Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1.    #1  
    A great many folks around these boards have asked why the 700w (a Windows Mobile Device) has a 240x240 resolution screen, when the 650 (a PalmOS device) has a 320x320 screen. A similar number of people have given their best explanation.

    Today, I noticed the following post made by a member of the Windows Mobile development team: http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/...14/531972.aspx

    Take a read... if you've been wondering why the two devices have different resolutions, this post will help you understand (and understand why neither resolution is necessarily better than the other, given the operating systems using them).
  2. #2  
    Good find, it makes alot of sense and will put those 700P 240+240 rumors to rest.
  3. JDELUNA's Avatar
    Posts
    104 Posts
    Global Posts
    105 Global Posts
    #3  
    So I take it that when Windows Mobile finally goes to 480 x 480 Palm will jump up to 640 x 640 !!!! God Bless
  4. #4  
    Not quite.

    Palm 160x160 WM 240x240
    Palm 320x320 WM 480x480

    You are comparing low res with high res.

    Surur
  5. #5  
    I think Palm OS is better at scaling (the pixel and a half spoke of in the article). I know Handera had a 240x240 screen at one point, if I'm not mistaken. Of course the new Linux based one is a whole new can of worms.

    One thing people need to keep in mind is that at some point it makes no sense to increase the pixel density. I don't know where that point is (to me 320x320 looks good), but 1280x1280 is probably too much crammed into a small screen...
  6. iramike's Avatar
    Posts
    506 Posts
    Global Posts
    507 Global Posts
    #6  
    The way I really read into the choice of screen resolution was more of MS choice that it was a hardware issue. Palm was made to support higher res and WM wasn't made for anything other than the 240x240 or the 240x320. I see where some people might be upset about this. Think about it though, its just a matter of how each device handles what it has. Yes maybe the experienced eye can see the difference, but for the average user or to someone that needs the phone for what it does as opposed to what it looks like. Just my humble opinion.
  7. #7  
    Also with a high res application, it will require more memory to run. So for Palm OS to go to a higher res would also require them to bump RAM on their devices. Doubt that is going to happen anytime soon.
  8. #8  
    Actually, AZN, it would only require slightly more operating memory to run. As for storage, so long as the graphics are vector based (buttons, lines, text, etc) the scaling will be done on the fly and no additional files will be needed. If its a bitmap system (like lots of games use) then yes, it will potentially use a lot more memory.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    I think Palm OS is better at scaling (the pixel and a half spoke of in the article). I know Handera had a 240x240 screen at one point, if I'm not mistaken. Of course the new Linux based one is a whole new can of worms.
    I was just thinking about that screen shot of the ALPs running the Memo program and what resolution that screen could be. Since theirs some realestate below it unused I whould think that screen is either 320x480 or 160x280 in my head.

    Timmay
    Iím a lucky man to count on both hands
    The ones I love..

    Visor Pro -> Visor Edge -> Treo 180 -> Treo 270 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> T|T2+SE T68i -> Treo 600 -> T-Mobile MDA -> Treo 755p -> Treo 800w -> Treo 755p -> PALM PRE -> Palm Pre 2 -> HP Palm Pre 3

    Twittering about
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by allocentric
    Take a read... if you've been wondering why the two devices have different resolutions, this post will help you understand (and understand why neither resolution is necessarily better than the other, given the operating systems using them).
    Well, he didn't quite say that. In fact, he agreed that for most applications 320x320 is almost always better than 240x240.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  11.    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R
    Well, he didn't quite say that. In fact, he agreed that for most applications 320x320 is almost always better than 240x240.
    True, but I was trying to be diplomatic. As I not-so-clearly mentioned in the initial post (and the author of the article alluded to) those resolutions are the best for the respective operating system using them, based on the current costs of components.

    For video, photos, and clarity of onscreen graphics & text, there is no question that more pixels on the screen is better. However, the user interface components of Windows Mobile simply won't scale well on 320x320 screens, based on their 240x320 heritage (as the author of the article explained). I'm sure that complaints about the 240x240 screen on the Treo 700w will subside once a 480x480 screen makes its way into a future WM device (much in the way that some PalmOS users stopped complaining when the Treo 650 got 320x320 over the previous 160x160 on the Treo 600). The Windows Mobile users will just need to remember that while text, graphics, and other UI elements will be clearer on a 480x480 screen, they won't actually see any additional information on most screens (since many programs will simply feature "pixel doubling"). They will, however, see more information onscreen for things like photographs and spreadsheets (though the spreadsheets would start to get really tiny on a 480x480 screen). So, if the WM programs feel "cramped" right now, it's not likely to seem any better in the future. But, hey, at least the text will be sharp!

    I put up the link to that particular posting because it seemed like there were people that couldn't understand why the Treo 700w would naturally be 240x240, and why there's no way a future PalmOS Treo would use a 240x240 screen (although it's entirely possible that a low-cost Treo might use a 160x160 screen). I was thrilled to see that someone with the authority to post on the matter - an actual developer within the Windows Mobile team - put up an article discussing the issue. Since there's been a fair amount of confusion around the TC boards, I hoped that reading that author's explanation might add additional clarity to understanding the issue.

    In my personal view, it would make more sense to discuss whether or not an OS originally designed for 1:1.5 ratio screen (rectangle - portrait orientation) works well when used with a 1:1 ratio screen (square). I think it would be interesting to hear from former or current PocketPC users and what they think of the usability of Windows Mobile on a 1:1 screen. PalmOS users - and I'm among them - had it fairly easy. We started with 1:1 screens, and then got 1:1.5 added on (though it's currently only on PDAs... but, I'd love to see a 320x480 Treo!). I've got to believe that it's easier to go to a greater ratio than the reverse.

Posting Permissions