Am I the only one who thinks that whoever decided to revert to 16:10 for Samsung's tablets should hang by his/her/xer tongue?!!! Who was the idiot? Did the S2 and S3 not sell well enough? So let's break it down: 16:10 is useless in portrait mode. The only thing this might (might(!)) be good for would be media consumption, specifically movie watching. Why provide the S-pen then? Is this solely a media consumption device? Or is this a productivity tablet? Pen says it's a productivity tablet. 16:10 format says media only. Clearly Samsung doesn't know what it wants, so it decided to screw up both--I mean, who in his right mind would pay upward of $650 to just watch movies (and little else)?
Why, Samsung, why?
Wanna watch movies on Android? There are plenty tablets out there for much less than half of this. No need for fancy pen-compatible screens to watch movies. And why would one need top-notch Dolby quad speakers to watch movies on the train (or on the toilet)?! You want to watch movies in style? Get a man cave, with 150" OLED screens with subwoofers, tweeters, and all that jazz! What loser buys tablets to do professional movie watching? Non-professional movie watching can be done very well on a 4:3 tablet: you don't need a 16:10 screen to watch movies on a plane, or YouTube cat videos!
Well, I'm in the other camp, and basically ask "Why oh Why in The Wide Wide World of Sports" does someone want a 4:3 tablet? If you want something the same aspect ratio as your computer monitor... Then Use Your Computer Monitor!!!
To me, the first and foremost reason for a tablet is ... Portability.
To accomplish that we want lightweight, thin, and NOT cumbersome. They need to be easily handled as they are constantly picked up, put down, held in one hand, etc etc.
The 16:10 aspect ratio is easier for that. It's easier to set on the edge of a table, it's easier to (as you say) be a media consumption device. I don't think they are meant to be your 'do everything' computer, that's why we have laptops, desktops, mobile phones, etc.
They are a niche product, yes, to be used sitting on the couch, lawn chair, etc. Where you don't put them down (when using) but hold they device. The 4:3 format is just unwieldy in that regard. And besides, the interface isn't usually a browser, it's an app, which are much more 16:10.
If you want something for productivity, get a laptop, that's what they're for.
I don't think 16:10 has much to do with practicality as its lower surface area than 4:3. Lower surface area means less OLED panel, less wacom digitizer, and thus lower costs for competing with the larger 4:3 ipad pro 10.5 in the marketing department.
The fact that the Tab S4 has 16:10 format is the only reason I consider buying a new tablet from Samsung. I still use my Galaxy Tab S 10.5 and I like it but it's getting a bit old and the battery has been better. I never considered the S2 or S3 due to it's awful screen format. A tablet for me is 99% for watching videos, so what I want is a great screen (oled) and widescreen format. If I need a portable device to be productive, I'll use my laptop. But that has nothing to do with the screen format anyway, since nearly all computer screens today are 16:10 or 16:9 aswell.
I do mostly watch movies at home of course, on my oled tv and surround sound system, but when I travel I still want a nice oled screen with the right format to carry with me to get the most out of whatever I watch on the go also. I prefer not to use a crappy 4:3 or LCD-screen for that.
And what was said about losers buying tablets to watch movies could also be said about productive work I guess (what losers use a tablet to do professional work?)
Hellberg said:
And what was said about losers buying tablets to watch movies could also be said about productive work I guess (what losers use a tablet to do professional work?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree. There's no need to be insulting just because you disagree. Discussing the pro's and con's is the way to go. Thinking you're going to influence mfg's by slinging insults... well, those that do that will get it right back, or just ignored for immaturity.
I have a Galaxy Tab Pro 8" model, and love the screen. Sadly the device was buggy like all androids of that age and slowed down, due to programing and lack of memory/storage space. I enjoyed the 16:10 format it had.
Fast forward to 2015 I got a S2 8" model. While I disagreed with the screen display change to 4:3 and reducing the resolution it worked out well overall and have been happy with the device for the past 3 years. Its getting older and wanting something a little snappier a hence why I'm looking at the S4.
That said the screen size change back to the 16:10 format for the S4 is because it reduced the bezels on the top/bottom. With that they could lengthen the screen and still pack the larger battery in the device, as well they increase the screen resolution because its longer. Personally screen ratio doesn't bother me as much as how does the device function, it could have a 4:3 or 16:10 and still I'd be potentially looking at it. Really can't wait to see one in person hopefully next week.
graphic designer here. appreciate the 16:10 choice -- my main display is a 34" ultrawide, and i appreciate the extra real estate. was a big fan of the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 as well, so i'm happy Samsung ditched 4:3.
I still had my original Tab S 8.4, had some iPad and minis, and I still prefer 16:10.
Let's keep things friendly in here.
I returned my S3 the other day because of the 4:3. I didn't research but also wouldn't have ever thought there would be a 4:3 display. So I ordered the S4 and am picking it up today.
I just picked a S4 up to replace my S3. I am very happy they got away from 4:3. It is however a perssonal preferencr for every one. Most computers are 16:9 so the 16:10 is better for me.
Aqua1ung said:
Am I the only one who thinks that whoever decided to revert to 16:10 for Samsung's tablets should hang by his/her/xer tongue?!!! Who was the idiot? Did the S2 and S3 not sell well enough? So let's break it down: 16:10 is useless in portrait mode. The only thing this might (might(!)) be good for would be media consumption, specifically movie watching. Why provide the S-pen then? Is this solely a media consumption device? Or is this a productivity tablet? Pen says it's a productivity tablet. 16:10 format says media only. Clearly Samsung doesn't know what it wants, so it decided to screw up both--I mean, who in his right mind would pay upward of $650 to just watch movies (and little else)?
Why, Samsung, why?
Wanna watch movies on Android? There are plenty tablets out there for much less than half of this. No need for fancy pen-compatible screens to watch movies. And why would one need top-notch Dolby quad speakers to watch movies on the train (or on the toilet)?! You want to watch movies in style? Get a man cave, with 150" OLED screens with subwoofers, tweeters, and all that jazz! What loser buys tablets to do professional movie watching? Non-professional movie watching can be done very well on a 4:3 tablet: you don't need a 16:10 screen to watch movies on a plane, or YouTube cat videos!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look at EVERY book you see at the store, comics too, they're closer to 16:9/16:10 aspect ratio than 4:3 or 3:2. Same with TV and Movies. Most websites are catered for Smartphones which opt for the elongated aspect ratio over the squat 4:3 one.
4:3 is good for PDFs and digitized textbooks/informational books like DIY books, great for retro games/emulation
3:2 is great for note taking and a bit better at displaying PDFs since it's closer to 8.5x11 inch paper that the US uses and A4 that other places use.
16:9/16:10 great for comics, novels, movies, games and websites.
Either way, the beauty of OLED is that it's amazing at displaying the aspect ratio you want and hiding the cut off bit since it doesn't require backlighting so you don't get those annoying grey (trying to be black) bars on things. Also none of that weird LCD dim screen shimmer issue.
Though, my Note Pro 12.2 (yes that old tablet) is approximately the same size as the margins of loose leaf ruled paper. Which made note taking on it a dream. I still use it for that reason alone. Also because that version of S Note is one of the best versions ever. I'm not a fan of Samsung Note. And I like that size for drawing too. Though their 4 sub-pixel screen really messes with color accuracy and causes pastel colors to look terrible due to that added white sub-pixel.
Got to say the 16:10 ratio on the screen while some complain about it, really works incredibly well for DeX mode.
Actually I don't think I've had my tablet out of DeX mode since I turned it on! I just like the function of it considerably more considering the screen size at least for me its worked out very well.
For me, 16:10 is a mistake. Love the 4:3 on my Tab S2 8" and can't imagine you could every hold a 10" 16:10 for anything more than a few minutes especially in portrait mode.
Each to there own I guess.
Masteryates said:
For me, 16:10 is a mistake. Love the 4:3 on my Tab S2 8" and can't imagine you could every hold a 10" 16:10 for anything more than a few minutes especially in portrait mode.
Each to there own I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's funny, in that portrait mode is the easiest way to hold a 16:10 tablet. Yes, the bezel does need to be wide enough to put your fingers underneath and a thumb on top, but most tablet makers realize this and make the bezels wide enough.
This is of course with one hand. With 2 hands any of the tablet sizes can be held comfortably. But with one hand, it's more awkward with 4:3 than 16:10 (in portrait mode).
Yes, ea to their own, no doubt there. But holding something, a rectangular shape is easier and takes less leverage, than something that is virtually square. That's not really opinion, that's a bio mechanical fact.
AsItLies said:
But holding something, a rectangular shape is easier and takes less leverage, than something that is virtually square. That's not really opinion, that's a bio mechanical fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to disagree with you here AsItLies;77335736. With both 16:10 and 4:3, our tablets are too big to get our hands totally around the device, and therefore we end up having to hold them essentially in the bottom corner, if we chose to hold one handed.
With a 4:3, the centre of gravity is closer to the holding hand than it is on a 16:10. That means the a 16:10 tablet puts more stress on the holding hand, even if the weights of the tablets are identical, as the lever arm is more. The structural engineer sat beside me confirms this.
If you go back to the days of 7" tablets, you would be correct as the your hand could get right around a 7" 16:9 tablet, (like the Nexus 7 2013,) but maybe not a similar 4:3 tablet.
Samsung gets a lot of criticism for the small battery on the Tab S2 8", but for me, its the best of both worlds as its unbelievably light and website don't feel cramped or cut off.
Like I said, each to there own.
Masteryates said:
I have to disagree with you here AsItLies;77335736. With both 16:10 and 4:3, our tablets are too big to get our hands totally around the device, and therefore we end up having to hold them essentially in the bottom corner, if we chose to hold one handed.
With a 4:3, the centre of gravity is closer to the holding hand than it is on a 16:10. That means the a 16:10 tablet puts more stress on the holding hand, even if the weights of the tablets are identical, as the lever arm is more. The structural engineer sat beside me confirms this.
If you go back to the days of 7" tablets, you would be correct as the your hand could get right around a 7" 16:9 tablet, (like the Nexus 7 2013,) but maybe not a similar 4:3 tablet.
Samsung gets a lot of criticism for the small battery on the Tab S2 8", but for me, its the best of both worlds as its unbelievably light and website don't feel cramped or cut off.
Like I said, each to there own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See, here's the thing (and I'm glad you describe it clearly), when ** I ** hold a tablet, it's with one hand, in portrait mode, and you are correct, they are (now) too wide to get your hand completely around it like a phone.
So? and that's what I said earlier; The Device Has To Have A Bezel Wide Enough For Your Thumb!
By placing your thumb on the top part of the bezel and fingers underneath (of course not all the way to the other side, too wide), then, as I said, the center of gravity (thus the weight and difficulty to hold the device) is easier, it's less fatigue, it has to be as it's less cumbersome. and unwieldy.
So no, it's not really 'ea to their own', it's simple bio mechanics. If you don't mind it being heavier to hold that way, and you like 4:3, go for it. But the fact remains, one handed, on the long side, is easier with 16:10 (again! as long as the mfg has enough sense to include a wide enough bezel - I returned a huawei mediapad m5 for just that oversight by the mfg... no bezel at all, big mistake on a tablet - although perfect for a phone - narrower, one hand goes all the way around).
AsItLies said:
See, here's the thing (and I'm glad you describe it clearly), when ** I ** hold a tablet, it's with one hand, in portrait mode, and you are correct, they are (now) too wide to get your hand completely around it like a phone.
So? and that's what I said earlier; The Device Has To Have A Bezel Wide Enough For Your Thumb!
By placing your thumb on the top part of the bezel and fingers underneath (of course not all the way to the other side, too wide), then, as I said, the center of gravity (thus the weight and difficulty to hold the device) is easier, it's less fatigue, it has to be as it's less cumbersome. and unwieldy.
So no, it's not really 'ea to their own', it's simple bio mechanics. If you don't mind it being heavier to hold that way, and you like 4:3, go for it. But the fact remains, one handed, on the long side, is easier with 16:10 (again! as long as the mfg has enough sense to include a wide enough bezel - I returned a huawei mediapad m5 for just that oversight by the mfg... no bezel at all, big mistake on a tablet - although perfect for a phone - narrower, one hand goes all the way around).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok I'm getting you now. If you are holding in Portrait, the 4:3 has its centroid nearest your hand. What you describe though by saying holding it along its long side, is landscape, which means the centroid is nearest your hand on the 16:10 tablet.
So it's each to there own with respect to tablet ratio and if they use it in Landscape or Portrait. Agreed that bezel size is vital though. :highfive:
Masteryates said:
Ok I'm getting you now. If you are holding in Portrait, the 4:3 has its centroid nearest your hand. What you describe though by saying holding it along its long side, is landscape, which means the centroid is nearest your hand on the 16:10 tablet.
So it's each to there own with respect to tablet ratio and if they use it in Landscape or Portrait. Agreed that bezel size is vital though. :highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's kind of funny Really, and I guess many would say tedious also, but hey, to make things clear sometimes this is what u need to do!
To make the point again, I'm not holding it with one hand on the long side with it in landscape mode, that would mean having your hand ** underneath ** the device.
I'm referring to holding it in portrait mode ** with your one hand on the side ** ... not on the bottom underneath. So it's portrait, not landscape
And when I pick it up and carry it, hand stays in much the same place, just screen off and pinch both sides, easily done with one hand. But that's really not the case with 4:3, as it's like a ** box **. There's really no side to carry it with 1 hand, or hold with 1.
Yes, it's individual, no doubt. But factually speaking, the 16:9 is easier to use and carry around. As with everything, one has to decide what's important to them.
Cheers, glad we clarified it with only having to write 1 chapter of a book, it could have been worse!
I just got my Verizon S4 and I'm loving everything about it. It is so much easier to type in, handle, carry than my S3. I love this aspect ratio. It way better for reading and running apps on portrait and watching videos on landscape. The thin bezels and lack of physical buttons is great. Also performance is top notch.
The only reason I haven't upgraded from Tab S 8.4 to Tab 2 or 3 was aspect ratio. I'm glad they switched back to wide-screen. Can't wait for mine to arrive.
Related
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.
So I've done some basic research on phone components out there that could truly create an AMAZING WP7 phone, while still staying within realistic terms, and here's what I've come up with (I'm giving explanations for each aspect in parentheses):
The ultimate WP7 would be a 4.7in (Can still fit in your pocket comfortably, while giving you a perfect view of the 1080P definition of your screen) HTC Touch Pro 3 (because its predecessor truly is the best combination of practicality and entertainment) with a dual-core 1.5ghz snapdragon processor (It has a release date set for Q4 2010, but will probably be moved to Q1 2011), 1024mb RAM (It's very rare to find a phone with this spec, but it is by no means unrealistic), a fourth chassis spec for a physical gamepad along with the physical keyboard with tilt (the actual keyboard would slide down, and the game pad would appear on the left and right of the screen by separation of the landscape physical keyboard while it's not in a slide down position, with an analog stick on the left, and four action keys on the right (Definitely the most unrealistic part of this phone description )), a 12 megapixel camera (nothing new in a phone) with HD video, 64 GB of Micro SD enabled (...), and at least 6 hours of talk time along with 48 hours standby (with the dual-core of the snapdragon processor users can expect a significant reduction in battery consumption since the cores are independent of each other) all on the Windows Phone 7 UI.
It’s a mouthful, but it’s almost enough to bring tears to my eyes… lol not really, but just make the phone HTC, and significantly loosen your hardware requirements Microsoft
Do you guys have a different definition of what makes the ultimate WP7 phone?
4.7in!
Thats insain, the HD2 is considered large enough (if not slight too big) 4 would surfice
dual 1.5Ghz snap dragon? really, since smartphones are working away from multitasking due to instability issues its unlikely to make much of a difference, but will happily take the core reduction and lower power consumption! 1080p is an insainly high res as well, im sure it will look good as an advertising milestone but with such high DPI i think you'll find it hard to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p infact i believe you would need to have your device 6inchs from your eyes to see 1080p at standard DPI, to detect the differences when you take in to account the significantly higher DPI you would need to have the phone on the end of your nose, viewing angles would require the device to be nearer 10inchs. not that id turn it down but its not a big deal
what i want is a 45nm 1.5ghz snapdragon, ~4in display using 65k or 16m bit depth, no more than 8mp camera, (12 on such as small lens would be **** or at best no improvment) a propper graphics core with its drivers!
Ill stick with the gig of RAM but suggest an internal 64GB storage and a SD expansion, multiband support so i can make it work everywhere! 4G would be handy if networks ever upgrade, everything else can be the same as the HD2 because that is the king just now! oh, you can keep your keyboard but what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
as for the OS, well to be honest unless the Gods on here unlock WP7 ill keep my 6.5.5
blaiz123 said:
The ultimate WP7 would be a 4.7in (Can still fit in your pocket comfortably, while giving you a perfect view of the 1080P definition of your screen)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've held the Droid X in my hand and the biggest downside to that phone, I see, is the size. Its huge!
Also, 4.7 inches just to view 1080p? With many 32" TVs out there you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p. With that in mind, 720p HD resolution won't make more difference than an SD video so you can be sure that 1080p won't be anything more than a selling point.
theomni said:
I've held the Droid X in my hand and the biggest downside to that phone, I see, is the size. Its huge!
Also, 4.7 inches just to view 1080p? With many 32" TVs out there you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p. With that in mind, 720p HD resolution won't make more difference than an SD video so you can be sure that 1080p won't be anything more than a selling point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the important part would be how well it records... Also, if I don't have to do any converting so it plays on a given device then all the better - even if it's not really usable on the phone. I may hook the phone up to a friends TV while visiting. So, there is potential for use, even beyond a selling point.
dazza9075 said:
4.7in!
Thats insain, the HD2 is considered large enough (if not slight too big) 4 would surfice
dual 1.5Ghz snap dragon? really, since smartphones are working away from multitasking due to instability issues its unlikely to make much of a difference, but will happily take the core reduction and lower power consumption! 1080p is an insainly high res as well, im sure it will look good as an advertising milestone but with such high DPI i think you'll find it hard to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p infact i believe you would need to have your device 6inchs from your eyes to see 1080p at standard DPI, to detect the differences when you take in to account the significantly higher DPI you would need to have the phone on the end of your nose, viewing angles would require the device to be nearer 10inchs. not that id turn it down but its not a big deal
what i want is a 45nm 1.5ghz snapdragon, ~4in display using 65k or 16m bit depth, no more than 8mp camera, (12 on such as small lens would be **** or at best no improvment) a propper graphics core with its drivers!
Ill stick with the gig of RAM but suggest an internal 64GB storage and a SD expansion, multiband support so i can make it work everywhere! 4G would be handy if networks ever upgrade, everything else can be the same as the HD2 because that is the king just now! oh, you can keep your keyboard but what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
as for the OS, well to be honest unless the Gods on here unlock WP7 ill keep my 6.5.5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS isn't allowing 3rd-party multi-tasking at this time, but will do it with stock parts of the OS - so even if there isn't support for other programs you'll still use it (but I'm willing to bet that there will be support at some time).
The ARM spec that the chip is based on includes the 4G component. You'll probably need a provider patch / software update, but it's in the 1.5 GHz dual core snapdragon.
The GPU is also in there, and although not as good as others I've read about, still is nothing to scoff at
For me though, the bigger the better when it comes to the screen. I'm looking for an all-in-one device that goes everywhere. If I need a better camera, I'll grab mine. A better video camera, I'll grab mine. A better portable computer, I'll grab mine. But my next phone will certainly be my GPS, Music Player, and of course, phone.
I also like the slide out keyboard, if for no other reason than no wasted screen real estate.
dazza9075 said:
what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be a pretty sweet deal, but I think we're looking at at least 2020 for projection keyboards
blaiz123 said:
That would be a pretty sweet deal, but I think we're looking at at least 2020 for projection keyboards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, there are projection keyboards out now and they've been around since the beginning of this decade. All though I'm not sure how good this technology is now.
theomni said:
Actually, there are projection keyboards out now and they've been around since the beginning of this decade. All though I'm not sure how good this technology is now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you serious? So you mean I can actually sit down with my computer and if I have the proper platform I could type on a projected keyboard that would disappear when I turned off the platform? Because that would be pretty amazing.
Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...
I'd like to have a 4" device with a landscape 5 row querty keyboard, a touch pro 3 but bigger then the current touch pro2 and thinner. As far as the internal go, I'd love to have high end but I'll settle with the base seeing how everythings going to be performanced based on that.
mapaz04 said:
Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that is very intresting...hmm i wonder how it feels not to have any key feedback, need to look in to that, i can see a bluetooth projector for computers and PDAs being hugely useful...asuming it works that is!
mapaz04 said:
Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, but I wouldn't want to buy into this technology until it evolves so that the user can also feel the touch of the keys of the projected keyboard. And I'm not talking about a simple vibration, I would actually want to feel as if I'm typing on a real keyboard. That type of technology will definitely not be available until at least 2018
Check out
the specs for the new HTC HD3, sounds perfect to me! Can't wait to get my hands on one...
registeredxdadevi said:
the specs for the new HTC HD3, sounds perfect to me! Can't wait to get my hands on one...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
anyone wanna pop the bubble?
Here
is the link
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/351797/leaked_htc_hd3_smartphone_revealed/
Not sure how true it is, but sounds good to me...
registeredxdadevi said:
is the link
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/351797/leaked_htc_hd3_smartphone_revealed/
Not sure how true it is, but sounds good to me...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awwwwhhh, I thought it said DUAL-CORE 1.5 ghz processor, that almost made me want to buy the phone, even though it lacks a physical keyboard with tilt (Which is a MAJOR dealbreaker for me)
Besides what is up with all of these HTC HD promotions, how come there are no Touch Pro 3 announcements. HTC is being very narrowminded not promoting a phone that could actually distinguish itself from the iphone in terms of hardware (and I'm talking about more than just a bigger screen...)
I just
love the big screen, with the screen even bigger it's got my wallet! Just not sure about this new windows 7...hopefully we get to test it somehow before purchasing.
Kloc said:
I'd like to have a 4" device with a landscape 5 row querty keyboard, a touch pro 3 but bigger then the current touch pro2 and thinner. As far as the internal go, I'd love to have high end but I'll settle with the base seeing how everythings going to be performanced based on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2nd that
specs etc...don't care...wp7 should run smoothly on any device running wp7...
i'm being cpt. obvious
I'm a writer. I write about cell phones. I've used all of the WP7 phones. The best one is the Samsung Focus. That's my opinion. It has by far the best display. the right size screen and the best form factor. It's well made despite the rap that it's plastic. The plastic on this phone and the build quality are excellent. The HD7 is heavy. The start button is awkward and the display is pitiful. The HTC Surround is bulky, housing a speaker that virtually nobody uses. The LG Optimus is a nice phone, but it's heavy and small. The screen is narrow. The HTC Mozart is very nice. It's smaller and the display is nowhere near the Focus. It has a better camera than the others. This is my take. I've had several takes on all of them. The Focus wins.
ennx said:
I'm a writer. I write about cell phones. I've used all of the WP7 phones. The best one is the Samsung Focus. That's my opinion. It has by far the best display. the right size screen and the best form factor. It's well made despite the rap that it's plastic. The plastic on this phone and the build quality are excellent. The HD7 is heavy. The start button is awkward and the display is pitiful. The HTC Surround is bulky, housing a speaker that virtually nobody uses. The LG Optimus is a nice phone, but it's heavy and small. The screen is narrow. The HTC Mozart is very nice. It's smaller and the display is nowhere near the Focus. It has a better camera than the others. This is my take. I've had several takes on all of them. The Focus wins.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really, I don't find the HD7 heavy at all. Matter of fact, I would say a couple of inches more than the HD7 would make the perfect phone!
makoute said:
Really, I don't find the HD7 heavy at all. Matter of fact, I would say a couple of inches more than the HD7 would make the perfect phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I find the heft to be reassuring, not overly heavy. But I've also had the tp2 and hd2.
hello people,
okay im thinking of buying a WP7 device but but i can't decide between Omnia 7 or LG optimus 7,
i can get either one of them in 16gb, as i can just get the omnia 7 16gb from germany change the language to english and the optimus comes in 16gb only anyway so storage isn't problem
the only difference is that the omnia is bigger and has better screen according to people, but i dont really care about having/not having an SAMOLED while the lg looks slimmer and easier to hold, and alot of people have said the back and search button on the omnia is too sensitive so im guessing that would be bad when reading or playing games
so question 1; can you stick the omina in a skinny jeans while sticking an earphone in the head phone jack or is it too big?
2: would having a 3.8inch screen on the lg affect gaming and reading books on the phone as it seems almost all smartphones are required to have a 4.0inch or bigger screens
Well i have a Mozart because of its nice "pocket-size".
But i have to admit that the Omnias screen is really nice and has a lot of advantages while browsing/reading etc, but i prefer a phone which easily fits into my pocket because i am not reading or surfing all the time.
Seriously, most of the time your phone will be in your pocket, so you have to test out, which phone you prefer
I'm posting this from an LG quantum. I believe it has the smallest screen of all wp7's. I've checked out the focus, and to be honest I don't at all think my experience is any worse. Everything comes thru clear and looking very high res. And even that would be a plus of a smaller screen, higher pixel density.
These phones are very high end, I don't think screen size will make that much of a difference.
Oh and skinny jeans? Really? 2007 called, it wants its feminine douchebag fashion back.
Omnia7 has a better form factor and of course the amazing amoled, and IMHO it does matter. What I don't like with the optimus 7 is its home key button, it looks quite cheap and I believe it doesn't wake up the screen if pressed coming from sleep. As for the omnia7 back and search buttons, its true...being quite sensitive. I have a fried who has big hands and keeps on hitting it accidentally as he uses the device for browsing. For me, I already get the hang of using it without hitting it. So it takes a little getting used to but the pros outweigh the cons that's for sure especially if you say you can get the 16GB version. I only have the 8 but I'm I still have 2 GB left after all the stuff I have.
Sent from my OMNIA7 using Board Express
I would go for the LG. I've had my HD7 for about a month and I hate the capacitive buttons more than I could have ever imagined hating them. I have to always be conscious of how I hold my phone because if your finger grazes the wrong part of the phone you'll get kicked out of whatever you were doing. I type way slower than I used to type on my much smaller iPhone because I need to be extra careful when I hit the space bar; if I overshoot it by a millimeter I hit the home key. I also type slower because I can't hold the phone with my optimal grip, the capacitive buttons force you to keep your hands clear of that area.
For the life of me I can't figure out why someone would prefer capacative buttons.
I would go for the LG just because it feels better built the Samsung is all plastic and feels a little cheap.
Screen size I think is negligible in this case as .2 inches isn't really a big deal. At least I don't think so.
Sent from my HTC Liberty using XDA App
The size difference is about .5 I believe when you are comparing thinness.
I would say that the screen difference is neglectable at best.
Zaslav said:
I would go for the LG just because it feels better built the Samsung is all plastic and feels a little cheap.
Screen size I think is negligible in this case as .2 inches isn't really a big deal. At least I don't think so.
Sent from my HTC Liberty using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Omnia 7 uses metal. Probably explains why it is 20g heavier than the Focus.
sure haven't said:
I'm posting this from an LG quantum. I believe it has the smallest screen of all wp7's. I've checked out the focus, and to be honest I don't at all think my experience is any worse. Everything comes thru clear and looking very high res. And even that would be a plus of a smaller screen, higher pixel density.
These phones are very high end, I don't think screen size will make that much of a difference.
Oh and skinny jeans? Really? 2007 called, it wants its feminine douchebag fashion back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, first thing I thought of was the new Miller Light beer commercial.
geoken said:
I would go for the LG. I've had my HD7 for about a month and I hate the capacitive buttons more than I could have ever imagined hating them. I have to always be conscious of how I hold my phone because if your finger grazes the wrong part of the phone you'll get kicked out of whatever you were doing. I type way slower than I used to type on my much smaller iPhone because I need to be extra careful when I hit the space bar; if I overshoot it by a millimeter I hit the home key. I also type slower because I can't hold the phone with my optimal grip, the capacitive buttons force you to keep your hands clear of that area.
For the life of me I can't figure out why someone would prefer capacative buttons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed, capacitive buttons do suck.
geoken said:
I would go for the LG. I've had my HD7 for about a month and I hate the capacitive buttons more than I could have ever imagined hating them. I have to always be conscious of how I hold my phone because if your finger grazes the wrong part of the phone you'll get kicked out of whatever you were doing. I type way slower than I used to type on my much smaller iPhone because I need to be extra careful when I hit the space bar; if I overshoot it by a millimeter I hit the home key. I also type slower because I can't hold the phone with my optimal grip, the capacitive buttons force you to keep your hands clear of that area.
For the life of me I can't figure out why someone would prefer capacative buttons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah actually at first I wondered why LG would make the home button on the quantum a physical button, but after reading about the sensitivity, and noticing how sensitive the back and search button on mine are, I'm glad they did. And I assume it was on purpose with this knowledge?
You can use the iPhone as a comparison, assuming you've used one. It has a 3.5" screen, and I find it's big enough for most tasks.
mcorrie1121 said:
You can use the iPhone as a comparison, assuming you've used one. It has a 3.5" screen, and I find it's big enough for most tasks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Big enough, sure, but 4.3in is better.
nrfitchett4 said:
Big enough, sure, but 4.3in is better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO 4" are better than 4.3" in this case HTC really has lost their way.
That said, I wish there was a Samsung device with a 4.3" (or perhaps even 4.5") screen.
i wanted to get the Samsung Omnia 7 just for the amoled screen. But 8GB of memory is too little for me so i got the HD7. The screen wasn't as bad as i expected (coming from the HD2) its really nice and colourful.
4,3? damn before i would buy that i would go for a 7" one
$10 credit card sized phone and serious touch tablet
nrfitchett4 said:
Big enough, sure, but 4.3in is better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point wasn't that bigger was too big, but that if 3.5" isn't too small, then neither will 3.8/4" be.
Zaslav said:
I would go for the LG just because it feels better built the Samsung is all plastic and feels a little cheap.
Screen size I think is negligible in this case as .2 inches isn't really a big deal. At least I don't think so.
Sent from my HTC Liberty using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Omnia 7 has a more or less complete metal casing.
I'd get the LG Optimus 7. I compared it with the Samsung Omnia 7 in a store and I THINK THE SCREEN ON THE LG IS BETTER.
Why:
1)
Most OLED screens have a lower effective resolution than normal LCDs because they have fewer subpixels. If you compare both you will notice text on webpages etc is looking jagged on OLED displays and much smoother on normal LCDs.
Search for "pentile matrix" on google.
2)
OLED screens consume big amounts of power when the image is very bright (black text on white background like on most web pages). To reduce power the OLED is auto-reducing brightness if an image with many white areas is displayed. WTF! This would p*ss me off. At least the store units did this and changed brightness while scrolling from dark areas to bright areas on a web page.
3)
OK the black levels on OLED are better but the LG's arent that bad.
Viewing angles arent good on the LG but I dont notice this at all in daily use.
Other points:
4)
Hardware buttons instead of touch (though the buttons arent that great but they do their job).
5)
Many free LG exclusive apps available.
6)
Hacking: Integrated MFG-tool with many options like a basic registry editor without unlocking (unlock works fine btw).
I bought an Optimus 7 and its working quite well. Second on my list was the Mozart which is also very nice, but I activated the capacitive search button by mistake all the time while testing.
Optimus 7 downsides:
-Headphone out has sligtly audible background noise, even more when on an active GPRS connection
-My device creaks a bit if you press it in between your fingers with force
-Pinkish spot in center of pictures taken with camera
-Supplied headphones are a piece of **** at least compared to my Koss Porta Pro
-First unit had broken bluetooth, had to send it in for repairs, now its ok
-Ringer volume is kinda low (no secondary speaker)
Obviously, price matters, and size matters.
Which one to get?
Depends on what you use your tablet for. I like the 10 inch size for movies and Internet, but the 8.4 size is better for use if you do a lot of reading on it. I've had the 10.1 for the last 8 months and loved it. I just got the 8.4 at the $200 price and am loving it, too - I will sell which ever one wins out. Haven't decided yet
Got the 10.1 myself, very happy with the tablet! Just the lack of custom rom support is the negative atm. Looks like that goes for the whole Tab Pro range though...
Really depends on your personal preference, how you will use the device, etc.
Increased screen space will make for more pleasurable web browsing, watching video, etc. However, the larger screen comes at the obvious price of increased device size and weight. A larger device is going to harder to hold with one hand, hold will lying in bed, etc. Although not unmanageable, by any means.
If you travel a lot, or carry the tablet out of the home often; a larger device means more to lug around. A smaller one is easier to shove into your carry-on bag. Again, its all very manageable even with a larger device. But there is a difference. And if the tablet never leaves your house, many of these things won't matter that much.
What I've liked about the smaller devices, is that I can shove them in a coat pocket. Or even into a pants pocket (pants with bigger pockets, obviously) if I move from room to room in my house, and have my hands full.
I've always gravitated towards the smaller tablets. I started in the tablet world with the 7" HTC Flyer. Then went to the Note 8, and not the Tab Pro 8.4. While the size is creeping upwards, these form factors still have the "small tablet" benefits I've mentioned. On the other hand, I have to admit I've enjoyed the slight increases in screen size. So I see the case for the larger form factors as well.
Its a tough decision, I'll admit. But a the same time, I think no matter what size you get, you'll probably be happy in the long run. Enjoy the "pros" and manage the "cons" of whatever size you get.
Dankees said:
Obviously, price matters, and size matters.
Which one to get?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a 10.1" Note, my wife the 8.4 tab pro. Both are quite nice. Her hands are smaller than mine, and she can not palm the 10". 12.2" is too big for me.
I have a oneplus 3 phone. Very happy with it, it's just I want to upgrade to a bezel less phone.
I wonder, for xiaomi mix 2 video playback, will there be 100% full screen or there will be two black bars on the left and right edges?
please advise.
Whatever you want, but what do you want
Before anything else, I think you need to realize that if you get a bezeless phone, you are going to have viewing differences then phones with a bezel, as it's a wider viewing area then the ratio most phones take video in (explained in more detail below). However, that does not mean it's changing the video from the way it's currently captured on your bezeled phone to the way it would be captured on a bezeless phone. The only thing that impacts the video capture is hardware such as the camera, megapixels of the camera and recording resolution or in terms of viewing, screen resolution and dpi. Therefore, that is probably what you should make any phone buying decisions based off of and you can use a handy website like gsmarena..com to get full specs on phones from all around the world in addition to a bunch of other useful tools like size comparisons.
With that said, if all your concerned with is cosmetics, then the Mi Mix 2 still has you covered as you literally get a button that says fullscreen. Tap it on, the video stretches to fill the screen, tap it off, it retains its proper ratio in letterbox (black bars). As that feature demonstrates though it's purely for looks, which is why I would caution you from making any decisions based off of it. It's like deciding whether a phone is right for you based on a phone case, which has nothing to do with the fact that your buying a pocket computer and ignores what it's used for or in your case what size pictures/video you want. The Mi Mix 2 takes video in 4k, 3840x2160 at it's highest resolution, that is a 16:9 ratio. Phone sizes are not typically made in 16:9 ratios, they are wider, but 16:9 is the most common ratio used across the entertainment industry from video distributed in movie theaters, TV, YouTube, to video being captured on most phones.. Consequently, any bezeless phone will have a wider viewing area then the video they capture in 16:9, yielding black bars.. However, does that matter? Have you ever decided on buying a computer based on whether you have black bars when watching YouTube in fullscreen, probably not, and most likely you do have black bars at the top and bottom of videos because computers tend to use more square ratios. Therefore, regardless of any cosmetic differences, which can be achieved by stretching a video to fill the screen (a technique often used when broadcasting non standard ratios on TV and even a setting you can trigger on most TVs through the display menu), the Mi Mix 2 captures video in the most widely used and distributed ratio of 16:9. Therefore, if you watch your recorded videos on most TVs, it will fill the entire screen and since the Mi Mix 2 shoots in 4k UHD, the resolution will be pretty good too.
Hope that helps. I own a Mi Mix 2 and honestly it's a fantastic phone all around, although the explanation above is really for any bezeless phone and for anyone making decisions in a similar fashion. Essentially you should decide what you need out of a phone first then judge how things look, which will help inform why they look that way and how much weight you should afford to any cosmetic aspect. I also work in the film industry and realize most people don't know or necessarily pay attention to things like video ratios, so I'm happy to share, but as mentioned above, regardless of your knowledge, you should not take for granted the fact that phones nowadays are massively powerful pocket computers capable of incredible things and instead reduce them to "black bars".