Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1.    #1  
    I think they should have used a 5:3 aspect ratio screen (like the Pre, Pre 2, iPhone, etc.) instead of moving to a 16:9 screen. 16:9 makes sense for an Android phone since the whole thing is designed around landscape keyboards and the ability of the home screens to rotate. With webOS, everything designed to be used mostly in portrait orientation to allow for everything to be done with one hand. A 5:3 screen would allow for a higher resolution (side to side in portrait) and would allow for easier one-handed operation.

    I'm 99% sure it is a cost cutting move since I'm sure every LED manufacturer is already making 800x480 screens for all the Android devices out there. It would cost more to get somebody to make a high resolution 5:3 screen (unless they were somehow able to use the same LCD as Apple uses in the iPhone 4 but I'm sure we all want something a little bigger).

    or am I just being nitpicky?

    For me, my dream device would basically be the Pre 3 but with a 960x640 screen at around 3.7 inches. Make it dual core and add a bigger battery as well :P
  2.    #2  
    LCD*

    sorry I'm on my Pre and apparently it likes to change LCD to LED
  3. #3  
    To me, more pixels and more inches is better, and with most HTML-formatted SDK apps it shouldn't be an issue. My main worry is that PDK apps (games and such) won't work at all. I'm okay if they're letter-boxed and even scaled imperfectly, but I'd hate to have to wait for Pre3-specific versions of apps.
    Palm history: II, IIIc, Kyocera 7135, Treo 650, Centro, Pre, FrankenPre+, (legit) Pre+ & TouchPad.
  4. #4  
    Wouldn't you use the 16:9 aspect ratio for stuff like movies in where you would use the phone on its side?
  5. #5  
    Is it possible that the reason for that is bc of future devices that will be touch only? If the rumor leak is true, that may have been the thinking.
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    Is it possible that the reason for that is bc of future devices that will be touch only? If the rumor leak is true, that may have been the thinking.
    The iPhone is touch only and is 5:3...
  7. #7  
    Right now, it is mainly for portrait. But, it looks like webOS 3.0, from what we've seen on the Touchpad, is designed for landscape, and they've told us repeatedly that the Pre 3 will eventually get webOS 3.0. They're probably taking the extra time to put it on the Pre 3 so that they can work out how to get a design that will work in both portrait and landscape modes, so they can have one webOS that will work great across all form factors.
  8. #8  
    Um... the iPhone 4 is 4:3 (960 x 640), and so is the Pre (literally half the screen dimensions at 480 x 320) .

    Regarding your comment on the difference between this and a 16:9 ratio, Im not sure I understand - are you implying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with how many pixels the display has/inch? It doesn't, of course, other than being proportionate.

    Moving to a 16:9 aspect ratio probably has more to do with getting the highest resolution possible for the planned supporting hardware on the Pre 3. 960 x 640 might have been too much of a load for the Qualcom chip and the Adreno 205 GPU to handle suitably, while also performing all of the other tasks WebOS and their users will demand of it, but, the 800 x 480 was the next standard resolution down may have been successfully tested to perform adequately under those same loads.

    Every extra pixel requires power to keep it lit, and extra CPU power to keep changing it on demand.

    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  9. brandonp1's Avatar
    Posts
    83 Posts
    Global Posts
    85 Global Posts
    #9  
    My main problem with the Pre3 is when Leo said products would be available to purchase weeks, not months, after their reveal, we still don't have a Pre3 to purchase...months after the Feb 9th reveal... Not sayin' but just sayin'...
  10. #10  
    When the average consumers walks into whatever carrier that will have the Pre 3, I promise you they will NOT ask this question.

    I personally have no clue what the 5:3 is suppose to look vs 16:9, like most it will be about a new phone and what it can do, and the apps
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Um... the iPhone 4 is 4:3 (960 x 640), and so is the Pre (literally half the screen dimensions at 480 x 320) .

    Regarding your comment on the difference between this and a 16:9 ratio, Im not sure I understand - are you implying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with how many pixels the display has/inch? It doesn't, of course, other than being proportionate.

    Moving to a 16:9 aspect ratio probably has more to do with getting the highest resolution possible for the planned supporting hardware on the Pre 3. 960 x 640 might have been too much of a load for the Qualcom chip and the Adreno 205 GPU to handle suitably, while also performing all of the other tasks WebOS and their users will demand of it, but, the 800 x 480 was the next standard resolution down may have been successfully tested to perform adequately under those same loads.

    Every extra pixel requires power to keep it lit, and extra CPU power to keep changing it on demand.


    I highly doubt the CPU/GPU combo couldn't handle the same screen as the iPhone 4. Apple has a custom chip, but it ain't THAT custom. Now, webOS not being able to adequately handle it, maybe.

    I think it purely has to do w/ getting the screens and possibly physically fitting it while maintaining it's relatively "small" size compared to the 4/4.3" monsters
  12. RafRol's Avatar
    Posts
    544 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #12  
    As long as it's properly balanced for one-handed operation (which people claimed it is back in Feb.), then I'm OK with whatever wide-screen ratio they go with. That being said, I would have liked to see 16:9 in a resolution of 854x480 for true 480p playback. But I don't think there's a manufacturer out there that makes one.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by RoverNole View Post
    When the average consumers walks into whatever carrier that will have the Pre 3, I promise you they will NOT ask this question.

    I personally have no clue what the 5:3 is suppose to look vs 16:9, like most it will be about a new phone and what it can do, and the apps
    They are both differnt, but not THAT differnt to make it a big deal. 15x9 or 16x9, wont really make much of a differnce.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by linh.nguyen View Post
    I highly doubt the CPU/GPU combo couldn't handle the same screen as the iPhone 4. Apple has a custom chip, but it ain't THAT custom. Now, webOS not being able to adequately handle it, maybe.

    I think it purely has to do w/ getting the screens and possibly physically fitting it while maintaining it's relatively "small" size compared to the 4/4.3" monsters
    I believe, sincerely, that WebOS devices make a higher demand on the CPU than other devices, because of the card interface and ease of having so many cards (applications) open simultaneously, versus any other mobile OS, which makes doing such things more abstract and less intuitive.

    This is the down side of WebOS - the great multitasking leads to cards left open and forgotten about, many of them, sucking up CPU clock time and battery life.

    And, that is how it has to be, in order for the user to have the complete WebOS expereince.

    Having said the above, its quite possible that HP has tested a device with higher resolution under normal WebOS user use and found it to be underpowered/unsuitably performing with the proposed hardware, and then found that not to be the case with a slightly smaller screen density - the display is a HUGE drain on CPU and battery life - probably the main consumer, actually.

    Oh, and BTW, everyone - its NOT a 5:3 aspect ratio, its 4:3, as I explained above.

    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  15.    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Um... the iPhone 4 is 4:3 (960 x 640), and so is the Pre (literally half the screen dimensions at 480 x 320) .

    Regarding your comment on the difference between this and a 16:9 ratio, Im not sure I understand - are you implying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with how many pixels the display has/inch? It doesn't, of course, other than being proportionate.

    Moving to a 16:9 aspect ratio probably has more to do with getting the highest resolution possible for the planned supporting hardware on the Pre 3. 960 x 640 might have been too much of a load for the Qualcom chip and the Adreno 205 GPU to handle suitably, while also performing all of the other tasks WebOS and their users will demand of it, but, the 800 x 480 was the next standard resolution down may have been successfully tested to perform adequately under those same loads.

    Every extra pixel requires power to keep it lit, and extra CPU power to keep changing it on demand.

    You're wrong. The iPhone 4 has a 5:3 ratio screen. Do the math. As does the Pre/Pre Plus/Pre 2. Well, technically its not a PERFECT 5:3 ratio but the resolution 480x320 and now 960x640 have ALWAYS been referred to as 5:3 ratio screens.

    The only company I can think of that even uses 4:3 screens in any of their phones is RIM.

    I'm not saying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with what is possible in terms of resolution and pixel density but I am saying that it has alot to do with what is already being manufactured by the LCD manufacturers out there.

    If you force your manufacturer to have to retool to make an entirely new LCD then its going to cost alot more for you to produce your phone.

    I'm sure this wouldn't be a big deal for HP... but for Palm of a year ago. I guarantee the Pre 3 was already in the works when HP bought Palm and I bet Palm was going the cheapest route possible in creating the phone.

    Common sense.
  16. sjaakb's Avatar
    Posts
    147 Posts
    Global Posts
    148 Global Posts
    #16  
    My main "problem" with the Pre3?...... None, since there is no Pre3 to be found in the market. And if it comes to market "in the coming months" and it does not have 4G then it solves another problem such as why bother.......
  17. #17  
    The iPhone 4 has 4 times more pixels, so 4 times the screen dimension i.e.
    4 pre screen captures will fit on one iPhone 4 screen with no scaling.

    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Um... the iPhone 4 is 4:3 (960 x 640), and so is the Pre (literally half the screen dimensions at 480 x 320) .

    Regarding your comment on the difference between this and a 16:9 ratio, Im not sure I understand - are you implying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with how many pixels the display has/inch? It doesn't, of course, other than being proportionate.

    Moving to a 16:9 aspect ratio probably has more to do with getting the highest resolution possible for the planned supporting hardware on the Pre 3. 960 x 640 might have been too much of a load for the Qualcom chip and the Adreno 205 GPU to handle suitably, while also performing all of the other tasks WebOS and their users will demand of it, but, the 800 x 480 was the next standard resolution down may have been successfully tested to perform adequately under those same loads.

    Every extra pixel requires power to keep it lit, and extra CPU power to keep changing it on demand.



    -- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by rdtmk View Post
    You're wrong. The iPhone 4 has a 5:3 ratio screen. Do the math. As does the Pre/Pre Plus/Pre 2. Well, technically its not a PERFECT 5:3 ratio but the resolution 480x320 and now 960x640 have ALWAYS been referred to as 5:3 ratio screens.

    The only company I can think of that even uses 4:3 screens in any of their phones is RIM.

    I'm not saying that the aspect ratio has anything to do with what is possible in terms of resolution and pixel density but I am saying that it has alot to do with what is already being manufactured by the LCD manufacturers out there.

    If you force your manufacturer to have to retool to make an entirely new LCD then its going to cost alot more for you to produce your phone.

    I'm sure this wouldn't be a big deal for HP... but for Palm of a year ago. I guarantee the Pre 3 was already in the works when HP bought Palm and I bet Palm was going the cheapest route possible in creating the phone.

    Common sense.
    Well, we are both wrong: I suggest you do your math again.

    Its actually 3:2, if you REALLY do the math: 960/320 =3; 640/320=2.

    That's 3:2. (lowest common denomintor stuff)

    The Pre is 480 x 320; thats also 3:2 480/160=3; 320/160=2. (more lowest common denomintaor stuff)

    The 800 x 480 = 5:3, VERY conventional, and what MOST devices are using, so supplies for that will be more easily fabricated and ready for incoroproation into smartphones, IF they are available, that is!

    Last edited by LCGuy; 04/09/2011 at 07:24 PM.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by sjaakb View Post
    My main "problem" with the Pre3?...... None, since there is no Pre3 to be found in the market. And if it comes to market "in the coming months" and it does not have 4G then it solves another problem such as why bother.......
    it should have 4g when it hits the market . I hear tell the veer is 4g , and if thats the case the pre3 should be as well !!
    ĦṔ-Ḷṫ-Ŧḯη
    Here is a direct link to webOS Doc for all carriers
    http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/...octor_Versions
    P.S. if i have helped you and you are thankful please hit the thanks button to the right---->
  20.    #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Well, we are both wrong: I suggest you do your math again.

    Its actually 3:2, if you REALLY do the math: 960/320 =3; 640/320=2.

    That's 3:2. (lowest common denomintor stuff)

    The Pre is 480 x 320; thats also 3:2 480/160=3; 320/160=2. (more lowest common denomintaor stuff)

    The 800 x 480 = 5:3, VERY conventional, and what MOST devices are using, so supplies for that will be more easily fabricated and ready for incoroproation into smartphones, IF they are available, that is!

    Ah, yeah you're right. I've been saying 5:3 when I should have been saying 3:2.

    Thanks for keeping me on track lol
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions