iPhone 4 Retina Display matched by upcoming Sharp smartphone

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 76
    jason98jason98 Posts: 768member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kaisdaddy View Post


    ... I don't think that display resolution on a screen the size of the iPhone's is going to get any higher for the foreseeable future.



    I hope Apple one day will get rid of the "Home" button, move the ear speaker all the way up and give the all available area to a new wider screen.
  • Reply 42 of 76
    azharazhar Posts: 34member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Oh for god's sake.

    9 mp on a device with the optics of a camera does nothing but produce huge files. When will people stop drooling over meaningless numbers?

    I have an amp with an 11 on the volume dial to sell you.



    You're AB-SO-LUTE-LY right! But most people are just too idiotic to realize this, especially non-techie people.



    I had a cousin who owned a Sony Ericsson with an 8MP camera. But the pics he took with it were comparable to mine- taken from a Nokia 2.0MP!



    It's more to do with the imaging processor. That's why the iPhone 3G takes far better pics than the SE 8MP!
  • Reply 43 of 76
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jason98 View Post


    I hope Apple one day will get rid of the "Home" button, move the ear speaker all the way up and give the all available area to a new wider screen.



    The reality of that would be difficult to implement. The space on top and on the button is needed not just for the ear speaker and microphone, but to physically hold the phone without setting off any screen inputs.



    Would make for a dramatic format though.
  • Reply 44 of 76
    mgl323mgl323 Posts: 247member
    Maybe the next generation iphone will have a better resolution? Damn I can't wait!
  • Reply 45 of 76
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    Any smartphone that can run Android 2.2 can run Flash 10.1. My Evo runs 2.2 and just got a recent update that removed the 30fps cap. As the lastest Android phones keep moving to 2.2 they will move to Flash 10.1 Apple is not leading the way Android is gaining on them at a rapid pace. Flash like it or not is very far from dead.



    Yes, but this device runs 2.1



    My android phone runs 2.2. It 'features' the flash 10.1 plug in. When I use it my phone gets hots and you can see the battery life indicator drain in front of your eyes. I can't interact with flash as there is no click/rollover differentiation, video does play, but it's choppy and you can't scrub through it. It's impossible to scale most flash sites to fit the phone as when you try and pinch zoom, the flash thinks it's being clicked.



    It's a pretty pointless experience - Although I do see a lot of nice animated advertisements.



    Any site using flash purely for video delivery is simply lazy. There have been alternatives for years - it's normally an indication of inexperienced, lazy or incompetent site developers. Browser check - does the user have flash? yes/no - does the user have quicktime? yes/no, deliver content as appropriate. It's not hard.
  • Reply 46 of 76
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mgl323 View Post


    Maybe the next generation iphone will have a better resolution? Damn I can't wait!



    It's not necessary. Once you're about 300dpi there's no point in further improvement. If 300dpi is the standard for professional print, then being slightly above that on a screen held 12" from your face is all that is required.



    It's a little like animating at more than 40 frames a second - the human brain isn't fast enough to perceive anything other than smooth motion from about that rate upwards. So I"m glad that people's games render at 60+ frames a minute on windoze - it's serves zero point.



    Apple launch, others deride, then follow like lambs to the slaughter.



    I'd love to see another company really challenge Apple - create new products and concepts and get them widely accepted, but as long as people sell their products with "look, the resolution is now as good as Apple's of four months ago" I'm not going to be very impressed.



    Yes, I know Apple don't invent this stuff, I know they're not the first. But they have the skill to bring existing technologies to market place, make them main stream and desirable products for the masses. iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad - none of them brought anything new to the market place, it was just done in a different way.



    It doesn't matter if the next iPad or iPhone has 1400 dpi resolution and a 3D camera, people will still buy it as fast as it can be produced.
  • Reply 47 of 76
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RobertMorein View Post


    Who's going to by a phone from Sharp?



    Bingo. But, I welcome more competitors, Apple can't make enough iPhone 4 and iPad for the whole world..!
  • Reply 48 of 76
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    The 9 megapixel camera sounds impressive. I know nothing about the quality, but it beats Apple's still camera function (especially in the iPod touch, naturally). Apple really should give serious camera quality updates to as many devices as makes sense.



    The megapixel figure is irrelevant. More pixels != Better quality. It's just a number.



    Quality comes from better optics, quality of light sensor, the lens. More pixels simply mean larger files with lots of noise when you're talking about anything other than a professional digital SLR that allows you to adjust ISO and focal length. The iPhone camera is pretty good, and certainly outperforms most phone cameras of "higher resolution" that I've seen examples from.



    The numbers game was played with computers until people realised that processor speed was sort of irrelevant - overall performance is about the whole ecosystem, not some number on the side of a processor - it's why PC vendors now sell on ram rather than processor speed. These stupid figures on cameras - such as cheap digitals offering "16 megapixels" will soon fade away into marketing history.
  • Reply 49 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    The megapixel figure is irrelevant. More pixels != Better quality. It's just a number.



    So, are you saying buying a 20MP DSLR camera is a waste of money, a 2MP pocket camera will be just as good? After all, they are just numbers.
  • Reply 50 of 76
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    So, are you saying buying a 20MP DSLR camera is a waste of money, a 2MP pocket camera will be just as good? After all, they are just numbers.



    Aww, come on, you know what the original poster was talking about. Megapixels is a number, you have to take several other things into consideration.
  • Reply 51 of 76
    shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jason98 View Post


    I hope Apple one day will get rid of the "Home" button, move the ear speaker all the way up and give the all available area to a new wider screen.



    Yes please, a 4 inch screen would be great. I hope they ditch the home button and make the border touch sensitive with virtual buttons that illuminate and change according to the app being used. Would be great for games to have the 'fire' and 'move' buttons on the side where your thumbs are rather than on the screen itself.
  • Reply 52 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    Aww, come on, you know what the original poster was talking about. Megapixels is a number, you have to take several other things into consideration.



    No I don't, when does the MP stop being a number? Is 5MP ok, but 5.5 is just going to be full of noise, and just marketing? They made a claim without thinking of the "other things" to take into consideration, they have no idea of the sensor size, the lense type etc of the device.
  • Reply 53 of 76
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Oh for god's sake.

    9 mp on a device with the optics of a camera does nothing but produce huge files. When will people stop drooling over meaningless numbers?

    I have an amp with an 11 on the volume dial to sell you.



    So, are you saying that less megapixels means better quality pictures? Or are you just trying to say that the camera in the iPhone is perfect and no competitor could possibly improve on it, and therefore deserves ridicule?



    Most cameras allow you to decrease quality, so you don't necessarily need to take full-size 9mp photos... Maybe before you bash it, you should try it out. I don't think anyone was "drooling" over it, but the possibility exists that they might have a better camera in their phone.
  • Reply 54 of 76
    applappl Posts: 348member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Oh for god's sake.



    3.5-inch 960 x 640 capacitive touchscreen, 1GHz Snapdragon processor and 9.6-megapixel camera with flash... EVDO Rev.A, WiFi b/g and Bluetooth 2.1+EDR there?s infrared, GPS, 1-Seg mobile digital TV and an FM transmitter, as well as compatibility with KDDI?s mobile wallet electronic payments system...



    There?s also 512MB of RAM and a 2GB microSD card preloaded (up to 32GB supported), and the whole thing weighs in at 138g... the display has a dual-power mode which can show battery status, signal, missed calls and other reminders without the backlight being active, and it seems to beat the Continuum to the post with a second touchscreen panel for the Android controls...







    Yeah. It goes to 11.
  • Reply 55 of 76
    hzchzc Posts: 63member
    Is no one even curious how existing apps will run on a display twice the width and height? I wonder if Sharp has customized the OS to automatically scale existing apps or if they will simply take up a quarter of the screen...



    ... or are some elements going to be stretched while others aren't?
  • Reply 56 of 76
    applappl Posts: 348member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jeff1741 View Post


    Are they claiming the same pixel density that Apple is?





    Claiming? This is a matter of reporting fact, not making claims.



    The pixel count / unit measurement is the same, yes. So the pixel density is the same, yes.



    So they make no claims, but instead, report the pixel density, which is the same as the iPhone 4.
  • Reply 57 of 76
    applappl Posts: 348member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RobertMorein View Post


    Who's going to by a phone from Sharp?








    Japan: Sharp dominates its home country Japan. The company has the largest domestic share of the cell phone market, and is one of the largest players in the LCD and LSI markets.[2]

    The Americas: Driven by rising U.S. demand for LCD TVs, sales in the America's rose 8.3% from 2007 to 2008.[6] To satiate demand, Sharp opened up a new LCD TV production facility in Mexico,[7]

    Europe: Regional sales in Europe rose 11.9%, and operating income climbed 38.8% in 2007. [6]

    China: Sharp's fastest growing geographic market, operating income increased 11.2% from 2007 to 2008, on sales growth of 22.4%.[6] Growth has been fueled by a growing population of Chinese capable and willing to buy high-end cell phones and TV with LCD technology. [4]









    To put things in perspective, Japan is the world's second-largest economy. China is no midget, and they are said to be Sharp's fastest growing market.



    I think that millions and millions of people are "going to buy a phone from Sharp".
  • Reply 58 of 76
    jasenj1jasenj1 Posts: 923member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    No I don't, when does the MP stop being a number? Is 5MP ok, but 5.5 is just going to be full of noise, and just marketing? They made a claim without thinking of the "other things" to take into consideration, they have no idea of the sensor size, the lense type etc of the device.



    AI isn't really the place for a primer in digital photography, but I'll give it a shot. Check out the links below for a decent coverage of the subject.



    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos.../pixels_01.htm

    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...density_01.htm

    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...quality_01.htm

    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...r_sizes_01.htm



    OK, for those that didn't bother to read all the DPReview links...

    More important than the number of pixels is the size of the sensor. If you cram 10 million pixels onto the head of a pin, each pixel does not gather much light - and you get noisy, low quality pictures. If you spread those pixels out over size of a 35mm slide, each pixel can gather much more light - and you get rich, beautiful pictures. Typically, more pixels in a tiny area = lower quality than fewer pixels over a larger area. The tighter the pixels are packed, the more noise there is in the system.



    That's one of the advantages of DSLRs. They use a much larger sensor than point & shoots and cell phones.



    Back on topic. I'm looking forward to 300ppi laptops & desktop displays. I REALLY hope Apple sees that coming and is working furiously on resolution independence.



    - Jasen.
  • Reply 59 of 76
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Usually there's no reason to disbelieve MP counts. The problem is MP is only a count of the sensor sites. The real problem is that it's not a measure of camera quality, despite popular perception otherwise. MP never tells us about the quality of the lens, the sensor size, dynamic range or processing quality. That sort of information is harder to communicate to consumers, a lot of phone makers usually don't try.



    Yah...was very disappointed when Fuji left their high ISO designs to chase MPs in their point and shoots but it was probably impossible to sell well against high MP Canons and such. I still like my 6MP F31fd although I should check out the new backlit point and shoots.
  • Reply 60 of 76
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Superbass View Post


    So, are you saying that less megapixels means better quality pictures?



    Sometimes. It depends on design and conditions.



    Quote:

    Most cameras allow you to decrease quality, so you don't necessarily need to take full-size 9mp photos... Maybe before you bash it, you should try it out. I don't think anyone was "drooling" over it, but the possibility exists that they might have a better camera in their phone.



    Fuji had a "low light mode" that turned their 12MP sensor into a 5MP sensor for better light sensitivity but it didn't work too well. Most other cameras don't even bother to try for better ISO when in reduced res mode...they just use it to save space and time writing to flash. Other than that it doesn't buy you anything.



    A lower MP sensor with better ISO performance is far different from simply dropping your resolution on the same sized higher MP sensor.
Sign In or Register to comment.