[Q] Higher Resolution Android Phones - General Questions and Answers

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

Related

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.

5.3" device: question about cpu

Does a larger touch screen With same resolution need a faster cpu?
My doubt is about larger touch screen, not actual screen size. Would touch-scrolling run smooth With 800x480 resolution and 5.3" size?
This could be The case: use blu studio 5.3" screen With ZTE tania hw.
If the screen is of same resolution, the load on the SOC is the same.
illegaloperation said:
If the screen is of same resolution, the load on the SOC is the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I hope bluproducts (and other minor manufacturers) will offer WP devices soon.
MS should give WP to manufacturers for free and ask a fee for xbox live/bing maps only (the way nokia is doing With its maps)
Displaying the same resolution uses the same CPU cycles regardless of physical screen size. However, a larger screen size might require a more detailed touch-sensor grid and I'm not sure if that would result in more CPU cycles or just greater battery drain (relatively speaking).
but on big screen lags are more visible!
so from user experience point, large screen devices need better CPU
PoisonWolf said:
Displaying the same resolution uses the same CPU cycles regardless of physical screen size. However, a larger screen size might require a more detailed touch-sensor grid and I'm not sure if that would result in more CPU cycles or just greater battery drain (relatively speaking).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's exactly what I was asking.
I'd try produce a 5" WP with 1Ghz for 199 similar to the blue studio offer
Cotulla said:
but on big screen lags are more visible!
so from user experience point, large screen devices need better CPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WP7 doesn't lag.
Sent from my SGH-I897
MikeyMike01 said:
WP7 doesn't lag.
Sent from my SGH-I897
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right. Unfortunately ZTE didn't release a 5" WP but just another 4.3"
A 199 5" WP would sell very very well.
Unless they tweak the god damn OS to a new level with higher resolution... i don't want any kind of devices that i have to see my pictures as numerous of square pixels (visibly)
And i don't think that you would ever have WP on a tablet and 5.inch is something related to a tablet, not a phone anymore. my Titan is 4.7 inch and it has touch the lowest PPI and the size of my pocket.
Strike_Eagle said:
Unless they tweak the god damn OS to a new level with higher resolution... i don't want any kind of devices that i have to see my pictures as numerous of square pixels (visibly)
And i don't think that you would ever have WP on a tablet and 5.inch is something related to a tablet, not a phone anymore. my Titan is 4.7 inch and it has touch the lowest PPI and the size of my pocket.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
resolution is fine imo. 10" netbooks are usually 1366x768 therefore 5" @ 800x480 are more than accettable.
regarding WP on a 5.3" tablet, why not ? you know women's purses sometimes are so small that no tablet could fit into them...

Galaxy S5 rolling out with 2560x1440???

HI,
As a Korean who is waiting for galaxy s5, I am recently reading about Korean articles that notifies me with latest rumors about Samsung's next upcoming phone and figured out that Galaxy s5 will be likely to roll out with a 2560x1440 556ppi display. I personally think this is a meaningless over spec since there are no advantages to it... Here are why
1. 5xxppi displays won't be sharper and won't display more contents than current 4xxppi (FHD) displays.
I have seen both Optimus G and G2 which sport around 320ppi and 420ppi displays respectively. Unlike the specs suggested I did not feel G2 was sharper than optimus G since 320ppi is so dense already (Jobs's retina propaganda is right I guess...).
Also one of the main benefits of using a higher resolution display is that higher res displays can display more stuff on a single screen. However, I found G2 does not display 33% more stuff than optimus G does even though it should. g2 probably can do it but doing so will make texts extremely small. 5 in. displays have limit due to its small size and raising resolutions do not make it to display more contents. This tells that even every pixels of FHD displays cannot be used effectively, meaning same thing will happen to 2560x1440 displays with even more wasted pixels.
2. Higher resolution displays drains more battery
If there is no advantage in doing so, why would waste battery in vain?
3. 2560x1440 resolution = pentile display
It is quite obvious. Making high PPI displays with AMOLED is extremely hard since putting pixels together is a difficult task. As you guys all know, pentile has been a gimmick Samsung has been using for a long time to produce displays with higher PPI without actually putting pixels only 66% dense as the PPI on the spec sheet. It seems like Samsung thinks this gimmick is something acceptable since average customers do not even know what the pentile means. If Samsung goes for 2560x1440 resolution, they will make it pentile for sure. I have seen people saying pentile does not matter since the Galaxy s3 since the pixels are dense and no one can tell the difference. I do agree to some extent but color distortion is quite apparent in pentile displays... Especially white which requires all RGBs to be turned on.
If Samsung can produce pentile 2560x1440display, they can probably produce RGB FHD display with S-Stripe. I think the RGB FHD display will make more sense.
Thank you for reading this long writing.
Please share what you guys think about Samsung trying to use 2560x1440 display on GS5
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Mod Edit
Thread for discussion/speculation/rumors is HERE
Thread closed
malybru
Forum Moderator

Aspect Ratios for Phablet Screens?

Hello,.
My current phone for years has been the Samsung Galaxy S4. I believe the aspect ratio of its screen is the same as a standard wide-screen movie (or wide-screen TV, 16:9. It seems like 16:9 widescreen is standard for laptops now too. (Although i preferred the older 4:3 taller laptop screens.) Likely desktop monitors as well. I think Android and Windows tablets are all 16:9 as well, although the Ipad (at least the older ones) is 4:3. So I think the 16:9 aspect ratio of my Galaxy S4 screen is pretty standard now for most types of screens, including phones 5 inch screens and under.
I am thinking of getting a bigger screen phone, or phablet. Although there are disadvantages with the increased size, I also see advantages, especially with my aging eyes, and think it might somewhat be able to function as a small tablet, while still fitting (even if not as well) in a front (male) pants pocket..
I think the size for a "phablet" is considered 5.5 inches and higher. Many are 5.5 inches, some 5.7 inches, and some even larger, such as 6 inches. By far the most common though, seem to be 5.5 and 5.7 inches.
I understand that the reported measurement of screen size is the diagonal measurement, from one corner diagonally across.
Well, there could be different combinations of height and width that would end up measuring 5.5 inches diagonally, for example.
So my first question is-- does a designated screen size of 5.5 inches refer to a specific screen height and width, or are there multiple different 5.5" screen sizes, that all end up being 5.5" diagonally? Or is it standardized?
I compared my S4 with a 5.5" screen phone in a store. The 5.5" phone was only slightly wider, but MUCH longer than my S4. (That description is holding the phone portrait, of course.) As the S4 is already standard widescreen aspect ratio, that would make the phone I saw much wider (if landscape) or longer (if portrait) than standard widescreen movies, TVs, laptops, Android tablets, etc. I can understand why they might not want to make the phone much wider, making it harder to hold. On the other hand, one wonders how valuable a larger screen is if the increase in size is mostly in one direction, and the aspect ratio of the screen becomes so skewed, so much longer and narrower (portrait) than other screens?
However, regarding my earlier question- if 5.5" screen size is not sometihng standardized, but could be different combinations of height and width to add up to 5.5" diagonally, then all 5.5" phones might not have that skewed extra long and narrow screen aspect ratio? Which is it? All 5.5" screens the same height and width (of screen, not phone), or do they differ?
If one goes larger than that, to 5.7 inch, might that more likely add width as well as length, to have a more normal aspect ratio? Or do those still keep a similar width (in portrait), while adding still more length, to create an even more skewed longer and narrow (portrait) aspect ratio?
I am eager to hear whatever info and insight you have on this issue. Thanks in advance for your input.
Although I have a new phone now, I am still curious about this question. For instance, whether a 5.5 inch screen, referring to the diagonal measurement, refers to a standardized screen height and width, or whether that might differ among phones, only that the diagonal measurement ends up at that number?
And other questions I asked in the OP.
Thank you.

Categories

Resources