Related
wish screen is most pixelated, htc sensation or the note. Dose someone know if there is a test who show the 720p mobile screen comparison inzoomed
Samsung Galaxy Note
800 x 1280 pixels, 5.3 inches (~285 ppi pixel density)
HTC Sensation:
540 x 960 pixels, 4.3 inches (~256 ppi pixel density)
(http://www.gsmarena.com)
I meen side by side in real world, 1280x800 pentile vs 960x540 rgb
Last time I check, this is the real world oh Hai luk, search!
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1313795&highlight=pentile+vs+rgb
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1359716&highlight=pentile+vs+rgb
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...D---is-the-PenTile-matrix-bad-for-you_id23134
I mean to other 720p displays like the rezound and lg 4 g, not 800X480 screens
Oh, please, we're talking about small screens. 1000 pixels on 4 inches.
If you see pixels on any of those two screens you should call the Guinness Book of Records to claim the sharpest eyesight on the World.
I can't see any pixels when reading text on the Galaxy Note Screen.
Hell, Ipad and Ipad 2 have 1024x768 on a 10" screen and nobody is complaining about pixellation.
You're talking about a screen that's 5" and has roughly the same resolution.
falluja said:
wish screen is most pixelated, htc sensation or the note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I answered your question above, specifically the HTC Sensation is more "pixelated" because the ppi is lower(though only by a tiny bit, and not noticeable)
falluja said:
Dose someone know if there is a test who show the 720p mobile screen comparison inzoomed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right now I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only other 720P mobile screen available(limited). The Res on the Nexus is 720 x 1280 pixels, 4.65 inches (~316 ppi pixel density) So the "pixelation" would be higher on the Note vs the Nexus. The Note may have more "pixels" then the Note, but the Nexus has smaller screen to pack those Pixels in.
Also, the Galaxy Nexus uses the same Pentile screen that the Note does.
Spartan2x said:
I answered your question above, specifically the HTC Sensation is more "pixelated" because the ppi is lower(though only by a tiny bit, and not noticeable)
Right now I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only other 720P mobile screen available(limited). The Res on the Nexus is 720 x 1280 pixels, 4.65 inches (~316 ppi pixel density) So the "pixelation" wouyld be higher on the Note vs the Nexus. The screens have the same number of pixels (1200*800 vs 1280*720, they just took 80 from one sie and added to the other) but the Nexus has smaller screen to pack those Pixels in.
Also, the Galaxy Nexus uses the same Pentile screen that the Note does.
Edit, not the same pixels.
1200 times 800 is 960,000
1280 times 720 is 921,600
Opps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Notes screen is 1280x800 not 1200x800
http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxynote/note/spec.html?type=find
Gunner86 said:
Notes screen is 1280x800 not 1200x800
http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxynote/note/spec.html?type=find
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, I must have mis-read it. I got it right on my first reply because I did a copy and paste.
edited
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
the answer is :
"
Who
Gives
A
####
"
Great another iphone thread
From the big ole Note
miko3d said:
the answer is :
"
Who
Gives
A
####
"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly +1
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
steveblue said:
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting.. Although I would think you wouldn't need to plot viewing distances. I would think you would need to either know the algorithm in which apple uses to make this "retina" claim or you would just go by the viewing distances specified by the manufacturer.
I could be wrong but that was my thought. Definitely an interesting idea though.
steveblue said:
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ignore the others lol... This is a great post as I was thinking the same thing. You explained it much more impressively that I ever could though...
I like this thread. Steve definitely sounds like an expert on the subject.
So according to apple, we do have retina display! !
DPMAce said:
I like this thread. Steve definitely sounds like an expert on the subject.
So according to apple, we do have retina display! !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should lead to some great Samsung ads.
its all marketing by the great apple. Only company I know that can be late to a party, create a new word, and then set the standard. Its becoming dead around these parts.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
There's nothing "pseudo science" about the resolution of the human eye. It's nothing but a ratio between ppi and viewing distance. It could be argued whether apple's phones and tablets are below the ratio and whether their official viewing distances make sense, but the concept itself is sound science. If you increase the pixel density or view the screen from further away, you won't be able to distinguish individual pixels.
Nice to know.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
I would say it's exactly on the fuzzy edge of retina display - for 285 ppi, the shortest distance from the screen that the user is still unable to discern the pixel difference is about 12 inch. (for iPhone 4s it's 10.5 inch)
For normal usage of the Note (my usage), it's about 11-12 inch or larger, so it's on the verge of retina display.
Before i prove your theory, let me see if I can care less about this exercise.
---------------------------
Yeah it's a Galaxy Note, are you jealous?
I disagree that the Note has a retina display. it looks considerably more grainy than my wife's iPhone 4. it doesn't bother me, but I know it's there
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
deymayor said:
Before i prove your theory, let me see if I can care less about this exercise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can definitely care less about this exercise - by ignoring it and not posting a reply at all. I guess you do care about it a bit.
leppo said:
I disagree that the Note has a retina display. it looks considerably more grainy than my wife's iPhone 4. it doesn't bother me, but I know it's there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but the new ipad also has a retina display - and it has lower ppi than the Note.
but .....
freemini said:
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, PenTile RGBG is the dirty word here. I wish they went with an RGB matrix. I can definitely see the dotted edges on small text. That said, the dots are far smaller than the terribly-obvious ones on older screens like on the Nexus One, so I can easily ignore it.
tytung2020 said:
I would say it's exactly on the fuzzy edge of retina display - for 285 ppi, the shortest distance from the screen that the user is still unable to discern the pixel difference is about 12 inch. (for iPhone 4s it's 10.5 inch)
For normal usage of the Note (my usage), it's about 11-12 inch or larger, so it's on the verge of retina display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this is true, then for me I can't see the individual pixels from my regular viewing distance. Yes, I actually held a ruler up to eye level and put my phone at the end and honestly 1ft is kind of close.
On a side note, I have always loved my Note's screen. If it is not the pinnacle, it sure is sitting on top w/ only a few other phones atop the Android ecosystem.
freemini said:
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is only 1/6 (~17%) not 1/3 less!
And the macbook is just another laptop but if you call it the latter, apple drones get their panties in a bunch.
To start with, "Retina display" is a marketing term, created by Apple. It has no formal definition or "standard". It's only meaningful in terms dictated by Apple relative to their own products.
It's also (as mentioned at the bottom of the OP) based on the distance you're holding the device from your face, you're not likely to be using a 5.3" device at the same distance as a 9.7" device. It's this distance relative to the ppi that they're using to determine if it's a "retina" display or not.
Don't adopt proprietary marketing terms as a meaningful identifier.
I would imagine that since it's a term created, by Apple, to describe a feature of Apple products, it's irrelevant when applied to non-Apple products. They might've lost their "reality distortion field", but they've still got one of the more heavily backed marketing teams in the world.
I sure hope the screen technology on the new LG Nexus 4 is as good as, or close to that of the HTC One X screen ?
I have the Galaxy Nexus, and international One X, running CM10 Nightly's on both. There is absolutely no question whatsoever, that the One X has by far the superior screen technology, over Samsung's 720p pentile AMOLED screen on the Galaxy Nexus. The One X is easier to see outside in daylight, the image is more crsip / sharp on the One X, and reading texts in e-mails and news webpages is also far clearer and more detailed on the One X. Only thing the Samsung screen has on it, is the deep blacks and cartoon colors, that's it.
I know the Nexus 4 uses IPS technology, similar to that of HTC's One X. I am not even asking for the Nexus 4 to be better than the One X's screen, I will be a happy camper as long at it is at least the same quality and clear image.
Whats the verdict ?
I read somewhere that they are very close in quality. Hard to choose which is best, so I wouldn't worry!
some say yes
i think probably not, but close
They're basically even. I wager some reviews will say its better, but overall they'll be a draw.
I'd say it's better. IPS is amazing.
Sent from my SGH-T959V using xda premium
Looks like you can afford it, buy it and put it side by side then let us know. I would go to a Sprint or ATT store, they have both the One X and LG Optimus G.
Screen
They should be very similar, the only difference I could see from the Specs sheet is that the Nexus 4 has a resolution of 1280x768 and 320dpi vs the One X's 1280x720 and 312 dpi.
its better afaik...
768x1280 vs 720x1280
True HD IPS plus vs Super IPS2
plus the contrast is greater
OT:
If I'm not mistaken, the SLCD2 screens in the ONE X are made by Samsung, and now they even makw SLDC3 1080p screen like showcased in the HTC J Butterfly.
I don't understand why Samsung keeps using their inferior (Screenburn, low Brighness, inaccurate colors.., in most cases higher power usage) Amoled screens
in their top Smartphones.
The Galaxy Note 2 with an 5.5" 1080p SLCD3 would have been amazing.
wurzelsepp3 said:
OT:
If I'm not mistaken, the SLCD2 screens in the ONE X are made by Samsung, and now they even makw SLDC3 1080p screen like showcased in the HTC J Butterfly.
I don't understand why Samsung keeps using their inferior (Screenburn, low Brighness, inaccurate colors.., in most cases higher power usage) Amoled screens
in their top Smartphones.
The Galaxy Note 2 with an 5.5" 1080p SLCD3 would have been amazing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are COMPLETELY mistaken - Samsung don't make the one x screens at all.
Sharp & acer make the screens available on the ONEX (with Sony making a few that seem to be U.S AT&T version only)
Sharp is the warm yellow variant
Acer is the cool blue variant
Most say sharp is the better version.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
"S-LCD Corporation (Hangul: 에스 엘시디, Japanese: エス・エルシーディー) is a South Korean manufacturer of amorphous TFT LCD panels and wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd"
This is what Wikipedia tells me.
wurzelsepp3 said:
"S-LCD Corporation (Hangul: 에스 엘시디, Japanese: エス・エルシーディー) is a South Korean manufacturer of amorphous TFT LCD panels and wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd"
This is what Wikipedia tells me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Panel IDs for HTC ONE X
Sharp 0x294000f
Acer 0x4940014
Sony 0x1810
Sony tends to be US AT&T only for most, international devices are either acer or sharp.
So, you can forget Samsung making these screens.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
S-LCD is a company name for Samsung, not the name of an LCD technology. It's super-LCD versus Samsung-LCD. Same acronym, different meaning.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
I've seen a couple of articles talking about the Samsung Galaxy S5, which is rumored to have a QHD 2k screen ( 2560 x 1440).
Just curious what others thought. Personally, I went from the HTC Rezound (which was also a 720p screen, but smaller at 4.3", so a higher PPI) to the Moto X, but I love the Moto X screen. I honestly can't imagine having a screen that's any sharper. I almost don't want a higer-rez screen, since it would probably just be a waste of battery power.
I'm sure there are some folks who are spec-oriented, but I feel all of the trade-offs made by the Moto X (720p screen, dual core, etc) were exactly right. Great screen, great battery, responsive UI, etc.
The newer SOCs well be more efficient, it won't have issues delivering fast performance for 1080p while getting good battery if well optimized, especially if reduced to dual core like the MotoX.
The MotoX screen have RGB matrix so it would have more subpixels than a Pentile and Diamond matrix AMOLED screen of the same resolution.
sent via tapatalk
I switched from the HTC One which had the most amazing screen. The Moto X is fine by all means though, it's vibrant and clear and 720P is more than adequate. I think I'm a sucker for AMOLED as well, the blackest of blacks, I'll never go backs. I've owned a GNex and a Note 1 and I feel this AMOLED is calibrated very well. Not quite as cartoony looking as my brother's Note 3.
The screen is 4.x" diagonally. If you can see a difference between 720p and 1080p, you need to take off your magnifying glasses and move the phone away from your face. While I'm all about bigger and better specs, a 2k res screen on a phone isn't necessary.
Yes
Yes. Samsung can make a millionp screen and I still wouldn't touch them. Lol
Sent from my Moto X cellular telephone...
The Moto X was engineered to be the best balance of hardware/screen/size/battery etc available. To that end the 720p screen is perfect. When the same balance can be achieved with a higher resolution screen then I will want it.
You will notice this is very similar to how Apple engineers a phone, no hardware is included that isn't optimized and balanced. They don't force a feature into the phone for the sake of marketing that really hurts the overall product balance.
The MotoX screen is fine but not as good as other Android like S4. I am happy with battery life and screen on time though so its a trade off.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
someguyatx said:
The MotoX screen is fine but not as good as other Android like S4. I am happy with battery life and screen on time though so its a trade off.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My only reference is my GS3 and the screen on the X is every bit as nice.
Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk
Yes the X screen is nicer than GS3
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
I'm OK with it. But really wish it had a 1080. Want from htc one to moto x and can tell the difference
c19932 said:
I'm OK with it. But really wish it had a 1080. Want from htc one to moto x and can tell the difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? My son has the HTC One and we compared them, and I preferred the Moto X
KCJunkman
Ya know if the Moto x had a 1080 screen....battery wouldn't be as good. Personally I'll take the extra battery life. Screen looks good to me.
Sent from my Moto X cellular telephone...
I have the note 3 and honestly, the difference between the 1080p screen of the Note 3 isn't that much better than the 720p screen of the Moto X. They are both very sharp and as was stated above, I would rather the increased battery life than the sharper display. But in all fairness, I'm no pixel junkie so the 720p screen doesn't bother me at all.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using xda app-developers app
The only reason I was even remotely interested in the Moto X was because it carried an HD display-size: was AMOLED and was RGB-like matrix. The rest like usability and one-handed nature was icing on the cake. A FHD display is stupid and impractical for most common cases: the rare exception for me is reading textbooks and other small-font paragraphs: in which case, you're using the wrong tool for the task. Get a tablet or the 5.5"+ displays. The only other phone with a similar display is the Note 2 and that phone completely contradicts what makes the Moto X attractive.
However though, food for thought, anyone looking for a backup phone should consider a Note 2.
Yes, because I can't see the difference between this and a 1080p on a screen of this size (and probably neither can you).
I've never had a 1080p screen but I can't imagine anything being noticeably sharper than the Moto X's. That aside, the vast majority of the time you're not thinking about whether or not you can see traces of pixels when staring at the thing, you're just using it to actually do things and in that context brightness, color balance/saturation, and contrast are what you actually notice. All of those are great on the Moto, now every LCD screen I see looks washed-out to me!
Until batteries get a whole lot better, I don't see the point in 1080p for anything less than a 5" screen. It's like buying a 40" 4K TV... Just an opinion of course!
These resolution comparisons on screens smaller than five inches are getting ridiculous. 720 or 1080 really makes no difference on a screen this small. Unless you look at your phone with a magnifying glass or microscope the human eye can't really tell the difference. Backlight makes a bigger difference than anything. Anyway here is an article from professionals that will give a little more insight.
http://lifehacker.com/do-i-need-a-1080p-display-in-my-smartphone-1450793273
Samsung = e-penis enlarger...
I think the 720p screen is a big part of the reason the device is as snappy as it is, as well as good on battery. I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p but it's tough without a side-by-side. The resolution is perfect IMO.
In the Note 10.1 (2014) forum as well as a few other 10" tablet forums people complain about the fact the resolution on the 12.2 is the same as on 10.1" devices. I hadn't really thought much about it until tonight. I was sitting at my desktop which is a dual monitor setup. Desktop is a 27" iMac with a resolution of 2560x1440 and a gorgeous 27" widescreen Samsung monitor at it's max resolution of 1920x1080.
A pair of 27" monitors, one which lets me do very detailed pixel peeping in photoshop (iMac), and another which is so crisp and stunning, and still with very easy to read text (The Sammy). Neither of these 27" beautiful screens has as many pixels as our lil' tablet. I don't want this to be a debate regarding PenTile as that is not the point. Just saying that the resolution on my Note Pro blows away every desktop and laptop (as well as other tablets) I own.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
wingdo said:
In the Note 10.1 (2014) forum as well as a few other 10" tablet forums people complain about the fact the resolution on the 12.2 is the same as on 10.1" devices. I hadn't really thought much about it until tonight. I was sitting at my desktop which is a dual monitor setup. Desktop is a 27" iMac with a resolution of 2560x1440 and a gorgeous 27" widescreen Samsung monitor at it's max resolution of 1920x1080.
A pair of 27" monitors, one which lets me do very detailed pixel peeping in photoshop (iMac), and another which is so crisp and stunning, and still with very easy to read text (The Sammy). Neither of these 27" beautiful screens has as many pixels as our lil' tablet. I don't want this to be a debate regarding PenTile as that is not the point. Just saying that the resolution on my Note Pro blows away every desktop and laptop (as well as other tablets) I own.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People will complain about anything. Can't make everyone happy and some people think specs are more important then real world results. too bad for them. Love this tablet and couldn't imagine going back to a little 10 inch!
Yep. My beautiful full hd 60 inch tv is only 48 ppi and 1920x1080 pixels. Never complain
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Supposely, Apple will release a Macbook Air 12 inch with "Retina" display. When I checked the resolution, it's the same as our Note Pro 12.2.
Samsung marketing department should have named our tablet the Galaxy Note 12.2 Retina LOL.
My 12.5" 1920x1080 laptop looks much sharper. My 12.2 is noticeably jagged at closer viewing distances, even on straight lines like the light brown line surrounding this reply box on XDA.
PenTile is the reason. I would much prefer a 1920x1200 RGB stripe screen over a 2560x1600 PenTile screen.
I have note pro p-901 and my wife has note 2014 p-601. Both of them have great resolution which is better than any laptop I have used...
And of course better resolution than Ipad air with retina display (my ex-tab)....
I like sammy tablets and I think Tab-S has a brilliant sharper screen than Note Pro...
I used to be very very worrying about the resolutions before I purchased this device. After I bought it, I have been satisfied with the resolutions.
With people having 2k res smart phones it seems the world is about numbers rather then immersion any more. I don't get also. I love the screen on this bad boy. I never understood the rat race on numbers and packing as many pixels into a small screen as possible. When will it get to a point of crazy, as in you wont be able to see the difference with the human eye..
Well by that time we will have robotic eyes and then complain that the screen in our new robo eyes are are not as pixel dense as the ones the billionairs have. :cyclops:
Now I do like bright colors alot so I love the look of samsungs s5 screen.. Over saturated colors are great to look at imo. Though 2k Samoled screen vs 1080p Samoled screen I prob wont really see the hype.. I will focus on the colors.
same here. The resolution is already insane. Could it be better? Obviously. But no way I am going to ***** about this.
I ran a showing of The Hobbit 2 in 2K on both this tab and the newest iPad.
I have converted 14 long-time Apple fans in 4 minutes. Says it all, I believe.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
ShadowLea said:
I ran a showing of The Hobbit 2 in 2K on both this tab and the newest iPad.
I have converted 14 long-time Apple fans in 4 minutes. Says it all, I believe.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4 mins? A 2k trailer or what? Link please, my dad has the air and I'd love to fully blow him away once and for all
Sent from my SM-G900T using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
ChironexFleckeri said:
I never understood the rat race on numbers and packing as many pixels into a small screen as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you be happy if the screen was 1280x800?
Put the Note 12.2's 2560x1600 screen next to a 12.5" laptop's 1920x1080 screen, display the same small text like on a website or document and see if you can tell the difference. It's not the resolution that's the problem, it's the pentile layout that makes it look jagged.
When will it get to a point of crazy, as in you wont be able to see the difference with the human eye..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You really can't see the pixelation caused by the pentile layout? I can clearly see it on smaller text at normal viewing distances.
Just because your eyes can't see them doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
You might find this research paper interesting too:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsid.186/abstract
Master Ramy said:
4 mins? A 2k trailer or what? Link please, my dad has the air and I'd love to fully blow him away once and for all
Sent from my SM-G900T using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wasn't an online vid, I had the file on my SD. Sorry. But you can usually find the high-res trailers at (ironically) trailers.apple.com.