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.
Related
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
Just curious..
I have both the motorla atrix which is a 4inch screen and the nexus S which samsung says is a 4 inch..
but when i measure the top of the actual screen of the nexus s to the Atrix
The atrix is longer, top to bottom,
corner to corner it seems the same,,
4 inches is the diagonal corner-to-corner measurement.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
matt2053 said:
4 inches is the diagonal corner-to-corner measurement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's correct, all screen measurements are along the diagonal. Some phones have the same diagonal measurement but may have wider or taller screens with different aspect ratios. For instance the iPhone 4 has a shorter and noticeably wider screen than the HTC Desire which is taller and more narrow. The Motorola Atrix has a qHD display that is again a different aspect ratio and looks a bit odd with the current software on the Atrix as it adds extra pixels that makes the icons smaller on the display. It's just a numbers game...one 4" display can be different from another 4" display. Which is why some companies are promoting display resolution numbers instead since 940x540 is "bigger" than 800x480. And other companies promote physical display size since 4.3" is bigger than 4.0" displays.
So basically it doesn't mean much when you get a measurement tool out and compare phones. Does it work for you is a more important question.
Great example of this, is the Evo and Droid X, they are both 4.3 inch displays but the Evo is wider while the Droid is longer. It's just different resolutions, and by the way you measure screens diagonally
Sent from my Xoom
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.
I have two android phones. Both of them have the same resolution and similar display size (as per company specifications), TFT capacitive touchscreen, 256K colors, WVGA resolution 480x800 pixels. The only small difference is..one has a display size of 3.5 inches and the other 3.75 inches....not much of a difference.
However, the phone with the 0.25inches larger display size shows pixel grids horribly and in the other one it doesn't show at all. What could be the reason? I also see banding on the larger display, which is not present in the other.
The larger display seems like a display with much less actual resolution. Does phone resolution specs on paper of the larger display lie? How do I check the actual resolution of a display?
The attached image below shows what I mean by pixel grids being visible.
It also depend on the technology being used (TN panel, IPS or AMOLED), the quality control come into play, and subpixels arrangement. Paper spec for display are useless, it's better to see the phone in person.
After using several onscreen navbutton phones in the past and having this S8 for 5 days now, I see almost no reason as to why the 18.5:9 screen aspect ratio decision was made.
It would still have a big screen, probably close to the S7 Edge size.
The only thing I can think of is that Samsung is used to creating apps for 16:9 ratio screens because previous phones had physical navbuttons. Maybe they didn't want to have to mess with that and just put the navbuttons on the screen and increased the length to accommodate the extra buttons taking up space on the button; still allowing them to make 16:9 native apps. I just don't like it. It makes for an awkward Android experience, especially with unsupported apps.
I disagree. Based on the number of pre-orders alone for this phone, it will soon become one of the most popular android phones in use. As use increases, more companies will fit their formatting to the unusual aspect ratio. The fact that the G6 also has this aspect ratio (and yes, I know it's not exactly the same, but close enough) means that there will be more impetus for developers to accommodate the screen. I think this is a big step forward in the mobile phone industry, it just needs to take some time for the rest of the industry to catch up.
marinebio94 said:
I disagree. Based on the number of pre-orders alone for this phone, it will soon become one of the most popular android phones in use. As use increases, more companies will fit their formatting to the unusual aspect ratio. The fact that the G6 also has this aspect ratio (and yes, I know it's not exactly the same, but close enough) means that there will be more impetus for developers to accommodate the screen. I think this is a big step forward in the mobile phone industry, it just needs to take some time for the rest of the industry to catch up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The preorders aren't an indication of the abnormal height of the phone, but the infinity screen itself. They could've kept it infinity just the same with 16:9.
Why do you think this is a big step forward? What purpose does the super tall phone serve in your opinion?
Hoping we can have a good discussion.
Disagree. This should be the standard much more comfortable than s7 edge. Not because of the edges but becaus3 of the slim side ratio. Would not buy another 16:9 phone ever again
I really don't know why people are *****ing about the aspect ratio. With modern Android you don't notice this at all because the developers know how to deal with constaints of interface elements. Now you can see one google news more. You have more space above the keyboard. List views have one more entry. Whats the problem with that? Maybe there are apps that are incompatible but I have yet to see one.
To be honest I've not encountered any issues worth talking about, related to elongated screen. If there is software that can take advantage of extra screen (and there will be more coming soon), great, if not there are bars on the screen just like if I had larger bezel (or like watching 4:3 program on my HDTV). Actually I have hard time telling where the screen ends and bezel starts. I was expecting to miss physical home button, but since it is now permanent part of the screen and it is still there, except invisible, it doesn't bother me at all. And benefits of longer screen are great: finally we can have 2 programs display properly on the screen at the same time, typing is much easier, with more text displayed, web pages show more, with less scrolling, most cinema movies are shot at 1.85:1, some are as wide 2.39:1 etc.
In my opinion.. the only issue with the weird aspect ratio is that it fools some people into thinking their screens are so much bigger than it actually is. The S8 for example has only 2% more screen area than a 16:9 5.5" screen while the S8+ has 17% more screen area. The regular S8 screen is also narrower than screen on iphone 7 plus.
If you are going from a 5.5" 16:9 ratio phone like the iphone 7plus.. the regular S8 WILL feel like a smaller screen in comparison.
eduardmc said:
Disagree. This should be the standard much more comfortable than s7 edge. Not because of the edges but becaus3 of the slim side ratio. Would not buy another 16:9 phone ever again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can keep the exact same slim side ratio and reduce the height of the S8 to get roughly the same size screen as the S7 Edge in a much smaller body. Not sure where you were going with that.
I'm actually quite happy with the screen.
the extra wide/tall screen helps create better immersion in 3D games, improves field of vision in VR, and compensates for the screenspace now lost to the onscreen buttons(or in my case, my physical keyboard)
the slimmer design also makes the phone more comfortable to hold, the S8 has the perfect width for me.
pete4k said:
To be honest I've not encountered any issues worth talking about, related to elongated screen. If there is software that can take advantage of extra screen (and there will be more coming soon), great, if not there are bars on the screen just like if I had larger bezel (or like watching 4:3 program on my HDTV). Actually I have hard time telling where the screen ends and bezel starts. I was expecting to miss physical home button, but since it is now permanent part of the screen and it is still there, except invisible, it doesn't bother me at all. And benefits of longer screen are great: finally we can have 2 programs display properly on the screen at the same time, typing is much easier, with more text displayed, web pages show more, with less scrolling, most cinema movies are shot at 1.85:1, some are as wide 2.39:1 etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You made a few good points:
1. Multi-window works better
2. Bit more room to type
3. More webpage for scrolling less
While those are good, if I was given a decision I'd still take a shorter phone. I personally prioritize the size of the phone over many other things.
If this phone was released as 16:9 with a 5.5" screen (same as S7 Edge), it would be slightly larger than an iPhone 6/7. Which is insane because their screens are only 4.7". To me the iPhone is the perfect one-handed size phone with every other hardware being not so great.
The S7 was a 5.1" phone and the natural progression could've been to a 5.5" 16:9 phone in a smaller body than the S7 with the same size screen as S7E. I really think they went with 18.5:9 because of the apps. I bet you this screen would be 16:9 if you chopped off the navbar softkeys. Could be wrong though.
I'm really just nitpicking
I've actually enjoyed the taller screen. I went with the plus and am still able to function just as I was able to on the s7e. It gives you an option to expand apps that aren't already expanded to take full advantage of the screen, and watching video with bars on the side isn't a big deal to me, because as was said above that would be the bezels on an older s model phone and I prefer(love) the look of this one. An iphone may have the perfect ratio, but the resolution doesn't compare to these screens and that's what I'm looking for more than the ratio, just my opinion of course. That bixby button on the other hand...