POST A COMMENT

25 Comments

Back to Article

  • inighthawki - Saturday, January 12, 2013 - link

    Anyone else find the idea of curved screens pretty dumb on a phone? Reply
  • phoenix_rizzen - Saturday, January 12, 2013 - link

    Would be really handy in a watch, though. Something like a Pebble 2. Reply
  • Brian Klug - Saturday, January 12, 2013 - link

    I was wondering what function or utility curved displays would serve, but I'm kind of impressed with the reference designs they have setup there. With the flip cover closed you get a sliver of display that has notifications and other info. I honestly think that's kind of neat - like a Samsung Continuum taken to its full extent.

    -Brian
    Reply
  • sheh - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Adding a secondary small display is a simpler solution, like flip phones. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    That wouldn't be protected then, though. The curved display as Brian describes it would still be protected from most abuse. Reply
  • NeBlackCat - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Not me. I once had an Acer Liquid Metal which had a curved plastic touchscreen overlaying the flat LCD. It was much easier to type accurately on than similarly sized completely flat screens. Reply
  • zebrax2 - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    That make sense since with a curved display a smaller part of your finger tip would be touching the screen providing more accurate selection Reply
  • sheh - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Not necessarily, although these examples definitely aren't exciting. Reply
  • nathanddrews - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Don't worry, soon Apple will patent it and call it iCurve and then you'll think it's cool. Reply
  • KPOM - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    When did anyone mention Apple in this thread before you? Reply
  • Mumrik - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    remember when we paid extra to get a monitor that wasn't curved? Reply
  • QQBoss - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Burying a lead is what a detective does to avoid solving a case.

    Burying a lede is what you did.

    1080p at 4.99". So when can I get my 4K 24" or 27" monitor? 2560x1440 is nice, but falling so far behind the dpi curve. What is limiting Samsung from scaling up other than probably intentional blindness as to user acceptance? I guess they would never answer a question about failure rates related to area, would they.
    Reply
  • Brian Klug - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    I used to be a stickler for lede vs lead, but both are actually acceptable spellings that refer to the exact same thing apparently.

    Also the answer for why you don't see gigantic displays is the same size and yield optimization function that affects die size. Bigger = higher odds of finding a defect, and thus more material thrown away.

    -Brian
    Reply
  • blanarahul - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    I've still got no idea why Samsung likes to emphasize that they have a 4.99" 1080p screen and not a 5" 1080p screen.

    ((1920^2)+(1080^2))/4.99 = 441.46
    ((1920^2)+(1080^2))/5 = 440.58

    The difference in PPI is less than 1 and they still like to brag about it.
    And it is much harder to pronounce 4.99 than it is to pronounce 5.
    Reply
  • blanarahul - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Sorry. It should be
    2202.9/4.99 = 441.46
    2202.9/5 = 440.58

    where 2202.9 = ((1920^2)+(1080^2))^(1/2)
    Reply
  • Xyraxx - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    They are being accurate... Since when do enthusiasts like us fault companies for being accurate down to the point?

    Does this really rustle your jimmies? I mean, its 4.99.... so that what they are calling it. Why exactly would your mind be put at ease if they told a little lie and called it 5" when its NOT 5"?

    Is there really any rational reason to insist they tell a tiny little white lie for no reason? Jesus.... get a grip man.
    Reply
  • sheh - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    I think Acer hinted at high DPI 20"+ monitors. Reply
  • Roland00Address - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    How usable would such a screen be outdoors? Reply
  • Xyraxx - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    Screen size, pixel layout and resolution don't tell us anything about view-ability in direct sunlight. We will need to await more details for that. Reply
  • Brulath - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    A display constituting half a cylinder split down its axis is hemicylindrical, not hemispherical (half a sphere). That said, it'd be pretty cool if they could create a hemispherical touch display in the future - such a device could make for some pretty interesting 3D experiences if combined with headtracking. Reply
  • Brian Klug - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Ahh, good catch, fixed!

    -Brian
    Reply
  • s44 - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    267ppi (Note 2 RGB) to 440+ in one generation? That's pretty farfetched. Note that the 310 number they're highlighting is from the Pentile S3, *not* the Note 2. Reply
  • iwod - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    I used to think 300 PPI were enough, but since i could spot the difference 300 PPI and 400 PPI, and also 400 PPI and 500 PPI, How many PPI is really enough.

    There are things that can easily go unnoticed. Partially because our brain filter details out. But for Fonts, especially CJK, they are very noticeable.
    Reply
  • ssj4Gogeta - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    Over 9000 should be enough. Reply
  • jamescox - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link


    I have tried looking at some displays with a regular magnifying glass, but I can not differentiate sub-pixels without significantly higher magnification. I can often see the pixel grid, but white pixels still look like a white square; I cant differentiate the RGB sub-pixels even on a normal, low ppi display. I was wondering what magnification you actually need for a high ppi display.

    Also, if you had a cylindrical display, but with it curved around the viewer, would this require changes to how a 3D game is rendered, or would it still look correct even though the rendering is using a flat rectangle as the view?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now