Side Note: The reason there are so many "android fans" here is because of DED and his intentionally gutter-born articles. The headlines are great for SEO, I'll give him that, but because they're so great with SEO, they draw a lot of attention. The quality of his "journalism" and his unveiled opinions are usually reserved for the forums of some corner of the internet without a decent moderator. AI gives him top billing. You reap what you sow.
The Galaxy Note ( which you state is the best) is the one using the newer Pentile display technology of which this entire article was based on.
NOW, do you see the ridiculousness of this??
Actually, ff they wanted a real comparison they should have spent the time to set up the camera to minimize moire (which is very bad on the iPhone screenshot) and really should have increased the letter size on the iPhone to match the others since the comparison is essentially useless otherwise. (Unless the goal was to see what the letter looks like at the same pixel size, which negates the density advantage, particularly with a bad picture.)
It looks like the first display to finally be close to the iPhone 4/4S will actually surpass it with a "real" count of 495ppi, not a "false" count of sub-pixel trickery.
As Kristian Vättö mentions, what's the point of a 6.1" display? It's too large for a smartphone and too small for a tablet. It might just be a concept that gets the densest pixels in the largest possible display or it might be for some other use, like a car's console display where such 6.1" might be ideal. Either way, I'm glad Apple is doing to the display industry what it did to the smartphone market. Perhaps next year Android-based devices will catch up to Apple's iPhone 4 introduced 1.5 years ago.
Arguing over which screen is better, the iPhone or the Nexus, is like arguing over which car performs better, a Fiat 500 or a Smart. They are both so tiny it hardly matters. If we were comparing tablet screens or notebook screens it might make sense, but on a phone, I'm sure they are both good enough.
All 3 current high-end display technologies have advantages and disadvantages.
Pentile has its disadvantages. But there is no denying that (according to the people who have, like, actually seen one) the Nexus has a screen which looks GREAT.
Apple's screen tech is good for many reasons.
Super AMOLED Plus is also a good technology, and has many advantages.
Is it even possible that anybody, anywhere, besides Apple, has technology which is Good? Is it possible that technology that Apple did not choose could also be a good choice?
I don't know why you ask that last question, because it has nothing to do with Apple choosing it or not. I don't like it when companies use technical shortcuts to perpetuate marketing bullshit, period. Let me give you an example where Apple was accused of doing the same.
A few years ago, Apple was sued for using 6-bit color channels in their LCD displays, but advertising "millions of colors" which is technically only true when using 8-bit color channels. Other companies where doing this too, so it was a common lie. What they were doing was subpixel dithering to trick the eye into seeing "more" colors. Most people didn't know or care unless they were graphics artists (but then professional graphics artists use expensive wide-gamut calibrated displays from NEC or something like that). However, I took issue with Apple marketing what was technically a lie. At the pixel (a single RGB display unit) level, 6-bit LCDs could not really display millions of colors.
PenTile is no different. It's subpixel sharing between "pixels" (a term I put in loose quotes because they are no longer made from fully independent RGB subpixels). I'm not talking about the "Super PLUS" version, I'm talking about the non-PLUS variation referenced in the AI article. My distaste is for companies using subpixel tricks like these and then claiming inflated numbers (in the case of Apple, more colors, and in the case of Samsung, more pixels).
I am not saying that everyone will find PenTile ugly, nor did everyone object to the 6-bit color displays. Yes, there are visual artifacts associated with both tricks, but not everyone will care. But that's not the issue. The issue is that companies are inflating their color and pixel counts. And that's a con job.
It looks like the first display to finally be close to the iPhone 4/4S will actually surpass it with a "real" count of 495ppi, not a "false" count of sub-pixel trickery.
As Kristian Vättö mentions, what's the point of a 6.1" display? It's too large for a smartphone and too small for a tablet. It might just be a concept that gets the densest pixels in the largest possible display or it might be for some other use, like a car's console display where such 6.1" might be ideal. Either way, I'm glad Apple is doing to the display industry what it did to the smartphone market. Perhaps next year Android-based devices will catch up to Apple's iPhone 4 introduced 1.5 years ago.
500 ppi is borderline pointless (no pun intended). Apple set the mark right regarding pixel density.
Arguing over which screen is better, the iPhone or the Nexus, is like arguing over which car performs better, a Fiat 500 or a Smart. They are both so tiny it hardly matters. If we were comparing tablet screens or notebook screens it might make sense, but on a phone, I'm sure they are both good enough.
It's like guys arguing over being 1'' vs 1.1''.....nevermind......
I'm jumping between my Vibrant and 4S and realized how both are too small to really enjoy a whole lot. Especially considering my rather large fingers take up half the screen in any case...
I'm glad Apple is doing to the display industry what it did to the smartphone market. Perhaps next year Android-based devices will catch up to Apple's iPhone 4 introduced 1.5 years ago.
It's actually an LG display.
Anyway, LG already has a 4.5" smartphone with a 720p (326ppi) AH-IPS display.
Anyway, LG already has a 4.5" smartphone with a 720p (326ppi) AH-IPS display.
Don't tell me you've forgotten the investment Apple made to LG or overlooked the fact only Apple is using the 326ppi IPS panel. Apple investments are clearly paving he way for consumer innovation that was have happened much more slowly without them.
[...] Apple has instead chosen to stick with LCD screens for its Retina Displays. Those LCD screens feature in-plane switching (IPS), which allow for picture and color accuracy at extreme viewing angles.
Apple was just granted a patent on their technique of bonding the IPS LCD screen to the touchscreen element above it. This technique allows for lower production cost. Maybe that's why the Samsungs of the world are so keen on trying to develop OLED screens. To avoid yet another patent smack down.
"The panel looks downright gorgeous, with unbeatable viewing angles, remarkably crisp text and graphics and a beautiful feel as one swipes across it"
Find a single bad first impression of the screen. Tip: You can't. It's still super amoled. Even when compared side by side with any iphone 4.
Pentile Matrix has better outdoor performance, white performance, and better battery life. At that PPI, you would have to put it under a microscope to see subpixels.
Not sure why this article is trying to imply that the iphone4's screen is any better.... I sure hope everyone has compared things like black performance between an iphone's LCD display and any amoled display
It's fun to watch you guys dig to the bottom of the barrel to try and find something wrong with it.
samsung won't sell 4 million of these in the first 3 days....
Comments
Side Note: The reason there are so many "android fans" here is because of DED and his intentionally gutter-born articles. The headlines are great for SEO, I'll give him that, but because they're so great with SEO, they draw a lot of attention. The quality of his "journalism" and his unveiled opinions are usually reserved for the forums of some corner of the internet without a decent moderator. AI gives him top billing. You reap what you sow.
Good points.
I'm no expert in what to look for in magnified screens, but it looks to me like the "Galaxy Note" is the best, with the iPhone coming in second.
Which technology is in the upper left-hand corner? It looks better than both the Galaxy S2 and the iPhone. Which phone is the Galaxy Note?
The Galaxy Note ( which you state is the best) is the one using the newer Pentile display technology of which this entire article was based on.
NOW, do you see the ridiculousness of this??
Also, are there no smileys in iOS texting?
The Galaxy Note ( which you state is the best) is the one using the newer Pentile display technology of which this entire article was based on.
NOW, do you see the ridiculousness of this??
Actually, ff they wanted a real comparison they should have spent the time to set up the camera to minimize moire (which is very bad on the iPhone screenshot) and really should have increased the letter size on the iPhone to match the others since the comparison is essentially useless otherwise. (Unless the goal was to see what the letter looks like at the same pixel size, which negates the density advantage, particularly with a bad picture.)
NOW do you see the ridiculousness of this??
On another note, I want the Galaxy Note. Gonna love that Super AMOLED PLUS/HD display. Good size too.
:sigh: The Galaxy Note does not have a Super AMOLED+ display.
:sigh: The Galaxy Note does not have a Super AMOLED+ display.
THOSE DANG DIRTY APES.
I'mma slit my wrists now.
The Galaxy Note ( which you state is the best) is the one using the newer Pentile display technology of which this entire article was based on.
NOW, do you see the ridiculousness of this??
Yes. The new high rez pentile display seems to be nothing short of excellent.
But what accounts for the green hue? None of the others have it.
Naw. The proof is in the pudding.
All 3 current high-end display technologies have advantages and disadvantages.
Pentile has its disadvantages. But there is no denying that (according to the people who have, like, actually seen one) the Nexus has a screen which looks GREAT.
Apple's screen tech is good for many reasons.
Super AMOLED Plus is also a good technology, and has many advantages.
Is it even possible that anybody, anywhere, besides Apple, has technology which is Good? Is it possible that technology that Apple did not choose could also be a good choice?
I don't know why you ask that last question, because it has nothing to do with Apple choosing it or not. I don't like it when companies use technical shortcuts to perpetuate marketing bullshit, period. Let me give you an example where Apple was accused of doing the same.
A few years ago, Apple was sued for using 6-bit color channels in their LCD displays, but advertising "millions of colors" which is technically only true when using 8-bit color channels. Other companies where doing this too, so it was a common lie. What they were doing was subpixel dithering to trick the eye into seeing "more" colors. Most people didn't know or care unless they were graphics artists (but then professional graphics artists use expensive wide-gamut calibrated displays from NEC or something like that). However, I took issue with Apple marketing what was technically a lie. At the pixel (a single RGB display unit) level, 6-bit LCDs could not really display millions of colors.
PenTile is no different. It's subpixel sharing between "pixels" (a term I put in loose quotes because they are no longer made from fully independent RGB subpixels). I'm not talking about the "Super PLUS" version, I'm talking about the non-PLUS variation referenced in the AI article. My distaste is for companies using subpixel tricks like these and then claiming inflated numbers (in the case of Apple, more colors, and in the case of Samsung, more pixels).
I am not saying that everyone will find PenTile ugly, nor did everyone object to the 6-bit color displays. Yes, there are visual artifacts associated with both tricks, but not everyone will care. But that's not the issue. The issue is that companies are inflating their color and pixel counts. And that's a con job.
Funny how we weren't called Apple fanboys when we didn't agree with the "millions of colours" advertising.
@Suddenly Newton.
Funny how we weren't called Apple fanboys when we didn't agree with the "millions of colours" advertising.
The millions of what? Wacha talkin' 'bout?
It looks like the first display to finally be close to the iPhone 4/4S will actually surpass it with a "real" count of 495ppi, not a "false" count of sub-pixel trickery.As Kristian Vättö mentions, what's the point of a 6.1" display? It's too large for a smartphone and too small for a tablet. It might just be a concept that gets the densest pixels in the largest possible display or it might be for some other use, like a car's console display where such 6.1" might be ideal. Either way, I'm glad Apple is doing to the display industry what it did to the smartphone market. Perhaps next year Android-based devices will catch up to Apple's iPhone 4 introduced 1.5 years ago.
500 ppi is borderline pointless (no pun intended). Apple set the mark right regarding pixel density.
Arguing over which screen is better, the iPhone or the Nexus, is like arguing over which car performs better, a Fiat 500 or a Smart. They are both so tiny it hardly matters. If we were comparing tablet screens or notebook screens it might make sense, but on a phone, I'm sure they are both good enough.
It's like guys arguing over being 1'' vs 1.1''.....nevermind......
I'm jumping between my Vibrant and 4S and realized how both are too small to really enjoy a whole lot. Especially considering my rather large fingers take up half the screen in any case...
I'm glad Apple is doing to the display industry what it did to the smartphone market. Perhaps next year Android-based devices will catch up to Apple's iPhone 4 introduced 1.5 years ago.
It's actually an LG display.
Anyway, LG already has a 4.5" smartphone with a 720p (326ppi) AH-IPS display.
It's actually an LG display.
Anyway, LG already has a 4.5" smartphone with a 720p (326ppi) AH-IPS display.
Don't tell me you've forgotten the investment Apple made to LG or overlooked the fact only Apple is using the 326ppi IPS panel. Apple investments are clearly paving he way for consumer innovation that was have happened much more slowly without them.
[...] Apple has instead chosen to stick with LCD screens for its Retina Displays. Those LCD screens feature in-plane switching (IPS), which allow for picture and color accuracy at extreme viewing angles.
Apple was just granted a patent on their technique of bonding the IPS LCD screen to the touchscreen element above it. This technique allows for lower production cost. Maybe that's why the Samsungs of the world are so keen on trying to develop OLED screens. To avoid yet another patent smack down.
Apple was just granted a patent on their technique of bonding the IPS LCD screen to the touchscreen element above it.
That's exactly how Super AMOLED works.
@Suddenly Newton.
Funny how we weren't called Apple fanboys when we didn't agree with the "millions of colours" advertising.
Or sheep.
Quoting people that have used the device...
"The panel looks downright gorgeous, with unbeatable viewing angles, remarkably crisp text and graphics and a beautiful feel as one swipes across it"
Find a single bad first impression of the screen. Tip: You can't. It's still super amoled. Even when compared side by side with any iphone 4.
Pentile Matrix has better outdoor performance, white performance, and better battery life. At that PPI, you would have to put it under a microscope to see subpixels.
Not sure why this article is trying to imply that the iphone4's screen is any better.... I sure hope everyone has compared things like black performance between an iphone's LCD display and any amoled display
It's fun to watch you guys dig to the bottom of the barrel to try and find something wrong with it.
samsung won't sell 4 million of these in the first 3 days....