Thread: Why doesn't Nokia use retina display?
View Single Post
Kangal's Avatar
Kangal is offline Kangal
2012-03-26 , 06:56
Posts: 1,789 | Thanked: 1,699 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#58
Originally Posted by Cue View Post
Just to point out, your six is upside down, the iPhone 4/4S are 326ppi not 329ppi.

Agreed that other aspects are just as important but I think the iPhone display actually has the other aspects fairly well covered. The iPhone 4 has a 24bit IPS TFT display as does the Xperia S (not sure of the exact TFT technology used but the colour depth is the same and the viewing angles look similar on inspection).

This is in contrast to most other phones which only have 16bit displays. The current Lumias are also only 16bit. What makes it double worse for the lumia (most windows phones in the wild actually) is that their poor resolution and PPI do not mask any dithering applied to hide the colour banding.

This brings me to a good point about the software handicapped Nokia actually. If Lumiaman is listening. Nokia were designing for the WP7 spec which only allowed 800x480 16bit as the standard. There was in fact a case where HTC went outside of this spec (to the better side) but a windows phone update intentionally crippled peoples phones until MS could change the standard spec.

http://wmpoweruser.com/microsoft-adm...its-by-design/
Oh, you're right.
I used the PPI Calculator. And if Apple were specific of having 326ppi then it must have exactly 325-327ppi...which brings me to my next point. The iPhone 4 (and probably 4S too) don't have a 3.5 inch screen. They have a 3.53 inch screen: an additional 0.03 inches than stated, only rounded down for Marketing.

Besides, Steve Jobs was wrong. To have a "Retina Display" you actually need a ppi of greater than 476, at a focul distance of 12inches from your face. If the distance is shortened (closer) then you potentially need even more pixels (thus higher ppi) for "Retina Display" until you hit the "dropzone" which is about 2 and a half inches when your eyes can't focus well anymore (it blurs) so the ppi for "Retina Display" figure drops greatly.

Actually, the screen found on the iPhone 4, 4S and iPad 3 are IPS LCD's and are one of the best in the industry in-terms of many features. It's like comparing two 32in 1080p TV's, one from Samsung and another against a nameless Chinese OEM...its obvious the Samsung is superior thanks to better aspects (colour reproductivity, speed, transflection, viewing angles, black ratio, brightness, colour temperature etc etc).

What I was trying to say was that a 240ppi display doesn't look any worse than a 320ppi one. Having a larger display is more practical for the mobile user. So OEMs shouldnt race only for higher ppi's they should try to find a balance; like a super-high end display, that's large (practical) and with a modest (240) ppi

Example:
Having a lower resolution of 1190 x 700 on 5.3inch on my SG NOTE instead of 1280 x 800. That's 23% less pixels (260ppi), which I would happily "put up with" if it instead had a Plus screen: for improved aspect, colours and removing the "PenTile annoyance".
__________________
Originally Posted by mscion View Post
I vote that Kangal replace Elop!
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to mscion For This Useful Post

I'm flattered
Last edited by Kangal; 2012-03-26 at 07:10.
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kangal For This Useful Post: