I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
There's this thing in the CE design called "trade offs", I'm sure you're familiar with it. Manufacturers of devices must choose among various component attributes which will improve some things while negatively impacting others. Bigger battery means more run time but larger and heavier device. Faster processor means better performance but shorter battery life.
OLED gives better blacks but sacrifices accurate color rendering, power consumption when displaying whites, and direct sunlight legibility. I'm not saying any of those things are completely unworkable, just not as good as comparable LCD performance in those areas. Like I say: tradeoffs.
Apple is choosing somewhat poorer contrast ratio in favor of accuracy, off axis viewing, resolution and direct sunlight legibility. They are also not obliged to emphasize black in their UI to keep from adversely affecting battery life.
In general, the OLED craze strikes me as analogous to building audio systems with very heavy base response-- immediately appealing to a certain demographic but at the cost of musicality and accuracy.
At any rate, it's easy to forever judge Apple by they what don't choose instead of what they do. Since every manufacturer must make tradeoffs, there will always be something sacrificed in favor of something else. All you have to do is decide that the thing sacrificed is the most important and best thing and Apple loses again! But then, you already know that, as a devotee of the technique.
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
I had an N1 for a month but ended up selling it for a number of reasons, the screen being the main one. For me, it was just simply too difficult to read in any kind of bright sunlit condition. Others find the auto dim/brightness their solution..not me.
Having said that, the screen is simply gorgeous in ideal conditions. The deep blacks coupled with the crisp, bright/ vivid colors jump out as though they were 3D. I was totally taken aback when I first saw the boot screen.. woah.
Clearly some of the commenters posting here have not had any hands on experience with an OLED screen.
Still, I can't wait to see this new screen on the Iphone. It seems the IPS tech solves some of the washing out and poor angle viewing of the current screens.
You're missing that you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 720p and 960x640 on a 3" screen unless you have bionic vision.
Sheese...
Oh, didn't think of that in my never ending obsession of quality - and with the only knowledge on the subject that 720p video always looks good... Thanks for informing me! *goes on to wikipedia*
I was sold on the first leaked photos of the 4th gen iPhone. This only sweetens the deal.
It also makes me believe the rumors about the $99 AppleTV are true. That and the recent article about Apple's patent application on continuing play of media on different devices (e.g. start playing a movie on your iPhone on the bus and finish on your TV via ATV with one simple sync).
Wont be able to play the 720p video its supposed to be able to record, at least not in full resolution? Am I missing something?
Well, if you mean playback 720p at full resolution on its own screen, no it cannot, rarely can a device do that. Name ONE device that can play something it recorded itself at full resolution on its own screen. *Gets flood of macbook and macbook pro replies*.
The point is (if true!) that it will record 720p video, which will look good once you upload it and watch it on a screen that CAN display all those pixels.
Wont be able to play the 720p video its supposed to be able to record, at least not in full resolution? Am I missing something?
The only reason that would matter is on a display that is large enough for you to see blurring caused by scaling the video. On a screen of the described pixel density, it won't be an issue in the slightest.
The resolution of the next iPhone is 80% of the iPad resolution while being 1/3 the size.
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
Except outside, where most people use a cell phone...
...oh, and OLED drains battery to display those blacks.
Weekend brain fart, eh? It uses negligible power to display blacks but a lot of power to display colors. White can several times more power hungry on an OLED than an LCD. I don't know about anyone else, but most of my time on my phone is reading black text on a white or near-white background.
Oh, didn't think of that in my never ending obsession of quality - and with the only knowledge on the subject that 720p video always looks good... Thanks for informing me! *goes on to wikipedia*
Some seemingly logical questions (or complaints) need to be based in a realistic application.
I just hope the camera is a little better and by better I mean in basic light. My iPhone only takes good pictures on the face of the sun. Anything else is dark and out of focus.
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
I take it that you can state that as a fact because you've done a side by side comparison with the Nexus One and the new iPhone?
Trust me, those people will find something else to complain about. They always do.
Complaining about the iPhone screen is ridiculous. Discussing the merits or problems of screen types and resolutions is on thing but to dismiss the iphone because of its screen? Idiotic.
Weekend brain fart, eh? It uses negligible power to display blacks but a lot of power to display colors. White can several times more power hungry on an OLED than an LCD. I don't know about anyone else, but most of my time on my phone is reading black text on a white or near-white background.
Caught me before I edited it out....
But except for Gruber, and a few others, I refuse to look at white text on a dark BG-- too hard on these old eyes (and brain).
I used to have a 42" Toshiba LCD HDTV, but after a year or so I couldn't stand it any longer and gave it away. I now have a 50" Pioneer KURO plasma and the difference is night and day. LCDs just don't do black, at all, ever. It's an inherant limitation to the technology. They're not as ghastly as they used to be, but they're still pretty awful.
Obviously OLED isn't at HDTV sizes yet, but at least it can reproduce black on a small screen. I watch a lot of video on my iPhone (long train commute), and during the winter when it's dark outside any dark period in a video just looks like a screen full of grey. Any screen which can't do black, is, in my opinion, a broken design.
Except outside, where most people use a cell phone...
.
Most people? Are you sure about that? Take an iPhone out when out and about and you'll get mugged. I see people using them in offices and in trains mostly.
I do not know exactly how Android or some other products are faring with their OLED screens. Here's a great clue "Organic", and how organics interact with "Light" which is a form of radiation.
Unless they already solved the issues, anything organic is sensitive to light (radiation) given sufficient time. This one reason why, for high radiation storage, e.g., waste from nuclear plants/ Experts plan to use "molten" glass to encapsulate waste rods -- not composite plastics or anything organic. One drawback of glass for this purpose -- it can break "easily". So, the nuclear industry and the Department of Energy was recommending a site in Nevada or somewhere near those desert areas to store them based on no tremor (tectonic plates) activities.
i
By the way, you encounter the same issue with anything glass or similar "crystal" materials,.even without worrying about earthquake or any tremors. So, if you want to be pessimistic, you would consider a minus for LCD.
When you select "organic". you have to select an "organic material" which in turn defines the chemical bond structure. Together they affect how the final form interacts with light, and affect thee efficiency of conversion. This might explain what others already stated about the OLED being good at one thing and not another.
This is a known obstacle in another technology -- trapping of light to convert to electrical energy in proposed solar cells. If they cann resolve this, "organic solar cells" would have many advantages -- pliable, can be shaped to an form -- compared to the properties of silicon wafers.
By the way, there is not only one single OLED technology, for those who think that every single OLED will mean superior over LCD.
One other reason could be "Cost", even if some OLEDs are superior.
Another reason is availability, which in turn affects cost.
Do we really think that television manufacturers or anything using screens would have jumped in the bandwagon, if OLED is indeed the way to go?
Each company had to weigh in many of these factors and make a judgement what is best for their business strategy.
By the way, superior technology does not always trump bad technology. Just study the history of technologies.
One more thing. The other day, in another thread, one was recommending Androids, specifically the Nexus One. Since I do not know where the person is, I asked if he owned one.
It turned out, he did not own one. He based his opinions only from "all the interviews" he read. He claims all the reviews were good. Which is surprising because I did read a number of reviews, who actually used the phones extensively. The usual is mixed pros and cons. Not really black and white as many of us seem to suggest.
Even those who are diehard iPhone techies, found something very good about certain Android phones or Google technologies that they wish even Apple could copy and implement. At the same time, having been users of all three iPhones (some since the first version), there are so many little things about the iPhone/Apple way of taking care of the little things, that they took for granted. These little things, which are actually very big things, when it comes to "ease of use" became apparent when they were using an Android phone.
Even John Gruber commented to a "diary" of a techie iPhone worshipper that he agreed with what the other guy stated about the Android.
Most people? Are you sure about that? Take an iPhone out when out and about and you'll get mugged. I see people using them in offices and in trains mostly.
Actually, no. I am not sure. I am old school and use a land line when inside. I don't really like cell phones, as they tend to tether you to the device... There are times when I want to be alone, uninterrupted... That's just me, though.
"Why is the iPhone's screen smaller than the iPad?"
"How come I can't create or edit Excel documents on it?"
GTSC
I enjoyed your satirical homage to the Appleinsider trolls but Documents to Go is one of several apps that do indeed allow you to create and edit Excel documents on an iPhone.
Undoubtedly the trolls will complain that Apple doesn't bundle this feature into the iPhone OS.
Comments
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
There's this thing in the CE design called "trade offs", I'm sure you're familiar with it. Manufacturers of devices must choose among various component attributes which will improve some things while negatively impacting others. Bigger battery means more run time but larger and heavier device. Faster processor means better performance but shorter battery life.
OLED gives better blacks but sacrifices accurate color rendering, power consumption when displaying whites, and direct sunlight legibility. I'm not saying any of those things are completely unworkable, just not as good as comparable LCD performance in those areas. Like I say: tradeoffs.
Apple is choosing somewhat poorer contrast ratio in favor of accuracy, off axis viewing, resolution and direct sunlight legibility. They are also not obliged to emphasize black in their UI to keep from adversely affecting battery life.
In general, the OLED craze strikes me as analogous to building audio systems with very heavy base response-- immediately appealing to a certain demographic but at the cost of musicality and accuracy.
At any rate, it's easy to forever judge Apple by they what don't choose instead of what they do. Since every manufacturer must make tradeoffs, there will always be something sacrificed in favor of something else. All you have to do is decide that the thing sacrificed is the most important and best thing and Apple loses again! But then, you already know that, as a devotee of the technique.
Maybe in the next ones. Notebook IPS displays aren't currently made.
HP sells a notebook with an IPS display
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
I had an N1 for a month but ended up selling it for a number of reasons, the screen being the main one. For me, it was just simply too difficult to read in any kind of bright sunlit condition. Others find the auto dim/brightness their solution..not me.
Having said that, the screen is simply gorgeous in ideal conditions. The deep blacks coupled with the crisp, bright/ vivid colors jump out as though they were 3D. I was totally taken aback when I first saw the boot screen.. woah.
Clearly some of the commenters posting here have not had any hands on experience with an OLED screen.
Still, I can't wait to see this new screen on the Iphone. It seems the IPS tech solves some of the washing out and poor angle viewing of the current screens.
You're missing that you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 720p and 960x640 on a 3" screen unless you have bionic vision.
Sheese...
Oh, didn't think of that in my never ending obsession of quality - and with the only knowledge on the subject that 720p video always looks good... Thanks for informing me! *goes on to wikipedia*
It also makes me believe the rumors about the $99 AppleTV are true. That and the recent article about Apple's patent application on continuing play of media on different devices (e.g. start playing a movie on your iPhone on the bus and finish on your TV via ATV with one simple sync).
Wont be able to play the 720p video its supposed to be able to record, at least not in full resolution? Am I missing something?
Well, if you mean playback 720p at full resolution on its own screen, no it cannot, rarely can a device do that. Name ONE device that can play something it recorded itself at full resolution on its own screen. *Gets flood of macbook and macbook pro replies*.
The point is (if true!) that it will record 720p video, which will look good once you upload it and watch it on a screen that CAN display all those pixels.
Wont be able to play the 720p video its supposed to be able to record, at least not in full resolution? Am I missing something?
The only reason that would matter is on a display that is large enough for you to see blurring caused by scaling the video. On a screen of the described pixel density, it won't be an issue in the slightest.
The resolution of the next iPhone is 80% of the iPad resolution while being 1/3 the size.
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
Except outside, where most people use a cell phone...
.
Thanks for ruining it for all those people saying how lame Apple was for not using OLED screens! NOW what are they going to complain about?!...
Trust me, those people will find something else to complain about. They always do.
...oh, and OLED drains battery to display those blacks.
Weekend brain fart, eh?
Oh, didn't think of that in my never ending obsession of quality - and with the only knowledge on the subject that 720p video always looks good... Thanks for informing me! *goes on to wikipedia*
Some seemingly logical questions (or complaints) need to be based in a realistic application.
I just hope the camera is a little better and by better I mean in basic light. My iPhone only takes good pictures on the face of the sun. Anything else is dark and out of focus.
I really don't get your point at all. The screen is high-res, that's great, but it's still an LCD. That means washed out blacks, low contrast, and an overall flat look.
When you've seen a good OLED screen (Nexus One), an LCD just looks weak by comparison. A high-res LCD isn't going to fix that.
I take it that you can state that as a fact because you've done a side by side comparison with the Nexus One and the new iPhone?
Somehow I don't think so...
Trust me, those people will find something else to complain about. They always do.
Complaining about the iPhone screen is ridiculous. Discussing the merits or problems of screen types and resolutions is on thing but to dismiss the iphone because of its screen? Idiotic.
"Why is the iPhone's screen smaller than the iPad?"
"How come I can't create or edit Excel documents on it?"
"Why doesn't the camera come with a telephoto zoom lens?"
"Where's Final Cut Pro?"
"How come there's no app to connect to the Hubble Space Telescope?"
"Why won't AT&T let me make calls for free so I don't have to use their service?"
"Why isn't Steve Jobs' cell number pre-installed in the Contacts?"
And finally...
"Where's Flash?"
GTSC
Where's USB???
Weekend brain fart, eh?
Caught me before I edited it out....
But except for Gruber, and a few others, I refuse to look at white text on a dark BG-- too hard on these old eyes (and brain).
You, know, I have an LCD cinema display at home.
Where exactly is the "low contrast and washed out blacks"?
Have you even used one?
Yes, that's the MARKETING pitch.
ACTUAL tests and reviews show that the LCD screen is BETTER.
http://www.displaymate.com/Nexus_iPhone_ShootOut.htm
I used to have a 42" Toshiba LCD HDTV, but after a year or so I couldn't stand it any longer and gave it away. I now have a 50" Pioneer KURO plasma and the difference is night and day. LCDs just don't do black, at all, ever. It's an inherant limitation to the technology. They're not as ghastly as they used to be, but they're still pretty awful.
Obviously OLED isn't at HDTV sizes yet, but at least it can reproduce black on a small screen. I watch a lot of video on my iPhone (long train commute), and during the winter when it's dark outside any dark period in a video just looks like a screen full of grey. Any screen which can't do black, is, in my opinion, a broken design.
Except outside, where most people use a cell phone...
.
Most people? Are you sure about that? Take an iPhone out when out and about and you'll get mugged. I see people using them in offices and in trains mostly.
Unless they already solved the issues, anything organic is sensitive to light (radiation) given sufficient time. This one reason why, for high radiation storage, e.g., waste from nuclear plants/ Experts plan to use "molten" glass to encapsulate waste rods -- not composite plastics or anything organic. One drawback of glass for this purpose -- it can break "easily". So, the nuclear industry and the Department of Energy was recommending a site in Nevada or somewhere near those desert areas to store them based on no tremor (tectonic plates) activities.
i
By the way, you encounter the same issue with anything glass or similar "crystal" materials,.even without worrying about earthquake or any tremors. So, if you want to be pessimistic, you would consider a minus for LCD.
When you select "organic". you have to select an "organic material" which in turn defines the chemical bond structure. Together they affect how the final form interacts with light, and affect thee efficiency of conversion. This might explain what others already stated about the OLED being good at one thing and not another.
This is a known obstacle in another technology -- trapping of light to convert to electrical energy in proposed solar cells. If they cann resolve this, "organic solar cells" would have many advantages -- pliable, can be shaped to an form -- compared to the properties of silicon wafers.
By the way, there is not only one single OLED technology, for those who think that every single OLED will mean superior over LCD.
One other reason could be "Cost", even if some OLEDs are superior.
Another reason is availability, which in turn affects cost.
Do we really think that television manufacturers or anything using screens would have jumped in the bandwagon, if OLED is indeed the way to go?
Each company had to weigh in many of these factors and make a judgement what is best for their business strategy.
By the way, superior technology does not always trump bad technology. Just study the history of technologies.
One more thing. The other day, in another thread, one was recommending Androids, specifically the Nexus One. Since I do not know where the person is, I asked if he owned one.
It turned out, he did not own one. He based his opinions only from "all the interviews" he read. He claims all the reviews were good. Which is surprising because I did read a number of reviews, who actually used the phones extensively. The usual is mixed pros and cons. Not really black and white as many of us seem to suggest.
Even those who are diehard iPhone techies, found something very good about certain Android phones or Google technologies that they wish even Apple could copy and implement. At the same time, having been users of all three iPhones (some since the first version), there are so many little things about the iPhone/Apple way of taking care of the little things, that they took for granted. These little things, which are actually very big things, when it comes to "ease of use" became apparent when they were using an Android phone.
Even John Gruber commented to a "diary" of a techie iPhone worshipper that he agreed with what the other guy stated about the Android.
CGC
Most people? Are you sure about that? Take an iPhone out when out and about and you'll get mugged. I see people using them in offices and in trains mostly.
Actually, no. I am not sure. I am old school and use a land line when inside. I don't really like cell phones, as they tend to tether you to the device... There are times when I want to be alone, uninterrupted... That's just me, though.
"Why is the iPhone's screen smaller than the iPad?"
"How come I can't create or edit Excel documents on it?"
GTSC
I enjoyed your satirical homage to the Appleinsider trolls but Documents to Go is one of several apps that do indeed allow you to create and edit Excel documents on an iPhone.
Undoubtedly the trolls will complain that Apple doesn't bundle this feature into the iPhone OS.