| Author |
New SE phones lack of 16M colour screen |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2007-06-19 12:20:31, plankgatan wrote:
and like i said, we compared a 256k and a 16M. you couldnt see any big difference !
You left your statement hanging.  it should be "..couldnt see any big difference when the screen size is as small as the K850".
When the screen size is as big as N95 you will notice a significant difference. So the color/vibrancy/brightness of the N95 16m screen will be better than say W960. |
|
|
mustafabay
Joined: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Egypt
PM |
I don't really see why we need these kinds of discussions. I think it doesn't matter really how much better one screen is compared to another on a phone. I think the most important question is is the screen of the given phone good enough for you. How many people base their desision of buying a phone solely on the screen? If a certain screen is good enough than anything better is just a bonus. I also don't think mobile phone screens are good enough to merit a really serious discussion of each's merits. To really discuss how good a screen is you need data like contrast ratio and brightness and viewing angles. And I mean real solid data not my X's screen looks better than my friend's Y. Not to mention every person has a different perspective on what's good. And what about how pure the white and blacks are? I don't know what measures that, color saturation maybe? One screen has a yellowish white and another has a blueish white, which is better? Is it the screen's fault or the LED lighting. And I uppose it really could go on and on for ever.
Is it really that big of a set back that SE isn't doing 24-bit screens yet, I don't really think so. It's not totally behind the curve and in the end its just a phone which is acting as a swiss knife so don't expect it perform as well as every single feature in a standalone device.
I don't want a signature anymore. |
Dogmann
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: London England
PM |
@mustafabay
Good post and actually to a point i agree completely as i have always stated there is no right or wrong choices only what suits each individuals needs the best. Whilst it is good to discuss the merits of different specs you are right it is not just about the screen but the processor and graphics chip also play a part as does how i encode the material i am going to watch.
Obviously those that feel happy to stick with a 262k are perfectly free to do so and those of us that can see a difference and prefer a 16m colour screen will stick to devices with those. Maybe now everyone can be happy and this pointless bickering can end as it really does need to and not just here but throughout the whole Forum IMHO.
Marc
_________________
Nokia N95, 2gb Sandisk, Shure EC2g
Nokia E61 2gb Sandisk, Fring, Tom Tom 6
Dogmanns N95 Blog Experience @
http://dogmann.vox.com/
[ This Message was edited by: Dogmann on 2007-06-19 12:30 ] |
soane28
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 401
From: NZ
PM |
great points both of you. There are many factors to a great screen, and how many colours it holds is just one of them. Judging the quality of screens takes much more than the amount of colours.
And to people here that are still concerned about SE's screens, eldar over at mobile-review has mentioned the introduction of VGA screens in 2008 within two SE products.
http://www.mobile-review.com/articles/2007/se-strategy-en.shtml
So SE are certainly working hard in the backround on their screens, just think of them as a work in progress. |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
just to add that I have googled several resources, including wiki, that suggest that the human eye can perceive around 10 million different colours
This doesn't mean if we had a picture in front of us with 10 million different colours we could count them all, but it does seem to confirm that we are able to perceive the difference in colour density between 260k colours and somewhere towards 16 million colours such that we see a more colourful image towards this higher end
so hopefully that answers that part of this discussion
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Plus I hardly think a company would go to the trouble of implementing 16m colour screens if there was no perceived benefit for the user.
That would be plain silly.
|
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
but I guess the opposite is the question here...
if there is a perceived benefit, then why don't SE get into it?
I suspect it will come but SE take their own time to do things and sometimes this also means they do it better
|
tai020381
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
SE's strategy is to utlilise 16m colours for their upcoming Bravia phones?(save the best for the last ) |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
exactly my point... but we'll just have to wait a bit longer
in the meantime, as already said, I think we can be fairly happy with the quality of *some* of the recent screens we've been getting.
|
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
I tried answering it here
As I see it it's a matter of profit atm. |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
On 2007-06-19 16:19:13, masseur wrote:
I suspect it will come but SE take their own time to do things and sometimes this also means they do it better
My sentiments.
Just because SE does things at its own pace it is percieved as some sort of shortcoming, when in fact it is just working to its own schedule.
It would be a funny strategy if it only released some features just because another company did - it would mean forever riding on the coat tails of others and releasing devices with a hotch-potch of technologies that didn't really complement each other.
_________________
The UK's Best Selling Phones
Esato around the World
P990i + BT30Q
[ This Message was edited by: goldenface on 2007-06-19 15:42 ] |
DragonEye
Joined: Sep 26, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Canada
PM |
you guys seem hung up on the colors.. i rather have a higher resolution...
for example the n80's 262k screen with a res of 352 x 416 looks a hell of a lot nicer then then the n95.. allthough it's not nearly bright enough..
the m600i 262K screen is actually pretty good.. just the actual performance in sunlight is pathetic..
_________________
Shaolinmonk on HOFO Official PHONE JUNKIE
MyProfile http://www.howardforums.com/m[....]s=&action=getinfo&userid=20841
[ This Message was edited by: DragonEye on 2007-06-19 20:58 ] |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
dragoneye:
This goes without saying. The order of priority, imo
1. Physical Screen Size
2. Resolution
3. Color Depth
Anyway, nowadays the QVGA screen is the current defacto screen res on mid/high end. So the only comparable are screen size and color depth. On these 2 accounts SE is a bit slow. |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
but jesus. as long you not use your phone for watching movies, big deal which screen you have ! (i use my phone to make calls, send sms/mms, take pics & listen to music). you cant find anything more boring to watch a movie on your phone (no bigger joy i think). if i want to see a movie, i use my laptop or my 40" TV.
_________________
 k810i  w810i  T39
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2007-06-19 23:43 ] |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2007-06-20 00:38:34, plankgatan wrote:
but jesus. as long you not use your phone for watching movies, big deal which screen you have ! (i use my phone to make calls, send sms/mms, take pics & listen to music). you cant find anything more boring to watch a movie on your phone (no bigger joy i think). if i want to see a movie, i use my laptop or my 40" TV.
_________________
k810i w810i T39
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2007-06-19 23:43 ]
if you are happy with your squeezy 2inch screen, i am happy for you. But dont presume that should apply for everyone else. Most people would like to work with bigger screen (even for basic phone function). Using a bigger/16m screen as the view finder when taking photo is better than a small one. Surfing the internet on a bigger/16m screen is better. Viewing photo on a bigger/16m screen is better. (hope you wont try to argue against these inarguable points).
|
|
|
Posted: 2007-06-19 13:16
