccurate!

farnsbarns said:
That's not quite fare, the N1 has 480 lines of independently addressable pixels per row and 800 rows. It does have an 800x480 res it's just that there are only 2 channels per pixel. The images are manipulated and diliberatly out of focus otherwise, and I quote from the authors subsequent comment...
"The shot of the screen that is blurry is intentionally blurrier than what the screen actually looks like, it's the only way to get rid of the moire effect of the camera's CCD interfering with the pixel grid of the N1 screen. It's not as bad as it looks, just worse than the Droid's screen."
What he is saying is that if they didn't blur the image the camera would have seen the optical illusion you are supposed to see. Having a mixture of RG and BG Pixels is not really an issue and most certainly doesn't mean the resolution is lower.
He also says that stippled images are where you see it and only in certain circumstances... Once commenter noted that if you zoom by 1% the effect on his example images vanishes, the example images where designed to look wrong on a N1 screen, as comenter points out, if images designed to look wrong on a N1 do infact look wrong on an N1, does it matter, I can't see too many people designing images specifically to trip up the N1!
If you read the comments, all the users of N1 who posted said it is stupid to say it's a poor screen, they unanimously agree that it is the best screen they have ever seen on a phone, including some ex Droid users!
Also this a feature of the N1, and possibly the desire not AMOLED screens in general. actually, your entire post is totally inaccurate!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If my post is inaccurate, why does the author say that "the fairest way of counting raw pixels on the screen" gives a result of 392*653? How can a pixel that can only display 2 out of 3 colours count as a full pixel of resolution? If you want to count it that way, go ahead but you're only fooling yourself.
The author of the article is an N1 user, and he clearly doesn't think the screen is the best he has ever seen on a phone. Neither is he alone: "many of us were disappointed in the lack of crispness of text".
Maybe future AMOLED screens will have a different solution that allows for all 3 colours per pixel, but in the meantime potential Desire owners should at least be aware of the limitations of their AMOLED screen.
I'll end on something you quoted at me, which I thank you for since you proved my point so nicely:
"It's not as bad as it looks, just worse than the Droid's screen."

Moandal said:
If my post is inaccurate, why does the author say that "the fairest way of counting raw pixels on the screen" gives a result of 392*653? How can a pixel that can only display 2 out of 3 colours count as a full pixel of resolution?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is a resolution of N1 camera? 5MP you say? But every pixel out of this 5 million can record only 1 color (red, green or blue). It is same for professional cameras too. How about that?
"fairest way of counting" is just his opinion, not scientific fact. And there are 800 physical vertical pixels, like on every other WVGA display. Only difference is horizontally, so 392*653 is just his approximation, do not take it literally.
As author says there is not issue in pictures, just in hard edged objects like letters (or his patterns). Maybe it will be improved with better smoothing algorithms.

Is it a general AMOLED issue or only the problem of the N1 and Desire?
Does this affect web browsing?

Moandal said:
If my post is inaccurate, why does the author say that "the fairest way of counting raw pixels on the screen" gives a result of 392*653? How can a pixel that can only display 2 out of 3 colours count as a full pixel of resolution? If you want to count it that way, go ahead but you're only fooling yourself.
The author of the article is an N1 user, and he clearly doesn't think the screen is the best he has ever seen on a phone. Neither is he alone: "many of us were disappointed in the lack of crispness of text".
Maybe future AMOLED screens will have a different solution that allows for all 3 colours per pixel, but in the meantime potential Desire owners should at least be aware of the limitations of their AMOLED screen.
I'll end on something you quoted at me, which I thank you for since you proved my point so nicely:
"It's not as bad as it looks, just worse than the Droid's screen."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look if you feel the N1 screen is poor that is a matter of opinion but...
The definition of a pixel is a physical screen location that can be addressed and manipulated directly in the video RAM regardless of the BPP or number of colours it can display. That is a simple fact. The N1 has 480 of these per row and 800 rows. It is not questionable, it is an unwavering fact, you were wrong! as was the man who posted it until he backtraked in the comments with CAPITALS stating an important point (so important he didn't edit his original post
You also said that AMOLED is not all it's cracked up to be, AMOLED is not the culpret, Google/HTC is, AMOLED displays with 16 BPP (RGB pixels rather than RG / BG) already exist so AMOLED is all it's cracked up to be. Perhaps the N1 screen isn't but that wouldn't be because of AMOLED it would be because HTC decided to use RG BG pixels on THEIR AMOLED screen instead of RGB which is perfectly possible.
Both the statements in your post were unequivocabley and fundamentally inacurate. It is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of fact. You regurgitated someone else's inaccurate statement with no research, thought or even knowledge of the technologies involved.
If you believe "It's not as bad as it looks, just worse than the Droid's screen" proves either of your original points you are mistaken.
I'm not saying the N1 screen is good or bad and I (unlike you) made it clear that I was repeating other peoples opinions. If you feel aggrieved about your screen then I really feel for you but misinformation and repetition of inaccurate information is still a bad thing.

Well, please, this is not an issue on AMOLED, read this article:
http://www.displayblog.com/2010/01/20/nexus-one-pentile-matrix-oled-display/
And comments from user "NPS_CA" in this blog:
http://androidcommunity.com/nexus-one-display-not-true-wvga-20100325/
Then you will understand the situation.
When it (this technology) saves battery life and produce better viewing experience, I will take it any day.
I wont complaint about the actual number of pixels

With the pixel density, and considering how "small" the pixel is to the human eye, i highly doubt that the normal human eye will spot that issue *unless you are hawk LMAO*
you should not forget, what matters here is the human eye reception, I dont care what kind of display hardware/software they are implementing as long as they look pretty, .. AND those kind of displays are HUUUGE battery Savior, .. about 33% more efficient than the regular LCD (yes, probably because they are using the PenTile Matrix, hence using less sub-pixels to display).
so lets recap whats going on here (keeping in mind that the most important factor here is us, the humans, not the machines)
AMOLED looks way better (from a human point of view, not a hawk) than TFT or LCD screens on mobile phones
AMOLED saves you alot of battery life (around 33% compared to other TFT)

gogol said:
Well, please, this is not an issue on AMOLED
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, its the pentile tehnology that the author goes to great lenghts to explain in *yawn* detail.
Not that I care but does anyone even know if the Desire has this technology?

bcmobile said:
No, its the pentile tehnology that the author goes to great lenghts to explain in *yawn* detail.
Not that I care but does anyone even know if the Desire has this technology?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the Nexus One has it.
the Desire has the same screen as nexus one.
so using proof by induction, the Desire has it

does a screen of 460x800 pixel (or 392*653) really look ****ty for text?? i don't think so, there are many pixels!
look at the screen of an iphone! the half amount of pixels but you still can read text. a screen with that dpi can't be not good! i'm happier with more pixels than a supercalifragilisticflexpialidocious-sharp display. and by the way, more pixels means more details or more information on the same view! and i also don't think that you surf on the web without any zooming to the article!
the screen can't be so blurry as mentioned in the link of the first post. otherwise all the people of MWC 2010 are liing to us, they are stunned about the screen and its resolution.

Today I bougth HTC Desire and what I first mention was jagged font. Simply say - display is not so silky as on Touch Pro. On all texts you can see "dots shadow".
This behaviour is very much seen on typing cursor when blicking - it is not vertical simple line, but dotted line.
At first I think, that this is a fault, but after some reads and si this thread I start to thinking, that this is feature.

I think this is because of the OLED screen. Right?

I think so. But waiting to meet people with another Desire to compare if this is not bad display.

irkan said:
With the pixel density, and considering how "small" the pixel is to the human eye, i highly doubt that the normal human eye will spot that issue *unless you are hawk LMAO*
you should not forget, what matters here is the human eye reception, I dont care what kind of display hardware/software they are implementing as long as they look pretty, .. AND those kind of displays are HUUUGE battery Savior, .. about 33% more efficient than the regular LCD (yes, probably because they are using the PenTile Matrix, hence using less sub-pixels to display).
so lets recap whats going on here (keeping in mind that the most important factor here is us, the humans, not the machines)
AMOLED looks way better (from a human point of view, not a hawk) than TFT or LCD screens on mobile phones
AMOLED saves you alot of battery life (around 33% compared to other TFT)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
100% agreed...if it looks gud 2 human eyes, that's it...

To be honest, I don't really like it and get pretty annoyed by the pixelly text.
I have to mention: only when I keep phone within 30cm of my eyes. Any further and it's perfect.

SUPER-AMOLED versus AMOLED? Whats the difference?

I have been wondering this myself. I knew it was "brighter" but what else is the difference with this screen. Well, the BIG deal is that the digitizer is part of the glass not overlaid so you won't have the possibility to get dust under the glass but on top of the pixels... Like on Desire.
(from wiki)
Super Active-Matrix Organic Light-Emitting Diode or Super AMOLED is a display technology for use in mobile devices such as mobile phones. It differs from many other display technologies in that the layer which detects touch is integrated into the screen rather than being overlaid on top.
Compared with the first-generation AMOLED, the Super AMOLED claimed advantages are:
* 20% brighter screen
* 80% less sunlight reflection
* 20% reduced power consumption
HTCs next gen phones will no doubt have it as standard. I like the Desires screen, but I just wondered what the exact differences were with all this "super" talk. there you go. better in sunlight, and no dust, and brighter, and less power. thats it.

mcgon1979 said:
I have been wondering this myself. I knew it was "brighter" but what else is the difference with this screen. Well, the BIG deal is that the digitizer is part of the glass not overlaid so you won't have the possibility to get dust under the glass but on top of the pixels... Like on Desire.
(from wiki)
Super Active-Matrix Organic Light-Emitting Diode or Super AMOLED is a display technology for use in mobile devices such as mobile phones. It differs from many other display technologies in that the layer which detects touch is integrated into the screen rather than being overlaid on top.
Compared with the first-generation AMOLED, the Super AMOLED claimed advantages are:
* 20% brighter screen
* 80% less sunlight reflection
* 20% reduced power consumption
HTCs next gen phones will no doubt have it as standard. I like the Desires screen, but I just wondered what the exact differences were with all this "super" talk. there you go. better in sunlight, and no dust, and brighter, and less power. thats it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
htc has already said it will be going back to lcd screens as amoled technology is too expensive, i think even the future desires will be made with lcd screens

AndroHero said:
htc has already said it will be going back to lcd screens as amoled technology is too expensive
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have a source for this?

would love a source for that. I cannot believe that. LCD is old hat now and with Samsung planning to bring on 2 huge facilities for S-AMOLED production by 2013 it seems ridiculous to suggest HTC have ruled out using this technology in the future due to expense. It will become cheaper as it becomes more common place. It's certainly the way forward for mobile device screens. back lit lcd is inefficient.

AndroHero said:
htc has already said it will be going back to lcd screens as amoled technology is too expensive, i think even the future desires will be made with lcd screens
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't be further from the truth.
The reason why HTC is considering switching back to LCD for many of its currently AMOLED-equipped handsets is that there is a huge shortage of AMOLED screens. Apparently, all of these AMOLED screens are provided by Samsung, and Samsung is not producing enough of them.
Source: Just google HTC AMOLED SAMSUNG and you will get many links to related stories, for example
http://www.oled-display.net/the-sma...tc-must-switch-the-display-from-amoled-to-lcd
Conspiracy theory: Samsung has no problem producing enough Super AMOLED screens for their Galaxy S, which is available on almost every carrier. Samsung has said that it wouldn't make Super AMOLED screen available to other cellphone manufacturers within the year. Coincidence?

tsekh501 said:
Can't be further from the truth.
The reason why HTC is considering switching back to LCD for many of its currently AMOLED-equipped handsets is that there is a huge shortage of AMOLED screens. Apparently, all of these AMOLED screens are provided by Samsung, and Samsung is not producing enough of them.
Source: Just google HTC AMOLED SAMSUNG and you will get many links to related stories, for example
http://www.oled-display.net/the-sma...tc-must-switch-the-display-from-amoled-to-lcd
Conspiracy theory: Samsung has no problem producing enough Super AMOLED screens for their Galaxy S, which is available on almost every carrier. Samsung has said that it wouldn't make Super AMOLED screen available to other cellphone manufacturers within the year. Coincidence?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
soory, thats just what i heard lol you know how facts can get twisted on forums like this lol

That thing about Samsung's shortage is very funny indeed. There was no shortage just until the Galaxy S came out.
Yet, you gotta consider Samsung's move here. Samsung has the leading screen technology for their phones only. If you want the best you're pretty much obligated to get a Samsung.
Then again, with this move, they can't profit of selling SuperAMOLED screens to other manufacturers.
So if they are faking it, they are gambling on the point of having the best the market has to offer.

I don't think samsung is gambling here, they are still dependent on collaboration within the industry regarding so many other components that they make, so they wont risking alienating partners because of amoled screens alone, that is only one of their many business areas. I think it's just a shortage, that's it. If they can't make enough, they can't.
Also consider that samsungs phone division may have contractual preference in deliveries for Co-funding the new plant for example. I'm just speculating wildly tog give examples on possible business complexety involved.
Excluding supplies will for example not provide the increased price / revenue that an open market and limited supplies competition would give.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

They're not going to cripple HTC by not producing screens for them, especially since HTC can simple switch to another supplier, and get SLCD screens made by Sony for the Desire/Nexus One. It would also destroy HTC and Samsung's relationship if they did that.
On a side note, Yes Samsung has said they are keeping Super AMOLED tech to themselves for 18 months.

ive always wondered the difference too lol

Super-Amoled Plus
At OLED-Display.net there is also a graphic from Samsung Mobile Display which explain Super-Amoled-Plus:
oled-display.net/what-is-super-amoled-plus

I thought SuperAMOLED were made only by Samsung.
Thought they may as well be called SamsungAMOLED screens...

Umm, let's not forget that S-LCD comes from Samsung and Sony. Basically, Desires have Sony displays if i recall correctly.
Samsung has a well known history in shaping the market as they please ( memory chips lawsuits as much you like ).
There is no such thing as shortage of displays on a global scale. Amoled and S-Amoled are also made by Samsung (yours truly ).
Until S-LCD pays off enough , they will not think of changing the factory technology to make newer displays.
No conspiracy, it's only business and Samsung is good at it.
As far as I'm concerned S-LCD , Amoled and S-Amoled equally suck. I believe in better displays.

amoled suck because of the colorfilter degration. once they find the proper materals, they will be superior, unless u want higher refreshrates, that wont be easy, maybe with graphs to replace the coppwr wiring
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

mcgon1979 said:
would love a source for that. I cannot believe that. LCD is old hat now and with Samsung planning to bring on 2 huge facilities for S-AMOLED production by 2013 it seems ridiculous to suggest HTC have ruled out using this technology in the future due to expense. It will become cheaper as it becomes more common place. It's certainly the way forward for mobile device screens. back lit lcd is inefficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree.

*SLCD or AMOLED*

As you all know, the new batch of Desire for Telus will come with SLCD.
androidpolice.com/2010/07/15/htc-desire-headed-to-canada-on-telus
I'm not from Canada so just wondering should I wait for SLCD to available worldwide or just grab the current AMOLED.
The main concern of mine is AMOLED with pinkish issue.
Anyone can tell me which is better ? Please to explain to me as I'm totally don't have any knowledge regarding SLCD & AMOLED.
Many thanks

kelvintan said:
The main concern of mine is AMOLED with pinkish issue.
Anyone can tell me which is better ? Please to explain to me as I'm totally don't have any knowledge regarding SLCD & AMOLED.
Many thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it comes down to personal preference. I kind of like the AMOLED screen, and mine has a very soft neuance of a pinkish hue. But nothing that is annoying or anything. The SLCD is as you know the secondary preference of HTC, but it seems to be as good as the first choice..

I genuinely think if I wasn't a member of this forum and read pretty much everything about the desire, I wouldn't have noticed the pinkish tint to grey colours... That's just me, it really isn't bad and certainly not a deal breaker. For how often that colour even shows up, its not worth concerning yourself about. If you want AMOLED over an SLCD screen which I think is probably wiser seeing as it was HTC's first choice then get one now.. All I can say is the screens beautiful and full of colour, not having seen SLCD screens I can't say if it will be any different but unless its an improvement, then get an AMOLED one

Nit3m4re said:
I genuinely think if I wasn't a member of this forum and read pretty much everything about the desire, I wouldn't have noticed the pinkish tint to grey colours... That's just me, it really isn't bad and certainly not a deal breaker. For how often that colour even shows up, its not worth concerning yourself about. If you want AMOLED over an SLCD screen which I think is probably wiser seeing as it was HTC's first choice then get one now.. All I can say is the screens beautiful and full of colour, not having seen SLCD screens I can't say if it will be any different but unless its an improvement, then get an AMOLED one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't agree more. Haven't seen a SLCD live but I really like the shiny colors and this is enough reason for me to choose AMOLED over lcd I really don't care about the slight pink effect and anyway it's almost gone in 2.2.
I'm really happy with my desire
Regards

If you don't notice anything wrong with the screen on a Desire with amoled screen then don't bother with the canadian version.
Some people are just more geeky and uptight about these things.
Personally the oversaturated colors was the first thing I noticed when I saw the phone in a shop without having read about the issue on the internet.
Amoled: The colors is punchier and fuller, the blacks will be deeper.
This sounds really good and most people dont find the oled on the desire bad
at all. Because of the type of amoled they used on the desire the screen wont
seem as sharp as a hvga screen should be. If you want to see amoled screen
done right, check out the samsung omnia hd, just perfect.
Lcd: The colors arent as full but after having had a tp2 for 6 months i think it looks really good anyway. Any lcd screen with hvga resolution will appear alot sharper than the one on the desire. Also i found while the colors werent as deep as on a oled i found the color spectrum to appear wider than on desire. Dont know if thats true that just the way it appears to me and what I prefer.
The Slcd they will use on the canadian Desire will be a lcd with a
ips panel. ips panels arent normally used on cell phones but alot of
graphics artists use them on lcd monitors when doing photo work.
I think theyre supposed to show colors more accuratley than
tn or pva panels.
I know the viewing angles on them are really good,
like 160 degrees. The downside has been that they don't have quite as
fast response time as tn or pva panels but it isnt a big deal if youre
not a twitch fps player.

Also, I read that SLCD drains more power than AMOLED.

abvmoose said:
Also i found while the colors werent as deep as on a oled i found the color spectrum to appear wider than on desire.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is a contradiction. If colors are deeper then spectrum is wider. Amoled can display colors which LCD can't, and which doesn't even exists in any normal (sRGB) picture
abvmoose said:
The Slcd they will use on the canadian Desire will be a lcd with a
ips panel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you share a source of that info?

phentex said:
Also, I read that SLCD drains more power than AMOLED.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have two horses, one drinks 5 liters of water per day no matter what is doing, and other drinks 2 liters doing nothing and 10 if runs all day in full gallop, which one drinks more?
Consider you need additional 200 liters everyday to clean them and stables. Does it matter at all which one drinks more?

vlasac said:
It is a contradiction. If colors are deeper then spectrum is wider. Amoled can display colors which LCD can't, and which doesn't even exists in any normal (sRGB) picture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that the colors are deeper and the color spectrum or color space is the same thing, maybe im wrong. I found the colors the desire screen showed were deeper, by deeper i mean more intense and fuller, as one should expect from a oled display. To me, the colorspace didnt seem as wide as on my tp2's lcd screen. That's my personal impression of it. It could be because of the pinkish hue wish also might add to the oversaturation of some colors. I found the color red specially to be oversaturated wich gave me the impression of the colorspace not to be so wide.
It's true that Amoled can show more colors than lcd, at least when oled
is done right.
Can you share a source of that info?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know what, im not sure that I can. I was pretty sure that ive read somewhere that S-lcd is the buzzword for Samsung's and Sony's joint venture for creating newer generation lcd displays with ips panels.
But now that I look for it im not so sure. I was certain i read an post on Engadget where they clearly stated that it was ips panel but I cant find that now.
There is one source vaugley explaining it here:
http://androidcommunity.com/htc-for...ft-lcd-from-amoled-due-to-shortages-20100625/
But it says:
"But, the big question is: what is Super TFT LCD? Well, you’ve actually heard of it before, because it has a nickname that’s come up recently in the news (after the announcement of a certain tablet). Super TFT LCD’s nickname is IPS. Which, yes, became “famous” thanks to Apple’s iPad tablet. It provides a wide viewing angle, and provides very clear images — even if the colors aren’t as “distinguished” when compared to an AMOLED display."
But the source of those news is:
http://www.oled-display.net/the-sma...tc-must-switch-the-display-from-amoled-to-lcd
Wich really doesnt say anything about being an ips panel

If the SLCD is even vaguely readable in direct sunlight, go for it. Because the AMOLED isn't, I don't care what people claim.

If it's an IPS panel, the I'd be very tempted to give 'SLCD' a try.
But whenever I pick up another phone since getting my Desire I notice the muddy, bleeding blacks that OLED eliminates.

It's official now. Wondering any review which is better..

youtube.com/watch?v=gY6qpnoziZM

Google chose to stop selling Nexus One instead of putting LCD monitor to it.
This decision says a lot.

fadasma said:
Google chose to stop selling Nexus One instead of putting LCD monitor to it.
This decision says a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, but I don't think the AMOLED shortage had *anything* to do with Google shutting up shop on selling the Nexus One!
Regards,
Dave

tomek_fcb said:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gY6qpnoziZM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That video kinda makes me feel good about having an AMOLED screen.

There's no screens named SLCD. S-LCD is the COMPANY that makes the screens wich will replace AMOLED-screens on HTC DESIRE. S-LCD is a joint venture between Samsung and Sony. According to wikipedi, S-LCD makes S-PVA panels (wich is even worse than IPS). The video showing the "new" screen on desire is clearly a S-PVA panel.

janroar said:
There's no screens named SLCD. S-LCD is the COMPANY that makes the screens wich will replace AMOLED-screens on HTC DESIRE. S-LCD is a joint venture between Samsung and Sony. According to wikipedi, S-LCD makes S-PVA panels (wich is even worse than IPS). The video showing the "new" screen on desire is clearly a S-PVA panel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Patterned vertical alignment and super patterned vertical alignment (S-PVA) are alternative versions of MVA technology offered by Samsung's and Sony's joint venture S-LCD. Developed independently, they offer similar features to MVA, but with higher contrast ratios of up to 3000:1.....
PVA and S-PVA offer the best black depth of any LCD type along with wide viewing angles. S-PVA also offers fast response times using modern RTC technologies.
Source: Search Wikipedia for TFT LCD

I've had a new HTC Desire with S-LCD in my hand for a while, along with my old Amoled one.
It's surely a lot better than my old LCD (Touch HD).
What impressed me is the clarity of the display, the whites, the good contrast compared to old LCD and the fact that (I think) the phone is lighter.
Of course blacks and contrast are miles better on amoled.
But where it failed me, is better readability in direct sunlight. It's more or less the same as amoled, which is (for me) average. I can live with that, but I expected the S-LCD to compensate more for its shortcomings.
All in all, I feared worse, but I would take amoled any day.

according to my box, I have the amoled screen.
Must say I'm pleased with whatever it is !!

SLCD vs Amoled review coming from AMOLED

just want to offer advice to those who are still confused about this
i just switched from amoled to SLCD desire after one month of usage and believe me when i say the difference is day and night
SLCD is just much better, finally a clean true 252dpi display, no more dots, lines are finally lines, its just so impressive how sharp it is
colors and tint are more real and to my surprise blacks are good too, not as good as amoled blacks but very close, viewing angles are incredible and i don't know but even sunlight visibility is better (don't know what engadget was on about) at full brightness it's brighter then amoled
i placed it next to an iphone 4 and the pixel density didn't match of course but pretty close, colors and blacks to my pleasant surprise turned out better then the iphone 4 like a middle ground between retina and amoled
battery life seems better so far
i'm sticking with Desire for it's form factor, but seriously hope the Desire HD will feature SLCD because without is a real pitty, for me amoleds never again
check this detailed article about the matter http://gizmodo.com/5649483/smartphone-display-shoot+out

I think in a while amoleds will rule, samsung galaxy s' samoled looks really nice but I am happy I have a slcd desire and not an amoled one. On paper the amoled's specs might look better but in day to day usage the slcd desire is superior (eg in a line up the amoled will beat the slcd is 8 out of 10 tested variables but in real live usage you will probable just encounter in 90% of the time the 2 variables were the slcd beats the amoled)

I just replaced my Samsung Galaxy S for a HTC Desire (it has an SLCD screen). I deliberately compared the two displays before I sold the SGS & from what I could see the SOLED betters the SLCD only in contrast levels & deep blacks. In all other aspects the SLCD screen for me is superior.
Most noticeable is the sharpness of the SLCD over the SOLED. Text is readable in web page overview on the HTC where on the Samsung its not.

waw you replaced your galaxy with a standard desire
we can't deny how lush amoled colors can look in videos but image quality had serious issues, dithering as well as color banding, all gone now
it was funny with the amoled when i don't use my glasses i see the screen at a much lower resolution, i think the virtual resolution was failing on my broken eyes

Shall I swap for an SLCD?

I'm sure similar questions have been asked already but I find myself in a fairly unique position whereby my old phone was SLCD and Three UK replaced it with an AMOLED Desire under warranty. I can now either keep this one or complain and get it replaced. Which would be the better option in this scenario?
Thanks
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

Depends on you, AMOLEDS draw approx 3x more power when displaying white pixels, has a higher chance of getting a burn-in, but they use virtually no power when displaying black/ dark colours. SLCDs performs better under sunlight when compared to AMOLEDs, and they don't use Pentile matrix.

I would never do it... Images looks more beautiful on the AMOLED, believe me...

unnddd said:
I'm sure similar questionable have been asked already but I find myself in a fairly unique position whereby my old phone was SLCD and Three UK replaced it with an AMOLED Desire under warranty. I can now either keep this one or complain and get it replaced. Which would be the better option in this scenario?
Thanks
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since you live in the UK where there is not much bright sunlight, you may as well stick with the AMOLED.
Engadget recently did a comparison of the SLCD and AMOLED desires and the AMOLED one came out with the better battery life. If I had both in my hands I would just pick the one which has the most honest colours.

The colours aren't really of much concern. There seems to be a slight pinkish tint on the AMOLED but it really isn't that bad. Nor do I care about seeing it in sunlight (I live in the UK). The only thing that slightly bothers me is the fuzzy text, but since I don't have them both side by side I can't do a proper comparison. What do others think of the layout of the pixels on the AMOLED display as compared with the SLCD?
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

Having held them both side by side today I would still pick the amoled, the low black levels make for am immense movie watching and e- reading experience ( white text on a black background is really restful foot the eyes to read) the only time text trading is a problem is the SMALLEST red text on a black screen, so hardly ever!

revthanki said:
Having held them both side by side today I would still pick the amoled, the low black levels make for am immense movie watching and e- reading experience ( white text on a black background is really restful foot the eyes to read) the only time text trading is a problem is the SMALLEST red text on a black screen, so hardly ever!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm... I guess I'll just go to a Three store tomorrow and compare for myself. I'm very picky about this sort of thing and I don't want to have a phone I'm not happy with for the next 1 1/2 years or so. In a way I could be considered lucky being able to pick, but I find it's usually more of a misfortune in my case.
Anyway, thanks for the help.