Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I'm thinkin' that at this time a 800 x 480 3.5" AMOLED display is the very best (WVGA) offered on a handheld device. That certainly would be in keeping with what I expect from NOKIA.

The proof in the pudding is always in the tasting...



When we see and use this thing in the real world, we may find that this pudding is pretty dang tasty. :)




English translation of press release with commentary can be found here:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/01/s...ne-flu-immune/

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Isn't it a little bit too late for n900 ?

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Err, what should we be impressed about here ? The animations are not exactly smooth, the glare from the lamp is killing the display, and that guy is just so funny trying to use his fingers on a stylus interface, 3mm scrollbars/dropdowns or not :)

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

http://penguinbait.com/saysitall.png

hmmm

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

It's true that WinMo doesn't stand the comparison with Maemo.
And this Asus device has nothing to do with our NITs.

From a personal point of view, i'm not so interested in OLED displays as long as they are not reflective or transflective (outdoor, full sunlight readable).

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I am not too riled up with the screen size reduction - in fact the pluses seems to outweigh this negative for me at least.

But one thing I would want is a better screen readability in sunlight - better than the N810 I have.

And need I say an affordable price-point. Not the $700 price like the N97. I don't have that much money for a new shiny toy or even an handheld computer.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

How could the N900 be cheaper than the N97 ?
IIRC, the N900 will have at least a better screen ...

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I must admit I'm coming around to the new screen size. I was looking at some friends' HTC mobiles with screens just smaller and just larger, and they didn't look too bad.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I know, I know - and that's my only grouse.
The N810 started much cheaper at around $450 (I bough mine for $409).
But with a phone in it, if it costs 700+ then I am out...

Considering its a new experiment by Nokia (with Maemo phones) - they can at least keep it cheap to entice more people to gt on board Maemo. Just wishing :D

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

True, if its cheap enough, I may use it to do BT DUN from my pandora, provided it supports DUN, and I actually get a pandora?

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Because you are negating the cost of carrier certification as the N97 is sold thru carriers worldwide. Its also the current flagship device, so for now its priced higher than Maemo devices usually are.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Umm, didn't know it was my turn to impress you.

I offered to this thread the relevant results of my search for other devices that use the technology that is spec'ed for the N900. I wanted to see the difference before hoping on any band wagon.

What impressed me was the fact that there were not many devices out there yet. I am also reminded of the huge threads that were generated on the phone forums when 176 x 220 displays went from 2.2 inches to 1.8 inches...
This was as all due to a change over to a more efficient semiconductor used to manufacture displays... Gallium Arsenide, if I recall correctly.
In any event now displays under 2" for 176 x 220 are the norm and no one notices the size anymore. What some do notice now is that because of the increased pixel density the smaller displays are less prone to produce different color saturations between the top and bottom when viewed at different angles. In other words the denser pack sharpened the image and it was more readable and had more "pop". The 2.2" displays now look ancient in comparison.

YMMV and I'm not defending a dang thing. I'm just saying that a lot of energy is being used by some to do a hate dance on something we haven't even seen yet. :)

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

No, I just thought that particular device is linked because of some, well, niftiness or something that can be compared to. Even the same resolution/size means little if the display tech is not identical.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

This is not the same situation:
What you're describing is that resolution increases for a given display size in phones. I have a 2.2" phone, but of course it has 240x320, not 176x20. My next phone will must likely have a 2.6" display at the same resolution, so they go up again.

But then again, they didn't play a lot of videos on 2.2" 176x220-screens, did they? I do use my N8x0s as video players a lot, so size does matter (more than resolution actually).

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

It is exactly the same...

The physical dimension of some 176 x 220 resolution displays went from 2.2 to 2.0 then 1.8 inches... The same information was displayed just in and smaller and smaller area. (Back then some 240 x 320, QVGA displays were 4" or more IIRC)

The resolution or amount of information displayed on the N900 will be the same as an N800 but the display will be smaller.

BTW I am not comparing the screen size of the two devices Just trying to show the similarities in community reaction. :)

And Atilla, explain how the display tech is different please, I don't follow you.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

There are several similarly sized same-res screens out there that can look quite differently. E.g. the N800 and N810 have different screen technologies. But even within the same 'group' the brightness/contrast/refresh can vary wildly. Are you saying this ASUS is using the same 3.5" transflective Sony display that has been hinted by some people to be in the next Maemo device ? 'Cause if not, the only thing we can relate to is the DPI, we'll have to wait and see the actual device to tell how it stacks up to other similarly sized displays.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Wait doesn't your second sentence negate your argument? If your using the same resolution but on a smaller screen your still using a smaller screen for say movies. Whether people will care in the long run is different. (Screen size was one of the reasons why I choose the n800 over the iPod Touch)

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Ah, understood...

Comparable pixels per inch @ the same physical dimension is all I hoped to show.

And Laughing Man, my bad, Display resolution or the physical number of columns and rows of pixels creating the display...

Resolution is misleading, in the analog world it meant dots per inch. With digital displays I think it goes back to the original IBM VGA display technology which would always be 640 × 480 pixels per display regardless of physical size.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Hi.

I read through the first 31 pages of this thread, before I skipped to the end, because my opinion here was totally underrepresented on the 31 pages and I think it needs to be represented.

Most of you seems to think about the smaller screen as small and the N900 as a crippled N810. There is not a one person outside this forum that would call a LCD, any LCD, with a 800x480 resolution small. We all have been spoiled by the N810 [or older models] and, despite the failing sales, expect the N900 to be an improvement over that.

I own a N810 myself, and I can certainly see that a smaller screen will be worse in some cases, most specially for eBooks.

However.

Change focus for a minute. Put the beloved tablet aside and look at the market. Nokia still sell N810 and it is still pretty much a market leader in the underdeveloped market. But there's a big market out there where they suck. And that is on high resolution smart phones. It's a disaster that Nokia doesn't make anything that can compete with HTC in stats.

Edit: Paragraph removed (about N series) that distracted from the point. Also, it was wrong.

Nokia needs the N900 to be a phone. They are totally behind on touch smartphones. Someone mentioned the 5800. How can the screen on the 5800 or the N97 even compare to the screens of the HTC Touch HD, HTC Touch Pro2 or HTC Diamond2? It cannot! The top models from Nokia are just not good enough, screen wise.

Enter the N900 which more than anything is, as said here, the N97 killer. More open OS than N97 and HTC. Much, much better screen than the N97 and on par with HTC. And an already exisiting software base.

I personally have been sick at going through the internet connection sharing ritual between my N810 and my HP Ipaq 514. It takes me a couple of minutes to get online and I have to click around on two devices. So sick that I look at other options. I would love to have internal GSM/3G on the N810. I want an all-in-one device. I have been looking at the 5800. I have been looking at the N97. Both are just not up to HTC standards. I have been seriously considering the Diamond2. The Diamond2 is 800x480 pixels on a SMALLER SCREEN than the N900.

Guys, the N900 isn't an improved N810, we can all agree on that.

But it seems to me it is the VERY BEST HIGH RESOLUTION SMART PHONE on the market.

Nokia has done the right thing. I think they have a killer product here. The N810 isn't. The N810 is a very neat product for us few. But the N900 has potential to be the #1 smartphone on the market.

Still, I would really love to have Nokia compete with the Kindle. But, you know. Hardly anybody buys the Kindle either.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I'm not sure about anything with regard to the N900, not even if it will be called that.

What also hasn't been made clear is if it will be a true voice phone. That is, will the phone network connection be for data only... as shipped. :)

I guess the next step for us would be to watch the FCC for LJPRX-51 or 71 :cool:

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Really? Do 5800, N97, and E90 ring any bells?

Actually, Nokia itself markets N-series devices as "multimedia computers", not as "phones". :)

Easily. Yes, those HTC phones have all got 800x480 screens while 5800 got a 640x360 screen. Let us now look at a few more numbers though:

The HTC HD phones all have 3.8" 800x480 screens (245px/"). 5800 has got a 3.2" 640x360 screen (229px/"). In other words, screens are comparable in size and given their high pixel density are not that much different to look at.

Now the pricing. HTC Touch HD appears to start at $550, according to Google (if we ignore EBay scams). 5800 starts at $320 or so, almost two times cheaper than bug ridden Touch HD.

So, who is being behind here and who is being simply practical with their product line?

Not much better screen, mind you. 5800 and N97 have got 3.2" screens, N900 is supposed to have a 3.6" screen, so it is somewhere between 5800 and HTC HD phones in terms of the screen size. The number of pixels matters less with such small screens as your eyes are not going to spot all these pixels anyway.

Works like a charm between my N810 and E70. I do not even have to take E70 out of my pocket. Maybe your HPaq is a problem here? :)

No. As far as I could tell by googling, HTC HD phones all have 3.8" screens. N900 comes out with a 3.6" screen, unless the leak source got it wrong.

Am I the only one starting to feel like I am watching the new megapixel race here?

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

The N97 and the "N900" both have 3.5" screens according to their specs. My interest in the "N900" is whether it will be a true phone and how Nokia utilizes Maemo as a phone OS.

Not I. I think Nokia will pick a resolution that works for them and beat it to death. Look at how long they beat the 320x240 resolution in their phones.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Well, 320x240 wasn't "their" resolution, it was WinMobile's. Nokia tried to simply double S60 screen size from 176x208 to 354x416 but quickly backed off to cheaper mass produced 320x240 screens.

My guess is that 640x360 does not have long to live either.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

And thankfully so... as far as software goes.

I use a lot of locally stored web pages on my N800. I built these pages in order to quickly retrieve internet data and have it formatted correctly. These pages are based on the device being WVGA (800 x 480). I would hate to have to go through and resize each one every time the OS is updated. I can't imagine what it would be like for a software developer.

I can imagine what kind of uproar would erupt on the forums if favorite titles rendered incorrectly because of an OS change... I have already seen that first hand. :)

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Has Amazon been sending you their secret Kindle sales figures?

I have several friends with Kindles, so my impression is different about whether Amazon sells many.

You almost seemed to be saying that Nokia had to dump the tablet because its number starts with an N, not a T, which doesn't sound right.

What bugs me is not just abandoning tablets; it is the combination of abandoning tablets AND the takeover of this forum by maemo.org at the same time.

Your comments that Nokia needs a high resolution phone are no doubt right on.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

That is definitely a result of Conspiracy headed by the Tentacled One. Now, if He could only make His Finnish minions produce another E70 (preferably OMAP3 based, most preferably running Maemo), I would happily take over any forum for Him and wreak havoc in the hearts of unbelievers! =)

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

My point exactly. I was talking about "high resolution smart phones." The 5800 just isn't. 640x360 means much fewer pixels, much fewer characters when you're reading. And it's hardly a standard resolution either. If it compares to 800x480 in your eyes, you're trying to hard.

Also, you're mistaken about the HTC display sizes, the Diamond2 is a smaller phone.

Dimensions: 53.1 x 107.85 x 13.7 millimetres
Display_Diagonal: 3.2 "
Display+Resolution: 480 x 800
http://pdadb.net/img/touch_diamond2_2.jpg

Read up on this phone and you might find that the display is popular. HTC stats are very popular. The OS isn't. Yes, the phones are bug ridden. But not because of the display!

The big thing in the phone world is that 800x480 is a new cool thing on high end touch phones. It went from none except PDAs to a whole bunch of them. Symbian trails behind. Nokia would not want Symbian to trail behind.

"Megapixel race". Pff. iPhone started a trend of big screens with low resolution. Now we get big screens with very good resolution. That's not a step in the wrong direction. The NITs would not have been as popular if they had the iPhone resolution.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Lol, that wasn't my intention. I just ment to say the N900 seems to be more related to the other N products than the N810 was.

My other point in there was, although not said in such clear words, that Nokia probably don't need to make a N9xx tablet quite yet because they have the N810 and not too many products trumph that.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

At the same smallish screen size, it does compare to 800x480 in my eyes. I do not really care if letters in the book I am reading consist of more pixels, as long as they are smooth and readable.

Oh :( That is even worse than I thought.

5800 display is also "very popular", but nobody buys the display alone. If you look at these devices as a whole though, 5800 is a pretty nice, usable, cheap phone with a slim high-def screen. The screen is on the smallish side but it isn't too small for a phone. Now, any HTC device gets horrible once you go behind their custom visual sugar. This alone is the single biggest reason against buying an HTC phone. And guess what? You have just said that it has the same screen size (diagonally), just more pixels. So I am not even sure why anyone would buy that HTC phone.

Sorry but I fail to see why 800x480 is such a big thing on a 3.2" screen. You do not see all these pixels anyway.

3.2" is not a big screen. It basically renders the benefits of 800x480 resolution useless.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

I just read somewhere that analysts reckon they'll have shifted 1 million devices by the end of this year. No idea how that compares mind you.

/me wonders if the cases will be largely the same (not having paid much attention earlier), or do the leaked case dimensions differ too much?

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Yes, exactly. Because the higher resolution screen would have smoother and more readable letters at the same size, or smaller and more letters at the same pixel count. Win, win.

No, for a phone it has a huge screen. Huge. But with low resolution, which means grainer than your tablet. I have "defended" the 5800 elsewhere because i think it has an amazing value for money (compared to the N97 i.e.) but I would still much rather have the Diamond2. Hardware wise. Of course, the price reflects the difference.

If you compare it to phones instead of TVs or tablets, it's big. How many phones existed in 2006 with 3.2" screens? 3.2" is a big screen on a phone.

I have found that the N810 has a perfect width for reading eBooks. 800 pixels wide and actually about as wide as the page in a pocket book minus the margins. I have however read on a much smaller display and it is doable. The N900 has a display that is not much smaller.

When you manage to consider this as a phone and not a tablet, it follows that some think the N810 would be a very large phone. The Touch Pro2 also. I think the iPhone is chunky, really. Ultimately one would want a 6 inch display on a 3 inch phone. Second best would be a 3.5" display on a 3.6" phone. There is some room for shrinkage around the display on the N900 still. Or somewhat bigger screen on the same frame. And it's fairly thick by 2009 standards. But I think it will look good and feel good. I think it is a very interesting phone.

At a lower resolution I wouldn't even have bothered to log in here to share my opinion.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Numbers: If that is the real number, then I stand corrected and Nokia should start making their version of the 7" iPad ASAP or iPple will beat them to it.

Sizes: Excellent question, and someone (including me) wondered about the same before. Look here:
http://www.sizeasy.com/page/size_com...-vs-Nokia-N900

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Theoretically, yes, but not in practice. First of all, you can't make letters smaller because they become unreradable, even if all pixels are in place. Secondly, when you make letters large enough to be readable by normal humans from a standard 30-50cm distance, they look pretty smooth in both 800x480 and 640x360 resolutions. Try it for yourself.

Not really. Even with 5800, you can no longer see individual pixels, so it does not look much grainier. Now, if it had a physically bigger screen, it would obviously require more resolution.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Oh, but of course. I do own one of these and use it every day. And I believe, with a hint of doubt, that the Diamond2 would be almost as good to read on without changing the font size. What would the size loss on each character be, about 25%?

My favorite chat page which I use on my N810 has smaller letters than the eBook reader. And I zoom that chat page down to 80% so I can see more letters. Every day. It's even a low contrast colour scheme on that page.

I would not be able to zoom down on the Diamond2, it would be too small and unreadable. But 20% smaller is still readable for me. And the N900 will be larger than the Diamond2. It will be better than acceptable, at least for me.

It will NOT be as good as a larger tablet. It WILL be better than most cell phones on the market. Including all of Nokias.

Edit: I am talking about the LCD here.
We don't know that the N900 is the N900 we think it is. The phone part have to be acceptably good, too. If this device isn't good enough when it comes to phone stuff, I don't know who they expect to buy it. :B

Edit II: As I said, I think this is going to line up as a top of the line smartphone. If so, the price will be high. I would think a £550++ price tag here. I know the price suggestion will be flat out provocative to most NIT owner, but again. If it's not ment to be a tablet you can't expect the pricing to be set at the tablet level either. It must be compared with what it is ment to compete with. Which would be high end phones.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

Hey guys...I can see how going from a 4 inch to 3.5 sucks for you..because you guys expected an internet tablet. But I am sure Nokia will release something similar in the future...but this model is aimed at a different group altogether.
I wanted to buy the N97 but due to the 'clunkiness' of Symbian, low processing power lack of kinetic scrolling etc and just a bad translation to touch, I chose not to buy it when I found out that the N900 could be released this summer. If not I'll wait coz internal HW wise and software its not shining for the N97...and I want something different optimized for touch...and thats how I ended up on this forum.

I think the N900 with Maemo will have all the smooth UI +excellent hardware...it'll be the future of N series while Symbian is down shifted as repeatedly told previously.

I think you guys should be very happy that its going mass market because it will mean that there will be accelerated development, more support, quicker updates, more choice of HW, many more applications...Nokia will gain the consumers that are put off by symbian and will want to jump on this band wagon because for them its NEW...and something different (as everyone initially EXPECTED...an interface that will wow and is fun), which is a huge change after years of Symbian in a phone.

I cant wait for the N900 esp after reading a forum where ppl in the know commented that there is something 'special' about the screen, and the recent leak was pretty much spot on.

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

i love the influx of people with the doublethink line that a smaller screen is better in all possible ways.

as someone else said, one of the big marketed pluses of the NITs was the nice big screen...

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

And if the N900 is a telephone ment to be sold as a telephone, one of the big marketed pluses of the N900 will be the nice big screen.

For at tablet, this isn't a big screen, but for a telephone it IS. The first time one at my work place got an HTC Diamond HD, 3.8" screen, everyone were marvelling about the screen but thinking that it was a bit wide for a telephone.

I can't say I have seen anyone saying that a smaller screen is better in all possible ways.

*Edit: edit. :B

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

IIRC the N stands for eNtertainment. It comes back in N-Gage too. Its just to differentiate from E-Series and those without a letter. All N-Series are smart/rich mobile/portable multimedia devices. Most are smartphones, most have GSM + 3G (whatever the latest evolutions are in this region), and most run Symbian; but not by definition. At least, not anymore. See also Wikipedia. You can see all kind of 'experiments' or specific goals (features) in Nokia devices. Such as NFC. These are outsiders too, yet not some new letter to add is made for their product name in the sense of Nokia T800 or something.

Imagemagick does wonders. The rational is also that you don't switch every month your resolution. You stick to something which works, and if you switch you have your reasons for that. Could be money related, or switching to defacto standard, or...

There is no official statement from Nokia 'the tablets' are abandoned, and maemo.org is not owned or tied to Nokia or RX-51 or N900.

This is why the chosen font is important. Again, is the default font optimal for that, or are there free/commercial/pirated fonts which would deliver a better experience?

Re: N900 specs revealed
 

And 1000 :D:D:D