Page 26 of 30 FirstFirst ... 1621222324252627282930 LastLast
Results 501 to 520 of 589
  1. #501  
    Originally posted by silverado


    Let's start by trying to understand if it's possible and how much it would cost. No one that I know of has this kind of pixel density in any cosumer device. Not even the highest end laptops have this pixel density.
    Well, Samsung is going to be putting one in it's upcoming OS5 smartphone. That should tell us that it's at least possible, and reasonably affordable.
  2. #502  
    Originally posted by KRamsauer
    Well, Samsung is going to be putting one in it's upcoming OS5 smartphone. That should tell us that it's at least possible, and reasonably affordable.
    Interesting. I looked for the official specs of the SGH-i500 and here is what I found about the display:

    Display 162 x 176 pixels (324 x 352 support), TFT 65k Colour

    hmmm... It says 162x176 pixels (the extra pixels beyond 160 are clearly for phone status information), but only 324x352 support. I would say that if it had 324x352 pixels they would have happily said so.

    My conclusion is that it only has 162x176 pixels and it supports the higher resoltion because OS 5 supports it natively, as I mentioned before. That is, when a high resolution bitmap is displayed, the OS takes care of rendering it at the lower resolution.
    Last edited by silverado; 06/09/2003 at 12:45 PM.
  3. #503  
    Originally posted by silverado
    hmmm... It says 162x176 pixels (the extra pixels beyond 160 are clearly for phone status information), but only 324x352 support. I would say that if it had 324x352 pixels they would have happily said so.
    That may be true, but they do happily say so here: http://www.samsung.com/Features/Tech...e/SGH-i500.htm
    Bottom line: who knows?
  4. #504  
    Additionally, at this link, a PUG got ahold of one and they say it is indeed high res. http://www.nexave.de/news/more.php?news_id=741
  5. #505  
    As you say... bottom line: who knows?

    But I'm going to bet on it having the lower resolution, with some rendering/antialiasing that allows it to run double-density apps (could be just the native OS 5 feature).

    Otherwise, why would they go through those weird hoops in describing the specs when everyone knows that the high number of pixels is a great feature? They don't say RAM: 16 MB (32MB support), and they would be crazy if they did.
  6. #506  
    Looking through the pictures I've seen I think you may be right. None of them are clear enough for a definitive answer. Some of them seem to have the characteristic styles of high res screens (nicer rounding on buttons, for instance) but again, I can't tell for sure.
  7. #507  
    i am surprised no one has mentioned this before but isn't anyone else upset they put a camera in next gen. I work with the major oem automobile manufacturers and most of the corporate buildings do not allow you to enter with cameras. Rightly so as you are exposed to future models and designs.

    so this means though I would love the new t600 with its updates I will/would have to check the unit in at security. this kind of negates the usefulness of the device as a always on pager/mail/phone

    I would be surprised I am alone in being upset at this- surely any of guys/gals in tech industry have this issue?

    now a camera through the sdio would be useful

    here hoping that a "dumber" version will be available
  8. #508  
    Way, way back in this thread someone did a nice breakdown of the technical aspects (in language most could understand) of different pixel counts and the physical screen size. In that analysis it really seemed as if cramming a 320X320 resolution into a screen the size of the Treo 600 may be significant overkill and go well beyond the point where human eyes will be able to differentiate.

    I am very intrigued by the amount of debate and down right anger over unofficially reported specs. Those who have actually seen the device reported the screen was very nice and a signifcant imrpovement over the Treo 300. I honestly believe that for everyone except those trying to use a converged device as a complete replacement for a laptop, this device will be an excellent choice.

    JMHO

    Gargoyle
  9. vaylen's Avatar
    Posts
    30 Posts
    Global Posts
    35 Global Posts
    #509  
    Originally posted by gargoylejps
    I honestly believe that for everyone except those trying to use a converged device as a complete replacement for a laptop, this device will be an excellent choice.

    JMHO

    Gargoyle
    I don't think that being able to surf the web and actually be able to READ your web page should be solely the realm of a laptop. A Tungsten or Clie does it rather nicely.

    See the difference!

    http://www.members.aol.com/troykadam/web.gif
  10. #510  
    Originally posted by vaylen


    I don't think that being able to surf the web and actually be able to READ your web page should be solely the realm of a laptop. A Tungsten or Clie does it rather nicely.

    See the difference!

    http://www.members.aol.com/troykadam/web.gif
    Yes, they do it nicely on a larger screen. People who need that should buy a Tungsten W, or similar large devices. People who want a compact device would not be able to find a device with that pixel density (they don't make them yet). Even the SonyEricsson P800 has less than 30% better resolution than the current Treo.

    From the analyses I presented before, even high-end laptops don't have the pixel density we're asking from the small Treo screen.

    Bring that image you posted up on the best laptop screen you could find, at the highest resolution. Do you want your Treo's screen to be as wide as the image on the left? Of course not. You'd want to squeeze that image, with its glorious details, into a smaller screen. The Tungstens and Sonys do some of that nicely, but we don't want our Treo to be as wide as those devices either. Unfortunately, there comes a point when the screen is so small that this becomes impossible or just too expensive. That's what we are facing here.

    As I said before, a technically feasible solution would be for the new Treo to use a non-standard resolution, say 240x240. That is, a number that could be squeezed into this size screen. However, this would bring many compatibility problems. Handspring would have had to write a major patch to OS 5 to allow transparent compatibility between 3rd party apps and their new device.
    Last edited by silverado; 06/09/2003 at 03:31 PM.
  11. #511  
    How will the images from the built in digital camera look on a 160 X 160 screen? My concern is that they won't look good.

    You pixel experts want to weigh in on this?

    Cluemeister
  12. #512  
    Think about it: you get a 1" wide LCD on a 5 mega-pixel camera, and no one complains about their size.

    Now we get a 1.7" (assumption) LCD coupled with a VGA (assumption), or 0.3 mega-pixel camera, and you think the image would not look good?

    Come on...
  13. #513  
    Originally posted by confusedvorlon
    Somebody earlier in the thread was wondering if handspring followed our conversations.

    I asked them and got this response;

    Hi []. I've forwarded the link to other Handspring decision-makers who will take the comments in the thread into consideration, including feedback about the screen and other hardware features. Thank you.

    Cheers,
    Bonnie
    Web Site Feedback
    Hey, cool. Thanks for asking them for us, confusedvorlon.
  14. #514  
    Originally posted by spaner
    i am surprised no one has mentioned this before but isn't anyone else upset they put a camera in next gen. I work with the major oem automobile manufacturers and most of the corporate buildings do not allow you to enter with cameras. Rightly so as you are exposed to future models and designs.

    so this means though I would love the new t600 with its updates I will/would have to check the unit in at security. this kind of negates the usefulness of the device as a always on pager/mail/phone

    I would be surprised I am alone in being upset at this- surely any of guys/gals in tech industry have this issue?

    now a camera through the sdio would be useful

    here hoping that a "dumber" version will be available
    This is an issue with some federal buildings as well, or so I've heard. But for some reason Sprint is into heavily promoting its camera phones. That is probably why the Treo 600 will have one. I personally will have tons of use for the camera and badly want/need it, but hopefully for people with security issues, a camera-less version will be in the offering at some point.
  15. #515  
    Originally posted by spaner
    i am surprised no one has mentioned this before but isn't anyone else upset they put a camera in next gen. I work with the major oem automobile manufacturers and most of the corporate buildings do not allow you to enter with cameras. Rightly so as you are exposed to future models and designs.

    so this means though I would love the new t600 with its updates I will/would have to check the unit in at security. this kind of negates the usefulness of the device as a always on pager/mail/phone

    I would be surprised I am alone in being upset at this- surely any of guys/gals in tech industry have this issue?

    now a camera through the sdio would be useful

    here hoping that a "dumber" version will be available
    I work for a Navy subcontractor and the Navy does not allow camera phones on our site. If the phone is found in a Navy building it will be destroyed. So right now I am looking at the SPHI500, does not do all I want, but does most. I would love to have a camera in my phone, but it is not worth my job to get one.

    Jeff
  16. #516  
    Originally posted by monkeywithacold
    This is an issue with some federal buildings as well, or so I've heard. But for some reason Sprint is into heavily promoting its camera phones. That is probably why the Treo 600 will have one. I personally will have tons of use for the camera and badly want/need it, but hopefully for people with security issues, a camera-less version will be in the offering at some point.
    Its funny, because just this Friday an email went out to our corporation addressing exactly this issue. The first thing that I thought of was the new Treo600. It will be a real shame if they don't have a camera-less version available, especially if they are marketing it to the corporate world.

    One would think that if they omit the camera, that would enable them to fit some other feature in, although something like bluetooth or wifi could just be added via the SD slot.

    This phone has definitely got me excited, I can't wait to see the final specs and some real pics.
  17. #517  
    Vaylen, you keep saying there IS a difference between 160x160 vs 320x320, but I don't know about you, but the example comparison you give shows up at about 4 plus inches on my monitor. Of course, on a 4 inch screen, there IS going to be a difference. How about on a 2 inch screen? I don't think there is much difference. See example below (I resized your example image to 2 inches)

    http://www.stacworks.com/temp/web2.gif
  18. #518  
    Here's another thought on the 160x160 issue...

    It's possible that they're doing this to please Sprint. Think about this: Sprint currently offers unlimited data usage for all of their phones. They have a separate (much more expensive) plan for their PCMCIA cards. The unlimited data plan for phones keeps things simple for them and serves as a great marketing advantage. Well, if Handspring offered a 320x320 Treo it would follow that they'd change Blazer to be 320x320 compatible. More importantly, this means that their proxy-server would no longer scale images down to sub-160 pixel width, but would now cut the limit at close to 320 pixels. That means significantly larger images taking up more bandwidth on Sprint's network.

    Just a thought.

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  19. Iceman6's Avatar
    Posts
    463 Posts
    Global Posts
    500 Global Posts
    #519  
    Originally posted by wcarlson40
    Vaylen, you keep saying there IS a difference between 160x160 vs 320x320, but I don't know about you, but the example comparison you give shows up at about 4 plus inches on my monitor. Of course, on a 4 inch screen, there IS going to be a difference. How about on a 2 inch screen? I don't think there is much difference. See example below (I resized your example image to 2 inches)
    Dang! What I'm learning from this is, I like 4 inches better than 2 inches.
  20. boxer's Avatar
    Posts
    65 Posts
    Global Posts
    74 Global Posts
    #520  
    I can definitely say that I won't be buying the Treo 600 if it only has a 160 x 160 screen. I waited and "drooled" forever over the Kyocera 7135. Then, when I could finally have it, I learned of the Treo 600. I currently own a Handspring and really want to stick with them. So, Handspring (Palmsource - whatever), I want your Smartphone. However, with a 5 ARM processor, it better have a better screen than 160 x 160. Everyone else's 5.0s have a 320 x 320 or even 320 x 480 screen.

    Please have a good screen!!!...

    Thanks

Posting Permissions