Database Users

Reading Text on Super AMOLED

I remember a while back there was an article on Ars Technica (can't link yet, but google "ars Secrets of the Nexus One's screen" and you'll find it) about the Nexus One's AMOLED screen. They talked about how the AMOLED screen technology/layout resulted in text that wasn't as sharp as on the Motorola Droid. I'm curious if this is still a concern with Super AMOLED technology, as with the Epic 4G?
I'm looking to upgrade from my Palm Pre in the next few weeks (hoping the Epic 4G is out by then), but I'm hoping to do some background research before that. I use my phone quite a bit for web browsing now, and would probably increase that usage on a phone with a bigger screen and better browser. I'm also looking forward to being able to use Kindle's software for Android. Bottom line is that I know I'll be reading a LOT of text on my phone. Super AMOLED is supposed to be incredible for pictures and video, but if it's lackluster on text, it's not as useful to me.
If any of you have any thoughts or experiences regarding this issue (if it still is one on Super AMOLED), I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

Yes, it's still an issue.

SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
[/URL][/IMG]

violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I checked out your "Galaxy S (Epic, Captivate etc) VS EVO Comparison and thoughts" thread and it was an excellent overview. I'm leaning towards the Evo for the larger screen and better text readability. I'm out of town right now, but when I get back home next week I might try to track down an Evo somewhere. If the Epic comes out within the 30 day trial period, I'll check it out then.
The main things tempting me with the Epic are the nicer CPU & GPU, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy regardless after being on my sluggish Pre for a year. If only Palm had been bought by someone who could have brought some of WebOS's features to Android (I think I'll miss having cards and gestures). Either way, both look like excellent phones and I'm anxious to get started with Android.
Thanks for the feedback!

violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the reason that it comes out like that, will the text be fixed when Android Gingerbread comes out? I've heard that gingerbread changes the resolution, but I don't know if that's true.

EnderTheThird said:
I checked out your "Galaxy S (Epic, Captivate etc) VS EVO Comparison and thoughts" thread and it was an excellent overview. I'm leaning towards the Evo for the larger screen and better text readability. I'm out of town right now, but when I get back home next week I might try to track down an Evo somewhere. If the Epic comes out within the 30 day trial period, I'll check it out then.
The main things tempting me with the Epic are the nicer CPU & GPU, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy regardless after being on my sluggish Pre for a year. If only Palm had been bought by someone who could have brought some of WebOS's features to Android (I think I'll miss having cards and gestures). Either way, both look like excellent phones and I'm anxious to get started with Android.
Thanks for the feedback!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Visit a T-Mobile or AT&T store and look at the Captivate and/or the Vibrant..the Epic will have the same screen..once you see it you can judge for yourself...the text may not be as sharp but it may be acceptable by your use...so its worth checking..

I have a evo and do pretty much nothing but text reading (ebooks and the web). Text is very easy to read and I have not noticed any eye strain yet.
That sucks about super amoled not doing text well.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

gTen said:
Visit a T-Mobile or AT&T store and look at the Captivate and/or the Vibrant..the Epic will have the same screen..once you see it you can judge for yourself...the text may not be as sharp but it may be acceptable by your use...so its worth checking..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried doing that at a Best Buy yesterday but someone had stolen their demo unit(s). Apparently it's one of the more ghetto Best Buys in Boston. Who knew. I'll be checking it out when I get back home for sure though.

Hmmmm.... I went to the AT&T store last week, to check out the captivate and I didn't notice any problem in reading the text personally. I haven't made the switch to a smartphone yet so maybe my eyes are too inexperienced to notice something like that, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy with my future Epic 4G

I have the captivate and yes, text on it is not as crisp as on the droid or droid x. But is it an issue, no. On really light colored backgrounds like white or light grey, if you look hard for it, you can see some fuzziness. But on colorful backgrounds you really cant see it. I can tell you, its a beautiful screen. Overall it looks better than the droid x, which has been described as dull or drab. The colors on the S-AMOLED really pop, and the fact that its an OLED means that black backgrounds are really true black (complete absence of light).
In my opinion its the second best display available, second only to the iphone4 display.

derek4484 said:
In my opinion its the second best display available, second only to the iphone4 display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you say the retena display is better?

gTen said:
Why would you say the retena display is better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only way the retina display is better is if you're reading text from under 10" away from your face, but then again who the heck reads with a phone up in their face? I read alot of e-books and other sites and I can tell you reading a page from a normal distance there is little to no difference.
As far as video playback and pictures the Samsung blows the retina display out of the water and by leaps and bounds is the #1 screen in the phone market hands down.

i have to agree that retina display looks better in my opinion. I have pretty good eyesight so that may be why. However, it doesn't make a difference in eyestrain or readability.
I own a captivate and read ebooks on a white background regularly. Its honestly not an issue.

systoxity said:
i have to agree that retina display looks better in my opinion. I have pretty good eyesight so that may be why. However, it doesn't make a difference in eyestrain or readability.
I own a captivate and read ebooks on a white background regularly. Its honestly not an issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm more worried about screen-burn in, which is a very big problem for S-Amoled//Amoled screens.
With less than a year's use of my Nexus One, there is a slight amount of screen burn in, which isn't really avoidable.

NeonMonster said:
I'm more worried about screen-burn in, which is a very big problem for S-Amoled//Amoled screens.
With less than a year's use of my Nexus One, there is a slight amount of screen burn in, which isn't really avoidable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Screen burn ins were only a real problem with the early model amoled screens, much like plasma HDTV the screen tech has evolved and it doesn't hurt that the Super Amoled screens are developed by Samsung which are global HDTV innovators.
Besides for screen burn in to become permanent the screen would have to be on for hours on a static image, on a HDTV I can see that happening if you fall asleep maybe but who on earth turns off their phone's screen timeout and let's the screen stay on all day chugging battery life? That just won't happen.
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device. Not to mention you have a warranty which 100% covers such a thing as screen burn in and if you do happen to burn in a screen it usually happens sooner rather than later.

Sebrina said:
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't be worried about that if I were you. The Galaxy S series is on all four major US carriers and will undoubtedly get a pretty large hacker following, so even if Samsung does stop updating the Galaxy S phones, there will always be cyanogenmod or many other custom ROMS. And if you're posting here, rooting your phone and installing a custom ROM shouldn't be a huge deal.

Sebrina said:
Screen burn ins were only a real problem with the early model amoled screens, much like plasma HDTV the screen tech has evolved and it doesn't hurt that the Super Amoled screens are developed by Samsung which are global HDTV innovators.
Besides for screen burn in to become permanent the screen would have to be on for hours on a static image, on a HDTV I can see that happening if you fall asleep maybe but who on earth turns off their phone's screen timeout and let's the screen stay on all day chugging battery life? That just won't happen.
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device. Not to mention you have a warranty which 100% covers such a thing as screen burn in and if you do happen to burn in a screen it usually happens sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not possible to have permanent screen burn in..as for temporary one...even LCDs state not to keep the same image on for too long to avoid temp burn-ins...
As for updates...we are not sure how much of a bone Samsung will give, but at the moment, event the Sprint Moment has gotten a Foyo 2.2 by the community.

violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
[/URL][/IMG]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that 330% more power figure accurate for the GS screens, I was under the impression that they are different than all previous devices? I read a lot of text in my personal usage. I wonder if an app could be developed to make all white pixels black and black white? Although white text isn't ideal if it amounted to 350% power savings my eyes/brain could adapt eventually?

blakehess11 said:
I wouldn't be worried about that if I were you. The Galaxy S series is on all four major US carriers and will undoubtedly get a pretty large hacker following, so even if Samsung does stop updating the Galaxy S phones, there will always be cyanogenmod or many other custom ROMS. And if you're posting here, rooting your phone and installing a custom ROM shouldn't be a huge deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that samsung encrypts the hardware drivers so it's not very easy to port new android versions.. Is this not an issue?

kgold708 said:
Is that 330% more power figure accurate for the GS screens, I was under the impression that they are different than all previous devices? I read a lot of text in my personal usage. I wonder if an app could be developed to make all white pixels black and black white? Although white text isn't ideal if it amounted to 350% power savings my eyes/brain could adapt eventually?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that is for the regular AMOLED screen...the Super AMOLED screen would most likely be around like 260% for that..but you gotta realize that your screen will never be FULLY pure white like that...the next revision of Super AMOLED(for 2011 plans to go RGBW to fix that).
Either way you'd never have so much white on the screen for it to waist that much energy...
christophocles said:
I heard that samsung encrypts the hardware drivers so it's not very easy to port new android versions.. Is this not an issue?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does not make it easy but not impossible...if they release a Galaxy S 2 in the future with Gingerbread or any other phone with it and don't do Gingerbread for Galaxy S..with some effort it would be possible to port it...

Samsung Galaxy S3 SUPER-Ultra quantum-led

Samsung truly is the leader in technology, especially screen technology
Introducing the:
"The First Full-Color Display with Quantum Dots"
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Researchers at Samsung Electronics have made the first full-color display that uses quantum dots. Quantum-dot displays promise to be brighter, cheaper, and more energy-efficient than those found in today's cell phones and MP3 players.
Samsung's four-inch diagonal display is controlled using an active matrix, which means each of its color quantum-dot pixels is turned on and off with a thin-film transistor. The researchers have made the prototype on glass as well as on flexible plastic, as reported in Nature Photonics this week. "We have converted a scientific challenge into a real technological achievement," says Jong Min Kim, a fellow at the Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology.
Quantum dots are semiconductor nanocrystals that glow when exposed to current or light. They emit different colors depending on their size and the material they're made from. Their bright, pure colors and low power consumption make them very appealing for displays. Most computer monitors and TVs use power-hungry liquid-crystal displays (LCDs). Organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays are more brilliant and energy-efficient, but are confined to small gadgets because they are too expensive for TV screens, and their organic materials have limited lifetimes.
Quantum-dot displays would consume less than a fifth of the power of LCDs, says Samsung researcher Tae-Ho Kim. They promise to be brighter and longer-lasting than OLEDs. What's more, they could be manufactured for less than half of what it costs to make LCD or OLED screens.
This potential has caught the attention of big display manufacturers other than Samsung. LG Display is partnering with MIT spinoff QD Vision to develop quantum-dot displays.
To make their prototype, the Samsung researchers start by coating a solution of quantum dots on a silicon plate and evaporating the solvent. Then they gently press a rubber stamp with a ridged surface into the quantum-dot layer, peel it off, and then press it on the desired glass or plastic substrate. This transfers stripes of quantum dots onto the substrate.
In a color display, each pixel contains red, green, and blue subpixels. These colors are combined in varying intensities to produce millions of colors. By using their stamping technique over and over, the researchers can create a repeated pattern of red, green, and blue stripes.
They transfer the stripes directly onto an array of thin-film transistors. The transistors are made of amorphous hafnium-indium-zinc oxide, which provide higher, more stable current than conventional amorphous-silicon transistors. The resulting display has subpixels that are about 50 micrometers wide and 100 micrometers long, small enough for use in cell-phone screens.
"This is a powerful demonstration," says Seth Coe-Sullivan, cofounder and chief technology officer of QD Vision. "The individual technology elements aren't necessarily new. Samsung definitely did a lot of good engineering to put all the pieces together in an impressive way."
He cautions, though, that there are many more research and engineering issues to be solved, and that quantum-dot displays are still at least three years away from commercialization. The best quantum-dot devices are still not as power-efficient as OLEDs. They also need to last longer—right now, they start losing their brightness after about 10,000 hours. Finally, researchers will have to develop ways to manufacture them at low cost and large scale.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does this mean the new generation of Galaxy S (next year) will features a quad-core CPU/GPU, samsung's new 4gb powerful and efficient dram, and an ultra-super-mega-quantum display?
The future is looking bright my friends ​

Well the article you quoted said they are at least 3 years away from commercial viability, so I think the answer to your question is no.

to my best guess... it'll be 2015 ~ 2018 before we see that new technology hit the street level

Sounds (looks) really good on the eyes.

AllGamer said:
to my best guess... it'll be 2015 ~ 2018 before we see that new technology hit the street level
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed ...............

troed said:
Agreed ...............
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem?
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/02/nanophotonica-develops-s-qled-oled-to-develop-inferiority-compl/
Ahh, the wonders of OLED -- flexible displays, great viewing angles, and low power consumption. However, the folks at NanoPhotonica have "perfected" a quantum dot display technology called S-QLED that allegedly has superior picture quality, uses 30 percent less power, and costs three-quarters less than its OLED competition. The company is gearing up for mass production and is in talks with several OEMs to start producing S-QLED displays, but unfortunately there's no timetable for when they'll get to market. Guess we'll have to wait a bit longer to see just how perfect these QLEDs really are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

it'll be nice if they start mass producing them, until then it's still lab prototypes expensive to produce

AllGamer said:
to my best guess... it'll be 2015 ~ 2018 before we see that new technology hit the street level
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, read the article this is 3 years away, they need to milk what they are marketing now for a;ll it is worth

Nanophotonica is apparently 17 months away from mass production. I for one, am leaping on the IPO train for that one! Hell, maybe it'll buy me a new smart phone like Universal Display did (and then some of course) after making returns for shareholders on their OLED manufacturing processes that were put into the phone that I subsequently purchased with the returns. AKA, the Samsung Galaxy S which used their screen component technology. Nothing beats free, and I always buy unlocked as I hate contracts.
I'd suggest keeping an eye out because something like this is going to give along the lines of a 10-15X gain if they have enough patents on the technology.

Interesting?
Interesting? Maybe even related?
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-Samsung-lawsuit-a-battle-over-Samsung-Galaxy-S3-and-the-iPhone-5-both-slated-for-fall-release_id18446

Doesn't make sense legally to sue a company over a product that it hasn't released... how does apple know exactly what samsung will put into their future phones?
CromeX said:
Interesting? Maybe even related?
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-Samsung-lawsuit-a-battle-over-Samsung-Galaxy-S3-and-the-iPhone-5-both-slated-for-fall-release_id18446
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

the article is OOOOOOOOOOLD and has been mentioned here before.
and to the above poster ^^^ the article says Apple is affraid of the SGS3 that Sam is prepping to fight the imminent iP5, so they are hoping this law suit will make Sam change designs for SGS3 and make it less competitive.

Early 2012
While all eyes are on Android heavyweights, the Samsung Galaxy S2 and Motorola Droid Bionic, to take on Android's biggest smartphone rival the iPhone 5, there may be more stiffer competition for Apple sooner than expected. Samsung Galaxy S3 (confirmed for early 2012)
According to J.K. Shin, president of Samsung's mobile division, the Samsung Galaxy S3 will launch in early 2012. So what can we expect from the Samsung Galaxy S3. CNET states, "nothing less than a quad-core processor, a super-bright AMOLED 3D screen, a 12-megapixel dual camera, some augmented reality shenanigans, and of course NFC. It should certainly have the next version of Android, Ice Cream Sandwich, on board."

straw55 said:
While all eyes are on Android heavyweights, the Samsung Galaxy S2 and Motorola Droid Bionic, to take on Android's biggest smartphone rival the iPhone 5, there may be more stiffer competition for Apple sooner than expected. Samsung Galaxy S3 (confirmed for early 2012)
According to J.K. Shin, president of Samsung's mobile division, the Samsung Galaxy S3 will launch in early 2012. So what can we expect from the Samsung Galaxy S3. CNET states, "nothing less than a quad-core processor, a super-bright AMOLED 3D screen, a 12-megapixel dual camera, some augmented reality shenanigans, and of course NFC. It should certainly have the next version of Android, Ice Cream Sandwich, on board."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which means it'll be for sale in May/June just like the SGS1 and SGS2 were. It's next year's phone.
Please to be remembering they started talking about the SGS2 last year, leaked it in the fall, showed it right after the holidays, sent demo units out in the spring, and didn't sell until summer. Same story with the SGS1.
As for QD tech, lets not forget that OLED has taken over a decade to get where it is now, and it's still limited to small form factors, and ain't cheap or easy to produce. QD is 2020 tech.

GS3 - "Best Display We've Seen Recently" GSMArena

GSM recently did a preview and said this about the screen. And i'm sure they review tons of phones. Should shut up a lot of haters and doubters who most likely haven't even seen a pentile display =)
The hyperglazed plastic will not enjoy universal appeal, but that might not turn out to be too great a problem - all eyes will be on the screen anyway. It's huge, it's got beautiful colors and deep blacks, it's sharp, and in short it's the best display we've seen recently. As expected, the whole PenTile thing didn't prove to be a big issue and you'll have to have a 20/20 eyesight and look really carefully to even see it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And in regards to the Hyperglaze
This layer helps mask some of the fingerprints and is actually decently grippy, so it's probably the best bit about the S III back
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GSM Arena GS3 Preview
Thanks Bala_Gamer for this image. Picture means a 1000 words.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

Real and objective reviews and opinion are only by real users, not "gsm portals" reviewers

GSM Arena are notoriously clueless, as are a lot of tech bloggers.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

I've searched as much as I can on this. Despite the materials/construction, views on in-hand seem to be unanimously positive due to the rounded shape. Coupled with the placement of the power button I think this will be what makes me return my hox for this. I really doubt the display will be as good as the slcd2 (it's that good), but I hope it's close.

Since the time i got my first Nokia 6600 i have been following GSMarena reviews and opinions. I would have bought more than 10 phones since 6600 till my i9100 S2 based on their reviews and they never missed a shot. Their reviews exactly reflected the phone. Well, this is my personal opinion and i am not trying to generalize.

varunkumars said:
Since the time i got my first Nokia 6600 i have been following GSMarena reviews and opinions. I would have bought more than 10 phones since 6600 till my i9100 S2 based on their reviews and they never missed a shot. Their reviews exactly reflected the phone. Well, this is my personal opinion and i am not trying to generalize.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree the guys and girls at GSM arena are non bias and usually accurate. Let's not discredited them just because they did not like some parts.
Overall a positive review.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

Editorial aside, the news isn't all good. The good news is that the display's much brighter than the GN where it was a common complaint. The bad news is that it's not as bright as either the SGS2 or G-Note, especially at 50% brightness which is the most typical setting.

BarryH_GEG said:
Editorial aside, the news isn't all good. The good news is that the display's much brighter than the GN where it was a common complaint. The bad news is that it's not as bright as either the SGS2 or G-Note, especially at 50% brightness which is the most typical setting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Something I'm more interested to hear about is battery life. If the gorilla glass is thinner it might make the phone more visible also. If the battery life is great even with %75 brightness and better than the HOX at %50 brightness lets say, then I don't really see a problem and could see different kinds of trade offs.
I myself don't run my phones at %100 brightness that often.

SlimJ87D said:
Something I'm more interested to hear about is battery life. If the gorilla glass is thinner it might make the phone more visible also. If the battery life is great even with %75 brightness and better than the HOX at %50 brightness lets say, then I don't really see a problem and could see different kinds of trade offs.
I myself don't run my phones at %100 brightness that often.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if the glass is thinner it doesn't make the screen "more or less" bright.
One place where the brightness on my SGS2 is on full ALL the time is outdoors (auto sensor) and in bright sun it's hard to see, which means the SGS3 will have worse viewing outdoors than the SGS2.

Do the numbers always translate into how beautiful a display is? Serious question Ive never really paid attention.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium

ilostmypistons said:
Do the numbers always translate into how beautiful a display is? Serious question Ive never really paid attention.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Beautiful" is subjective. "Cd/m2" is not. I should have posted the link, sorry. There's also a sublink in the article that explains the testing methodology.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s_iii-review-757p2.php
Battery life is one of the things that concerns me. If any of you used Vlingo on the SGS2 in "listen mode" it was a battery pig. S-Voice always listening has to have an impact. Same thing with all the sensors being alive 24/7 waiting for you to blink or move the phone. You can turn it all off but it kind of kills the sizzle of the phone. I'm guessing Samsung made the battery 2200mAh for a reason.

Daemos said:
Even if the glass is thinner it doesn't make the screen "more or less" bright.
One place where the brightness on my SGS2 is on full ALL the time is outdoors (auto sensor) and in bright sun it's hard to see, which means the SGS3 will have worse viewing outdoors than the SGS2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having a thinner glass means a lot. If your visibility is improved then you don't need to tune up the brightness as much to see. The type of glass you use also can help our hurt visibility. Think of the glass as a diffuser, when light hits it, it will actually be reflected and diffused throughout the glass, this goes both ways from the monitor and outdoor lighting hitting the screen. By thinning the glass and changing he type of material the glass is made of you can drastically improve visibility. I mean look at the iPhone 4S (541 c^2/m) vs the Galaxy S1 (354 c^2/m) and if I'm not mistaken the Lumia 900 has a pentile (390 c^2/m)
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Noki...martphone-crown-in-outdoor-visibility_id29918
Everyone assumes the Galaxy Nexus and SGS3 are the exact screens, but the way they look is not going to be the same at all. The screen itself is reported to be a bit different as you can see they have different brightness ratings. In addition, the SGS3 is sporting Gorilla Glass 2. Being brighter and having Gorilla Glass 2 will surely bump it up from the Galaxy Nexus screen. But we'll have to wait and see.
I'm sure there are a lot more factors as to what improves what and that's why the engineers went with what they did. In the end the screen probably won't beat the HOS in sharpness and will probably not be as good outdoor but it will be good enough in those areas and better in other areas like contrast. We'll have to wait and see more test done with the device.
Putting all the above aside, Samsung went with the SAMOLED because it helps them make thinner phones in addition to gorilla glass 2 being thinner it probably helped with the foot print in the unit itself to give us the SD card and removable battery and maintain the thinness of the device.

SlimJ87D said:
Having a thinner glass means a lot. If your visibility is improved then you don't need to tune up the brightness as much to see/ The type of glass you use also can help our hurt visibility. I mean look at the iPhone 4S (541 c^2/m) vs the Galaxy S1 (354 c^2/m) and if I'm not mistaken the Lumia 900 has a pentile (390 c^2/m)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But wouldn't the scope he used to perform the test have netted all the variables out? Unless the test he's using perceives brightness differently than the human eye I'd think the comparisons would be relevant? No?
As for thickness of the glass, it's based on application and ranges from .5MM to 2MM. 2 is 20% thinner than 1 which doesn't seem that meaninful in terms of improved device packaging.
As an engineer, you'll find these interesting. They're way over my head.
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/sites/all/files/GG2 PI Sheet Rev b_050912.pdf
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/sites/all/files/COR_GG_Prod_Brochure.pdf

SlimJ87D said:
Having a thinner glass means a lot. If your visibility is improved then you don't need to tune up the brightness as much to see. The type of glass you use also can help our hurt visibility. Think of the glass as a diffuser, when light hits it, it will actually be reflected and diffused throughout the glass, this goes both ways from the monitor and outdoor lighting hitting the screen. By thinning the glass and changing he type of material the glass is made of you can drastically improve visibility. I mean look at the iPhone 4S (541 c^2/m) vs the Galaxy S1 (354 c^2/m) and if I'm not mistaken the Lumia 900 has a pentile (390 c^2/m)
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Noki...martphone-crown-in-outdoor-visibility_id29918
Everyone assumes the Galaxy Nexus and SGS3 are the exact screens, but the way they look is not going to be the same at all. The screen itself is reported to be a bit different as you can see they have different brightness ratings. In addition, the SGS3 is sporting Gorilla Glass 2. Being brighter and having Gorilla Glass 2 will surely bump it up from the Galaxy Nexus screen. But we'll have to wait and see.
I'm sure there are a lot more factors as to what improves what and that's why the engineers went with what they did. In the end the screen probably won't beat the HOS in sharpness and will probably not be as good outdoor but it will be good enough in those areas and better in other areas like contrast. We'll have to wait and see more test done with the device.
Putting all the above aside, Samsung went with the SAMOLED because it helps them make thinner phones in addition to gorilla glass 2 being thinner it probably helped with the foot print in the unit itself to give us the SD card and removable battery and maintain the thinness of the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a minor correction, the Lumia 900 uses an RGB stripe, not PenTile (I assume it's the exact same SAMOLED+ panel that was introduced with the I9100). The Lumia 800 has a smaller, PenTile screen.
About the Lumia's outdoor visibility, it's a result of their "ClearBlack" tech, which is a couple of polarizing filters behind the glass to reduce reflections of outside objects. Of course, thinner glass in the form of Gorilla Glass 2 should help as well.
My main hope is that what reviewers have said about the screen being better than the Nexus is true, especially that the usual PenTile graininess is less visible. I'm sure that the LCD2 on the HOX will remain the superior screen quantitatively, in terms of luminance and color reproduction, but that is not the whole story.

BarryH_GEG said:
But wouldn't the scope he used to perform the test have netted all the variables out? Unless the test he's using perceives brightness differently than the human eye I'd think the comparisons would be relevant? No?
As for thickness of the glass, it's based on application and ranges from .5MM to 2MM. 2 is 20% thinner than 1 which doesn't seem that meaninful in terms of improved device packaging.
As an engineer, you'll find these interesting. They're way over my head.
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/sites/all/files/GG2 PI Sheet Rev b_050912.pdf
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/sites/all/files/COR_GG_Prod_Brochure.pdf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure how the apertures work and measure things, visibility of the screen, light coming from the monitor and how the aperture works itself can all be different variables to be measured separately. If it bypasses through the glass and measures off the the panel itself or does it take into account the glass.
Like the test with the Lumia, Galaxy and iPhone. The brightness was measured seprrately and the visibility factor was done by controlling the environment itself by exposing the phones to different exterior brightness levels. They are actually determining outdoor visibility with photography rather than using an aperture, scope or device. So that I believe shows that brightness and outdoor viability should be independent of each other as they were controlled differently.
I had modified my original post to add this about how I have seen glass affect the military displays. "Think of the glass as a diffuser, when light hits it, it will actually be reflected and diffused throughout the glass, this goes both ways from the monitor and outdoor lighting hitting the screen. By thinning the glass and changing he type of material the glass is made of you can drastically improve visibility." There's also other factors such as how the glass is chemically cleaned on the surface and what kind of finish they add to the surface itself.
I wish I could answer more questions but I only have about 1.5 years of experience in this field as I was working on consumer products with no displays beforehand. I will take a look at those links after I eat dinner. Thank you, I've been looking for the test procedures of the gorilla glass.
---------- Post added at 08:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:35 PM ----------
teiglin said:
Just a minor correction, the Lumia 900 uses an RGB stripe, not PenTile (I assume it's the exact same SAMOLED+ panel that was introduced with the I9100). The Lumia 800 has a smaller, PenTile screen.
About the Lumia's outdoor visibility, it's a result of their "ClearBlack" tech, which is a couple of polarizing filters behind the glass to reduce reflections of outside objects. Of course, thinner glass in the form of Gorilla Glass 2 should help as well.
My main hope is that what reviewers have said about the screen being better than the Nexus is true, especially that the usual PenTile graininess is less visible. I'm sure that the LCD2 on the HOX will remain the superior screen quantitatively, in terms of luminance and color reproduction, but that is not the whole story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the correction. I haven't read or researched the Lumia as it runs windows...

ilostmypistons said:
Do the numbers always translate into how beautiful a display is? Serious question Ive never really paid attention.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Numbers does reflect how beautiful a display will be. But it won't matter to most of average users like me. In fact, I never pay to much attention on the screen to avoid over stress my eyes.
Sent from my Incredible S using XDA

Screens have gotten so good anymore I don't care. I guess I have to recognize I'm the out guy on this because you see so many people complain about the quality of the screen on various modern phones but its been a few handsets since I haven't been completely satisfied with the screen.

yep battery technology are holding phones evolution imho

krabman said:
Screens have gotten so good anymore I don't care. I guess I have to recognize I'm the out guy on this because you see so many people complain about the quality of the screen on various modern phones but its been a few handsets since I haven't been completely satisfied with the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would have to agree with you for the most part. I currently own the ipad 3 and the GS1. When it comes to text and sharpness, there is no challenge, ipad 3 owns my gs1. But in terms of pictures and videos, even my humble GS1 screens owns the lcd on my ipad (both made by samsung)
In the case of the GS3, it has a HD 720P over 300PPI. Texts will be crystal clear and sharp all the while giving me superior amoled video and picture qualities. Thats why I will never own another lcd screen given a choice. (didn't really have a choice with a tablet since ipad 3 was the best tablet to get)
Have you seen the 500px app on an amoled? It's freakin amazing. Much more than on my ipad 3. I doubt One X has a better screen than ipad 3 which has some serious color spectrum coverage.

As far as i'm aware the GS3 gas the same screen tech as the Galaxy Nexus, only that it's a little bit bigger. Does this mean that we can expect the same "burn in" issues as well...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1509123

How is THAT screen?

I created this thread specifically for all the members to talk about the new 2k screen of the LG G3. The screen is the most important feature of the LG G3 and it is what LG brags about the most. For many of us including me, the screen will be the deciding factor of whether we buy the phone or not.How does the new 2k display panel perform in real life situations compared to other high end phone display panels like the Galaxy S5 or HTC One M8? Let's have a nice dedicated thread to the most important feature on this phone.
Ideas to talk about:
•Contrast levels
•How your content looks on it
•Your thoughts of it compared to the previous display you had.
•Any weird issues? (Screen interlacing, ghost issues)
•Color production
•Do you find it nice and worthwhile?
•How are those BLACK LEVELS (Important!)
•Any heat issues with the screen?
•Good high and low brightness levels?

All of the above... Thinking of upgrading from a nexus 5...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

I have seen a couple of reviews that say the max brightness is quite dim. Can someone who owns one confirm if this is true?
The G2 has the best display I have ever had and I don't want to downgrade to a duller screen (I am not bothered about the high res as the G2 has enough res. I want bright and vibrant!

Spewy1 said:
I have seen a couple of reviews that say the max brightness is quite dim. Can someone who owns one confirm if this is true?
The G2 has the best display I have ever had and I don't want to downgrade to a duller screen (I am not bothered about the high res as the G2 has enough res. I want bright and vibrant!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go to s5 ^^ it's too bright and too vibrant :laugh: (^^)

And ffs please, reviewers, don't simply declare that you can't distinguish individual pixels on 1080p as well as 2k and then conclude from that that the extra resolution doesn't make a difference. The question is: how do you subjectively experience visual items in 2k vs. 1080p--images, text, UI items, etc.. Past 325 dpi, a pixel is not an item, so it's irrelevant that you can't see one. Tons of those online reviews provide what the reviewer thinks their impression of the screen must be instead of the reviewer providing their true impression.

Canard caché said:
Go to s5 ^^ it's too bright and too vibrant :laugh: (^^)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't like the s5. Various reasons but mainly the cover over the charging port and overall design.
I love my g2 but need more memory (64gb minimum). I am worried about the screen on the g3 but the reviewers all focus on the resolution but I want to hear from real users about the real world experience of the screen.
Many thanks in advance for any input from owners of the phone.

Great Arstechica review as usual
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/06/lg-g3-review-a-great-phone-with-way-too-many-pixels/

That cover on the S5 (my wife has one), is for water proofing and easily ripped off.
Personally, I could use a screen with less pixels and longer screen-on time. I consider the screen resolution to be a minus. My preference is less pixels and make it a 6", like the HTC One Max I just returned after a week.

liqn7 said:
Great Arstechica review as usual
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/06/lg-g3-review-a-great-phone-with-way-too-many-pixels/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't agree with you there. They did the same move as all the other reviewers where they presume that the inability to distinguish individual pixels automatically means people can't see any overall difference in image quality:
Even at point-blank range, it's hard to resolve a single pixel. 1080p screens are also beautiful, though, and when looking at the two, side-by-side, we aren't convinced the jump to 1440p is necessary. More pixels only matter if you can see them, and on a ~5-inch device, it's almost impossible to tell the difference between a 1080p screen and the 1440p screen of the G3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I asked above that any reviewers here avoid that particular groupthink and tell us how they actually experience 2k vs. 1080p.

Jimmy34742 said:
Can't agree with you there. They did the same move as all the other reviewers where they presume that the inability to distinguish individual pixels automatically means people can't see any overall difference in image quality:
That's why I asked above that any reviewers here avoid that particular groupthink and tell us how they actually experience 2k vs. 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the most important caveat is that hardly any apps will be optimized for 2k display when the phone finally arrives.
HAving said that, kind of hard to judge don't you think?

Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that

hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you?

theraker007 said:
I think the most important caveat is that hardly any apps will be optimized for 2k display when the phone finally arrives.
HAving said that, kind of hard to judge don't you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's logical. But so is the idea that the human eye can't distinguish pixels at a density greater than 326dpi. So, yeah, it comes down to subjective judgment calls. In that case, I'm interested in the subjective point of view of people who actually have one of these devices and their actual experience. We already know how do deduce logically what everyone's experience must be, and all the reviews I've read only do that. Images and text may appear sharper at a given distance from the eye in a way unrelated to whether or not you can distinguish an individual pixel.

The LG G3 has the best smartphone display I've seen: It's sharp, but it's also bright and has great color. The colors don't pop quite as much as on some of the better SuperAMOLED screens I've seen (such as on the just-announced Samsung Galaxy Tab S), but the sharpness is off the charts.
Comparing the G3's display to the one on the HTC One M8 (my current favorite Android phone), I felt the LG's was just as sharp, and a few details — such as drop shadows in Evernote — stood out slightly more. And even though colors weren't as vivid as on the HTC, the G3 had more natural skin tones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From Mashable's review. Everyone's eyes are different I guess.
Contrast was superb. Black text on white background — one of the most essential things a smartphone, or any display, needs to get right — really stood out. The ultra-sharp characters nearly jumped off the screen, and I couldn't discern individual pixels, no matter how close I put my eye to the screen.
So the LG G3's Quad HD display is more than just hype. But only a bit. There's nothing wrong with the HTC One M8's screen — or the Samsung Galaxy S5's or the iPhone 5S's for that matter. They're still mighty sharp, and can display great images, just not quite as sharply or as impressively as the LG G3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
---------- Post added at 06:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:24 AM ----------
hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

I truly hope that the screen is great on this phone but I can't wait any longer and have just ordered an S5. I have waited for all the flagships to come out this year and was truly hoping that the G3 would be the one. Two of the most important things to me are brightness and battery life and I'm worried that with the G3 I would end up having the brightness cranked all the time and would have poor battery life as a result. Really wanted to try LG this time but lost my nerve
Tapped it!

hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously? Those are much more important then resolution to improve upon.

helikido said:
Seriously? Those are much more important then resolution to improve upon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes but not for marketing.

I'm most concerned with the viewing angles, black levels, contrast, and color accuracy. I'm definitely getting the G3 but I really don't want to have to play the panel lottery. I'd prefer a warmer display over a cooler display - as long as it's not noticeably pink/green/blue, I'm fine. A slight yellow/orange tint is okay, but obviously a calibrated display would be the best. My black Nexus 5's viewing angles aren't great, with the screen washing out at 30+ degree angle. My buddy's white Nexus 5 seems to have better viewing angles, so I'm not sure what the deal is. I'm pretty confident in LG's ability to produce good displays -- they pretty much made this phone just to show off their new display.

Actually, I'm now concerned about the narrowness of the bezel. Yes, it's a cool feature, and everyone dreams of a bezel-less phone, but I already have problems due to the narrowness of my S4's bezel. When I'm holding my phone for an extended time, referring to notes while speaking to people, my grip often gets interpreted by the system as a touch and hold. That pops up a dialog that I have to dismiss, and it's really obtrusive in real time situations. Sure, I could be more careful, but it's just too easy to make that problem happen during normal usage. It's not like I have big fat hands or a weird grip or anything. I've already been thinking that when we finally get bezel-free phones, there will have to be utilities to create a non-reactive border of pixels in a user-specified width, or else the user will accidentally be popping things up all over the place. At present, though, I think the G3's large size and tiny bezel are actually going to make it difficult to use the way I want to use it even though it's hardly bigger than my S4. You never know until you actually use it for a few days and try to adapt, but there's no way to do that without buying it, which I'm now hesitant to do.

You're holding it wrong ☺
Sent from a mobile Gadget...

If this is the G4, are you interested?

[EDIT] Updated with more images
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Earl...suggests-the-phone-is-slightly-curved_id67046
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
It appears they've increased the size of the sensor for the camera, which is great, but if this is the G4 (along with the dimension listed in the article) then I'll have to pass. The G3 is big enough for me as it is and the design looks to be iterative. This wouldn't be able to compete with the S6/edge design-wise. Plus, at the purported size, it would be more of a Note competitor.

Japultra said:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Earl...suggests-the-phone-is-slightly-curved_id67046
It appears they've increased the size of the sensor for the camera, which is great, but if this is the G4 (along with the dimension listed in the article) then I'll have to pass. The G3 is big enough for me as it is and the design looks to be iterative. This wouldn't be able to compete with the S6/edge design-wise. Plus, at the purported size, it would be more of a Note competitor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How would this be a Note 4 competitor? it has a supposed 5.3 inch screen, thats smaller than our g3's.

sofir786 said:
How would this be a Note 4 competitor? it has a supposed 5.3 inch screen, thats smaller than our g3's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just speaking to the size of the actual handset. It is supposedly bigger than the G3., and that's just getting into phablet territory.

Looks nice in my opinion. G3 backcover is good as it is. No need to change it radically on the G4.
Only thing that I dislike is that the size increased which will lead to a lower screen-to-body ratio (one reason why I bought the G3).
What do you think, will the G4 have a curved screen as it looks like on this rendering or is it just the backcover design or bad angle?

Japultra said:
Just speaking to the size of the actual handset. It is supposedly bigger than the G3., and that's just getting into phablet territory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a tiny amount though, you're talking millimeters here. The note 4 is 153.5mm in height, theres just too much speculation, LG have always had really good screen to bezel ratio and body size, take for example comparing the LG G3 to the Sony Z series. We'll see soon enough though.

sofir786 said:
We'll see soon enough though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Official announcement expected when? This month?

Somewhere in April according to latest rumors. We can expect the new LG UX 4.0 this month.

natalya said:
Official announcement expected when? This month?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be announced by end of Q1 and released by Q2

sofir786 said:
Its a tiny amount though, you're talking millimeters here. The note 4 is 153.5mm in height, theres just too much speculation, LG have always had really good screen to bezel ratio and body size, take for example comparing the LG G3 to the Sony Z series. We'll see soon enough though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The dimension I'm more worried about is the width as that will affect the in-hand feel moreso than the height. At 76.5 mm, it's 2 mm wider than the G3 and 2 mm narrower than the Note 4. I can barely reach my thumb over to the opposite side as it is. I think that increase in width would definitely put the G4 safely into the "2 handed device" category.
At those dimensions, I can't imagine the screen being smaller than the G3. And knowing how LG loves having a great screen to body ratio, I actually think the screen might be a bit larger. But at the end of the day, these are just rumoured dimensions. The final product will most likely not be this wide. It just doesn't seem to match up.

I might get it. G3 is big enough, but I want a note so i could go bigger. Unless the screen to body ratio is drastically reduced. Need those tight bezels.

Japultra said:
The dimension I'm more worried about is the width as that will affect the in-hand feel moreso than the height. At 76.5 mm, it's 2 mm wider than the G3 and 2 mm narrower than the Note 4. I can barely reach my thumb over to the opposite side as it is. I think that increase in width would definitely put the G4 safely into the "2 handed device" category.
At those dimensions, I can't imagine the screen being smaller than the G3. And knowing how LG loves having a great screen to body ratio, I actually think the screen might be a bit larger. But at the end of the day, these are just rumoured dimensions. The final product will most likely not be this wide. It just doesn't seem to match up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reported specs make no sense at all lol tbh

sofir786 said:
The reported specs make no sense at all lol tbh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. With rumours of a smaller screen, a larger body makes no sense at all, given LG's track record.

I just picked up a G3 mere minutes ago, so no.

G4 have to be with full metal jacket, no more plastics please! This is only a rumor nothing else and I hope thats not true. If LG wants to be concurent G4 IMHO must have things are:
- metal(aluminum) unibody housing
- microSD slot
- Smaller display
- front facing speaker(s)
- and maybe capacitive buttons.
If they go for plastic housing I'm not interested because G3 is good enough!

I don't care about design that much, but I think that it should be metal body and front facing speakers, and screen to body ratio on G3 is perfect, so it makes no sense to reduce it.. What do you think G4 vs S6/ S6 edge vs One M9?
Sent from my GT-I8200N using XDA Free mobile app

lujki1 said:
I don't care about design that much, but I think that it should be metal body and front facing speakers, and screen to body ratio on G3 is perfect, so it makes no sense to reduce it.. What do you think G4 vs S6/ S6 edge vs One M9?
Sent from my GT-I8200N using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally, I'm not too impressed with what I'm seeing so far from the G4. Currently, I'm planning to pick up an S6 or S6 edge once it's released. The One M9 was unimpressive to me.

Not quite sure this is at all what it will be
Just saying:
its curved, G Flex territory, doubtful LG would do that
lock button is exactly the same as the original G Flex
Front is thesame as most mid-range phones LG anounced at MWC recently. Those were "knock-offs" of the G3(mid-range phones based of flagship), LG wont use that look on a completely knew flagship device
just sayin.....

Well i think G4 will have killer specs . On the other hand ,LG announced that will release something like a G Note thing that will be above the G series(specs probably) . If that rumor is confirmed later in 2015 i guess i wont upgrade from G3 to any flagship device like S6,M9, G4 etc.

If it has an OLED display of sorts then hell yeah. Although I do absolutely love my G3, I find the colours very underwhelming even when compared to my G2. The G2 screen, I find is arguably better with resolution aside.