- 12-28-2012, 02:53 PM #1
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?
12-28-2012, 03:30 PM #2
- 233 Posts
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
- 12-28-2012, 03:49 PM #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
- 12-28-2012, 04:30 PM #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.
- 12-28-2012, 05:07 PM #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.
- 12-28-2012, 05:24 PM #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.
- 12-28-2012, 06:12 PM #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...
- 12-28-2012, 06:58 PM #8
- 12-28-2012, 07:16 PM #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 )
- 12-29-2012, 03:41 AM #10
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:
Last edited by a5cent; 12-29-2012 at 04:43 AM.
- 12-29-2012, 09:55 AM #11
I read a review saying the whites look like a piece of paper in clarity
- 12-30-2012, 06:27 AM #12
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 10:31 AM.
- 12-30-2012, 01:54 PM #14
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 02:46 PM.
- 12-30-2012, 02:46 PM #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.
- 12-30-2012, 03:23 PM #16
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.
- 12-30-2012, 05:15 PM #17
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.
- 12-30-2012, 05:30 PM #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.
- 12-30-2012, 07:47 PM #19
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 ;-)
- 12-30-2012, 08:11 PM #20
- 12-30-2012, 08:13 PM #21
So maybe pushing to 1080p or higher ppi displays will actually be negative in more than a couple of ways.
- 12-30-2012, 08:37 PM #22
- 12-30-2012, 08:54 PM #23
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; 12-31-2012 at 12:21 AM.
- 12-31-2012, 03:52 AM #24
Try it in store if you see two side by side and see what you think.
- By ugetluke in forum Windows Phone 8Replies: 1Last Post: 02-23-2013, 03:53 AM
- By djncanada1 in forum Windows Phone 8Replies: 2Last Post: 12-16-2012, 11:27 PM
- By speedtouch in forum The "Off Topic" LoungeReplies: 13Last Post: 06-30-2012, 12:36 AM
- By iqpreay in forum Windows Phone 7Replies: 7Last Post: 10-09-2011, 12:04 PM
- By wheelerk in forum Windows Phone 7Replies: 2Last Post: 04-03-2011, 10:20 PM