Firstly, I'd just like to note that this source is from CNET, I'm not one for stealing information....
After all the slack Samsung has gotten regarding the size of the note, it seems LG is ready to bring something "Big" to the frame, The LG Optimus Vu
A 5" IPS with a 4:3 Aspect ratio... Looks pretty interesting to me. Although if that Design isn't stolen from the Nokia Lumia then I'm french...
**Insert from CNET**
If you thought the 5.3-inch Samsung Galaxy Note was a huge flash in the gigantic pan, you were massively mistaken. LG is looking to make its own sled-sized smart phone, giving us a glimpse of the LG Optimus Vu in a new teaser trailer.
This 5-inch mobile is different from Samsung's Note in one major respect though -- it boasts a screen with a claimed 4:3 aspect ratio. LG, we'd like to take this moment to offer you "room with a Vu" as a potential tagline. You're welcome.
The Korean gadget maker gave a sniff of the device and its quirky dimensions in a post on its blog. And if our deciphering of Google Translate is on the money, LG seems to reckon the 4:3 ratio is perfectly suited to the human hand.
Hmm. We've never had too much trouble keeping our hands on more rectangular mobiles to be honest, but we'll likely see the Vu making an appearance at Mobile World Congress at the end of this month, where we'll get a hands-on and see how it feels.
Not much else is known about the Vu -- the teaser video (which we've embedded below) shows circular metallic buttons and rounded edges that remind us a little of Nokia's Lumia 800.
Along the bottom of the device you can spy four touch-sensitive Android buttons, and while nothing else is known for sure, around the web we've seen unconfirmed reports of an 8-megapixel camera and a 1.5GHz dual-core processor.
We didn't hate the Note, but it is too big to be practical for most folks. In a few years will all mobiles be so supersized? Perhaps we should invest in trousers with bigger pockets.
**End**
P.S. If this has been posted, I'm sorry
Its going to release with Gingerbread...
LMAO
Link please?
---------- Post added at 08:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 PM ----------
Found it myself.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19736_7-57373285-251/lg-goes-big-with-5-inch-optimus-vu/?tag=cnetRiver
As least its small than the note and it doesn't look very appealing.
Samsung and the Note have recieved as much praise as criticism for the its size...in fact way more praise
As always the size criticism is a comment on the prefernce of the criticizer not the Note itself.
Obviously theres plenty big enough market for large screens.[/QUOTE]
LG seems to reckon the 4:3 ratio is perfectly suited to the human hand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahaha! Nice one! This is going to be shorter than the note and wider. How can that suit better to the hand?
Bassarnis said:
Hahaha! Nice one! This is going to be shorter than the note and wider. How can that suit better to the hand?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It'll only be .19" wider, and half an inch shorter. Might make it easier to reach the top and bottom at the same time, though you will have to stretch a little more to get across. That might not be a bad tradeoff.
E_man5112 said:
It'll only be .19" wider, and half an inch shorter. Might make it easier to reach the top and bottom at the same time, though you will have to stretch a little more to get across. That might not be a bad tradeoff.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except all the wasted space on that screen as most video these days are 16x9 like the Note Screen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Looking at LG's own records for updates, I won't even consider them a viable option.
MrDSL said:
Its going to release with Gingerbread...
LMAO
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The not still has gingerbread... Glass houses and all that.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
eallan said:
The not still has gingerbread... Glass houses and all that.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This phone was released almost 4 months ago and this one isn't even out yet.
Yeah that's a fair comparison.
It's strange to go with a 4:3 aspect ratio. Larger screens generally seem to be widescreen.
I don't mind seeing competition - it helps legitimize the 5 inch form factor to the masses.
ya, no android device should be released with gb at this point.. that's just sad
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Dumb ?, what difference would the 4:3 aspect make.?
From the Beast : Galaxy Note
sprintuser1977 said:
Dumb ?, what difference would the 4:3 aspect make.?
From the Beast : Galaxy Note
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you've noticed, since the Note is 16:10, there's some letterboxing (black boxes/bands at the top/bottom of the screen for any videos in the 16:9 ratio (widescreen). You can see this clearly when shooting a video at 1080x720.
That's cos the Note's length/breadth ratio is lower than that of a 16:9 screen. [That's a ratio of 1.78 in 16:9 vs 1.6 in 16:10]
For me, that's the optimum balance between movie watching pleasure and a nice wide (actually high) screen in landscape mode for me to read on.
On the other hand, with a 4:3 screen, the ratio is 1.33. That means a widescreen movie would have larger areas of the screen blocked out.
If I'm not clear or you'd like more info, please check this out:
Wikipedia
In the end, it all depends what you intend to use your phone for.
P.S. Am a little puzzled why they'd go for 4:3 though. I thought that the standards have shifted to 16:9 and 16:10.
itsjusttim said:
Except all the wasted space on that screen as most video these days are 16x9 like the Note Screen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Space is not wasted on a phone simply because it isn't used in movies.
sprintuser1977 said:
Dumb ?, what difference would the 4:3 aspect make.?
From the Beast : Galaxy Note
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A 4:3 would be more of a square shape. This means you get less of a long screen in portrait, and you get a more usable height in landscape (in my opinion). I actually prefer a 4:3 aspect ratio, as I think it's better for web browsing. Other needs and opinions will suit other aspect ratios better.
Here is an example of a 5" 4:3 screen and a 5.3" 16:10 screen such as the note displaying a 16:9 movie frame. You can also see specs such as image area/dimensions, etc.
Just wish it wasn't LG making this, or I might prefer it over the note.
Oneiricl said:
Well, if you've noticed, since the Note is 16:10, there's some letterboxing (black boxes/bands at the top/bottom of the screen for any videos in the 16:9 ratio (widescreen). You can see this clearly when shooting a video at 1080x720.
That's cos the Note's length/breadth ratio is lower than that of a 16:9 screen. [That's a ratio of 1.78 in 16:9 vs 1.6 in 16:10]
For me, that's the optimum balance between movie watching pleasure and a nice wide (actually high) screen in landscape mode for me to read on.
On the other hand, with a 4:3 screen, the ratio is 1.33. That means a widescreen movie would have larger areas of the screen blocked out.
If I'm not clear or you'd like more info, please check this out:
Wikipedia
In the end, it all depends what you intend to use your phone for.
P.S. Am a little puzzled why they'd go for 4:3 though. I thought that the standards have shifted to 16:9 and 16:10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually prefer a 4:3 for web browsing (at least on my desktop, as well as the iPad form factor). I would love to see a good implementation of it on a phone. Sadly, not sure that will happen with LG.
On a separate note, I just remembered my mother has an LG Vu already...
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Strange to recycle that name into an Optimus Vue for such a different phone.
Think of 4:3 aspect ratio as old-school CRT TVs, while 16:9 would be flat panel HD TVs.
Back on topic, I think manufacturers are finding a market for large phones or phoblets. As with the success of the SGN overseas has shown, once you go big, there is no going back. By having a phone of this size, you get the advantages of both a tablet and a phone and only have to carry one device. You also get the advantage of all day use because of larger batteries. There are may plusses with a phone this big.
adelmundo said:
Think of 4:3 aspect ratio as old-school CRT TVs, while 16:9 would be flat panel HD TVs.
Back on topic, I think manufacturers are finding a market for large phones or phoblets. As with the success of the SGN overseas has shown, once you go big, there is no going back. By having a phone of this size, you get the advantages of both a tablet and a phone and only have to carry one device. You also get the advantage of all day use because of larger batteries. There are may plusses with a phone this big.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I had my doubts about using the Streak as an everyday device...but it took me just a few days to get used to it. I still remember in June 2010 when the EVO came out...and I thought 4.3 inch screen was huge.
But after using the Streak, I've become too spoiled with the extra screen real estate. So like even the GS2 and G Nexus both feel too small for me now.
It's even far worse with the iPhone...even if I'm using it for less than 1 minute just to input something....far too small of a screen in general...
Thanks to the phablet market, that's the main reason why I have never purchased a tablet. I would basically never use it if I had one, since phablets already cover what tasks I want to do.
But it's kind of funny to see many people have the iPHone + iPad combination...for that "cool" factor....
First of all 4:3 is a retarded design, 16:10 is as square as you'd want.
SECOND and Most Important of all.....
ITS LG!!!
I had a G2X and it made me hate android for the brief period I used one before hocking it on Ebay.
The most buggy horribly buggy phone I've used to date!
Even surpassing my old HTC Touch Pro using Winblos mobile!
If you don't care about Reboots, Lockups, Sound driver crashes, Thermal runaways, and battery life.... It just may be the perfect alternative to the Note!!
E_man5112 said:
I actually prefer a 4:3 for web browsing (at least on my desktop, as well as the iPad form factor).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is definitely a 'to each their own' but I prefer a widescreen screen in portrait mode. It's like, well, reading a book.
It's good for forums - less space wasted for short '10char' replies, etc. Longer lines can just wrap.
benefits of 4:3:
point and shoot cameras shoot pictures in 4x3 aspect ratios.
TV shows are in 4:3 aspect ratio.
benefits of a wider screen:
movies/HD shows are widescreen so less letterboxing.
SLR pictures are generally widescreen.
web browsing kinda varies with the web site I guess.
- Frank
Related
I'm just getting more and more disappointed with HTC & Sprints recent practices..
Few weeks ago I went on the htc website and looked at the tech specs, and i'm almost certain it said 800x480 resolution as we all know..
The same thing on the sprint page.
Now, ever since the Nova v. Epson debacle they took down every mention of the phones resolution
Leading one to believe that the Epson units don't even have the same resolution.
Is it possible that these have not only a different screen, but even different resolution and no ****ing press release or information?
What the hell is going on here? WHY would they take down that kind of information?
I mean FFS how can you call it tech specs while leaving out key info?
I have a bunch of problems with my nova 003 phone right now, light leakage, screen separation, stuck pixel etc.
Now I have to worry about getting an even worse unit if I replace it!
All this added onto the 30fps cap and the bull**** with disabling the stock android launcher is making me a very unhappy camper..
Proof below:
Evo Tech Specs
Where it says:
Display 4.3-inch WVGA resolution Capacitive Multi-touch Screen
Compare that to the droid incredible tech specs:
Where it says:
Display 3.7-inch AMOLED touch-sensitive screen with 480 X 800 WVGA resolution
Or the HD2:
Display 4.3-inch HD touch-sensitive screen with 480 x 800 WVGA resolution
www.sprint.com (visit shop > phones > evo 4g)
I've gone through every bit of information they have on the website and NO mention of resolution anywhere..
The only other possible reason is that they don't want us to know that it has a lower res. than the iphone. (lol)
Or I'm just a crackhead and didn't realize that they never had the resolution up.
It all sounds too convenient though, why wouldn't they put something like that up?
Before the iphone4, WVGA was considered an excellent resolution.
The strangest part is that similar phones have that info easily accessible from htc.com.
So what is it, HTC too lazy to put up tech specs? Or are they trying to conceal something..
We already know that their are 2 variants of the evo displays, so it's not that far-fetched..
Finally, I know it can be done, but how do we check res on our phones? Can someone with an epson device chime in?
EDIT: PLEASE DON'T POST UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING PRODUCTIVE TO ADD.
What are the differences? Should I replace my evo and risk getting an epson unit?
Don't worry, they are all still 800x480.
Wvga is 480x800 or more. It says wvga on sprint site
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk
Is your screen so bad that you have to worry about what somone wrote about it? Sheesh, I ripped Avatar from Blueray to 800X480 and it looks awesome on my phone. No one I have showed it to has said..... man you shoulda got AMOLED.
The EVO is awesome.
My screen isn't bad, at all!
The worry is that i'll replace my phone, and my old problems will still persist and i'll also have a worse quality display..
I wasn't sure that WVGA meant 480x800 or greater. I thought it meant that ballpark..
i woudlnt' believe the resolution until someone has done tests. if any one follows tv technology, you'd know how many tvs lied about their own resolution. games as well.
Brutal-Force said:
Is your screen so bad that you have to worry about what somone wrote about it? Sheesh, I ripped Avatar from Blueray to 800X480 and it looks awesome on my phone. No one I have showed it to has said..... man you shoulda got AMOLED.
The EVO is awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be completely fair, you would expect that response from someone that has never seen AMOLED or doesn't have one next to a TFT panel. If you've only had ground beef your whole life, steak is going to be so much better once you get a taste.
heygrl said:
To be completely fair, you would expect that response from someone that has never seen AMOLED or doesn't have one next to a TFT panel. If you've only had ground beef your whole life, steak is going to be so much better once you get a taste.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair - Taste is subjective. It's like saying that SteakHouse 1 is better than Steakhouse 2. Not to everyone even after they have visited both.
I have the HTC incredible as well and I do not like the dots in the text. It's looks grainy. Pictures are very nice but small text is not as defined(anti-aliased) as TFT. Once again subjective to my own eyes.
mrmomoman said:
To be fair - Taste is subjective. It's like saying that SteakHouse 1 is better than Steakhouse 2. Not to everyone even after they have visited both.
I have the HTC incredible as well and I do not like the dots in the text. It's looks grainy. Pictures are very nice but small text is not as defined(anti-aliased) as TFT. Once again subjective to my own eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, but they mentioned movies.
It's a conspiracy!! Quick, put on your tinfoil hats!!! WTF is the big deal? Enjoy your phone for what it is... it hasn't changed simply because the specs may or may not have been listed previously.
topdnbass said:
I'm just getting more and more disappointed with HTC & Sprints recent practices..
Few weeks ago I went on the htc website and looked at the tech specs, and i'm almost certain it said 800x480 resolution as we all know..
The same thing on the sprint page.
Now, ever since the Nova v. Epson debacle they took down every mention of the phones resolution
Leading one to believe that the Epson units don't even have the same resolution.
Different screen, different resolution and no ****ing press release or information?
What the hell is going on here? WHY would they take down that kind of information?
I mean FFS how can you call it tech specs without giving any information on the resolution?
I have a bunch of problems with my nova 003 phone right now, light leakage, screen separation, stuck pixel etc.
Now I have to worry about getting an even worse unit if I replace it!
All this added onto the 30fps cap and the bull**** with disabling the stock android launcher is making me a very unhappy camper..
Proof below:
Evo Tech Specs
Where it says:
Display 4.3-inch WVGA resolution Capacitive Multi-touch Screen
Compare that to the droid incredible tech specs:
Where it says:
Display 3.7-inch AMOLED touch-sensitive screen with 480 X 800 WVGA resolution
Or the HD2:
Display 4.3-inch HD touch-sensitive screen with 480 x 800 WVGA resolution
www.sprint.com (visit shop > phones > evo 4g)
I've gone through every bit of information they have on the website and NO mention resolution anywhere..
The only other possible reason is that they don't want us to know that it has a lower res. than the iphone.
Or I'm just a crackhead and didn't realize that they never had the resolution up.
It all sounds too convenient though, why wouldn't they put something like that up?
Before the iphone4, WVGA was considered an excellent resolution.
The strangest part is that similar phones have that info easily accessible from htc.com.
So what is it, HTC too lazy to put up tech specs? Or are they trying to conceal something..
We already know that their are 2 variants of the display, so it's not that far-fetched..
If i'm right though.
Honestly.. you simply CAN'T leave that out of the tech specs!
We need to EMAIL them until they understand...
Lying to your customers and deceiving them this way is never gonna end well HTC..
Finally, I know it can be done, but how do we check res on our phones? Can someone with an epson device chime in?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC's page definitely needs an update. Doesn't the Evo also support WiFi N protocol as of the latest updates, and earlier hacks? :]
I think with the discovery of the use of Novatek and Epson screens in the phones, people are looking at HTC as a bottom feeder when it comes to parts.
I'm an A+ tech, had to teardown and put back together many machines, and if you looked at the different part numbers that existed for the same part (i.e. HP laptop LCD may have four different part numbers, the system board may have two, etc.), then you see HTC's use of two different parts for what it is, nothing.
WVGA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_VGA
Read, enjoy, relax
god people get bent outta shape over some stupid ****
lol
QVGA: 320x240
HVGA: 480x320
VGA: 640x480
WVGA: 800x480
That's how they are, the numbers never change.
some ignorance going on this thread. You should be weary of any replacement parts. you are paying for a $500 product; maybe it's biggest selling point being it's screen, and you're saying who cares?
Laptops often replace their screens with cheaper ones. HDTVs, eg. sony have replaced their higher end models with cheaper totally different panels (think $500 generic tv quality) after stellar reviews have been out. This is well documented.
The fact that manufacturers get away with false advertisement so often should be warning to keep on your guard.
If you think this is paranoia, you are not an educated consumer. That's ok, but don't insult those of us who are.
Thanks bob, exactly..
To the rest of you, seriously?
I'm not a damn idiot.
Someone mentioned it on another forum so I looked around and found no mention of the exact res. on either site, and hardly any tech specs at that..
Pretty unusual for one of the highest specced phones on the market, no?
@mrono.. I am well aware of the differences between the various standardized terms for display resolution..
However, the W in WVGA stands for Wide.
Are you telling me that 799x480 isn't wide vga?
I wasn't proposing that the newer ones have VGA res or something outrageous like that, but it's not out of the scope of imagination that there are differences between the epson and novatec screens apart from contrast/brightness..
It is obvious that the two displays are different, and if I got one with an off hue or the worst one because I couldn't put up with the screen separation, i'd be pissed.
So this is me covering my bases..
Which is only natural since recently it seems like they've been getting parts from wherever they can..
I'm not "complaining" about anything I just want to be sure I'm not making a mistake..
Very annoyed at all the assholes saying, just enjoy the phone.
I never mentioned anything about not liking the phone, which is why i'm REPLACING it and not returning it.
I love the phone other than the stuck pixel and screen separation..
I am COMPLETELY ****ING FINE with my current display. Happy?
Bob and Top...
It's not about being ignorant of facts, nor is it about being uneducated as a consumer. It's about taking the device for what it is... a PHONE. Yeah, so you may have shelled out $500 for it, but in the end, it's a phone. It's not a "down to the micron precision instrument". I'm an asshole for saying, "just enjoy the phone"? Get over yourselves. Nevermind, why waste my time with you? You'd probably complain about your Happy Meal toy.
Tell me this jye.
If it's just a phone, then I bet you'd prefer this?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
To most of us, these are not phones with extra gimmicks, but mini-computers with the ability to make calls..
They're expensive gadgets and have no reason not to work as expected.
It's not about being unable to accept a phones flaws, I accepted the G1's many flaws until it broke.
I'm trying to make an INFORMED decision about whether or not to replace my current evo with another possibly worse one within my 30-day window..
My only purpose in creating this thread was to spur conversation about the obviously different versions of evo's out there, and thus make a decision.
If you're going to complain and whine but don't have anything to add then might I politely ask you to "GTFO"?
Hey Top,
I haven't been complaining or whining... it seems that you're the one doing that, assuming there's a conspiracy in your original post. As for adding anything, I've said my piece, and contributed to this thread in my first post that stated that it wasn't necessarily a conspiracy and that, "it hasn't changed simply because the specs may or may not have been listed previously.
So kindly back the 'tude down a couple of notches.
I remember a while back there was an article on Ars Technica (can't link yet, but google "ars Secrets of the Nexus One's screen" and you'll find it) about the Nexus One's AMOLED screen. They talked about how the AMOLED screen technology/layout resulted in text that wasn't as sharp as on the Motorola Droid. I'm curious if this is still a concern with Super AMOLED technology, as with the Epic 4G?
I'm looking to upgrade from my Palm Pre in the next few weeks (hoping the Epic 4G is out by then), but I'm hoping to do some background research before that. I use my phone quite a bit for web browsing now, and would probably increase that usage on a phone with a bigger screen and better browser. I'm also looking forward to being able to use Kindle's software for Android. Bottom line is that I know I'll be reading a LOT of text on my phone. Super AMOLED is supposed to be incredible for pictures and video, but if it's lackluster on text, it's not as useful to me.
If any of you have any thoughts or experiences regarding this issue (if it still is one on Super AMOLED), I'd love to hear it. Thanks!
Yes, it's still an issue.
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
[/URL][/IMG]
violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I checked out your "Galaxy S (Epic, Captivate etc) VS EVO Comparison and thoughts" thread and it was an excellent overview. I'm leaning towards the Evo for the larger screen and better text readability. I'm out of town right now, but when I get back home next week I might try to track down an Evo somewhere. If the Epic comes out within the 30 day trial period, I'll check it out then.
The main things tempting me with the Epic are the nicer CPU & GPU, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy regardless after being on my sluggish Pre for a year. If only Palm had been bought by someone who could have brought some of WebOS's features to Android (I think I'll miss having cards and gestures). Either way, both look like excellent phones and I'm anxious to get started with Android.
Thanks for the feedback!
violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the reason that it comes out like that, will the text be fixed when Android Gingerbread comes out? I've heard that gingerbread changes the resolution, but I don't know if that's true.
EnderTheThird said:
I checked out your "Galaxy S (Epic, Captivate etc) VS EVO Comparison and thoughts" thread and it was an excellent overview. I'm leaning towards the Evo for the larger screen and better text readability. I'm out of town right now, but when I get back home next week I might try to track down an Evo somewhere. If the Epic comes out within the 30 day trial period, I'll check it out then.
The main things tempting me with the Epic are the nicer CPU & GPU, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy regardless after being on my sluggish Pre for a year. If only Palm had been bought by someone who could have brought some of WebOS's features to Android (I think I'll miss having cards and gestures). Either way, both look like excellent phones and I'm anxious to get started with Android.
Thanks for the feedback!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Visit a T-Mobile or AT&T store and look at the Captivate and/or the Vibrant..the Epic will have the same screen..once you see it you can judge for yourself...the text may not be as sharp but it may be acceptable by your use...so its worth checking..
I have a evo and do pretty much nothing but text reading (ebooks and the web). Text is very easy to read and I have not noticed any eye strain yet.
That sucks about super amoled not doing text well.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
gTen said:
Visit a T-Mobile or AT&T store and look at the Captivate and/or the Vibrant..the Epic will have the same screen..once you see it you can judge for yourself...the text may not be as sharp but it may be acceptable by your use...so its worth checking..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried doing that at a Best Buy yesterday but someone had stolen their demo unit(s). Apparently it's one of the more ghetto Best Buys in Boston. Who knew. I'll be checking it out when I get back home for sure though.
Hmmmm.... I went to the AT&T store last week, to check out the captivate and I didn't notice any problem in reading the text personally. I haven't made the switch to a smartphone yet so maybe my eyes are too inexperienced to notice something like that, but I'm pretty sure I'll be happy with my future Epic 4G
I have the captivate and yes, text on it is not as crisp as on the droid or droid x. But is it an issue, no. On really light colored backgrounds like white or light grey, if you look hard for it, you can see some fuzziness. But on colorful backgrounds you really cant see it. I can tell you, its a beautiful screen. Overall it looks better than the droid x, which has been described as dull or drab. The colors on the S-AMOLED really pop, and the fact that its an OLED means that black backgrounds are really true black (complete absence of light).
In my opinion its the second best display available, second only to the iphone4 display.
derek4484 said:
In my opinion its the second best display available, second only to the iphone4 display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you say the retena display is better?
gTen said:
Why would you say the retena display is better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only way the retina display is better is if you're reading text from under 10" away from your face, but then again who the heck reads with a phone up in their face? I read alot of e-books and other sites and I can tell you reading a page from a normal distance there is little to no difference.
As far as video playback and pictures the Samsung blows the retina display out of the water and by leaps and bounds is the #1 screen in the phone market hands down.
i have to agree that retina display looks better in my opinion. I have pretty good eyesight so that may be why. However, it doesn't make a difference in eyestrain or readability.
I own a captivate and read ebooks on a white background regularly. Its honestly not an issue.
systoxity said:
i have to agree that retina display looks better in my opinion. I have pretty good eyesight so that may be why. However, it doesn't make a difference in eyestrain or readability.
I own a captivate and read ebooks on a white background regularly. Its honestly not an issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm more worried about screen-burn in, which is a very big problem for S-Amoled//Amoled screens.
With less than a year's use of my Nexus One, there is a slight amount of screen burn in, which isn't really avoidable.
NeonMonster said:
I'm more worried about screen-burn in, which is a very big problem for S-Amoled//Amoled screens.
With less than a year's use of my Nexus One, there is a slight amount of screen burn in, which isn't really avoidable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Screen burn ins were only a real problem with the early model amoled screens, much like plasma HDTV the screen tech has evolved and it doesn't hurt that the Super Amoled screens are developed by Samsung which are global HDTV innovators.
Besides for screen burn in to become permanent the screen would have to be on for hours on a static image, on a HDTV I can see that happening if you fall asleep maybe but who on earth turns off their phone's screen timeout and let's the screen stay on all day chugging battery life? That just won't happen.
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device. Not to mention you have a warranty which 100% covers such a thing as screen burn in and if you do happen to burn in a screen it usually happens sooner rather than later.
Sebrina said:
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't be worried about that if I were you. The Galaxy S series is on all four major US carriers and will undoubtedly get a pretty large hacker following, so even if Samsung does stop updating the Galaxy S phones, there will always be cyanogenmod or many other custom ROMS. And if you're posting here, rooting your phone and installing a custom ROM shouldn't be a huge deal.
Sebrina said:
Screen burn ins were only a real problem with the early model amoled screens, much like plasma HDTV the screen tech has evolved and it doesn't hurt that the Super Amoled screens are developed by Samsung which are global HDTV innovators.
Besides for screen burn in to become permanent the screen would have to be on for hours on a static image, on a HDTV I can see that happening if you fall asleep maybe but who on earth turns off their phone's screen timeout and let's the screen stay on all day chugging battery life? That just won't happen.
I'm FAR more worried about the phone's future in regard of updates than I am of screen burn in on a mobile device. Not to mention you have a warranty which 100% covers such a thing as screen burn in and if you do happen to burn in a screen it usually happens sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not possible to have permanent screen burn in..as for temporary one...even LCDs state not to keep the same image on for too long to avoid temp burn-ins...
As for updates...we are not sure how much of a bone Samsung will give, but at the moment, event the Sprint Moment has gotten a Foyo 2.2 by the community.
violinbf said:
SAMOLED Pentil subpixel layout makes text look jaggad compared to LCD. The reason for this is that the true addressable resolution of SAMOLED displays is not 480x480 but 393x653. This is the one drawback of this display. See my other posts where i compared the LCD of the EVO vs the Galaxy S. Additional problems are screen burn in and poor power consumption for mobile devices. Text on white backround (web browsing, document viewing) consumes 330% more power than LCD. The color saturation, contrast, black level, and viewing angles are stunning though.
[/URL][/IMG]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that 330% more power figure accurate for the GS screens, I was under the impression that they are different than all previous devices? I read a lot of text in my personal usage. I wonder if an app could be developed to make all white pixels black and black white? Although white text isn't ideal if it amounted to 350% power savings my eyes/brain could adapt eventually?
blakehess11 said:
I wouldn't be worried about that if I were you. The Galaxy S series is on all four major US carriers and will undoubtedly get a pretty large hacker following, so even if Samsung does stop updating the Galaxy S phones, there will always be cyanogenmod or many other custom ROMS. And if you're posting here, rooting your phone and installing a custom ROM shouldn't be a huge deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that samsung encrypts the hardware drivers so it's not very easy to port new android versions.. Is this not an issue?
kgold708 said:
Is that 330% more power figure accurate for the GS screens, I was under the impression that they are different than all previous devices? I read a lot of text in my personal usage. I wonder if an app could be developed to make all white pixels black and black white? Although white text isn't ideal if it amounted to 350% power savings my eyes/brain could adapt eventually?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that is for the regular AMOLED screen...the Super AMOLED screen would most likely be around like 260% for that..but you gotta realize that your screen will never be FULLY pure white like that...the next revision of Super AMOLED(for 2011 plans to go RGBW to fix that).
Either way you'd never have so much white on the screen for it to waist that much energy...
christophocles said:
I heard that samsung encrypts the hardware drivers so it's not very easy to port new android versions.. Is this not an issue?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does not make it easy but not impossible...if they release a Galaxy S 2 in the future with Gingerbread or any other phone with it and don't do Gingerbread for Galaxy S..with some effort it would be possible to port it...
Hello,
Yes this has been talked about.
But lets verify this isn't the screen receptors.
This is the use of a Cheap LCD inside the acer iconia.
Just received mine.. and the pixels grain is very visible -- my laptop is below an ACER .. the grain is yeh cheap.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
my laptop
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
yup, does anyone checked on xoom screen?
I haven't yet
I had the transformer which was sent back cause of screen issues around the bezel and can tell you that the transformer didn't have this VISIBLE grid pixel system.
and they are very visible even at a distance.
not just in close.
habs101 said:
I haven't yet
I had the transformer which was sent back cause of screen issues around the bezel and can tell you that the transformer didn't have this VISIBLE grid pixel system.
and they are very visible even at a distance.
not just in close.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i only ever notice it when the screen is showing blacks or is off.
even then, it's really not a big deal.
edgie168 said:
i only ever notice it when the screen is showing blacks or is off.
even then, it's really not a big deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes what you see when the display is off or black is the capacitive grids..
What I posted was visible pixels on the display
Load up a few white pages or any bg and look.. u will see its not a crisp image.. that's why the acer display is not crisp clearnlike Asus.. u can see the pixel grid
I'm just not seeing what you guys are seeing. I know the std photo apps are crap, but that's why I use quickpic. When I view my photos (I do a lot of photography) they are bright, crisp and look great.
Okay you guys are just plain nuts.
Here's a picture taken from about 10" away using an 11-22mm lens on the Olympus four-thirds system - that means it's equivalent to a 22-44 mm lens on a 35mm camera. It's slightly overexposed, but trust me, taking shots of a backlit screen isn't easy. Besides, the overexposure is about the only way to see ANY grid actually. The photo app showing this is QuickPic.
Your example shots are taken with a cheap camera shoved all the way onto the screen - and you're picking up what I believe are scan line artifacts for the most part. It's also well known that the built-in viewer with Honeycomb (and Froyo for that matter) are horrible.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonymaro/5716511199/
This shot, viewed on a desktop screen should put the Iconia screen about "lifesize". I uploaded the straight out of camera shot to Flickr (well, after basic RAW conversion,) so you can click through and "pixel peek" if you want - and you'll see none of the crappy grid in the OP's photos.
Even with my nose shoved all the way onto the screen I don't see anything like what the OP is saying is there - yes, you can see pixels, but hey, who views their tablet with their nose hairs rubbing it? In real life to my eye the photo looks much better on the tablet than it does in the photo linked above.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
cybermage1 said:
Okay you guys are just plain nuts.
Here's a picture taken from about 10" away using an 11-22mm lens on the Olympus four-thirds system - that means it's equivalent to a 22-44 mm lens on a 35mm camera. It's slightly overexposed, but trust me, taking shots of a backlit screen isn't easy. Besides, the overexposure is about the only way to see ANY grid actually. The photo app showing this is QuickPic.
Your example shots are taken with a cheap camera shoved all the way onto the screen - and you're picking up what I believe are scan line artifacts for the most part. It's also well known that the built-in viewer with Honeycomb (and Froyo for that matter) are horrible.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonymaro/5716511199/
This shot, viewed on a desktop screen should put the Iconia screen about "lifesize". I uploaded the straight out of camera shot to Flickr (well, after basic RAW conversion,) so you can click through and "pixel peek" if you want - and you'll see none of the crappy grid in the OP's photos.
Even with my nose shoved all the way onto the screen I don't see anything like what the OP is saying is there - yes, you can see pixels, but hey, who views their tablet with their nose hairs rubbing it? In real life to my eye the photo looks much better on the tablet than it does in the photo linked above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
now take that same picture
with the android bg that i have on my tablet above which cmoes standard with honeycomb , and upload it at full resolution don't cmopress it. and dont shrink it
habs101 said:
now take that same picture
with the android bg that i have on my tablet above which cmoes standard with honeycomb , and upload it at full resolution don't cmopress it. and dont shrink it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See you support my point that it's not the screen... if it looks great with a real photo displayed but looks crap with your background then the problem is either the background or the app rendering it.
Using the built-in gallery app, that same photo exhibits vertical striping in the rendering that is visible to the eye at anything closer than 12 inches.
My wife and I both have an a500 and neither of ours look anything like your OP. My wife also has Nook and the only difference about the screen is its more vibrant
well.. i can see the gtid pixel system on icons the desktop photos even watching videos.. evem the demo unit we noticed it... only on extreme black colours it is not visible but light pics u can see the pixels-
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Pic taken at 8 inches away
make sure you view the high resolution of the photo by clicking on it .
That's true same thing to me but doesn't bother me that much.
Do you really use your tablet 8" away from your face? Also, while the Asus has a better screen aren't people saying the refresh rate is slower?
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
kappen said:
Do you really use your tablet 8" away from your face? Also, while the Asus has a better screen aren't people saying the refresh rate is slower?
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yet it's distrubing when u can see those from 15 inches away .
you can see the grid pattern ,
that screen is utterly cheap on the acer. even on their laptops same thing .
u can see the grid from a good distance away.
i am a brand person but when i see a good product i'll rave it, and when i see a **** product i have no issues to say it,
acer failed on the screen, period.
I would say return it for another. I am not seeing this on the two A500s I have
theheathen said:
I would say return it for another. I am not seeing this on the two A500s I have
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm also not seeing this on my A500 .
I think the grid being referred to is the arrangement of the pixels. On the transformer they are all evenly spaced squares and so even on close up viewing it looks good. On the iconia tab it looks more like a slight grid pattern of rows and columns when looking at it from closer than a foot away.
Trust me I own both tablets for the moment and aside from the screen the iconia is much better. However the selling point of the tablet for me is the screen. So I think if I can find a replacement my iconia will be returned and will get another transformer
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
I can see the touch screen overlay when holding at odd angles when the screen is mostly white. I can see the grid you talk of when I hold the screen up to my nose. Thankfully I don't use my tablet in either way. While I'm sure there are other screens that don't exhibit those issues, they aren't pratical problems for me and do not indicate a manufacturing problem, just different technologies. If it bothers you that much that you don't have the best possible screen on the market take it back and get an Ipad. When samsung puts their 10" retinal display on their tablet sell your ipad and get that one.
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
kappen said:
I can see the touch screen overlay when holding at odd angles when the screen is mostly white. I can see the grid you talk of when I hold the screen up to my nose. Thankfully I don't use my tablet in either way. While I'm sure there are other screens that don't exhibit those issues, they aren't pratical problems for me and do not indicate a manufacturing problem, just different technologies. If it bothers you that much that you don't have the best possible screen on the market take it back and get an Ipad. When samsung puts their 10" retinal display on their tablet sell your ipad and get that one.
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well to be honest I don't need it under my nose to see the grid I referred to.
Lying in bed with the tab propped on my chest (my preferred viewing position for nightime movie watching or web browsing in bed), looking at any images on screen from that distance (about 12 inches away) I can make out the pixel pattern of the Acer screen but not the Asus.
Trust me I wish the Acer screen was a sgood because in every other way it outdoes the Asus for me. But in the end On a device where the underlying OS and chipsets are the same, the screen is a big differentiator.
Sure the Usb port built in is nice, but most often I won't be using it as much of my video watching is streamed and my data access is stored in the cloud.
I am quite sure Asus will have connectors giving said funtionality to the transformer without need to buy the keyboard. As it is I saw an intriguing cable they will be selling which allows VGA out direcly from the Tab. This would be great when giving preentations for me. Instead of lugging a laptop, I can bring the tab and connect it and run powerpoint talk off the polaris app using vga out.
Do you think it might get better once its able to do 1080p in june?
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
I created this thread specifically for all the members to talk about the new 2k screen of the LG G3. The screen is the most important feature of the LG G3 and it is what LG brags about the most. For many of us including me, the screen will be the deciding factor of whether we buy the phone or not.How does the new 2k display panel perform in real life situations compared to other high end phone display panels like the Galaxy S5 or HTC One M8? Let's have a nice dedicated thread to the most important feature on this phone.
Ideas to talk about:
•Contrast levels
•How your content looks on it
•Your thoughts of it compared to the previous display you had.
•Any weird issues? (Screen interlacing, ghost issues)
•Color production
•Do you find it nice and worthwhile?
•How are those BLACK LEVELS (Important!)
•Any heat issues with the screen?
•Good high and low brightness levels?
All of the above... Thinking of upgrading from a nexus 5...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
I have seen a couple of reviews that say the max brightness is quite dim. Can someone who owns one confirm if this is true?
The G2 has the best display I have ever had and I don't want to downgrade to a duller screen (I am not bothered about the high res as the G2 has enough res. I want bright and vibrant!
Spewy1 said:
I have seen a couple of reviews that say the max brightness is quite dim. Can someone who owns one confirm if this is true?
The G2 has the best display I have ever had and I don't want to downgrade to a duller screen (I am not bothered about the high res as the G2 has enough res. I want bright and vibrant!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go to s5 ^^ it's too bright and too vibrant :laugh: (^^)
And ffs please, reviewers, don't simply declare that you can't distinguish individual pixels on 1080p as well as 2k and then conclude from that that the extra resolution doesn't make a difference. The question is: how do you subjectively experience visual items in 2k vs. 1080p--images, text, UI items, etc.. Past 325 dpi, a pixel is not an item, so it's irrelevant that you can't see one. Tons of those online reviews provide what the reviewer thinks their impression of the screen must be instead of the reviewer providing their true impression.
Canard caché said:
Go to s5 ^^ it's too bright and too vibrant :laugh: (^^)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't like the s5. Various reasons but mainly the cover over the charging port and overall design.
I love my g2 but need more memory (64gb minimum). I am worried about the screen on the g3 but the reviewers all focus on the resolution but I want to hear from real users about the real world experience of the screen.
Many thanks in advance for any input from owners of the phone.
Great Arstechica review as usual
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/06/lg-g3-review-a-great-phone-with-way-too-many-pixels/
That cover on the S5 (my wife has one), is for water proofing and easily ripped off.
Personally, I could use a screen with less pixels and longer screen-on time. I consider the screen resolution to be a minus. My preference is less pixels and make it a 6", like the HTC One Max I just returned after a week.
liqn7 said:
Great Arstechica review as usual
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/06/lg-g3-review-a-great-phone-with-way-too-many-pixels/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't agree with you there. They did the same move as all the other reviewers where they presume that the inability to distinguish individual pixels automatically means people can't see any overall difference in image quality:
Even at point-blank range, it's hard to resolve a single pixel. 1080p screens are also beautiful, though, and when looking at the two, side-by-side, we aren't convinced the jump to 1440p is necessary. More pixels only matter if you can see them, and on a ~5-inch device, it's almost impossible to tell the difference between a 1080p screen and the 1440p screen of the G3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I asked above that any reviewers here avoid that particular groupthink and tell us how they actually experience 2k vs. 1080p.
Jimmy34742 said:
Can't agree with you there. They did the same move as all the other reviewers where they presume that the inability to distinguish individual pixels automatically means people can't see any overall difference in image quality:
That's why I asked above that any reviewers here avoid that particular groupthink and tell us how they actually experience 2k vs. 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the most important caveat is that hardly any apps will be optimized for 2k display when the phone finally arrives.
HAving said that, kind of hard to judge don't you think?
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you?
theraker007 said:
I think the most important caveat is that hardly any apps will be optimized for 2k display when the phone finally arrives.
HAving said that, kind of hard to judge don't you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's logical. But so is the idea that the human eye can't distinguish pixels at a density greater than 326dpi. So, yeah, it comes down to subjective judgment calls. In that case, I'm interested in the subjective point of view of people who actually have one of these devices and their actual experience. We already know how do deduce logically what everyone's experience must be, and all the reviews I've read only do that. Images and text may appear sharper at a given distance from the eye in a way unrelated to whether or not you can distinguish an individual pixel.
The LG G3 has the best smartphone display I've seen: It's sharp, but it's also bright and has great color. The colors don't pop quite as much as on some of the better SuperAMOLED screens I've seen (such as on the just-announced Samsung Galaxy Tab S), but the sharpness is off the charts.
Comparing the G3's display to the one on the HTC One M8 (my current favorite Android phone), I felt the LG's was just as sharp, and a few details — such as drop shadows in Evernote — stood out slightly more. And even though colors weren't as vivid as on the HTC, the G3 had more natural skin tones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From Mashable's review. Everyone's eyes are different I guess.
Contrast was superb. Black text on white background — one of the most essential things a smartphone, or any display, needs to get right — really stood out. The ultra-sharp characters nearly jumped off the screen, and I couldn't discern individual pixels, no matter how close I put my eye to the screen.
So the LG G3's Quad HD display is more than just hype. But only a bit. There's nothing wrong with the HTC One M8's screen — or the Samsung Galaxy S5's or the iPhone 5S's for that matter. They're still mighty sharp, and can display great images, just not quite as sharply or as impressively as the LG G3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
---------- Post added at 06:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:24 AM ----------
hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I truly hope that the screen is great on this phone but I can't wait any longer and have just ordered an S5. I have waited for all the flagships to come out this year and was truly hoping that the G3 would be the one. Two of the most important things to me are brightness and battery life and I'm worried that with the G3 I would end up having the brightness cranked all the time and would have poor battery life as a result. Really wanted to try LG this time but lost my nerve
Tapped it!
hamad138 said:
Contrast and black levels are bad , i can garantee u that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously? Those are much more important then resolution to improve upon.
helikido said:
Seriously? Those are much more important then resolution to improve upon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes but not for marketing.
I'm most concerned with the viewing angles, black levels, contrast, and color accuracy. I'm definitely getting the G3 but I really don't want to have to play the panel lottery. I'd prefer a warmer display over a cooler display - as long as it's not noticeably pink/green/blue, I'm fine. A slight yellow/orange tint is okay, but obviously a calibrated display would be the best. My black Nexus 5's viewing angles aren't great, with the screen washing out at 30+ degree angle. My buddy's white Nexus 5 seems to have better viewing angles, so I'm not sure what the deal is. I'm pretty confident in LG's ability to produce good displays -- they pretty much made this phone just to show off their new display.
Actually, I'm now concerned about the narrowness of the bezel. Yes, it's a cool feature, and everyone dreams of a bezel-less phone, but I already have problems due to the narrowness of my S4's bezel. When I'm holding my phone for an extended time, referring to notes while speaking to people, my grip often gets interpreted by the system as a touch and hold. That pops up a dialog that I have to dismiss, and it's really obtrusive in real time situations. Sure, I could be more careful, but it's just too easy to make that problem happen during normal usage. It's not like I have big fat hands or a weird grip or anything. I've already been thinking that when we finally get bezel-free phones, there will have to be utilities to create a non-reactive border of pixels in a user-specified width, or else the user will accidentally be popping things up all over the place. At present, though, I think the G3's large size and tiny bezel are actually going to make it difficult to use the way I want to use it even though it's hardly bigger than my S4. You never know until you actually use it for a few days and try to adapt, but there's no way to do that without buying it, which I'm now hesitant to do.
You're holding it wrong ☺
Sent from a mobile Gadget...
[EDIT] Updated with more images
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Earl...suggests-the-phone-is-slightly-curved_id67046
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
It appears they've increased the size of the sensor for the camera, which is great, but if this is the G4 (along with the dimension listed in the article) then I'll have to pass. The G3 is big enough for me as it is and the design looks to be iterative. This wouldn't be able to compete with the S6/edge design-wise. Plus, at the purported size, it would be more of a Note competitor.
Japultra said:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Earl...suggests-the-phone-is-slightly-curved_id67046
It appears they've increased the size of the sensor for the camera, which is great, but if this is the G4 (along with the dimension listed in the article) then I'll have to pass. The G3 is big enough for me as it is and the design looks to be iterative. This wouldn't be able to compete with the S6/edge design-wise. Plus, at the purported size, it would be more of a Note competitor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How would this be a Note 4 competitor? it has a supposed 5.3 inch screen, thats smaller than our g3's.
sofir786 said:
How would this be a Note 4 competitor? it has a supposed 5.3 inch screen, thats smaller than our g3's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just speaking to the size of the actual handset. It is supposedly bigger than the G3., and that's just getting into phablet territory.
Looks nice in my opinion. G3 backcover is good as it is. No need to change it radically on the G4.
Only thing that I dislike is that the size increased which will lead to a lower screen-to-body ratio (one reason why I bought the G3).
What do you think, will the G4 have a curved screen as it looks like on this rendering or is it just the backcover design or bad angle?
Japultra said:
Just speaking to the size of the actual handset. It is supposedly bigger than the G3., and that's just getting into phablet territory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a tiny amount though, you're talking millimeters here. The note 4 is 153.5mm in height, theres just too much speculation, LG have always had really good screen to bezel ratio and body size, take for example comparing the LG G3 to the Sony Z series. We'll see soon enough though.
sofir786 said:
We'll see soon enough though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Official announcement expected when? This month?
Somewhere in April according to latest rumors. We can expect the new LG UX 4.0 this month.
natalya said:
Official announcement expected when? This month?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be announced by end of Q1 and released by Q2
sofir786 said:
Its a tiny amount though, you're talking millimeters here. The note 4 is 153.5mm in height, theres just too much speculation, LG have always had really good screen to bezel ratio and body size, take for example comparing the LG G3 to the Sony Z series. We'll see soon enough though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The dimension I'm more worried about is the width as that will affect the in-hand feel moreso than the height. At 76.5 mm, it's 2 mm wider than the G3 and 2 mm narrower than the Note 4. I can barely reach my thumb over to the opposite side as it is. I think that increase in width would definitely put the G4 safely into the "2 handed device" category.
At those dimensions, I can't imagine the screen being smaller than the G3. And knowing how LG loves having a great screen to body ratio, I actually think the screen might be a bit larger. But at the end of the day, these are just rumoured dimensions. The final product will most likely not be this wide. It just doesn't seem to match up.
I might get it. G3 is big enough, but I want a note so i could go bigger. Unless the screen to body ratio is drastically reduced. Need those tight bezels.
Japultra said:
The dimension I'm more worried about is the width as that will affect the in-hand feel moreso than the height. At 76.5 mm, it's 2 mm wider than the G3 and 2 mm narrower than the Note 4. I can barely reach my thumb over to the opposite side as it is. I think that increase in width would definitely put the G4 safely into the "2 handed device" category.
At those dimensions, I can't imagine the screen being smaller than the G3. And knowing how LG loves having a great screen to body ratio, I actually think the screen might be a bit larger. But at the end of the day, these are just rumoured dimensions. The final product will most likely not be this wide. It just doesn't seem to match up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reported specs make no sense at all lol tbh
sofir786 said:
The reported specs make no sense at all lol tbh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. With rumours of a smaller screen, a larger body makes no sense at all, given LG's track record.
I just picked up a G3 mere minutes ago, so no.
G4 have to be with full metal jacket, no more plastics please! This is only a rumor nothing else and I hope thats not true. If LG wants to be concurent G4 IMHO must have things are:
- metal(aluminum) unibody housing
- microSD slot
- Smaller display
- front facing speaker(s)
- and maybe capacitive buttons.
If they go for plastic housing I'm not interested because G3 is good enough!
I don't care about design that much, but I think that it should be metal body and front facing speakers, and screen to body ratio on G3 is perfect, so it makes no sense to reduce it.. What do you think G4 vs S6/ S6 edge vs One M9?
Sent from my GT-I8200N using XDA Free mobile app
lujki1 said:
I don't care about design that much, but I think that it should be metal body and front facing speakers, and screen to body ratio on G3 is perfect, so it makes no sense to reduce it.. What do you think G4 vs S6/ S6 edge vs One M9?
Sent from my GT-I8200N using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally, I'm not too impressed with what I'm seeing so far from the G4. Currently, I'm planning to pick up an S6 or S6 edge once it's released. The One M9 was unimpressive to me.
Not quite sure this is at all what it will be
Just saying:
its curved, G Flex territory, doubtful LG would do that
lock button is exactly the same as the original G Flex
Front is thesame as most mid-range phones LG anounced at MWC recently. Those were "knock-offs" of the G3(mid-range phones based of flagship), LG wont use that look on a completely knew flagship device
just sayin.....
Well i think G4 will have killer specs . On the other hand ,LG announced that will release something like a G Note thing that will be above the G series(specs probably) . If that rumor is confirmed later in 2015 i guess i wont upgrade from G3 to any flagship device like S6,M9, G4 etc.
If it has an OLED display of sorts then hell yeah. Although I do absolutely love my G3, I find the colours very underwhelming even when compared to my G2. The G2 screen, I find is arguably better with resolution aside.