Database Info

[Q] ..Just got the phone. TEXT is so blurry??

Just got my phone. The txt on the apps and main screens and just about all txt looks very blurry. Pics and such are perfect.
Is this something others are seeing? didn't see anybody mention it elsewhere.
Thanks!

Or is it that it's just not as clear as iphone4 screen?
it's really annoying to look at.

Might be a good time to schedule an appointment with your local optometrist.
My screen with text looks great.

haha. every other screen in my life is good.
Maybe I have a bad one. The app icons all look fuzzy too.

That'll be the Pentile matrix, doesn't bother most people.
Unless you have it really bad, then it might be a bad one.

Pentile RGBG matrix... effective resolution is lower than RGB. Comparing it to an iPhone 4 screen with even higher RGB resolution makes it look worse... so I suggest switching to a phone that has an RGB LCD like the MT4G or something if you don't want to deal with the pixelation. Also, the screen being 4" doesn't help... compared to a condensed 3.5" iPhone display.
CaptCaveman said:
Just got my phone. The txt on the apps and main screens and just about all txt looks very blurry. Pics and such are perfect.
Is this something others are seeing? didn't see anybody mention it elsewhere.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

That's also why I thought 4"+ was too big for 800x480 (S-)AMOLED. I was actually surprised for Samsung keeping that resolution.
Still, at such resolutions, I value vibrant colors more than higher resolution like on the iPhone 4.

Thanks for the info. It seems what's getting me is that images and apps aren't all made for the high res screen. So some look horrible, others don't.
SO I guess the lack of a standard, like iphone, makes not all apps equal.
hmmmmm

The only thing keeping me from getting this phone is the pentile matrix SAMOLED screen

Pretty much everything will be OK for the screen, 800x480 has been in common use for over a year.

You may have a duff one like me. The text on my Galaxy S is very well defined but slightly blurry on my Nexus S with a dodgy screen. Does your screen look a little greeny / yellow when viewed from an angle?

Unless its really bad blurry, its most likely just the pentile sub pixel layout all Samsung amoled screens have, which causes text to look just ever so slightly fuzzy compared to traditional lcd screens with full 3 pixels. It doesn't bother most people, and It's just a trade off we make for having the nice colors from amoled screens for the time being.
Doesn't bother me one bit. But the larger the screen gets at the same resolution, the more noticeable it gets. Next to my nexus one I can definitely notice it more on the 4 inch than the 3.7inch screen.

I have also noticed this "blurry" text, especially small text against a white background, which is almost unreadable. From an angle, the screen also does appear a bit yellowish. This is my first time with a "Galaxy S" phone, so I may just not be used to it... think i have a defective screen? i've been using a Motorola Droid 1 for the past year, fyi...

wuyanks said:
I have also noticed this "blurry" text, especially small text against a white background, which is almost unreadable. From an angle, the screen also does appear a bit yellowish. This is my first time with a "Galaxy S" phone, so I may just not be used to it... think i have a defective screen? i've been using a Motorola Droid 1 for the past year, fyi...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I think your screen is just fine. The amoled pentile is particularly blurry compared to the Droid screen which has text that looks razor sharp. So you're just coming from the device that shows this issue most prominently, that's all.

Certainly my Galaxy S with the exact same panel is perfectly readable from many angles.
My Nexus S text is blurry and the screen is yellowish when tilting.

silencer51 said:
The only thing keeping me from getting this phone is the pentile matrix SAMOLED screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
buy the asian/russian version when it comes out. because it will be SLCD.
you will get what you want.
i like the Super Amoled over the SLCD . i like Ratina over Super Amoled. but to each has his own .

So to you SAMOLED > SLCD, but Retina > SAMOLED. You do know that Retina = LCD right?
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
buy the asian/russian version when it comes out. because it will be SLCD.
you will get what you want.
i like the Super Amoled over the SLCD . i like Ratina over Super Amoled. but to each has his own .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

dinan said:
So to you SAMOLED > SLCD, but Retina > SAMOLED. You do know that Retina = LCD right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ofcourse, you understood me wrong. i said the name" retina " because of the pixel density is higher than normal LCDs or SLCDs. but yeah ofcourse i know lol.

Screen Door Effect... WHY GOOGLE/Sammy???
ok, just had a chance to look at the Nexus S... and WTF??? The screen is so pixelated. The screen door effect is horrible. I thought I took a step back in time for a second. The pixelation is soo bad I would never think twice about buying this phone. Why oh why don't these phone makers give the people what they want.
So, Apple comes out with the new retina display, and while it is way too small, it's soo very very very clear. Google's response? This? Come on... WHY? Aren't we suppose to be moving forward? Ok, so it's brighter and uses less power and has a higher refresh rate... WHATS THE POINT IF YOU CANT SEE ANYTHING???? THERE IS NO POINT.
I don't mean to be harsh... I'm not a Nexus hater... I just wish Google would have done a better job for their flagship phone.
Never been happier with my EVO on Cyanogen...

silencer51 said:
The only thing keeping me from getting this phone is the pentile matrix SAMOLED screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Get it in another country. In many countries it will come with Super Clear LCD, found on the S8530 Wave II. Super Clear LCD is said to have the advantages of Super AMOLED (sunlight visibility, viewing angle), but wheter that's true or not, it's a really nice display. Look it up on the internet, although I have to warn you, you'll lots of people complaining about the screen because the S8500 Wave I had Super AMOLED.

[Q] Higher Resolution Android Phones

I'm very surprised the Nexus S didn't come out with a higher resolution Super Amoled screen. Apparently, 2.3 supports higher resolution according to wikipedia. I'm just waiting for a new android phone with a higher resolution/pixel density to put the iphone 4 to shame.
Imagine, a Super Amoled screen with a 1024x768 or 1280x720 resolution would be the best mobile phone screen in the world.
When do you think we will realistically see android phones with higher resolution displays?

The current Super AMOLED screen already trades blows with the Retina Display. I'm sure there will be higher res screens at some point but whats the rush? Wouldnt a higher resolution screen be more of a burden on battery than the current screens already are anyway? I'd see resolutions that high being more relevant for tablets and PMP than phones.

Why? It will drain battery more and more, and higher resolution don't need for still small display. Just imagine, MP3 player with Desktop resolution.
Haha? Try push sensor button, wtf it's so small...
U wanna get more ability to use sensor keyboard? (sarcastic)

Well, android definitely needs to match or better the 640x960 resolution of the iPhone 4 to maintain feature parity.

The current SuperAMOLED screens are less battery consuming than old LCD and Retina, so bigger resolutions shouldn't be a battery problem.
But what's the point of having 1280x768 on a 4" screen?
I'm pretty satisfied with 480x320 on 3.2" and 800x480 on 4" looks also awesome.

The Meizu M9 have a 960x640 display, but (even if you are in china) this little boy is still difficult to find.
The next Meizu (M9ii) will have a 1280×854 or 1280×800 4" screen, and should be animated by a Tegra2 with 1Gb of RAM. They said that the release date will be on middle 2011, so maybe we will be able to grap it in the late 2011.
The two phones are running on a custom android 2.2 (the UI is very different from the classical Android).
For the battery, it's more backlight that drains power.
A higher resolution will only put a little more stress on the GPU, but if the OS is well coded, it should not consume a lot more.

DPI, its all about DPI

You can have all the DPI in the world, but all its gonna mean is LAG and Battery if we're still relying on the CPU to push pixels.

dimon222 said:
Why? It will drain battery more and more, and higher resolution don't need for still small display. Just imagine, MP3 player with Desktop resolution.
Haha? Try push sensor button, wtf it's so small...
U wanna get more ability to use sensor keyboard? (sarcastic)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have absolutely no comprehension of what resolution is. Look at the iphone going from 480x320 to 960x640. Did the icons get smaller? No I didn't think so. You simply put more pixels into an icon the same size. Because it seems you're under the impression that pixel count determines image size.

however, there is no need for a higher resolution because the display is that too small. better resolution would look like the same as the resolution looks on current phones.

I can see several reasons to be interested in higher screen resolution (but IMHO you will need at least a 3.5" display):
Games
ok, that's not for today, but with ports like the unreal engine on android, phones will become more like a mobile console (PSP phone, for example). A better resolution sounds like a better playing experience, but will still need more powerful hardware (and that's on the way with multi core SOC)
Video
isn't that obvious? and it's essential if you're watching videos with subtitles
Internet
I don't know for you, but on my 800x480 handset, i have to zoom out to have the full page, and zoom in, etc...
With a better screen resolution, the navigation will be easier
It's not interesting for everybody, but I think clivo360 and I are not the only guys looking for a higher resolution screen

Although 4.3" is probably the upper limit for what you'd consider "pocketable", I'd still be attracted to bigger screens and more powerful phones because there are things that can take advantage of them, such as video. Imagine 1080p screens on a phone!
At some point though, phones are probably going to suffer the same problem that PCs did - that hardware outdoes all user needs. Imagine a point where the hardware has reached such a point where for the average user, they don't need the most potent phone anymore. We're already well on the way there. It happened with PCs, where the average user needs office software such as word processing, a spreadsheet, and the Internet, but nothing that demands crazy hardware (the average user is not a high end gamer we're talking here).

A better resolution makes even more difference on an SAMOLED screen compared to an LCD/SLCD - due to the PenTile matrix configuration of pixels a 800x480 SAMOLED screen doesn't really have as many pixels as an 800x480 standard LCD.
Just take a close look at the screen of a Nexus One or Nexus S at some text and you'll see it's slightly fuzzy. See here for more info
Better resolutions aren't available yet because a) it's a relatively new technology and b) manufacturers are having a hard enough time making enough just to cover the existing devices that use them.
AFAIK, there is only one Android device with a larger screen resolution that, as long as you don't live in the good old US of A (and even there it can be done), can make calls: the Samsung Galaxy Tab. But not exactly small enough to fit in your trouser pocket (although it does slip easily into a jacket pocket).
PS: The Tab is fantastic for video (1080p MKV supported), games and general browsing (with plugins set to on-demand) plus the odd short book, although you do look very strange if you answer calls on it without a BT headset (very Trigger Happy).

Ugh, I won't flame people saying we don't need higher resolution, though I wanted to...
Here is one basic application where the higher resolution really does make a difference: Reading text .PDFs.
I tried reading PDFs on my 800 x 480 Samsung Fascinate (Galaxy S) and I wish the text was a little smoother. Sure, I'd like a slightly larger screen (no more than 4.3") but if the screen was larger I'd be even more desperate for higher resolution. I'd like to see 1024 * 640 on a 4" Android.
Higher resolution does not nesc. need more battery/CPU power: it's the brightness that uses the battery most.

critofur said:
I tried reading PDFs on my 800 x 480 Samsung Fascinate (Galaxy S) and I wish the text was a little smoother. Sure, I'd like a slightly larger screen (no more than 4.3") but if the screen was larger I'd be even more desperate for higher resolution. I'd like to see 1024 * 640 on a 4" Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't your phone's AMOLED screen use the PenTile matrix? If so, that's a huge factor. I have 2 Droid Incredibles, one AMOLED w/PenTile matrix, the other SLCD. The SLCD has MUCH smoother text despite both being the same 480x800 resolution. AMOLED w/PenTile matrix has a "screen door effect".
Anyway, Toshiba might make your dream come true, and even exceed what you'd like to see.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/16/toshiba-enters-pixel-density-fray-with-367ppi-lcds-for-cellphone/

its true about the screen door effect. texting the g2x is very smooth dispite the resolution being the same as the vibrant.

Not sure I could put larger than 4.3" in my pocket

720p Displays - 'Cool Factor' or a practical improvement?

I’m going to be buying a new phone soon. I’ve been eyeing up the Galaxy S II but I thought I might as well wait and see what is announced this month. One thing that all top end rumoured phones have in common is a 720p display. I have to admit this alone has tempted me to wait. But then I got to thinking, aside from the ‘cool’ factor. What benefit in the real world will a 720p display bring us?
The two main advantages that I can see are improved PPI and the obvious advantage when playing 720p videos. But a higher PPI means more processing power, which in turn means lower battery life. Also from an admittedly purely lazy point of view it means having to zoom in further to be able to read text.
A 720p display will now mean that 480p videos on youtube and the like will be upscaled and won’t look as good. ‘Just choose the 720p option’ you say. Fine, so long as you’re on wifi. Until 4G hits and is widespread (which in the UK is going to take a while) it will mean longer waits and buffer issues.
Yes I’m nit picking but I’d genuinely like to hear your thoughts on the pros and cons of a 720p display. I know there will be many more I’ve missed.

i see it from 2 sides....
720p = really nice picture quality
720p bad for some apps/games, which might no longer run properly, unless fixed, or some how the hardware can auto adjust the resolution to stretch it to fit.
720p can be a bit of a pain, if some Apps/Games developer decide to use too small of a touch area, due the larger dot-pix available in the 720p area
that also means DVD quality or lower quality videos played on the 720p will look like blurry or smeared, that can be fixed with software/hardware correction, like games.

^^ All that.
Plus, I don't really see the need for a 720 screen that's around the 4" size. Do you really need pixels that small? They'll be smaller than photons if we carry on like this and then it'll be reality that'll have to catch up with our tech
Personally, I wouldn't hold back for purely that one feature, but who knows what else is round the corner. Get a phone and let it be the best for a few months and then slowly drop down the list. As everyone always says, there's always something better coming, and if you waited then you'd never get anything.
Incidentally, I do have the SGS2, and it is REALLY nice

well definitely 1080p will be around the corner as we already stepped into the 720p kingdom
so 1080p on a 4" display would not be a long wait, but it will really make you think, what's the point of cramming so much in such a little screen
i can see 1080p to be a normal thin on a 10" tablet, but on a phone... that's a bit much
i do hope they don't go beyond 720p on any screen smaller than 5"
imagine running Windows Vista/7 on 15" wide LCD at 1080 (there are many laptops that are actually like that) it's soooooo eye strain-ful, it literally kills the eyes
i always down set the resolution back to something more readable to not strain my eyes

AllGamer said:
i always down set the resolution back to something more readable to not strain my eyes
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you need your reading glasses as well, so you can find your pipe and slippers?

i don't wear glasses, and i intent to keep it that way, reason why i prefer an easy reading, on 480 vs 720
on 720 i'll have to probably the the font size twice as big, to make it easily legible when you are in the car, bus/subway, or walking
no i don't get dizzy reading while doing any of the above
many people can't read if they are in a moving vehicle
probably due the same relevant issue about having to scan the text in a small device and straining your vision, while trying to keep an eye on the road and not crashing

AllGamer said:
i don't wear glasses, and i intent to keep it that way, reason why i prefer an easy reading, on 480 vs 720
on 720 i'll have to probably the the font size twice as big, to make it easily legible when you are in the car, bus/subway, or walking
no i don't get dizzy reading while doing any of the above
many people can't read if they are in a moving vehicle
probably due the same relevant issue about having to scan the text in a small device and straining your vision, while trying to keep an eye on the road and not crashing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you, therebisbreally no reason to go above 720p resolution on small smartphone devices. I myself notice my eyes begin to hurt after more than thirty minutes or so of heavy reading on my Sensation. Now I know my Sensation does not have 720p but I am just saying the size of the screen and the text on that screen is no doubt a strain on the human eye after extended reading done on the device. 1080p is definitely so,ethimg that should just make it to the larger tablets and not smartphones.
Oh and yes actually paying attention to the road while you are driving is a highly recommended activity lol.

AllGamer said:
that also means DVD quality or lower quality videos played on the 720p will look like blurry or smeared, that can be fixed with software/hardware correction, like games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is just plain wrong, low resolution video will look just as good on 720p displays.
Sent from my GT-I9100

Maybe i miss-understood your question, but i am using the Galaxy SII
I never had any screen / resolution issues

Well,first off,let's not forget that Android supports changing the DPI in build.prop(I think-haven't bothered in a while).I don't think manufacturers will leave 220-240 dpi of the current devices on 720p devices,but they would rather pump it up,so that everything stays the same size,but is just crisper.That's just my thought though.
On another note,lower resolution videos won't look worse at all.Resolution in that aspect is irrelevant.The same way that you can play a 720p video on a 480p screen without problems,you can do the opposite just as well.Unless some manufacturer decides to f*ck it up with upscaling tricks and stuff that will defo make the image blurry and ugly.
The only really valid argument on the topic,in my opinion,is the possible lack of processing power,especially when it comes to GPUs.We even saw the Mali MP-400,the most powerful GPU on a PHONE (DON'T SAY ABOUT THE A5 IN THE iPAD!!!!) to date,struggle to keep up in the case of the Galaxy Note's resolution.If the next gen of SoCs doesn't improve quite a lot in that aspect,we'll see some performance drops for sure.Not to mention the worst thing,the losses of battery life in case that extra power is met.Not that I mind about battery life as long as it makes it through the day,but many many people do.

Do any of you guys know the p in 720p stands for?
It has nothing to do with resolution, which is what you are all trying to talk about.

Papi4baby said:
Do any of you guys know the p in 720p stands for?
It has nothing to do with resolution, which is what you are all trying to talk about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
progressive, opposed to the i of interlaced.
Technically 720i use half the vertical pixels for each frame.

Papi4baby said:
Do any of you guys know the p in 720p stands for?
It has nothing to do with resolution, which is what you are all trying to talk about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes man,we know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p

sgs 2
sent from my cappy. xda app

HD rules

Stupid iOS fan boys are inventing things to trash Android again

Read a post today regarding why Android phones are so much bigger than the iPhone and it makes my blood boiled:
http://www.displayblog.com/2012/01/16/why-android-smartphones-are-bigger-than-the-iphone/
If he was true, I wouldn't complain. But that guy totally made things up by himself. It's clear that he had not done research to back up his "theory" -- he just made it up himself. Any Android users who had changed the LCD density of their devices would know that it's fairly easy to change the lppi. When a manufacturer increase the physical resolution of its device, it will adjust the LCD density to accommodate the denser display. That guy could find out the truth easily by asking around.

The article makes perfect sense to me. I for one would much rather have a smaller screen with higher pixel density.

does it really matter. you have a device and it works for you, if you read every post where somebody whines about the most trivial things then i feel sorry for you. get a life

I think I'll try to rebut this.
There are four DPI levels (MDPI is baseline):
LDPI: ~120DPI
MDPI: ~160DPI
HDPI: ~240DPI
XHDPI: ~320DPI
What this means is that when resolution increases from ~120 ppi (I prefer ppi when discussing pixel-based digital displays) to ~159 ppi fonts and icons will get smaller. This applies to all three levels of in-betweens. And displays north of ~320 ppi will continue to get smaller with no reprieve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True. But manufacturers do not create screen sizes of EVERY possible density. They tend to aim for a certain density. And I don't see why they won't round up 159ppi up to 160. They wouldn't (with minor exceptions) create a screen perfectly at the middle between HDPI and MDPI, for example.
If displays size were kept at 3.2 inches from the G1, the corresponding resolutions (ppi) would be:
G1: 180.23
Nexus One: 291.55
Nexus S: 233.24
Galaxy Nexus: 458.94
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you want to convert the screen sizes to 3.2 inches first? This doesn't make sense! Oh, and I think you calculated the Nexus S wrongly.
But because Android renders text and graphics like desktop OSes (e.g. Windows, OS X) increasing resolution above 320 ppi means smaller UI elements. The display had to grow in size to compensate for shrinking UI elements. iOS renders the Retina display not by shrinking UI elements by one fourth but by doubling clarity and sharpness. Unless Google adds an additional “DPI level” beyond XHDPI, Android smartphones that match or beat the iPhone 4/4S in resolution will always be bigger, much bigger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android would never need to go past 320dpi, just like the iPhone, for it is at the verge of the human eye's visual acuity.
FYI for those who don't know, 4 copies of the UI elements are created, for each of the different display densities. So scaling up would simply mean swapping the element with the identical one of the higher density. Anything past the highest density is also past 320dpi, higher than the limit the human eye can distinguish.
UI elements created for XHDPI are usually purposefully created such that they are big enough for the density, allowing UI elements to be comfortably big enough for users.
Then why are 1280×720 Android smartphones much bigger? Because UI elements would get too small if they were much smaller than 4.5 inches.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no point of having a screen higher than 320dpi. It would be hard for one to differentiate a screen of 320dpi and 360dpi of the same size. There is no point in google trying to compete in resolution with the iPhone at this point. And besides, a manufacturer could easily release a 3.5 inch phone matching the iPhone's screen perfectly with no problems.
So there is seriously no practical point in trying to squeeze 1280x720 into a small 3.5 inch screen. I doubt manufacturers will want to try that when a 320ppi screen could do the exact same job (which by calculations, a 960x640 screen fits perfectly), without users noticing any difference. This is when resolution does not mean everything. DPI is much more important than resolution.
Disclaimer: I am not an app developer, but this is what I understand from the documentation from the android developer website.

DirkGently said:
The article makes perfect sense to me. I for one would much rather have a smaller screen with higher pixel density.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If what he said was true, then it made perfect sense. The problem is, he's wrong, completely. An OEM will change the ro.sf.lcd_density in build.prop to adjust the LCD density so that the font size and icon size scale up as the physical resolution increase, period. That's a fact and I have not seen a single OEM who doesn't do that. In fact, if an end user roots his device, he can change the setting himself.
No offensive to the iOS fans, but I just couldn't stand for some of them who think they know everything and keep inventing new things to praise how great their OS is, when they couldn't even get the fact right. I mean, if he's saying a 3.5" screen is the perfect size, that's one thing because it's personal preference and no one can argue that. But he wasn't doing that. He just made up a theory that is just plain wrong and present it as a fact.

Why didn't Huawei use an AMOLED screen vs IPS?

It's kind of a head scratcher. I compared it with my 3T and is pretty noticeable as on the 3t the colors are better. Was it to keep cost down?

Screen on time is much better than amoled when viewing mostly white content such as web pages.
Amoled tends to over saturate colours, lcd is more subdued but also more natural looking.
Rgb matrix gives better sharpness than the pentile matrix typically used in amoled screens.
Possible issues securing sufficient quantities if amoled panels.
Mate 9 screen is also brighter.
My last three daily drivers were the Note 7, Oneplus 3 and s7. There's definite advantages to amoled but there's advantages to lcd as well. Personally I have no complaints, Huawei have used a very high quality ips panel, so I'd be surprised if cost was the main motivator.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

Exactly. People tend to hear AMOLED and think it's clear cut. It's not. Each tech has its own pros and cons.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs

I forgot to mention screen burn in - a problem that lcd panels don't face and which they still can't solve for amoled.
The screen on the Mate 9 is gorgeous, I've caught myself just staring at it a few times. Not once have I felt like it is a downgrade from the s7, and the s7 is a better panel than what the Oneplus has.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

hackdrag0n said:
Screen on time is much better than amoled when viewing mostly white content such as web pages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to LG. Their phones are LCD yet have terrible battery life. Yet my Pixel XL and Samsung phones have had much better battery life despite using AMOLED... so this is not necessarily true.
hackdrag0n said:
Amoled tends to over saturate colours, lcd is more subdued but also more natural looking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, color calibration/saturation has NOTHING to do with screen tech. The manufacturer sets the color calibration/target. The Mate 9 IS OVER SATURATED. Not as much as most AMOLED phones, but it is not calibrated to sRGB by ANY means. AMOLED phones have typically over saturated because AMOLED has had much higher color coverage capability, and it was a strong selling point. I dislike over saturated colors, but love AMOLED when it is set to a reasonable target (sRGB or Adobe RGB). Contrast is extremely important for image quality, ESPECIALLY in dark viewing conditions. Fast pixel response time is hugely important for a smartphone to maintain a "clean" looking display when scrolling. The Mate 9 LCD is one of the worst I've seen. It has bad ghosting and/or overshoot artifacting which makes the problem even worse.
hackdrag0n said:
Rgb matrix gives better sharpness than the pentile matrix typically used in amoled screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true. Maybe Samsung will bring back RGB for the S8. They used to have RGB AMOLED in older phones at one point, you know?
hackdrag0n said:
Mate 9 screen is also brighter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. Samsung panels have high brightness modes under sunlight and other bright light sources. I can trigger this mode whenever I want using root and a kernel. My Pixel XL is brighter than my Mate 9.
Governa said:
Exactly. People tend to hear AMOLED and think it's clear cut. It's not. Each tech has its own pros and cons.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is clear cut. AMOLED is superior. It's why I spent nearly $6,000 for TWO TV's in my house that are AMOLED. The quality is mind blowing on a large screen, and once you realize its benefits there, you will never want an LCD again... even on your smartphone. At least that's the case with me. It's also why Apple is going for AMOLED with the iPhone 8... because they know it's better.

No, it's your opinion that amoled is superior. It's not a hard fact.
I'm also not sure how your pixel can be brighter when review sites have it listed at under 400 nits and the Mate 9 is listed at over 600.
Actually, I'll rephrase that: if contrast ratio is the most important factor to you then yes amoled is a must. Other than that I still maintain that there are still areas where lcd has advantages.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

There are a lot of misconceptions about display technology.
As mentioned they each have advantages and disadvantages.
LCD has a very flat power consumption due to the fact that it's essentially white LEDs shining through color filters whereas AMOLED consist of individual pixels that combine to create color meaning that each LED will vary in consumption according to what is displayed meaning white requires all of them to shine at maximum to create white which is why AMOLED uses more power in that situation and no power when displaying pure black. LG has somewhat solved that on their TVs because they use 4 sub pixels: RGBW. They therefore create white separately and can save power that way.
AMOLED is only oversaturated because it is naturally a wide gamut display. When uncalibrated it will look oversaturated because all content is pretty much sRGB which is a limited color space. Many manufacturers including Huawei don't bother calibrating their displays for accuracy.
Huawei most likely used LCD for the regular Mate 9 because no decent 6" AMOLED was available which explains why the Pro variant has a 5.5" display.
LCD has poor latencies which is also why the regular 9 doesn't support Daydream. OLED displays naturally has low latencies which is why all Daydream compatible phones are AMOLED.
AMOLED is more prone to burn-in and is also prone to display degradation due to each sub pixel aging at varying rates.
LCD displays have higher peak brightness and is therefore more easy to see in sunlight. On the other hand, AMOLED have individually controlled brightness meaning pure blacks can be attained (turning off pixels completely) whereas LCD have edge lit displays with poor control resulting in light bleeding and above-zero blacks resulting in grey-ish blacks because there will always be some light shining through. So the contrast is much greater and only limited by peak brightness on the AMOLED display.
AMOLED doesn't have RGB but RG-BG sub pixels resulting in some odd problems including potentially green tint and reduced display quality and sharpness. Pentile sucks but the yields are better I guess and it does have some advantages such as decreased power consumption.
Finally, an often overlooked issue: many modern LCD displays use voltage controlled display brightness regulation where all AMOLED displays use PWM. Why is this important? PWM can cause eye strain and headaches. Especially due to the low frequency of 240 Hz that many AMOLED displays use. Your eyes won't necessarily notice the flickering but they can be irritated by it anyway.
PS. Typed this on my phone... Should have switched to laptop. What a pain to do this write-up.

↑ now THAT is a great post. Kudos.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs

hackdrag0n said:
No, it's your opinion that amoled is superior. It's not a hard fact.
I'm also not sure how your pixel can be brighter when review sites have it listed at under 400 nits and the Mate 9 is listed at over 600.
Actually, I'll rephrase that: if contrast ratio is the most important factor to you then yes amoled is a must. Other than that I still maintain that there are still areas where lcd has advantages.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look at the world of TV's. As is sits, LG's OLED TV's are the pinnacle of displays. They are the absolute best. No question, no contest, every quality review site agrees, as do the owners (myself included). I said the Pixel is brighter because I have enabled the Samsung panel brightness boost mode via root and a custom kernel - it acts just like the sunlight brightness boost on the S7/S7E, except I can enable it whenever I want. It is just as bright, if not brighter, than the Mate 9. The only advantage LCD has today is higher peak brightness, and that is only true in TV's since they have much larger backlights. Cellphones, AMOLED is actually much better in terms of outdoor viewing as tested by GSM Arena, due to a combination of peak brightness and lower reflectivity. Other than the potential for burn-in/image retention, there is zero benefit to an LCD in a cell phone.
Trixanity said:
LG has somewhat solved that on their TVs because they use 4 sub pixels: RGBW. They therefore create white separately and can save power that way.
Huawei most likely used LCD for the regular Mate 9 because no decent 6" AMOLED was available which explains why the Pro variant has a 5.5" display.
AMOLED is more prone to burn-in and is also prone to display degradation due to each sub pixel aging at varying rates.
AMOLED doesn't have RGB but RG-BG sub pixels resulting in some odd problems including potentially green tint and reduced display quality and sharpness. Pentile sucks but the yields are better I guess and it does have some advantages such as decreased power consumption.
Finally, an often overlooked issue: many modern LCD displays use voltage controlled display brightness regulation where all AMOLED displays use PWM. Why is this important? PWM can cause eye strain and headaches. Especially due to the low frequency of 240 Hz that many AMOLED displays use. Your eyes won't necessarily notice the flickering but they can be irritated by it anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone who actually knows something about AMOLED too on XDA! It's like finding a unicorn... just a few things to add...
LG does add a 4th white subpixel in their TV's, but it's moreso to increase peak brightness and not really save power. When display white, there are actually 3 subpixels turned on (I believe it's red, blue, and white) so it's not making much difference there... but it is certainly brighter because ALL the subpixels are WHITE subpixels (red, blue, and green have color filters), so having a white subpixel without a color filter eliminates brightness loss on those subpixels.
It blows my mind that Huawei couldn't get a decent ~6" AMOLED panel. Motorola did it for the Nexus 6. And hell, Samsung made them a custom 6.6" AMOLED display for the Honor Note 8! Oh well... maybe Samsung wanted less competition against the S8.
I will say that AMOLED phone panels have had a nasty tendency to burn-in. I can't say how the 2016 panels perform in normal usage (store burn-in is not a fair baseline), but it seems to improve every year. Neither of my 2016 LG OLED TV's show any burn-in, and 1 of them has been used as a PC monitor its entire time. I have taken a few steps to mitigate it (I hide icons behind browser windows, have the task bar set to auto-hide, and turn the brightness down slightly), but nothing major and it is perfectly fine. Image retention and uneven wear on the display is often confused with burn-in. For instance, the nav bar on my Pixel XL is clearly visible if I go fullscreen on a gray background (the most obvious color for burn/IR tests), but that is mostly because the black pixels there just never get used... so they're actually brighter, ever so slightly, than the rest of the screen. By running a manual compensation cycle when I'm not using the phone (such as white noise, or inverted colors), it mostly fixes the issue. That is an acceptable trade-off to me, especially considering the fact that the nav bar is always there. My TV's run black-screen compensation cycles automatically every 8 hours or so (after shutdown), so this is the nature of the beast.
True about the RG-BG pentile garbage. But that's Samsung's doing since they have terrible yields with full RGB. They did make at least 1 phone years ago that had true RGB AMOLED, and they marketed that specific feature too, literally telling customers how much sharper RGB is compared to pentile! - funny how they went away from it. Probably why their OLED TV division failed as well, since RGB AMOLED is clearly impossible to produce good yields right now, especially at larger sizes. I am hoping that the S8 brings back RGB AMOLED in the mobile world... rumors say it will.
AMOLED phone panels certainly do use PWM, but LG OLED TV's do not use PWM.

Nitemare3219 said:
Look at the world of TV's. As is sits, LG's OLED TV's are the pinnacle of displays. They are the absolute best. No question, no contest, every quality review site agrees, as do the owners (myself included). I said the Pixel is brighter because I have enabled the Samsung panel brightness boost mode via root and a custom kernel - it acts just like the sunlight brightness boost on the S7/S7E, except I can enable it whenever I want. It is just as bright, if not brighter, than the Mate 9. The only advantage LCD has today is higher peak brightness, and that is only true in TV's since they have much larger backlights. Cellphones, AMOLED is actually much better in terms of outdoor viewing as tested by GSM Arena, due to a combination of peak brightness and lower reflectivity. Other than the potential for burn-in/image retention, there is zero benefit to an LCD in a cell phone.
Someone who actually knows something about AMOLED too on XDA! It's like finding a unicorn... just a few things to add...
LG does add a 4th white subpixel in their TV's, but it's moreso to increase peak brightness and not really save power. When display white, there are actually 3 subpixels turned on (I believe it's red, blue, and white) so it's not making much difference there... but it is certainly brighter because ALL the subpixels are WHITE subpixels (red, blue, and green have color filters), so having a white subpixel without a color filter eliminates brightness loss on those subpixels.
It blows my mind that Huawei couldn't get a decent ~6" AMOLED panel. Motorola did it for the Nexus 6. And hell, Samsung made them a custom 6.6" AMOLED display for the Honor Note 8! Oh well... maybe Samsung wanted less competition against the S8.
I will say that AMOLED phone panels have had a nasty tendency to burn-in. I can't say how the 2016 panels perform in normal usage (store burn-in is not a fair baseline), but it seems to improve every year. Neither of my 2016 LG OLED TV's show any burn-in, and 1 of them has been used as a PC monitor its entire time. I have taken a few steps to mitigate it (I hide icons behind browser windows, have the task bar set to auto-hide, and turn the brightness down slightly), but nothing major and it is perfectly fine. Image retention and uneven wear on the display is often confused with burn-in. For instance, the nav bar on my Pixel XL is clearly visible if I go fullscreen on a gray background (the most obvious color for burn/IR tests), but that is mostly because the black pixels there just never get used... so they're actually brighter, ever so slightly, than the rest of the screen. By running a manual compensation cycle when I'm not using the phone (such as white noise, or inverted colors), it mostly fixes the issue. That is an acceptable trade-off to me, especially considering the fact that the nav bar is always there. My TV's run black-screen compensation cycles automatically every 8 hours or so (after shutdown), so this is the nature of the beast.
True about the RG-BG pentile garbage. But that's Samsung's doing since they have terrible yields with full RGB. They did make at least 1 phone years ago that had true RGB AMOLED, and they marketed that specific feature too, literally telling customers how much sharper RGB is compared to pentile! - funny how they went away from it. Probably why their OLED TV division failed as well, since RGB AMOLED is clearly impossible to produce good yields right now, especially at larger sizes. I am hoping that the S8 brings back RGB AMOLED in the mobile world... rumors say it will.
AMOLED phone panels certainly do use PWM, but LG OLED TV's do not use PWM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the first time I've been called a unicorn. I like it.
Thanks for the correction on the LG OLED TVs. I was under the impression they used the W-pixel to both produce higher brightness and reduce the added power consumption from going full tilt on each of the other pixels. I did not know they used filters like that actually. I thought they used similar tech to Samsung but apparently not But that also explains why their yields are so different.
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
I'm hoping the S8 can do away with both Pentile and PWM. Then I'd probably buy it instantly but that's wishful thinking.
PWM is apparently used to avoid hue shifts which I suspect might be because of the Pentile arrangement but I'm not sure. I've not seen measurements on the S2 but I've heard anecdotal evidence that it was actually not using PWM.
It might also explain why LG doesn't use it on their TVs; that they simply don't have that problem with hue shifts because their panels are so different. I wish LG would get back in the OLED display game for smaller screens including phones, tablets, laptops and monitors. It would be so awesome with some competition.
By the way, interesting note on the peak brightness. Can the brightness boost be maintained indefinitely or does it dim after a while? I know LG had a booster on their recent LCDs (of all things) and it dimmed shortly after. One thing I should note that the Mate 9 reaches up to 700 nits and that's not limited to auto brightness like Samsung's is meaning that you can manually boost it to that at all times. The Pixel XL only manages 400 in the same scenario but if you can boost the peak brightness through a mod and keep it there (perhaps even without auto brightness?) then that's impressive especially if goes over 700. I do believe 700 nits is about as bright as you'll get on a smartphone LCD. The only reason we even need it is because of sunlight. 700 nits would be blinding to my eyes in any other scenario
If only they could invent a display that could switch between being emissive and reflective with few drawbacks - that would solve a lot of problems.
Edit: forgot to address the Huawei panel. Whether Huawei could get a 6" panel for the phone or not is uncertain. I'm just guessing; I have no sources to back that up but it seems to be the case that they couldn't find a panel that suited their needs. They probably also had a good deal with JDI since they've used their panels for some years and AMOLED was only just about to become the expected standard. We've long seen LCD being used by most manufacturers - it's only in the recent year or two that it has spread to other brands than Samsung. I mean Apple, LG, HTC, Sony and Huawei have all been using LCD either exclusively or primarily. That's about to change in the coming years.
I'm thinking the AMOLED panels they could get weren't up to the standard they were looking for. The LCD panel they used was pretty damn good although poorly calibrated. Although now that I think of it the reason the Pro is is 5.5" might be more to do with the requirement for a curved display which limits their options quite a bit. Also, keep in mind a custom display is expensive so producing a phone on the scale of a Mate 9 would probably limit them to off-the-shelf components to avoid gutting their profit margins. I'm sure they could have gotten any display they wanted if they were willing to pay the price.
With that being said: there are probably many reasons not to go AMOLED for the regular Mate 9 and all we can do is guess what their reasons are.

Trixanity said:
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
I'm hoping the S8 can do away with both PenTile and PWM. Then I'd probably buy it instantly but that's wishful thinking.
PWM is apparently used to avoid hue shifts which I suspect might be because of the Pentile arrangement but I'm not sure. I've not seen measurements on the S2 but I've heard anecdotal evidence that it was actually not using PWM.
It might also explain why LG doesn't use it on their TVs; that they simply don't have that problem with hue shifts because their panels are so different.
By the way, interesting note on the peak brightness. Can the brightness boost be maintained indefinitely or does it dim after a while? I know LG had a booster on their recent LCDs (of all things) and it dimmed shortly after. One thing I should note that the Mate 9 reaches up to 700 nits and that's not limited to auto brightness like Samsung's is meaning that you can manually boost it to that at all times. The Pixel XL only manages 400 in the same scenario but if you can boost the peak brightness through a mod and keep it there (perhaps even without auto brightness?) then that's impressive especially if goes over 700. I do believe 700 nits is about as bright as you'll get on a smartphone LCD. The only reason we even need it is because of sunlight. 700 nits would be blinding to my eyes in any other scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S2... man, long time ago. They probably only managed RGB because of the low resolution and/or realized then just how bad the yields were.
I've never noticed PWM, so it's no issue for me. I believe the color hue shifts when viewing at an angle is actually because the display is pentile. LG's OLED TV's have mind blowing viewing angles - it is essentially perfect no matter where you view from in terms of color, AND the brightness does not decrease either like on an LCD - forgot to mention that too! LCD panels get much dimmer if you view off-axis... OLED do not.
As far as I know, the Pixel can maintain the brightness boost indefinitely. I have used it for upwards of 20 minutes or so before. I can manually enable it via widget, or have it set to function automatically as well. I'm not sure I want to test long periods of time though... there could be a downside to it over time (perhaps why Samsung does not allow it to be user enabled). I know LG's phones in the past have quickly turned down their peak brightness due to heat issues. I wonder if the Mate 9 could suffer from the same problem eventually? Probably not seeing as how Apple manages to have displays that bright as well without issue. I think LG's mobile division is just really, really lacking right now. Hopefully they bring OLED to their phones again soon (they've used P-OLED a few times, and I experienced it in their Watch Urbane LTE 2nd edition smartwatch, and that was fantastic).

Nitemare3219 said:
The S2... man, long time ago. They probably only managed RGB because of the low resolution and/or realized then just how bad the yields were.
I've never noticed PWM, so it's no issue for me. I believe the color hue shifts when viewing at an angle is actually because the display is pentile. LG's OLED TV's have mind blowing viewing angles - it is essentially perfect no matter where you view from in terms of color, AND the brightness does not decrease either like on an LCD - forgot to mention that too! LCD panels get much dimmer if you view off-axis... OLED do not.
As far as I know, the Pixel can maintain the brightness boost indefinitely. I have used it for upwards of 20 minutes or so before. I can manually enable it via widget, or have it set to function automatically as well. I'm not sure I want to test long periods of time though... there could be a downside to it over time (perhaps why Samsung does not allow it to be user enabled). I know LG's phones in the past have quickly turned down their peak brightness due to heat issues. I wonder if the Mate 9 could suffer from the same problem eventually? Probably not seeing as how Apple manages to have displays that bright as well without issue. I think LG's mobile division is just really, really lacking right now. Hopefully they bring OLED to their phones again soon (they've used P-OLED a few times, and I experienced it in their Watch Urbane LTE 2nd edition smartwatch, and that was fantastic).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a heads up, I've added an edit to my previous post.
I wish I could afford an OLED TV One would be foolish not to pick up an LG OLED TV over any LCD display out there today (barring the price that is).
I don't think maintaining peak brightness is an issue unless you're standing out in direct sunlight all day with your phone. I mean you wouldn't switch to manual brightness and crank it up when you're inside. Most probably use auto brightness anyway and that means it won't be anywhere near the maximum unless you're outside. I'm sure it might reduce the lifespan of the LEDs or maybe increase the likelihood of a defect.
I was actually quite intrigued by LG's G Flex series (aka banana phone) which had a P-OLED display. It might be a bit gimmicky especially the 'self-healing' back cover but it looked different but it was plagued by poor sales and the second iteration was let down by the Snapdragon 810.
The G6 will have their new 18:9 (2:1 really) 5.7" LCD display. It will have 2880 x 1440 resolution. So not this time.

While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt the input lag stems from the panel technology. Input lag is usually related to processing lag in the display controller and other IC. However they can achieve 1 ms response time and theoretically 100000 Hz refresh rate, so it has the potential to be the best gaming display technology ever.
As previously mentioned: what many consider burn-in is merely image retention which is very much reversible and it does continue to get better in that regard.

Trixanity said:
I doubt the input lag stems from the panel technology. Input lag is usually related to processing lag in the display controller and other IC. However they can achieve 1 ms response time and theoretically 100000 Hz refresh rate, so it has the potential to be the best gaming display technology ever.
As previously mentioned: what many consider burn-in is merely image retention which is very much reversible and it does continue to get better in that regard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well "burn-in" is actually the leds "burning" so there is no way to recover them.

Lodix said:
Well "burn-in" is actually the leds "burning" so there is no way to recover them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't really refute what I said. That's merely an explanation for what burn-in is. What I said is that many think image retention is burn-in when they're two different things (or more accurately you could say that the symptoms are the same but the prognosis is different especially if given the right medication - so to speak). Image retention is reversible as I said.

Trixanity said:
That doesn't really refute what I said. That's merely an explanation for what burn-in is. What I said is that many think image retention is burn-in when they're two different things (or more accurately you could say that the symptoms are the same but the prognosis is different especially if given the right medication - so to speak). Image retention is reversible as I said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the problem with oled panels is the burn-in, not the retention. Maybe this year they have manged to solve it someway since Apple is implementing it in their iPhones and people are very nitpicking with their devices.
PD: I am all over AMOLED panels, it is one of the reason why I got the 9 Pro.

I don't mind a quality 1080 panel. Huawei makes me rethink my love of AMOLED displays.
I personally don't see a major difference unless it's the newest Samsung flagship. Not a major change from my 6p or Nexus 6 but these weren't cream of the crop AMOLED displays.
I truly thought this would be the mate that got the qhd AMOLED especially after the honor note 8 that released not long before this one. Extremely happy with the LCD panel.
Last 2 LCD phones I used was LeEco s1 and lg v10. The s1 had a great LCD panel that look AMOLED. Lg v10 just looked washed out most of the time.

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're wrong. In 2015, yes they were ****. I had an EG9600 and it had about 50ms of input lag. I have 2 2016 TV's now, a C6 and a B6. The B6 just got an update and it does 28ms of input lag at 4:2:2, but close to 70ms at 4:4:4. The C6 does 34ms of input lag at either setting (4:2:2, or 4:4:4). The lag is NOT noticeable at all, and part of this is because the pixels respond instantly to new frames (<.1ms) whereas IPS and VA can take MANY milliseconds to update the pixels - some panels take dozens of milliseconds for a full transition for some colors. OLED is the fastest refresh for a panel today. My C6 has hundreds of hours of PC use ONLY, and has ZERO burn in... NONE.
Lodix said:
But the problem with oled panels is the burn-in, not the retention. Maybe this year they have manged to solve it someway since Apple is implementing it in their iPhones and people are very nitpicking with their devices.
PD: I am all over AMOLED panels, it is one of the reason why I got the 9 Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is a lot of people mistake burn-in for image retention because they don't come back and check again later after viewing different content on the display for awhile. I will say that burn-in can be an issue for phones though, depending on how you use them/set them up. My friend's S5 has the keyboard ghosted/burned into the display. He must text a LOT or something. Blew my mind when I saw that.

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not in Gaming/PC Mode on the most recent models. On the 2017 OLED the input lag is 21ms in virtually all situations.
Trixanity said:
I wish I could afford an OLED TV One would be foolish not to pick up an LG OLED TV over any LCD display out there today (barring the price that is).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For pricing, you just have to wait until Black Friday for deals on the current year's models. That's the best time to buy a TV that will last you many years. Picked up the LG 65" C7P for $1900 last Fall. I wouldn't consider Samsung's QLED TV's over LG's RGBW OLED. However, there is the advantage of luminance. QLED have a higher luminance. Also keep in mind that although RGBW is not Pentile and doesn't suffer from inferior sub-resolution, you do lose color volume to an extent when using the higher levels of luminance (You'll be depending on the additional white sub-pixel). I'd say this is a fairly tertiary concern but could be important if you use the OLED in a bright living room. If using a dark room, there's absolutely no contest. Personally, I have the C7P in a living room and still completely satisfied. There's a reason why it's a champ on every review site. Oh and for reference, all the LG 2017 OLED have essentially the same panel irregardless of price.
Trixanity said:
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Samsung Galaxy Note II (2012) also had a Full RGB AMOLED Display (720P HD). That was the last time for phones. However, Samsung also still does Full RGB AMOLED for the larger 9.7" models in their premium lines of tablets (Galaxy Tab S2, Tab S3). Those have the same 4:3 resolution as the iPad (2048x1536). The 10.5" Galaxy Tab S has a 2560x1600 Full RGB AMOLED Display as well. I certainly hope Samsung turns away from Pentile sometime in the future, but I don't think they'll do so anytime soon for smartphones. However, there is some hope.