Related
Browsing trough the WP7 ROM dump, I came across this folder:
Code:
Phone_DPI_262
This seems to be a new resolution, because Windows mobile always supported DPI 192, 120 and 96.
Maybe this means a higher resolution for the coming Windows Phones.
Just a thought. Let me know what you think about it.
[ElCondor] said:
Browsing trough the WP7 ROM dump, I came across this folder:
Code:
Phone_DPI_262
This seems to be a new resolution, because Windows mobile always supported DPI 192, 120 and 96.
Maybe this means a higher resolution for the coming Windows Phones.
Just a thought. Let me know what you think about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe 800x800 or something. Sounds like an ugly squared tablet.
TheDeadCpu said:
Maybe 800x800 or something. Sounds like an ugly squared tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know it's 800X800? I was more thinking about 1280X800.
Probably, but come to think of it.. Theres something called XGA and thats 1024×768.
To keep the widescreen ratio with 800x480 they would need something like 1200x720. Of course they are going to have other aspect ratios so I don't know.
This is a nice graphic that shows all resolutions...
I think WXGA would be the one that comes very close as it is 5:3 resolution just like WVGA.
262 DPI was actually mentioned by MS at MIX when they were talking about WVGA. I personally completely fail to understand what it means - it's supposed to be dots per inch, right? So without the size of the screen DPI is what exactly?
Well the screens won't get much bigger than the HD2 I think, expect if they're going to make tablets.
The problem is, the bigger the screen the lower DPI you should get at the same resolution. However, all VGA and WVGA devices previously had 192DPI in WM, regardless of screen size. So I guess it's a different thing here. What exactly it is I don't know.
vangrieg said:
The problem is, the bigger the screen the lower DPI you should get at the same resolution. However, all VGA and WVGA devices previously had 192DPI in WM, regardless of screen size. So I guess it's a different thing here. What exactly it is I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true. I guess it doesn't tell us much, but at least it's bigger so either the screen size, or the screen resolution will probably be bigger.
WinMo 6.x supported 4 Logical DPIs (note that logical DPI is different from physical DPI, which is the bit that varies with each LCD panel/resolution)
96, 128, 131, 192
Note that a 5 inch panel might be operating at the same logical DPI as a 4 inch panel (lets say 192), but the physical DPI would be less on the 5 inch panel (larger physical pixel size)
If you were to change the logical DPI on a 4 inch screen from 192 to 262, while leaving the physical DPI the same (screen size/resolution does not change) - all on-screen elements would appear larger - more pixels would be used to draw each icon, scrollbar, etc.
Windows Phone 7 is showing 4 logical DPI's right now too:
96, 131, 192, 262
Just that we've lost 128 and picked up 262
Okay. But does that mean higher resolutions? Do you know if there will be higher resolutions?
The design of WinPhone 7 pretty much allows an arbitrary resolution, it's designed to be fully scalable. 1920x1280 @ 262 DPI @ 4 inches would make one ridiculous high res screen
As for what's in store, I wouldn't be surprised to see a large-format screen device like a tablet in the months following WP7's release.. but I don't have any specific knowledge of one yet.
Da_G said:
The design of WinPhone 7 pretty much allows an arbitrary resolution, it's designed to be fully scalable. 1920x1280 @ 262 DPI @ 4 inches would make one ridiculous high res screen
As for what's in store, I wouldn't be surprised to see a large-format screen device like a tablet in the months following WP7's release.. but I don't have any specific knowledge of one yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, yeah that would be indeed an amazing screen resolution for such a small screen!
A tablet would be very cool, I wonder if that's what HTC is working on.
Da_G said:
As for what's in store, I wouldn't be surprised to see a large-format screen device like a tablet in the months following WP7's release.. but I don't have any specific knowledge of one yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But you do have general knowledge of one
RustyGrom said:
But you do have general knowledge of one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hehe nice one there. I'd like to know that too.
Maybe they need it for fully working HDTV support, although we're yet to see WP7 device that supports HDMI interface...
Possibly.
Zune supports it, so it would be odd if they wouldn't add HDMI support for WP7.
dont forget guys...higher resolution doesnt necessarily mean a larger screen.
you can still have a 1280 X 1024 etc etc higher res screen while still making it into a 3.7-4.3 inch screen.
hell you could even have a higher res screen into a 2.8 inch slot.
the difference with display screen isnt always about the resolution however its about the Pixel Size, the larger each pixel is the large the screen is, the smaller the pixels the smaller the screen.
just to give you guys a head up, at work i was wokring with an OLED Microdisplay screen that had the resolution of 1280 X 1024, YES better resolution than most HD TVS, however the display screen was less than an inch small, the reason is was because of how small the pixels were. its pretty cool.
hasseye said:
dont forget guys...higher resolution doesnt necessarily mean a larger screen.
you can still have a 1280 X 1024 etc etc higher res screen while still making it into a 3.7-4.3 inch screen.
hell you could even have a higher res screen into a 2.8 inch slot.
the difference with display screen isnt always about the resolution however its about the Pixel Size, the larger each pixel is the large the screen is, the smaller the pixels the smaller the screen.
just to give you guys a head up, at work i was wokring with an OLED Microdisplay screen that had the resolution of 1280 X 1024, YES better resolution than most HD TVS, however the display screen was less than an inch small, the reason is was because of how small the pixels were. its pretty cool.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really, oh that's nice. Such screens would be really amazing on mobile devices.
Then isn't that blocking manufacturers from competing with iPhone 4's 960x640 'Retina Display' straight from the get go?
I know they will no doubt be able to make some cracking looking screens at that resolution but it is a bit disheartening to know that it can never meet the resolution of the iPhone, and I imagine by the end of the year there will be several competing Android devices that have matched that resolution too.
Do you think Microsoft will stick to this requirement?
Seems like Microsoft wants to make sure all devices run perfect at launch in hopes of rave reviews for WP7 so all the limitations. I suspect them to open it up very quickly after launch so it doesn't get left behind.
I'd rather them hang on for a bit to be honest. The only reason the iPhone's new screen is that resolution is simply because its double the last one. So they can easily resize content for the screen. It's only 10-15% higher pixel density than phones we've already got, so not that big of an improvement, unless you're comparing it to the other iPhones of course.
Might as well wait a year or so and go for 1280x720. Better to standardise the platform on a resolution like that every couple of years than to have lots of inbetween resolutions competing and wasting developer resources.
Considering the screen sizes we are talking about, does anything north of 480×800 really make that much of a difference to the naked eye?
lordcanti86 said:
Considering the screen sizes we are talking about, does anything north of 480×800 really make that much of a difference to the naked eye?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No.
The term 'retina display' is bull, in reality you would have to hold the iPhone 18 inches from your face to reach the limits of your eyes.
Which brings me to the main point: If you have a bigger display, you can hold it farther from your eyes and have the same effect.
940 or 800 pixels? It hardly matters. What matters more is the actual size of the screen and any WP7 device with a 3.7" or 4" screen at WVGA is to be preferred to the iPhone's too small 3.4" screen.
I believe the 480x800 was a minimum spec, and that the other would be an exception to the rule for some other devices.
480x800 is fine, they need to get rid of this HVGA crap though.
vangrieg said:
480x800 is fine, they need to get rid of this HVGA crap though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HVGA is good if you need a compact device, not everyone wants a large device, some want's it slim and compact.
I belive that it will not make a big difference to have it as 800x480 or 960x640 (it would matter if the screen was big, but in the iphone case it wouldn't).
The usage of this resolution is pure technical and i really respect this move. now the only thing they need to do to maintain the apps compatability of the old iPhone is to render the apps 2 times larger on both axis (x,y) so if you have an image that is 20 pixels height and 50 pixels width (20x50)it would be (40x100), notice this will not affect the aspect ratio nor will result in a distortion or pixelating the image (the same screen size but having more pixels).
Now if you come to the real world, i will not matter for the naked eye, i would love to see this screen compared to the WVGA i have on my HD2. i doubt that there will be a noticable difference.
Pure physics say that the Naked Human Eye at a distance of 30cm can see objects that are 0.1mm, any object smaller (or objects that have a distance of 0.1mm or less will appear as 1 object, so this returns us to the "a mere 78 micrometers" (0.078mm) means that you can notice that the pixel itself is a an object that cannot be seen by the naked eye easily, that's why each pixel for us will be represented as almost 1.5 pixels). now i'm not saying that it is the same, not at all. it makes difference from the old screen they were using, but the same result we would get if they made a bit lower resolution screens (0.1mm).
Anyhow, for that particular screen size, the resolution usage is more a technical point of view than a real function point of you. you will enjoy the new screen resolution but you will not see all the pixels
I have to agree with everyone above me. While yes, things will look crispier on that iPhone screen, you have to remember also that they're not taking advantage of that screen estate... As someone above me stated, the icons won't be smaller for you to fit more info on the screens, the icons will have the same size, but will look sharper.
Is it worth it? Don't know... 960x640 is a lot. But can you see the difference to our 800x480? Sorry, but if you do, you should be in a secret american bunker.
And don't forget! iPhone's screen is 4:3 as ours are 16:9 (roughly). Should you put the iPhone's screen in 16:9 form, it would be 960x540... So the improvement isn't that great... (And i'm not mentionning that most sites are still being written to fit a 800x600 pc screen, so having a 800x480 hold in landscape will render the site 100% accurately... in theory that is xD)
Sure it looks like the iPhone will have a great resolution but at 3.5" screen size it doesn't make it and where near what I'd be looking for. I want a bigger screen and I've found the pixel density of 800x480 is good enough to make everything look crisp. Maybe MS will add 1600x960 and 960x640 to there list of supported resolutions seems how that just doubling what they currently have as standards. Ok maybe 1600x960 is a bit much but hey it can happen.
NoWorthWhile said:
I have to agree with everyone above me. While yes, things will look crispier on that iPhone screen, you have to remember also that they're not taking advantage of that screen estate... As someone above me stated, the icons won't be smaller for you to fit more info on the screens, the icons will have the same size, but will look sharper.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point. If you have a very high res (960*640) screen but are limited to the same screen proportions as a very low res screen (480*320) you've lost a lot of the advantage.
Is it worth it? Don't know... 960x640 is a lot. But can you see the difference to our 800x480? Sorry, but if you do, you should be in a secret american bunker.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Partly agreed. If they get cleartype to work properly (both portrait and landscape, and on OLED screens) then 800*480 is good for images and text.
I'm all for high res, but 800*480 is good, plus OLED is the way forward and hasn't reached full 800*480 resolution yet.
I think the foundational technologies (surrounding silverlight) enable resolution-independence very easily and may even enforce it, so moving to any widescreen resolution should be easy in future, with only the potential problem of bitmap pixellation.
I think we're reaching a point where the resolution in no longer important.
We all remember a couple of years ago when we "drool" about having vga resolution phone.
Now that the 800x480 are the standard and the 960x640 are becoming a standard also, all resolutions beyond this point becomes meaningless as we, humans, cannot see the difference in a standard size phone terminal.
Won't more pixels on the screen though lead to better touch perfomance?
ROCOAFZ said:
Won't more pixels on the screen though lead to better touch perfomance?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does performance have to do with pixel resolution??
The digitalizer (that plastic layer above the LCD) takes care of the touch input, not the LCD itself.
rogeriopcf said:
What does performance have to do with pixel resolution??
The digitalizer (that plastic layer above the LCD) takes care of the touch input, not the LCD itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, more pixels on the screen = more pixels to render = slower performance. For example, a lot of the XNA games made will probably be 320x480 and automatically scaled up for performance reasons.
As far as I remember, Da_G said they are working hard on completing DPI_262, which opens new resolutions, like 1280x720 and so on .
I think that even Hummingbird from Samsung, which is way faster (in GPU even more) than Qualcomm Snapdragon, will perform quite well with those resolutions. And when they come, we will have even better CPUs and GPUs.
lordcanti86 said:
Considering the screen sizes we are talking about, does anything north of 480×800 really make that much of a difference to the naked eye?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It depends on the size of the screen and the viewing distance, but in general, yes. There's a reason why printers don't print at 300 dots per inch any more - it's because the eye can easily detect a difference between 300 pixels per inch and 600. In fact, even going from 600dpi to 1200 makes a visible difference sometimes.
Or, to look at it another way, is there a visible difference when you switch ClearType on and off? ClearType multiplies the resolution by three on one axis. If you can see a difference then the original resolution is comfortably below the finest your eye can resolve.
I'd focus more on screen clairity, color depth/contrast/brightness, ect. before trying to cram more pixels into a sub 5" screen. How about a nice OLED? ...I'd rather have this as compared to more dpi.
Is possible to change the screen resolution from 480 x 800 to something smaller or the pixel density from 252 to something smaller to increase the performance in games? Because there are some devices with smaller screen resolution with adreno 200 that perform better in games.
So today I ran relative benchmark and I found it can maintain 50-60fps with all the options off at 1280x800, at 1920x1080 aka 1080P FullHD it drops to 30-35fps this leads me to the optimal resolution for our Nexus 7 2013 is 1280x800 just above 720P, at 900P it drops to 45-50fps.
Is their anyway to force 1280x800 on all games via xposed framework or alike?
i've used dpi and resolution changers on other devices but they always shrink the picture instead of stretching it accross the whole screen, leaving black borders how do I stretch the picture to fill the whole after dropping the resolution? do you raise the dpi?
I support this! So many devices are bottlenecked by sheer number of pixels. Imagine the performance boost of a galaxy note 3 (1080p device) if it had 1 million or so less pixels to move around. The n7.2 would become a powerhouse.
Sent from my SGH-I317 using xda app-developers app
Recently got this tab for the high resolution screen but have been disappointed by the Facebook app the pictures are pixelated and videos any way to load them higher resolution ???
bilalrashid said:
Recently got this tab for the high resolution screen but have been disappointed by the Facebook app the pictures are pixelated and videos any way to load them higher resolution ???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Facebook app is actually designed for phones. They haven't created a tablet style version of the app yet, so you're better of viewing things in portrait mode on Facebook or try and use the website rather than the app.
Pictures are automatically compressed and loose quality when they've been uploaded to Facebook so that maybe a factor although it pretty much comes down to what the other user (who you're viewing the media from) is using to take pictures or video's and how they're uploading them. It looks perfectly fine on my Tab S.
Just because your screen is a resolution of 2560 x 1600 this doesn't mean that when a person takes a 1920 x 1080 video it will look any better than on a 2560 x 1600 screen. It should actually look a bit worse as it's 2x the pixels of 1920 x 1080 and thus your tablet is having to use 4 pixels for every one pixel that would be used on 1920 x 1080 native screen. This makes images look slightly more blocky when they're not the native resolution of the screen, though this problem is harder to see on a tablet screen due to the size of them. It's hard to describe but I've done my best.
The main area's of advantage you'll get out of a high pixel screen and the AMOLED is from better colour reproductions, clearer UI and better looking webpages/books when reading.
Hope this helps If it does give me a thanks!
And here I thought I was the only one with Facebook video problems. I am glad to know it was not my tablet acting up.