alright … is time for a few facts about resolution. bigger numbers are not necessarily better products. here is the breakdown:
960 x 640 res
3.5 in. screen
800 x 480 res
4.3 in. screen
translate that resolution to a FULL screen of 22 inches … like on your desktop. and the iphone is at a 6029 x 4019 resolution. the lumia 900 is at a 4088 x 2453 resolution.
now i would like to know how the new york times can claim “the iphone screen is of course much sharper.” i would like to know who is the eye-doctor to these guys that can see that far into infinity. i would REALLY like to know! how do you do it?
how can you POSSIBLY discern ANY sort of difference at those ranges? it’s like telling someone that you can tell the difference between 50 degrees below zero and 52 degrees below zero.
HD is at 1080 p ……… or 1920 x 1080. so you’re talking about the Nokia being over DOUBLE the res value of HD … and the iphone being 3 times the rate of HD resolution. AND you want consumers to believe that you can tell a difference? that they would be able to note a difference?
not to mention, that there is NOT much media out there at a 4019 resolution! lol … when blu-ray is at 1080, and even THAT is a gigantic file size with current encoders. can you imagine to fit a 4019 res? have to remember, that with those screen sizes, pixels per inch translate to MUCH higher “seen” resolutions than the given 960 x 640 or 800 x 480. a 1080p video on a 4.3 inch screen at 480p is going to look exactly the same as it would on a 3.5 inch at 640p.
your brain might convince you the SMALLER screen is sharper — that’s how res works. is a trick of perception. if that 3.5 inch screen were at the same exact 480 res, it would STILL ‘look’ sharper. so a selling point only, at the cost of performance. because once past the threshold of visibility by the naked eye, any higher res value becomes an unnecessary drain on the GPU.
and i don’t care what your name is, how much marketing you have, or how dedicated your consumer base; the higher the res, the more work for a GPU. the more ENERGY a device will consume. it all comes down to practicality.
i salute those makers who do NOT choose to take the illogical path Apple has chosen in higher resolutions that produce very little return. you lower performance, you disrespect the user’s time. all for a selling-point. congratulations. a flim flam is a flim flam. if you can tell the difference in those resolutions … should hire yourself out as a human microscope. because only true difference in “unseen” res values is in over-all performance and function of a device.
how it works. not rocket science. a more compact resolution is not necessarily better, while refresh rate has more to do with “smooth appearance”… anyone who has ever tried to play an MKV on a 1080p with not-the-best processor knows what i mean. suddenly you’re watching foreign cinema.
now, you manufacturers …. i know the public is gullible. i know young men are gullible …they think size matters. decide a spec is one more bragging-right. but lay-off the flim-flam this time around. why? because you are promising something empty — a quality their senses do not even realize. it’s like saying an ice cream is NOW made with PODS OF THE YANG YANG TREE! when it’s like adding dust to the formula.
makes me feel sad for Apple — proud of Microsoft — and wishing deeply that i could get you all to understand. in the end it’s not how many sales, or how much money and expansion …. no. it’s about how you are remembered. and i for one, would like to remember American industry as honest. even though days like that are long behind us. we can hope for a future with smarter products and smarter people. smarter PHONES? well, let’s just hope they stay on the less dangerous side of stupid.