|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:19
|
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#21
|
| The Following User Says Thank You to benny1967 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:21
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#22
|
| The Following User Says Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:37
|
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#23
|
EDIT: Okay. The screen complaint is no longer at 100% anymore. Speak up. WHO FORGOT TO CHECK IT ?

|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:43
|
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#24
|
Well, at 3.5" and with the Fremantle touchy-feely UI on top it might as well be QVGA. The days when you could take advantage of the full 800 pixel wide screen to display lots of useful info at once are sadly gone.

|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:46
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#25
|
Well, I skipped it, because it's not that big a deal -- same information, it's 10% smaller, so just hold it 10%
The crime here is shrinking a device that was a perfectly acceptable size, and thus forcing a screen-size shrink that's not part of a useful tradeoff.

|
|
2009-05-25
, 13:57
|
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#26
|
Hey... That's not 10%. It's ~37%. Half the diagonal means quarter the size.
|
|
2009-05-25
, 14:06
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#27
|
Sure, if you're talking area, but linear dimensions scale inverse-linearly with distance, and area dimensions scale inverse-quadratically, so it comes out the same. 10% smaller diagonal = 10% closer.
Damn you people with no arm-lengthening dioptries !
But seriously, I noticed people already using the N810 by holding it real close to their eyes, certainly closer than they would do with any book or things they use for a prolonged period of time. Decreasing that distance further sounds like a recipe for myopia to me
|
|
2009-05-25
, 14:17
|
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#28
|
|
|
2009-05-25
, 14:38
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#29
|
It doesn't. Area size is proportional to the square of the diagonal (quadratic, not linear).
Square of half is quarter.
| The Following User Says Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-05-25
, 14:50
|
|
Posts: 5,795 |
Thanked: 3,151 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Agoura Hills Calif
|
#30
|