Welcome to the WPCentral Forums Create Your Account or Ask a Question Answers in 5 minutes - no registration required!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36
Like Tree8Likes
  1. BIGPADDY's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    10,585 Posts
    Global Posts
    10,657 Global Posts
       #1  
    Hi all

    I was waiting for the second gen of windows phone holding off for a 1080p display then read that Windows Phone 8 has support to 64 cores but not 1080p display

    I found this quite upsetting put I still wait to see what the 2nd gen will be like

    But I starting to like the news of the SONY xperia Z

    Anyone else upset or confused why they didn't include 1080p support?
    The craziest member on WPCentral!

    SONY Windows Phone 8.1 release sometime in June!
  2. kevin2577's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    233 Posts
    Global Posts
    235 Global Posts
    #2  
    It is a bit upsetting but when you look at it is also not necessary or practical for phones to have 1080p screens at this point.

    For necessary, unless Windows Phones start to have giant Galaxy Note sized screens there won't be a discernible difference to the human eye, and even on larger screens the difference is very hard to see

    For practical, there are several problems with the current limited crop of 1080p android phones (like the DROID DNA/HTC Butterfly). One is battery life, those phones have atrocious battery life so far. The second is performance, the Droid DNA has top of the line internals and stutters on simple tasks like swiping between homescreens or moving between even medium sized web pages. Third is storage, transferring 1080p videos to phones will have significant impact to free storage capacity on phones.

    So while I agree that better specs would be better, I also feel that the spec arms race should take a backseat to performance and real world usage. Look at first generation Windows Phones with single core processors, they are slicker than some 4.04 dualcore android phones on homescreen and app launching and stability. I would rather Microsoft focus on other issues in improving WP8 rather than engaging in the arms race
    Thanked by:
    BIGPADDY and ImAdrian23 like this.
  3. BIGPADDY's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    10,585 Posts
    Global Posts
    10,657 Global Posts
       #3  
    I like your thinking let lagdroid have the 1080p display, got to admit i see quad core android set struggle with jelly bean and ice cream sandwich with a lot more glitches than what windows phone 8 as.

    I see what 2nd gen are like I only wish SONY would join in however i know why they can't but I will take a look at SONY flagship for next year and if it good I might go for that (im a SONY fanboy ).

    I'm torn I can't decide I love windows phone 8 operating system but I what to have the latest and greatest mainly from SONY
    The craziest member on WPCentral!

    SONY Windows Phone 8.1 release sometime in June!
  4. #4  
    No, not upset at all.

    All else being equal (note that newer displays typically offer improvements beyond just better resolutions), an overwhelming majority of all people will perceive no difference between a 1080p display and a 768p display, at least not on a 4.8" screen. That barely perceivable benefit isn't worth the costs (lower frame rates in games, lower brightness and/or higher power draw from the battery by the GPU).

    The situation is similar to the megapixel race between digital cameras. Today, sensor size and optics are much more important than higher megapixel counts, but such issues go far beyond what most consumers are willing to understand. Consumers typically want a simple number that they imagine is a direct reflection of quality. It's understandable, but tech is never that simple.

    The same applies to smartphone displays. Better contrast and color gamuts, lower reflectivity, higher brightness and better energy efficiency would be much more important than higher resolutions. Improving any of those specs would have a much larger impact on perceived display quality, but again, most consumers don't want to be bothered with such messy issues.

    1080p devices will probably sell well, primarily due to "spec whores" looking for novelties, but probably represent the end of resolution scaling on smartphones as more people realize the benefits aren't really there.

    Of course, the larger the screen is on your device, the higher the probability is of seeing a benefit to a 1080p display. On a 5" screen most people won't notice a difference, but on a 4" screen nobody will.

    More on this issue is here.
  5. jdevenberg's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    1,037 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,501 Global Posts
    #5  
    1. Windows Phone 8 does not support 64 cores. Its kernel can support processors with up to 64 cores, but the OS its self cannot.
    2. I see no reason to not let manufacturers use 1080p displays, just like I see no reason not to allow the Snapdragon S4 Pro quad core chip

    If you don't want poor battery life, don't get that phone. The lack of 1080P and quad core support are the reasons HTC scrapped the Zenith. Also, I have used dual core android phones (Galaxy S II Skyrocket and Pantech Burst) for 3 months earlier this year that ran Android 4.0 just fine, no stutter, no lag. Android still has a lot of other issues, but give credit where credit is due, Google has finaly managed to put together a UI that runs smoothly. Saying Android still has problems with stutter and lag is the same as people saying they don't want to use Windows Phone because they don't want the BOSD or viruses on their phone.
    foosball likes this.
  6. weetigo's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    137 Posts
    Global Posts
    139 Global Posts
    #6  
    1080p screen is the new stat that flagship phones will need to have, and Mobile World Congress/CES 2013 announcements are going to reiterate that. Furthermore, every 2013 review will list "720p-only" as a shortcoming of the Windows Phone platform.
    foosball likes this.
  7. crystal_planet's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    993 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,041 Global Posts
    #7  
    The funniest part of all this is it's just a pissing contest over specs. Most can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on a 50" plasma screen, but the difference between the two on a 4.5" screen is insurmountable.

    What a society we've become.
    My next phone...
    Thanked by:
    BIGPADDY likes this.
  8. jdevenberg's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    1,037 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,501 Global Posts
    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by crystal_planet View Post
    The funniest part of all this is it's just a pissing contest over specs. Most can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on a 50" plasma screen, but the difference between the two on a 4.5" screen is insurmountable.

    What a society we've become.
    That isn't a 100% fair comparison. Viewing distance is just as big a factor as pixel density and screen size. Since cell phones are used much closer to your face than a TV and screen sizes are increasing, 1080p becomes a factor. When we are talking about a 4" screen, you couldn't tell a difference, but at 5" and even more so 5.5-6" as phones are moving that direction, you will be able to tell.
    foosball likes this.
  9. BIGPADDY's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    10,585 Posts
    Global Posts
    10,657 Global Posts
       #9  
    The thing with this is when 1080p display come in it will mean I can a buy a cheaper 720p screen with almost the same spec in that sense lots of people will get a good deal.

    It would be cool for the phone manufacture to make a 3D display like the htc evo 3d and the lg one that would be awesome (3D is a gimmick that I like )
    The craziest member on WPCentral!

    SONY Windows Phone 8.1 release sometime in June!
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by jdevenberg View Post
    ..., you couldn't tell a difference, but at 5" and even more so 5.5-6" as phones are moving that direction, you will be able to tell.
    Possible, but very unlikely. At 5.5" you might be able to see a difference... but only under very close scrutiny and only when viewing high contrast computer generated images without anti aliasing (a.k.a. video test images)... we are discussing theoretical issues... far removed of the practical concerns of everyday usage.

    Even people with perfect eyesight will see no benefit whatsoever when playing games or viewing videos or pictures. Gamers should stay far away from such displays, as lower frame rates will be very noticable.

    1080p displays would be great if they came without costs. They don't... it's about selling devices to people who care more about specs than usability... that is contrary to the spirit of WP.

    This analysis of the iPhone's retina display sheds more light on the subject:

    http://www.kybervision.com/Blog/file...naDisplay.html
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-29-2012 at 03:43 AM.
  11. BIGPADDY's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    10,585 Posts
    Global Posts
    10,657 Global Posts
       #11  
    I read a review saying the whites look like a piece of paper in clarity
    The craziest member on WPCentral!

    SONY Windows Phone 8.1 release sometime in June!
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by BIGPADDY View Post
    I read a review saying the whites look like a piece of paper in clarity
    That may be true, but unfortunately, that would also mean washed out blacks... LCD technology isn't up to getting both right :-(

    Personally, I much prefer better blacks and higher contrast over true whites, which is also why I prefer OLED over LCD, but that comes down to personal preference.

    The kindle paperwhite is the closest I've seen display tech get to real paper, unfortunately, eInk has terrible refresh rates... every tech has up- and down sides.
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-30-2012 at 09:31 AM.
  13. jdevenberg's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    1,037 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,501 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by a5cent View Post
    That may be true, but unfortunately, that would also mean washed out blacks... LCD technology isn't up to getting both right :-(

    Personally, I much prefer better blacks and higher contrast over true whites, which is also why I prefer OLED over LCD, but that comes down to personal preference.

    The kindle paperwhite is the closest I've seen display tech get to real paper, unfortunately, eInk has terrible refresh rates... every tech has up- and down sides.
    A full array LED backlit LCD is able to get both right, but due to the thickness and weight compared to using an edge lit LED arrangement, they are not very common.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by jdevenberg View Post
    A full array LED backlit LCD is able to get both right, but due to the thickness and weight compared to using an edge lit LED arrangement, they are not very common.
    I seriously doubt that. I look at quite a few displays and I have yet to see a LED backlit LCD display with adequate contrast. Show me a review of a LED backlit LCD display, in which near infinite contrast ratios were measured (like that of an OLED display), and I will gladly reconsider. Of course you might get such near infinite contrast ratio measurements, if tests are restricted to measuring an entirely black screen and an entirely white screen, but in any other more realistic scenario (an actual movie), the blacks return to being dark greys... at least that is what I've noticed so far.

    I would sooner assume that you're preferences are simply different from mine. Likely you don't perceive the differences in contrast ratio as strongly as I do. Perhaps you don't dislike LCD's inability to render slight differences in very dark hues as much as I do. Whatever the reason, I'll be the first to admit that I am very picky about these things.

    EDIT: Either way, I'm not aware we will be seeing such LED backlit LCD displays in smartphones anytime soon ;-)
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-30-2012 at 01:46 PM.
  15. barne19801's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    40 Posts
    #15  
    I love the contrast of oled, that is until you start to get the degradation that comes with them. If for any reason you have a part of the screen that stays black a lot, e.g the notification bar on the galaxys, or as i suspect on wp8, the borders of the tiles. The benefit of such good contrast is completely destroyed by browsing on a white screen and seeing areas of screen different shades of white, or grey or blue. They never tell you that when the flaunt these pretty colours on the screen.

    As for 1080p, unless you are going over 5 inch what's the point, you cant see the difference, you have to pay for pixels that are basically useless, then power them with a gpu and battery working harder than is necessary.

    It seems its to just one up apple or to say the screen is best because off ppi, which is not true. I would rather they spent the extra time on battery, or build quality, or exclusive apps, im looking at you htc. Or for Samsung making amoled better and not giving you a product that degrades fairly rapidly like within 2 months of use.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by barne19801 View Post
    I love the contrast of oled, that is until you start to get the degradation that comes with them. If for any reason you have a part of the screen that stays black a lot, e.g the notification bar on the galaxys, or as i suspect on wp8, the borders of the tiles. The benefit of such good contrast is completely destroyed by browsing on a white screen and seeing areas of screen different shades of white, or grey or blue. They never tell you that when the flaunt these pretty colours on the screen.

    As for 1080p, unless you are going over 5 inch what's the point, you cant see the difference, you have to pay for pixels that are basically useless, then power them with a gpu and battery working harder than is necessary.

    It seems its to just one up apple or to say the screen is best because off ppi, which is not true. I would rather they spent the extra time on battery, or build quality, or exclusive apps, im looking at you htc. Or for Samsung making amoled better and not giving you a product that degrades fairly rapidly like within 2 months of use.
    I agree with all of that. Personally, I haven't had an OLED display long enough for it to degrade, or I was just lucky, but I've seen it on other devices... ugly.

    Anyway, the fact of the matter is there is no "best" display technology. It's all about trade-offs and what each of us prefers. That probably isn't a popular message, as most will prefer easy answers, but it is reality.

    I'm not really happy with OLED technology either, but for me it's the best option of those that currently exist. I suspect we won't be seing OLED technology used on 1080p displays though... powering 1080x1920 pixels (OLED powers each pixel individually) will be devastating on battery life.
  17. barne19801's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    40 Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by a5cent View Post
    I agree with all of that. Personally, I haven't had an OLED display long enough for it to degrade, or I was just lucky, but I've seen it on other devices... ugly.

    Anyway, the fact of the matter is there is no "best" display technology. It's all about trade-offs and what each of us prefers. That probably isn't a popular message, as most will prefer easy answers, but it is reality.

    I'm not really happy with OLED technology either, but for me it's the best option of those that currently exist. I suspect we won't be seing OLED technology used on 1080p displays though... powering 1080x1920 pixels (OLED powers each pixel individually) will be devastating on battery life.
    i speak from owning a htc desire with oled, a galaxy s2 with oled, a galaxy s3 with oled and briefly a lumia 820 with oled. Hands down the best one was the lumia but 4 of the 5 phones had degradation, the lumia i had for only 2 weeks so it didn't get chance. On top of that the battery drain when on anything other than dark colours really does suck in comparison. Once you have had oled for a while lcd does never quite cut it again, you just don't get the vibrancy but you adjust. I am a quality controller by profession so im geared towards noticing a flaw straight away. Its what you can put up with. For me degradation, poor battery life, and burn in ( very easy to get on oled ) and in dark environments you notice dark blotches or lines, i mean bedroom dark at night. If they iron out those kinks im there, but until then im back to lcd.

    Tempting a flaming i know but the iphone 5 screen really is awesome, its the best panel i have seen, has very good contrast which is led back lit i believe. But to each his own, the world would be boring if we all agreed.
  18. BIGPADDY's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    10,585 Posts
    Global Posts
    10,657 Global Posts
       #18  
    I'm just going to throw something to the equation what if we forget about battery, gpu etc would the display be good if it had nokia fresh rate at 60Hz will that be able to push all those lovely pixels.
    The craziest member on WPCentral!

    SONY Windows Phone 8.1 release sometime in June!
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by barne19801 View Post
    Tempting a flaming i know but the iphone 5 screen really is awesome, its the best panel i have seen, has very good contrast which is led back lit i believe. But to each his own, the world would be boring if we all agreed.
    I think we do agree: we all have different eyesight, have different colour preferences, react differently to high contrast and brightness settings, etc. etc. etc... we agree that everyone has different requirements because we are all different, and for that reason alone there isn't a single best display.

    I also very much like the iP5's display, but overall I like the L920's even better, although I can't quite put my finger on what it is. I perceive the L920's display's to be slightly more saturated, and as I'm used to OLED, that might explain it. In complete darkness I actually prefer the iP5, but under office lighting or outdoors I prefer the L920. Forced to choose one instead of an OLED display, I would take the L920's ;-)
  20. casab1anca's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    67 Posts
    Global Posts
    68 Global Posts
    #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by jdevenberg View Post
    Windows Phone 8 does not support 64 cores. Its kernel can support processors with up to 64 cores, but the OS its self cannot.
    Apps only care about multi-threading, not about multiple cores. Multi-threading has been supported ever since WP7, but the kernel only supported a single core back then. Now that the WP8 kernel supports multiple cores, there's nothing stopping apps from making use of 64 cores, except there isn't such a processor on the market yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by weetigo View Post
    Furthermore, every 2013 review will list "720p-only" as a shortcoming of the Windows Phone platform.
    The iPhone's awesome retina display is only 640p and nobody's complaining.
  21. barne19801's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    40 Posts
    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by a5cent View Post
    I think we do agree: we all have different eyesight, have different colour preferences, react differently to high contrast and brightness settings, etc. etc. etc... we agree that everyone has different requirements because we are all different, and for that reason alone there isn't a single best display.

    I also very much like the iP5's display, but overall I like the L920's even better, although I can't quite put my finger on what it is. I perceive the L920's display's to be slightly more saturated, and as I'm used to OLED, that might explain it. In complete darkness I actually prefer the iP5, but under office lighting or outdoors I prefer the L920. Forced to choose one instead of an OLED display, I would take the L920's ;-)
    Oddly i was comparing the 920 to my 8x and the colours on this seem more saturated, but, now here an interesting thing, the default picture of the kid playing football looked better on the 920. In that i could see more detail, the reason been there was a lower ppi than the 8x and so you could see the details a bit easier, im now thinking you can go to far with the ppi, because its now beyond what the eye can see it starts to essentially obscure details because you cant see them without zooming in. There is not a massive difference in ppi but it would seem its enough to just make that difference. At least to me.

    So maybe pushing to 1080p or higher ppi displays will actually be negative in more than a couple of ways.
  22. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by casab1anca View Post
    Now that the WP8 kernel supports multiple cores, there's nothing stopping apps from making use of 64 cores, except there isn't such a processor on the market yet.
    You're forgetting that Microsoft strictly standardizes the hardware platform. The current chassis spec limits WP to using a dual core CPU. So yes, other things are stopping apps from making use of more than two cores ;-)
  23. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by barne19801 View Post
    Oddly i was comparing the 920 to my 8x and the colours on this seem more saturated, but, now here an interesting thing, the default picture of the kid playing football looked better on the 920. In that i could see more detail, the reason been there was a lower ppi than the 8x and so you could see the details a bit easier, im now thinking you can go to far with the ppi, because its now beyond what the eye can see it starts to essentially obscure details because you cant see them without zooming in. There is not a massive difference in ppi but it would seem its enough to just make that difference. At least to me.

    So maybe pushing to 1080p or higher ppi displays will actually be negative in more than a couple of ways.
    I can't inspect your visual cortex or what exactly it is you are seeing (I have no 8x at hand) but if I had to venture a guess, I would say you've likely misidentified the culprit.

    You are likely looking at a high resolution image that must be down sampled. Down sampling an image from say 1920x1080 to 1280x720 (your 8x's native resolution) always incurs a loss of detail (pixels are removed from the image to fit it on your screen). The same applies when down sampling to the L920's native resolution, but less so, as it has a native resolution of 1280x768, meaning it has an extra 48 pixels of horizontal resolution in which to include detail that was down sampled away on the 8x. In other words, I'm guessing the effect you noticed isn't due to a PPI overdose, but simply due to the slightly lower resolution on the 8x.

    You could test this by comparing an image with a resolution of 1280x720 on both devices. If you still feel detail is being lost, due to that detail effectively being to small to be picked up by the naked eye (the PPI overdose), then you are right. If not, then I am.
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-30-2012 at 11:21 PM.
  24. barne19801's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    40 Posts
    #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by a5cent View Post
    I can't inspect your visual cortex or what exactly it is you are seeing (I have no 8x at hand) but if I had to venture a guess, I would say you've likely misidentified the culprit.

    You are likely looking at a high resolution image that must be down sampled. Down sampling an image from say 1920x1080 to 1280x720 (your 8x's native resolution) always incurs a loss of detail (pixels are removed from the image to fit it on your screen). The same applies when down sampling to the L920's native resolution, but less so, as it has a native resolution of 1280x768, meaning it has an extra 48 pixels of horizontal resolution in which to include detail that was down sampled away on the 8x. In other words, I'm guessing the effect you noticed isn't due to a PPI overdose, but simply due to the slightly lower resolution on the 8x.

    You could test this by comparing an image with a resolution of 1280x720 on both devices. If you still feel detail is being lost, due to that detail effectively being to small to be picked up by the naked eye (the PPI overdose), then you are right. If not, then I am.
    You could be right, i only have the 8x at hand. This was only an observation made in store. Though my guess would be those extra 48 pixels wouldn't make such a big difference. I don't know, would be interesting to see. Im not even sure what the resolution of that picture is as it doesn't tell you but in either phone it doesn't fill the screen fully so who knows.

    Try it in store if you see two side by side and see what you think.
  25. ImAdrian23's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    269 Posts
    #25  
    1080p is a win to developers, especially for WP ones.

    /s.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-23-2013, 02:53 AM
  2. Windows Phone Marketplace Issue with Payment
    By djncanada1 in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-16-2012, 10:27 PM
  3. [June 22] St. Louis Windows Phone Development Workshop with Nokia
    By speedtouch in forum The "Off Topic" Lounge
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-29-2012, 11:36 PM
  4. how many Media Codecs that Windows Phone Supports ?
    By iqpreay in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-09-2011, 11:04 AM
  5. Windows Phone Support Tool
    By wheelerk in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-03-2011, 09:20 PM

Posting Permissions