POST A COMMENT

38 Comments

Back to Article

  • SilthDraeth - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I wonder how long it will take to get 1080p in a screen this size. Not that I believe it is truly needed, as my Samsung Epic (Galaxy S) screen looks damn good showing any video I play on it. Reply
  • Deleted - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    1080p would be pretty useless in anything less than a 7" screen. I'm waiting to see larger-scale implementation of these mobile display technologies. Oh, the things I would do for a 23" 5760x3240 SAMOLED+ display. Reply
  • sleepeeg3 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Go blind? Reply
  • CharonPDX - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Hey, that's just an old wives' tale! Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I have 15inch dell xps laptop that is full hd 1080p
    even after using it i feel the resolution is tooo much for a 15 incher
    and i feel that any screen less than 14 or 15 inch having a full hd screen would be superfluous
    and anyways playing a full hd 1080p video on a 7 inch or any screen less than 15 is not going to get you the actual quality of that video
    you are surely gonna miss out on the viewing experience
    .
    What i feel is
    lets not get into the rat race
    which the recent digital and phone camera's have been in
    just increasing the megapixels in camera's doesnt gets you the best quality
    optics are much more important than just megapixels
    .
    Same should be the approach for displays too
    just increasing the resolution is not a solution to it
    we should also give more importance to the display technology tooo
    n i feel anything above hd in a 4 inch phone would be just waste of pixels
    and GPU power tooo
    .
    Hope soo these manufacturer get my point :)
    Reply
  • Exodite - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    The display resolution situation is not comparable to camera sensor resolution, as increasing the former is always preferable.

    There's no situation where a higher resolution isn't better, even if you have poor eyesight you can always scale text and UI elements as appropriate.
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    That phone camera was just for comparison
    I never meant it exactly the same way
    .
    The point here is will you benefit with Full HD resolution on a 4 inch or even 5 inch screen??????
    what i meant here is higher resolution will be more gpu hungry for sure
    and plus you wont even notice the difference
    and also no benefits because with that high resolution you surely will miss out the quality which was on a 15 incher
    Even our eyes have some limitation isnt it ?
    i suggest rather the display technology should be given more preference than just the resolution
    Reply
  • GuinnessKMF - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Trying to hamstring progress by saying that "you won't notice the difference" is pretty shortsighted. Individual users eyes are different, it's not my fault your incapable of discerning the difference.

    Human eyes average the ability to detect at around 500ppi from a 20" distance. This only gets higher as you get closer to the screen, as you would with a cell phone.

    People complaining about laptops having too high of resolution on small screens are really complaining about their OS or browser/applications not properly scaling to use the resolution.

    I love seeing high resolution screens come out, and I hope they continue to increase the pixel density, and more OS/Web/Application developers will use vector graphics to take advantage of them.
    Reply
  • Grandal - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    "People complaining about laptops having too high of resolution on small screens are really complaining about their OS or browser/applications not properly scaling to use the resolution."

    ^^^^ THIS

    Pop in an Ubuntu or other Linux LiveCD and be amazed at how awesome that 14/15" display looks at 1080P or 1200P.
    Reply
  • cptcolo - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I second:
    "People complaining about laptops having too high of resolution on small screens are really complaining about their OS or browser/applications not properly scaling to use the resolution."
    Reply
  • cocoviper - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    It all depends how close you're holding the phone to your face.

    Apple's retina display positioning of it being the highest density you can see with your eyes assumes you're going to hold it about 2.5 to 3 ft from your eyes and that your vision is near the median of the statistical population.

    If however your vision is better, or you hold your phone closer, you can easily resolve 430-480 ppi (which is in the range of that 4.8" 1080p screen I linked above).
    Reply
  • GuinnessKMF - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    That's exactly what I hate about Apple's claim of a retina display on their cell phone, it makes it so people think that's "as good as it can get". 2.5-3' is an absurd distance to hold your phone out, 8" is a bit more reasonable, meaning that there's room to quadruple the density just to meet the median point. Reply
  • sleepeeg3 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    960 pixel width is the current web-standard. There comes a limit between PPI and screen size, because the phone gets to bulky. I suspect anywhere from 1280x720p to 1700 x 960 and 4.5 - 5" will be the future upper limits of cell phones. Reply
  • sleepeeg3 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    *too Reply
  • fancarolina - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I'm betting Apple already has a prototype they will just release it after the iPhone 5 with a 720 screen. Can't give you everything at once you might not keep on spending. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Nah, they will double it again to get 1920x1280, which would be able to hold a 1080p video.

    But that won't be for a few years. You'll see a QXGA (2048x1536) iPad long before a 1080p iPhone.
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    The post hasnt been correctly written
    rather pixel density of apple iphone 4 is 329ppi
    and LG Optimus LTE having a resolution of 1280x720 is 326ppi
    Anand you are really weak in maths :P
    :D
    Reply
  • Camikazi - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Everywhere I am looking says iPhone 4 PPI is 326, I also did the math and came up with 326, so I guess you need to check your math. Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    your are weak in maths dude
    i will explain you
    iphone 4 has a resolution of 640x960
    dp=sqrt(Wp^2 + Hp^2) Wp and Hp and width and height resolution in pixels

    PPI=dp/di where di=diagonal size in inches.
    for iphone 4
    dp=sqrt(640^2 + 960^2)
    dp=sqrt(1331200)
    dp=1153.77
    PPI=1153.77 / 3.5
    PPI=329.65040

    Check your maths dude
    :)
    Reply
  • GuinnessKMF - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Before you go insulting peoples math, maybe you should understand the topic a little bit better.

    Check: http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html 326ppi
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone 326ppi

    You're aware that 3.5" is a marketting number, not the exact screen size. It's also listed as 9cm, or 3.54330709 inches. Or 325.619... ppi

    Check your facts dude
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    i checked it here
    http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_4-3275.php

    but what about the maths
    and those formulae
    why dont u
    do the maths
    So what is the exact screen size then ????
    Reply
  • GuinnessKMF - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    It says ~330ppi, the tilda means approximately, I think I'd believe apple.com and wikipedia values over gsmarena. I have done the math, if you use 9cm and convert it to inches you get 325.6 ppi as I said, rounded up to 326.

    It's an incredibly small difference but if you want to go calling people out on bad math and throwing in smiley faces and "dude" to make it seem like you're not just nitpicking go ahead.

    The thing is that their math was just fine, as was yours, but you don't respect significant digits. 3.5" could mean 3.450 to 3.549 inches, if they're working it out as 3.543 inches (9cm) you get 326ppi. And all of this is assuming square pixels (not always the case, although the iPhone does seem to have them).
    Reply
  • cocoviper - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/25/ortustech-launches-...

    Panel available for about a year :)
    Reply
  • jrs77 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    These high resolutions displays are rather pointless imho, as they don't offer any advantages over the currently available ones.

    We could argue back and forth about the "retina-thingy" but truth to be told anything above 300 dpi isn't going to add anything. Most computer-screens have something between 72 and 96 dpi and they're totally fine with this "low" resolution allready and you need to be closer then the length of your arm to really see single pixels and get a dizzy image.

    I've got an old mobile with a 4" screen and 640x320px and it's totally sufficient allready imho. But then again, I'm using my mobile to make calls or maybe read/write an eMail or SMS. I simply can't be bothered to surf the web on a 4" screen, when I've got 10" tablets and 11" subnotebooks around.
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I have 15inch dell xps laptop that is full hd 1080p
    even after using it i feel the resolution is tooo much for a 15 incher
    and i feel that any screen less than 14 or 15 inch having a full hd screen would be superfluous
    and anyways playing a full hd 1080p video on a 7 inch or any screen less than 15 is not going to get you the actual quality of that video
    you are surely gonna miss out on the viewing experience
    What i feel is
    lets not get into the rat race
    which the recent digital and phone camera's have been in
    just increasing the megapixels in camera's dont gets you the best quality
    optics are much more important than just megapixels
    .
    Same should be the approach for displays too
    just increasing the resolution is not a solution to it
    we should also give more importance to the display technology tooo
    n i feel anything above hd in a 4 inch phone would be just waste of pixels
    and GPU power tooo
    .
    Hope soo these manufacturer get my point :)
    Reply
  • Exodite - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    PPI is a completely irrelevant metric on its own, for smartphone the actually interesting metrics are display size and resolution. PPI merely helps to give an idea of perceived sharpness.

    Personally I feel that most desktop displays have too low resolution given their size, I'd be very happy to see a 2560*1600 or 2560*1440 resolution on affordable 20-22" displays.

    Anyway, 720p makes a lot of sense to me on a smartphone as it would allow for native display of a lot of HD content. Such as TV shows.

    As well as allow for a better web browsing experience, obviously.
    Reply
  • jrs77 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    720p on a 4" screen is total bollocks and doesn't improve your experience of viewing movies or browsing the web, if look at it in a reasonable distance.

    At 40 cm distance - which would be the length of your forearm - you can't distinguish single pixels whe the density is higher then 150ppi, so yeah higher resolution is pointless, no matter what.

    When talking about HD-content then the best way to deal with it on small screens like mobile phones is to simply render a 720p video at only 360p, i.e. half it's resolution, and you won't even be able to tell the difference at those 40-50 cm distance. It's simple physics and capabilities of the human eye.

    Look at magazines in that regard, which are usually printed in 150-200dpi, and nobody would actually say that the image-quality of Playboy or the like is bad.
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Totally agree with you dude
    anything above 720p on a 4inch phone will be useless
    Why dont people understand that our eyes do have some limitation

    Rather display technology should be given more preference than just
    the resolution
    Reply
  • Iketh - Tuesday, October 11, 2011 - link

    "Dude" i'm already sick of reading your ignorant comments.

    Bring on the 500ppi screens. That is close enough to the limits of our eyes, NOT ~300. I most definitely notice the difference, I'm sorry you're handicapped. Manufacturers, don't listen to these egotistical idiots that think their opinion speaks for everyone.
    Reply
  • DParadoxx - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Who holds a smartphone at arms length? When I'm browsing the net before going to sleep its at perhaps 20cm. Reply
  • steven75 - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    The problem with your argument is nearly all devices haven't reached 300 dpi except for one notable example.

    So sure, I agree once everything else is at that level, it won't be a big deal to improve on it.
    Reply
  • kenyee - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    I stand a better chance getting lucky w/ one of those models in that photo than us being able to buy one of these in the US this year :-)
    The LG Optimus 3D took forever....the Optimus Black took forever....something like 6 months to get to the US IIRC...
    Reply
  • vtohthree - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    People here are trying to compare ppi in a notebook/laptop to a tablet.

    In a tablet PPI is critical, you have the device upfront and closer to your face, in addition, the ppi makes the text much more crisp/sharper and easier on the eyes, we could most certainly use 1080p in say... a 10.1" tablet.

    I agree, 1080p is just fine in a 15" notebook that is 1-2' a way from your eyes, and the text may even seem too small, but move your face close to the text and you will see that text is not sharp enough if it was say..less than a foot away. Having said that, I enjoy/prefer/welcome desktop real estate anyways.
    Reply
  • Mugur - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Phone resolution is getting higher, while notebooks seem stuck at 1366*768 more and more, if you don't pay a premium...

    Anyway, 720p is just about right for 4-7". Bring them on!
    Reply
  • Mugur - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Posted from my Nook Color with CM7. :-) Reply
  • aliasfox - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    At some point, the general populace just won't care. sure, CD sounds better than 128 Kbps mp3, and DVD audio sounds better still, but the % of consumers who can tell the difference goes down with each step up in quality, and the percentage that's willing to pay goes down even faster still.

    I for one will be happy to see 600dpi screens everywhere just so no matter how I look at it, everything will be smooth as silk. But if what's given away (free with contract!) is the minimum acceptable level (think iPhone 3GS), then that's the standard we'll get to live with, and the standard most OS and app developers will be targeting.

    There's one good thing to be said about the iPhone ecosystem - once the 3GS gets dropped (next year?) the minimum experience Apple will have to code for will be 960 x 640, allowing all customers of newer hardware to experience this difference. I'll bet there will be plenty of Android phones at 800 x 480 or even 480 x 360 still for sale.

    Lastly, resolution independence support in the mobile space (pinch to zoom) is much, much more prevalent and easier for people to understand at the moment. Every time I see someone with an ultra high res laptop display surfing the web, I see people squinting at their laptops. Ultra high resolution in the laptop space will become more useful once a) laptop makers start incorporating high res panels and b) windows and Mac OS make it just as easy for the novice to understand scaling on their laptops as on their phones. B has to come before A though, I think.
    Reply
  • sheh - Monday, October 10, 2011 - link

    Like other people above, I'm waiting for 300dpi desktop monitors at 22-24". And 16:10 please. And move already to OLED and no backlight. Reply
  • Iketh - Tuesday, October 11, 2011 - link

    I'll write the definition of "impulsive buying" the first time I see a 22" Viewsonic OLED on sale... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now