How Apple can have a 4" retina display in their next iPhone

[MrX8503]

Of course I have.
I owned a Captivate and I have compared it to an ip4 many times.
I think the screen on the ip4 is great.
Its just that when you hold the ip4 next to a s-amoled screen, it looks a little washout cause the s-amoled screen is much richer in colors.
I'm just disputing another poster saying the ip4 screen is better than any other screen out there.
I think the ip4 screen is a close 2nd.

See when I look at that I see it as oversaturated. I think it looks nice, but its a bit much. Its almost like when a photographer goes heavy on the photo touch ups.

From what I can tell, it really depends on what you prefer. Looking at the recent screen comparisons, both the IPS and SAMOLED perform the same in direct sunlight.

 

[QueBert]

So, would a 2 inch screen with 2048 x 1280 resolution be better than the iPhone 4? Surely it has higher resolution so it must be better -- right?

Hey, you're free to chose a smaller phone, I don't mind. Does it bother you that most everyone else is going larger than 4 inches? If so, why?


Brian

Why would what others do bother me? Mostly everyone I see is driving a big ass SUV around here, I guess that means a Yukon is better than my Camry and I should trade up right? Different strokes for different folks. I don't need a 4+ inch screen, 3.5 is fine, the 3.7 on my Moto Droid is fine too. But the resolution/size of the iPhone 4 is perfect for me. What everyone else is doing doesn't concern me, I like what I like. That's why I still own a CRT. Now give me a phone with a 4" IPS I might like it, but I definitely don't want an OMLED with washed out looking colors. But people liking them doesn't surprise me, most people I know think brighter = m0ar b3tt4r! They don't care anything about how accurate the colors are.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Why would what others do bother me? Mostly everyone I see is driving a big ass SUV around here, I guess that means a Yukon is better than my Camry and I should trade up right? Different strokes for different folks. I don't need a 4+ inch screen, 3.5 is fine, the 3.7 on my Moto Droid is fine too. But the resolution/size of the iPhone 4 is perfect for me. What everyone else is doing doesn't concern me, I like what I like. That's why I still own a CRT. Now give me a phone with a 4" IPS I might like it, but I definitely don't want an OMLED with washed out looking colors. But people liking them doesn't surprise me, most people I know think brighter = m0ar b3tt4r! They don't care anything about how accurate the colors are.

S-AMOLED screen don't look washed out at all.

 

[yh125d]

None of those android devices you mentioned has a 300 dpi resolution screen. Remember that print is 300dpi which essentially makes the iPhone screen look almost as good as printed paper.

Noone has forgotten that and its not the point I was making. Having an ultra high DPI screen is great to have but when you compromise the usability of the phone by focusing on resolution, you're going to turn off a lot of customers who are going to go for the phones that still have a higher resolution than older phones (though to a lesser extent), and also have larger screens which help much much more in making a phone easy to use than having a sharper screen improves image quality (and why the hell is image quality THAT much of a priority in mobile phones, a sector that has always been ruled by improving usability?)

 

[Brian Stirling]

I don't want oversaturated colors. I want colors that are true to life. From reviews ive seen of the galaxy the whites have a blue tint. Just because OLEDs are fast that doesn't mean that IPS displays are slow, especially for cellphone use. The only area where I could see a fast responsive screen is necessary is if you're playing an FPS on a phone.

From every review I've seen and test myself I have not seen streaking or ghosting being exhibited. You're assumption of a retina display not being noticeable is an exaggeration. Maybe some can't tell as easily, but a 300dpi screen down to something like a 200dpi is like night and day.

The point is SAMOLED screens are nice, especially for movies, but it is not vastly superior to an IPS display.




Your exaggeration makes the point irrelevant because the 3.5" screen on the iPhone is smaller, not small. So the comparison doesn't make sense.

I think having a 4"+ screen is a plus, so I'm not against that. I'm just saying that I would prefer a 4" or maybe even a 5", but at a 300dpi resolution.

Nonsense, the iPhone is now at the small end of the spectrum and highlighting the fact that smaller is a problem was the point whether you wish to get that or not. Again, a smart phone with a 2 inch screen IS laughable but the 3.5 inch screen on the iPhone, while not exactly laughable, is none-the-less worthy of a chuckle!

The user experience will improve with larger screens and that is the bottom line!


Brian

 

[zerocool84]

Why would what others do bother me? Mostly everyone I see is driving a big ass SUV around here, I guess that means a Yukon is better than my Camry and I should trade up right? Different strokes for different folks. I don't need a 4+ inch screen, 3.5 is fine, the 3.7 on my Moto Droid is fine too. But the resolution/size of the iPhone 4 is perfect for me. What everyone else is doing doesn't concern me, I like what I like. That's why I still own a CRT. Now give me a phone with a 4" IPS I might like it, but I definitely don't want an OMLED with washed out looking colors. But people liking them doesn't surprise me, most people I know think brighter = m0ar b3tt4r! They don't care anything about how accurate the colors are.

Brighter??? lol

The IPS screen on the iPhone is brighter than the S-AMOLED and one of the brightest screens out there. Read the Anandtech review of the iPod Touch so it's the other way around. YOU are the one who prefers brighter.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Why would what others do bother me? Mostly everyone I see is driving a big ass SUV around here, I guess that means a Yukon is better than my Camry and I should trade up right? Different strokes for different folks. I don't need a 4+ inch screen, 3.5 is fine, the 3.7 on my Moto Droid is fine too. But the resolution/size of the iPhone 4 is perfect for me. What everyone else is doing doesn't concern me, I like what I like. That's why I still own a CRT. Now give me a phone with a 4" IPS I might like it, but I definitely don't want an OMLED with washed out looking colors. But people liking them doesn't surprise me, most people I know think brighter = m0ar b3tt4r! They don't care anything about how accurate the colors are.

SUV's aren't the appropriate vehicle for an analogy here. The better comparison would be between cars and pickups. If all you need is transportation (think a phone for mostly talking) then a Corolla is perfectly adequate, but if you want to haul lumber you'd be better off with a pickup. And, if you want to be able to carry a lot of lumber and other construction materials you may want a big pickup. You could, I suppose, cut the lumber up and take many trips with your Corolla but wouldn't the pickup be the better vehicle.

Hey, thanks for playing! :biggrin:

Brian

 

[cheezy321]

SUV's aren't the appropriate vehicle for an analogy here. The better comparison would be between cars and pickups. If all you need is transportation (think a phone for mostly talking) then a Corolla is perfectly adequate, but if you want to haul lumber you'd be better off with a pickup. And, if you want to be able to carry a lot of lumber and other construction materials you may want a big pickup. You could, I suppose, cut the lumber up and take many trips with your Corolla but wouldn't the pickup be the better vehicle.

Hey, thanks for playing! :biggrin:

Brian

Yep, but the pickup has terrible MPG (battery life). So, you definitely pay extra for that 1 - 2 times a year you pick up the lumber or construction materials. Just wanted to add to your analogy.

 

[MrX8503]

Honestly people are just gonna hate just to hate, especially if it's an apple product. Preach all you want about larger screens, obviously that's what you prefer since that is what you own.

It has already been stated several times that a large high res screen would be sweet but a few of you are crying that the retina screen doesn't matter simply because your phone isn't rocking one.

I bet once your phones go 300dpi you would be singing a different tune. Again this is about high res + large screen but some have taken it to making a big deal out of nothing. I'm happy with my 3.5" retina screen, I'm not out to prove that a larger screen is useless. I can see with my own two eyes the sharpness of a retina display so you're wasting your breath.

 

[randomlinh]

Nonsense, the iPhone is now at the small end of the spectrum and highlighting the fact that smaller is a problem was the point whether you wish to get that or not. Again, a smart phone with a 2 inch screen IS laughable but the 3.5 inch screen on the iPhone, while not exactly laughable, is none-the-less worthy of a chuckle!

The user experience will improve with larger screens and that is the bottom line!


Brian

why do you assume the user experience will improve? not everyone has the same target use for a phone. I still argue anything over 4" w/ a sllim bezel will be detrimental to MY user experience because I don't want to carry that around in my pocket all day, every day.

You seem to take the single stance that your use of a smartphone is the end-all-be-all way to use a phone. it's not.

 

[MrX8503]

why do you assume the user experience will improve? not everyone has the same target use for a phone. I still argue anything over 4" w/ a sllim bezel will be detrimental to MY user experience because I don't want to carry that around in my pocket all day, every day.

You seem to take the single stance that your use of a smartphone is the end-all-be-all way to use a phone. it's not.

I agree. He seems to think that his user experience is the right experience for everyone.

 

[zerocool84]

Honestly people are just gonna hate just to hate, especially if it's an apple product. Preach all you want about larger screens, obviously that's what you prefer since that is what you own.

It has already been stated several times that a large high res screen would be sweet but a few of you are crying that the retina screen doesn't matter simply because your phone isn't rocking one.

I bet once your phones go 300dpi you would be singing a different tune. Again this is about high res + large screen but some have taken it to making a big deal out of nothing. I'm happy with my 3.5" retina screen, I'm not out to prove that a larger screen is useless. I can see with my own two eyes the sharpness of a retina display so you're wasting your breath.

You're there to prove that other screens are inferior which you tried to do. It goes both ways.

 

[MrX8503]

You're there to prove that other screens are inferior which you tried to do. It goes both ways.

The thread is mainly about 4" + high res, then people came in parading that a high res screen doesn't matter or as much. I'm just disagreeing with that.

 

[zerocool84]

The thread is mainly about 4" + high res, then people came in parading that a high res screen doesn't matter or as much. I'm just disagreeing with that.

Ok like I said, you disagree and others disagree. You're trying to make yourself out like only others are disagreeing are you are not. Everyone has a valid opinion here.

 

[MrX8503]

I'm just trying to stay on topic of large screen plus high res. I never went on to say a large screen doesn't matter/useless.

 

[BenSkywalker]

I don't want oversaturated colors. I want colors that are true to life.

Color saturation can be tuned per device, it is not something that is native to the display type(oversaturation that is).

The only area where I could see a fast responsive screen is necessary is if you're playing an FPS on a phone.

Some people could easily say the only time they need higher pixel density is when they are zooming in on photos to get a closer look. 80dpi is still readable, even if it isn't the best experience.

From every review I've seen and test myself I have not seen streaking or ghosting being exhibited.

You have one, should be plenty evident enough. Run an iP4 next to a SAMOLED, or any OLED based device for that matter, and watch the difference.

You're assumption of a retina display not being noticeable is an exaggeration. Maybe some can't tell as easily, but a 300dpi screen down to something like a 200dpi is like night and day.

I can certainly see the difference. What I find more then a little questionable is someone who claims that a 50% increase in pixel density is a major factor but claims to not notice a 500x difference in response time. If your eyes are good enough to see one, you should be able to notice the other.

The point is SAMOLED screens are nice, especially for movies, but it is not vastly superior to an IPS display.

On a technology basis SAMOLED is shockingly superior to IPS, they aren't remotely close. This isn't about Apple versus anyone else- Apple does not produce the retina display and doesn't drive the technology in the display field. IPS is going to be replaced by one of the various OLED technologies, nothing is stopping manufacturers from creating an OLED display with the same pixel density as the RD eliminating almost every advantage that RD has while maintaining the immense native advantages of OLED display type.

 

[yh125d]

Honestly people are just gonna hate just to hate, especially if it's an apple product. Preach all you want about larger screens, obviously that's what you prefer since that is what you own.

It has already been stated several times that a large high res screen would be sweet but a few of you are crying that the retina screen doesn't matter simply because your phone isn't rocking one.

I bet once your phones go 300dpi you would be singing a different tune. Again this is about high res + large screen but some have taken it to making a big deal out of nothing. I'm happy with my 3.5" retina screen, I'm not out to prove that a larger screen is useless. I can see with my own two eyes the sharpness of a retina display so you're wasting your breath.

Ahh, its not an iphone thread without someone pulling the "everyone hates it cause its apple and they're jealous they don't have one" card.


Pro-tip: If our 4+" phones also had the same DPI as the iphone 4, 3.5" Would still be small for a smartphone these days

 

[Brian Stirling]

Yep, but the pickup has terrible MPG (battery life). So, you definitely pay extra for that 1 - 2 times a year you pick up the lumber or construction materials. Just wanted to add to your analogy.

Actually my use of the pickup (smart phone) isn't a couple times a year it's many times a day. Yes, a high functioning cell phone gets terrible mileage and that's why you want a bigger battery.


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

why do you assume the user experience will improve? not everyone has the same target use for a phone. I still argue anything over 4" w/ a sllim bezel will be detrimental to MY user experience because I don't want to carry that around in my pocket all day, every day.

You seem to take the single stance that your use of a smartphone is the end-all-be-all way to use a phone. it's not.

No, I'm not telling you that you have to opt for a larger phone, all I'm saying is that the larger phones provide greater usability and that if you can tolerate the larger size why not get more usability. If you agree with Jobs that 3.5 inches is perfect then great, I'll go with something bigger.


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

I agree. He seems to think that his user experience is the right experience for everyone.

Not at all, what you want is your business and I have no say in your choice. What I am talking about is the direction the smart phone industry is going in and offering reasons why I think that. I get the feeling that a good many that argue in favor of smaller phones are afraid I'm right and that there will be fewer small phones for you to chose from. Use what you want, it is a free country...


Brian

 

[MrX8503]

Color saturation can be tuned per device, it is not something that is native to the display type(oversaturation that is).

That is news to me. Is this a setting on the phone? I have not seen this.

Some people could easily say the only time they need higher pixel density is when they are zooming in on photos to get a closer look. 80dpi is still readable, even if it isn't the best experience.

I'll say it for the last time, pick up a magazine. 300dpi is not overrated. Its only overrated because supposedly Apple brainwashes people. I work with print, so I'm super anal about resolution. So maybe this doesn't matter to you.

You have one, should be plenty evident enough. Run an iP4 next to a SAMOLED, or any OLED based device for that matter, and watch the difference.

I can certainly see the difference. What I find more then a little questionable is someone who claims that a 50% increase in pixel density is a major factor but claims to not notice a 500x difference in response time. If your eyes are good enough to see one, you should be able to notice the other.

I've seen the SAMOLED next to my iphone, the difference is not as big as having a retina display. You think response time is easier to spot than resolution? Bring that up to an avg consumer, I guarantee you that a consumer can spot the resolution difference before anything about a difference in response time.

500x difference in response time? Yet another exaggeration. If a display is fast enough for its uses increasing it 500 fold does.....absolutely nothing. If you're so sensitive to response time I'm surprised you put up with the lagginess of Android.

On a technology basis SAMOLED is shockingly superior to IPS, they aren't remotely close. This isn't about Apple versus anyone else- Apple does not produce the retina display and doesn't drive the technology in the display field. IPS is going to be replaced by one of the various OLED technologies, nothing is stopping manufacturers from creating an OLED display with the same pixel density as the RD eliminating almost every advantage that RD has while maintaining the immense native advantages of OLED display type.

SAMOLED shockingly superior? What makes it vastly superior? I think its a better tech, but your exaggeration assumes that IPS is garbage when this is simply not true. Tell that to all the photographers that their IPS screens are garbage, they'd laugh at you.

I understand that Retina display is not a technology, so you can stop that notion. I only use that term because its easier to reference. Any panel type can have high pixel density.

Ahh, its not an iphone thread without someone pulling the "everyone hates it cause its apple and they're jealous they don't have one" card.

Pro-tip: If our 4+" phones also had the same DPI as the iphone 4, 3.5" Would still be small for a smartphone these days

When someone totally denies what is fact in front of them, I can only assume that its because of favortism of what they own. I admitted that a larger screen is nice, you have nothing more than pushed retina display in "marketing" territory. 300dpi is 300dpi, no amount of words changes that.

Apple could solve world hunger and people would still hate them for some reason.

Not at all, what you want is your business and I have no say in your choice. What I am talking about is the direction the smart phone industry is going in and offering reasons why I think that. I get the feeling that a good many that argue in favor of smaller phones are afraid I'm right and that there will be fewer small phones for you to chose from. Use what you want, it is a free country...


Brian

Read my OP. You went on a tangent on how RD is irrelevant to screen size.

 

[BenSkywalker]

That is news to me. Is this a setting on the phone? I have not seen this.

If you work with print and you don't know how to calibrate a monitor perhaps you should look into another line of work If your device doesn't allow it then you should talk to the people who make it to update the firmware so that it can, the hardware is without a doubt capable of it.

I'll say it for the last time, pick up a magazine. 300dpi is not overrated.

Ink bleeds, any decent display does not. Also, you keep bringing up magazines as if they are the holy grail of print technology. They exhibit banding, poor color seperation, poor dynamic range, and overall rather poor sharpness compared to a vaguely decent photograph. 300dpi is a step. It is used for print magazines as a compromise between cost and quality- I don't think anyone in the print business would be assinine enough to try and claim it is the optimal setting for quality.

Its only overrated because supposedly Apple brainwashes people.

Not in the least. It is overrated because it is on a display with terrible response time, latency, and contrast. Pixel density is one element of a display, but it is only one element.

Bring that up to an avg consumer, I guarantee you that a consumer can spot the resolution difference before anything about a difference in response time.

Walk into any high end A/V store and try exactly that. Ask them to choose between a 720p Pioneer Plasma and a 1080p LCD- see what they say.

500x difference in response time? Yet another exaggeration.

Under .01ms to 5ms, it was a very slight exaggeration, but it was for the benefit of the RD, not OLED.

If a display is fast enough for its uses

If the iPhone is going to play video or games then 5ms isn't fast enough. I still have a NEC FP2141SB-BK that I get to use when I want respectable speed, even the terrible quality wise TNs are clearly and noticeably slower then a CRT.

If you're so sensitive to response time I'm surprised you put up with the lagginess of Android.

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/254/20100911092050.jpg

The whole BS line that Android is more laggy then iPhone may work on some, not so much on me. That is an entirely different topic, I'm talking about display technology.

SAMOLED shockingly superior? What makes it vastly superior?

Superior color range.

*Vastly* superior speed.

*Vastly* superior contrast.

IPS advantage- it can push higher nits(which can be useful if you enjoy reading things with sunlight glaring on it- I'd rather turn my wrist and avoid it).

Bookmark this thread. Bring it up in another 18 months. If Apple hasn't moved to OLED technology by that point I'll mail you $20(no joke). That will be the best example of OLED being a clearly superior technology.

 

[yh125d]

When someone totally denies what is fact in front of them, I can only assume that its because of favortism of what they own. I admitted that a larger screen is nice, you have nothing more than pushed retina display in "marketing" territory. 300dpi is 300dpi, no amount of words changes that.

Apple could solve world hunger and people would still hate them for some reason.

Nobody had denied any fact about it that I've seen, just disputed the importance of said facts. I'm not arguing that 300DPI isn't good. I'm just saying to the industry as a whole, I'm pretty sure most people would prefer to lose a little sharpness (the sharpness difference in practice is NOT all that large. That's not me talking, thats 2 iphone 4 owners talking, saying the difference between their screen and my evo is pretty small) if they could gain a lot of screen size and make the phone much more usable.


300 DPI makes the screen look a little better. You have to be looking at it very closely to see that it's a lot better than a 4" 800x480 phone. Since most people don't hold their phones 8" away from their face, a good bit of that DPI is wasted. You can barely tell the difference between 4" 800x480 and 3.5" 960x640 sharpness at arms length, and if you think you can see a huge difference, you have a placebo effect going on. Conversely, a .5"+ larger screen can make a smartphone much much more easy to use at any length, and doesn't necessarily have to make the phone larger, or if larger, only a tad.

 

[MrX8503]

1.If you work with print and you don't know how to calibrate a monitor perhaps you should look into another line of work If your device doesn't allow it then you should talk to the people who make it to update the firmware so that it can, the hardware is without a doubt capable of it.

2.Ink bleeds, any decent display does not. Also, you keep bringing up magazines as if they are the holy grail of print technology. They exhibit banding, poor color seperation, poor dynamic range, and overall rather poor sharpness compared to a vaguely decent photograph. 300dpi is a step. It is used for print magazines as a compromise between cost and quality- I don't think anyone in the print business would be assinine enough to try and claim it is the optimal setting for quality.

3.Not in the least. It is overrated because it is on a display with terrible response time, latency, and contrast. Pixel density is one element of a display, but it is only one element.

4. Walk into any high end A/V store and try exactly that. Ask them to choose between a 720p Pioneer Plasma and a 1080p LCD- see what they say.

5.Under .01ms to 5ms, it was a very slight exaggeration, but it was for the benefit of the RD, not OLED.

6.If the iPhone is going to play video or games then 5ms isn't fast enough. I still have a NEC FP2141SB-BK that I get to use when I want respectable speed, even the terrible quality wise TNs are clearly and noticeably slower then a CRT.

7. The whole BS line that Android is more laggy then iPhone may work on some, not so much on me. That is an entirely different topic, I'm talking about display technology.

8. Superior color range.*Vastly* superior speed. *Vastly* superior contrast.

IPS advantage- it can push higher nits(which can be useful if you enjoy reading things with sunlight glaring on it- I'd rather turn my wrist and avoid it).

9.Bookmark this thread. Bring it up in another 18 months. If Apple hasn't moved to OLED technology by that point I'll mail you $20(no joke). That will be the best example of OLED being a clearly superior technology.

1. I know how to calibrate a desktop monitor. I was referring to a cellphone display.
2. Thanks for making that up. You don't know what you're talking about.
3. Your right IPS displays are terrible. Again exaggeration.
4. I'm referring to RD. Most people can see the difference on that level.
5. I don't understand why you think something so minor is more noticeable than a resolution difference.
6. I do a lot of reading at hardocp. Your representation of a cell phone requiring fast response time is simply not true. I know what fast displays or CRTs benefit and you're reaching/blowing up the importance of response time in a phone.
7. If you're so sensitive to speed I thought that it's peculiar that you don't mind OS lag which is more noticeable than display response.
8. Faster response != vastly superior.
9. Never said this. Also you don't think future phones won't have higher res screens?

I honestly don't understand the argument anymore, lol. The point of the thread is a trend towards bigger screens and apple needs to up the res if they wanna keep their RD. That's all, I really don't care what is better, I just want a 4"+ 300dpi display.

 

[coolVariable]

A certain amount of bezel is still currently necessary.

Not really.
Name 1 good reason.

To avoid accidental "touches" from holding the phone? Just put sensors on the side that detect (and disable) such accidental touches. Problem solved.