Database Users

Type of display?

I've been doing some research, and not even the official spec sheet from Motorola mention what type of display the XOOM has other than "10.1” 1280x800 resolution" and "HD widescreen display".. AMOLED? IPS? Comparable to the iPad? I haven't seen any comments on the the quality of the display either.. like.. at all.. I'm very curious.
Very important feature you know, seeing as you are going to be staring at it do everything.

From a couple videos I have seen (purely speculation) it does not look to be amoled. If I had to guess I would say lcd like the ipad. From owning both a amoled (captivate) and a lcd (galaxy tab) both are nice but I prefer the amoled.
Sent from my SPH-P100 using XDA App

It's a TFT LCD touchscreen, WXGA (1280 x 800), 160DPI, 720p HD with 16:9 aspect ratio

I believe I also saw that Moto is using Gorilla Glass for the screen as well.

Darn, a transflective lcd would be the killer thing.... *sigh*

Its a 16:10 display not 16:9
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

So, we heard from our source that the iPad 2 would have a "super high resolution" Retina Display, we heard from AppleInsider that the iPad 2 is getting around 4X the graphics performance of the iPad, and of course there's the fact that the iPhone 4's Retina Display offered a pretty impressively painless upgrade path for developers -- an iPad 2 with a 2048 x 1536 screen is starting to sound less and less like the crazy dream of naive fanboys. But wait, there's more! A .png has been found in the iBooks 1.2 source files, dubbed Wood [email protected]. It's sized at 1536 x 800, while the old and busted Wood Tile.png in iBooks 1.1 was 768 x 400 -- that's 2X in each direction, or 4X the pixels, for anyone who's counting. Incontrovertible evidence? No, but we want to believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/17/ipad-2-retina-display-evidence-mounts-this-time-a-png-of-wood/
Compare the two if this ipad 2 rumor is true?

Bukem75 said:
Compare the two if this ipad 2 rumor is true?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most likely not true. The only displays sporting something close to that (WQXGA, since QXGA with 4:3 aspect ratios pretty much died off) are 27"-30" graphics professional monitors and will run you well over $1,000. I doubt they could shrink it down to tablet-sized, or at the very least make it cost-effective.

PLS LCD vs Super Amoled Plus

Hey guys
I'm thinking to buy the 7" Tab Plus or the 7.7" one(when they will appear ) and I was wondering if any of you have any experience with PLS LCD and Super Amoled Plus displays.
Which one is better,in terms of quality,power usage,etc
I googled for that but it didn't help much,and i'd prefer to hear from someone who saw in real life both displays

As we know both are made bu samsungand both are the best in market (even better than the ipad IPS Screen ) but Pls screen has more natural colours like what we see with our eye in real world . Amoled colours are so vivid like animation movies ,etc but it is very good in power saving and better in black color . Finally it depends on your taste and how you prefere to see colors and you should see both side by side to decide but personally I hated my friends galaxy s2 after I compared it to my galaxy tab 10.1
advice : (buy galaxy tab 7.7 higher resolution , better processor ,thinner and easier to handle )
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

thanks for your answer
seems it will be a tough choice,and i will have to wait till both will be on stores so i can compare myself although the 7.7 price is kinda much..around 700 euros
I like the natural colours so i guess i will go with 7 plus
Anyway,in the meantime if someone else has other opinions pls share

I would say Super AMOLED Plus hands down. It's true that the AMOLED displays portray images more vivid and with very deep contrast, but I wouldn't say that the colors are unnatural, in fact I find it to be a major advantage of the 7.7, it will make movies that much better. The Super AMOLED Plus displays also don't have a backlight so they are much thinner and use less power. This is technology much more advanced than the panels in today's TVs. The Super PLS displays Samsung makes (what the 7.0 Plus has) are also very good, some say better than the IPS displays in tablets, but it's still an LCD, not quite as good as the Super AMOLED Plus in my opinion.
Also do not forget that the 7.7 display is higher resolution at 1280 x 800, the 7.0 Plus is 1024 x 600, and in my opinion it will make a big difference especially in Honeycomb. But don't let any of us persuade you in your decision, if you can, go look at them side by side in person and decide for yourself. We don't know what the 7.7 will cost yet, but I imagine the 7.0 Plus will be cheaper so if that is an important factor for you then it wouldn't be unwise to consider it.
As far as other specs go, the 7.7 is a bit thinner and lighter and has a bigger battery, a slightly faster processor, and a 64GB option.

Ok,thank you both for answer
Well yeah the price is an important factor..the 7 plus will cost 300 euros and the 7.7 will cost almost 700 euros so I will stick with the 7 plus for now
Here is a video which shows both side by side if someone else is interested to see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHOxPJBgieg
My first conclusion is that the super amoled looks brighter and colours are different than the ips pls one,but they ask too much..i will get it in a year or so when it will be half of price

Optimus G Pro vs Galaxy Note 2

Hey guys i need help with this list, i have never used a LG phone, Im listing the advantages of both plz let me know if i have left something out
Galaxy Note 2
S Pen
microSD, up to 64 GB
Stereo FM
True Blacks (AMOLED Display)
Air View
64 GB storage
Split Screen Mode
Simultaneous Video & Image Recording
Removable Battery
Optimus G Pro
13MP Camera
Lighter
1080p Resolution
Higher PPI
Brighter Display (IPS Display)
True Whites (IPS Display)
Adobe Flash Built In
2.4 MP Front Camera
Slimmer Bezel
Curved Glass

Definitely g pro or xperia z if you can afford or s4 if you can wait.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app

I've seen a lot of people post "true blacks" and "true whites" for IPS, blacks on the latest generation Samoled are actually getting brighter as compared to the Galaxy S, Whites on the IPS on the other hand are a bit of a blue shade (cool color tone) but thats just preference and I really like the whites on IPS compared to Samoled.
With that said, Im also interested on the Optimus Go Pro see if it can give the Note 2 a beating!

13mp pixel does not make the camera better. The colors are better and low light is MUCH better on Samsung.
I have a note 2 and was deciding for a while between those exact phones. I was worried about the screen... but it looks beautiful.
One thing weird though... you have to go into the android settings menu and go to "display" change the screen mode to neutral. The standard colors on the screen are way too cartoony. I do not know what this is default. It almost made me not get the phone until I saw that this can be changed.

I like the Note II's screen size actually if slightly larger better yet,so what is the size of the LG comparing to the Note,if its smaller I understand why you have failed to mention...

wait for Galaxy IV

cyprusx said:
Hey guys i need help with this list, i have never used a LG phone, Im listing the advantages of both plz let me know if i have left something out
Galaxy Note 2
S Pen
microSD, up to 64 GB
Stereo FM
True Blacks (AMOLED Display)
Air View
64 GB storage
Split Screen Mode
Simultaneous Video & Image Recording
Removable Battery
Optimus G Pro
13MP Camera
Lighter
1080p Resolution
Higher PPI
Brighter Display (IPS Display)
True Whites (IPS Display)
Adobe Flash Built In
2.4 MP Front Camera
Slimmer Bezel
Curved Glass
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
theres not a single valid reason there on Gpro that beats up the note.. probably if you mention 5,6" screen..? does it have it? oh wait its less than 5" meaning its considered a downgrade for any note owner and.. for the record.. its an LG and it runs ICS still and it has a locked down bootloader](meaning no custom roms at all), with LG your device most likely will end up its life with the same OS it came out.. and all the things I mentioned are the main reasons of WHY never in your life get an LG lol.. heck even the nexus model its having hard times hehe

it's clear if you put this post in this thread it's sure the people tell you that samsung is the best. I prefer samsung.

Dude what are you talking about this phone is 5.5 in your thinking of the first optimus G

Cant we have true blacks & true whites at the same time..?
__________________________________
via GT-N71OO using XDA App-HD

You've already answered it yourself. You listed all the nice features that make the Note 2 worthy, but you only listed hardware specs that aren't really that noticeable (1080p vs 720p is still not a big difference - refer to reviews of you want) and can be disregarded. Adobe flash is easily installable, and the camera on the Note 2 is superior in low light and color reproduction.
From a neutral standpoint, I'd go with N2, namely due to thermal issues on the LG OG Pro, lack of stylus and slow updates by LG.
Oh, and did I mention unlocked bootloader out of the box and extremely easy, 15-second root installation?

Extra features on the Optimus g pro
Full hd
13 mpx camera
Snapdragon 600 (the new version)
32gb inbuilt memory
3140 mah battery
But you expect things to get better with new releases. ..the only thing I think is of more in that is the snapdragon 600... rest I don't think much of
scribbled from "the phab" (the note 2 -N7100)

pakure said:
Extra features on the Optimus g pro
Full hd
13 mpx camera
Snapdragon 600 (the new version)
32gb inbuilt memory
3140 mah battery
But you expect things to get better with new releases. ..the only thing I think is of more in that is the snapdragon 600... rest I don't think much of
scribbled from "the phab" (the note 2 -N7100)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't have the S600, it has the S4 Pro, same as the Xperia Z.
EDIT : Yup, it has the S600, apologies! But still, it comes down to whether you want raw power or useful features.

G Pro vs NoteII
G Pro has 13 MP BIS by Sony(Exmor series) whereas Note 2 has 8MP BIS by Sony.
So obviuosly the LG will be on par or better.
G Pro has 1080p LCD display. Its higher res, better colors. While Note 2 has 720p display with battery efficiency and vibrant colours. Almost same. But the LG wins.
The G Pro has the Snapdragon S4 Pro 600 (even faster) + Adreno320. The Note2 has Exynos Quad + Mali 400 GPU.
On CPU terms the LG is somewhat ahead, but the graphics processor has almost double the performance.
LG wins again.
Note2 has S-Pen2.0. None on the LG Optimus G Pro. Shame
Nifty Samsung bouquet of features like S-Play,Tilt, Direct call. Not there on the LG.
Samsung has a better resale value and service network.
LG will not be easily available and will be quite expensive.
The LG Optimus G Pro is a new product which builds on the great hardware that its predecessor provides. Its obviously better.
But I love the Note 2 more. Its way more functional.
Just my 2 cents.

Doesn't the LG also have wireless charging? Not that much of a difference, but worth noting for some. I still core GN2 or GN8!
HellRa1SeR said:
G Pro vs NoteII
G Pro has 13 MP BIS by Sony(Exmor series) whereas Note 2 has 8MP BIS by Sony.
So obviuosly the LG will be on par or better.
G Pro has 1080p LCD display. Its higher res, better colors. While Note 2 has 720p display with battery efficiency and vibrant colours. Almost same. But the LG wins.
The G Pro has the Snapdragon S4 Pro 600 (even faster) + Adreno320. The Note2 has Exynos Quad + Mali 400 GPU.
On CPU terms the LG is somewhat ahead, but the graphics processor has almost double the performance.
LG wins again.
Note2 has S-Pen2.0. None on the LG Optimus G Pro. Shame
Nifty Samsung bouquet of features like S-Play,Tilt, Direct call. Not there on the LG.
Samsung has a better resale value and service network.
LG will not be easily available and will be quite expensive.
The LG Optimus G Pro is a new product which builds on the great hardware that its predecessor provides. Its obviously better.
But I love the Note 2 more. Its way more functional.
Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Better colors on the LG is purely subjective.

Assuming both displays are calibrated correctly then definitely AMOLED. I am not saying IPS is bad.

EarlZ said:
Better colors on the LG is purely subjective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LCD displays reproduce exact real-life colours, whereas AMOLEDs sometimes saturate colors. But I do get your point. Some people do like vibrant and colorful displays.

HellRa1SeR said:
LCD displays reproduce exact real-life colours, whereas AMOLEDs sometimes saturate colors. But I do get your point. Some people do like vibrant and colorful displays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We all like vibrant color displays, we'd all have to stick with our old devices if we don't.
@TOPIC - The only thing I don't like with AMOLEDs are the bluish white tones...
There's no doubt newer models of smartphones are designed to out-do the older ones even if the model is just 6-months-old.

If battery life better, go Op Pro!
Sent from my GT-N7100

Galaxy S4 mini

Samsung annonced officially, the Samsung Galaxy S4 mini.
it has 4.3" qHD disply, android 4.2.2 but with out most of the features of S4 (like no double shot, no 360 panorama), has S Health but with out S4 sensors like temperature sensor, barometer and humidity sensor
chipset is most likely Snapdragon 400 at 1.7Ghz with 1.5Gb of RAM and internal storage is 8Gb with Micro SD card slot for expanding it.
rest of connectivity options and usual, wifi, bluetooth,GPS with GLONASS etc...
also has IR blaster for remote controlling.
the phone has dimensions of 124.6 x 61.3 x 8.94mm and weighs 107g which is cool
battery is user replacable and is 1900mAh.
no word on pricing. samsung will show it off on June 20 and most likely to reveal pricing then.
available color options are Black Mist and White Frost.
i kinda like it except the qHD screen. it should have been at least 720p but all its success depends on its pricing.
what do u guys think?

The SIII Mini always struck me as a bit pointless, having neither the spec to appeal to those that like phones with a bit of muscle or the price point for those that want a decent phone on a budget. It didn't really satisfy anyone and I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see more of the same with this.

Definitely not more of the same, but then the s3 mini was especially useless. Rumors/leaks have the ATT version of the s4 mini at 720p (presumably pentile, but no confirmation). But gsmarena just confirmed that the version announced for europe is NOT pentile. It's got the same RGB s stripe as the Note 2. At 4.25" with qHD, it has a very respectable 259ppi that is at least as sharp as a Galaxy S3, and maybe slightly sharper. I'd almost as soon have RGB qHD as 720p pentile, so at least I know for sure what I'm getting. It comes with air view and multiwindow, which is kinda surprising.
http://www.androidbeat.com/2013/05/gs4-mini-720p/
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_mini-review-932.php
If this is $300, I'm gonna be very happy. If $350, I'm gonna be a little happy. If $400, I'm gonna be not very happy, but might get it anyway.

fortunz said:
Definitely not more of the same, but then the s3 mini was especially useless. Rumors/leaks have the ATT version of the s4 mini at 720p (presumably pentile, but no confirmation). But gsmarena just confirmed that the version announced for europe is NOT pentile. It's got the same RGB s stripe as the Note 2. At 4.25" with qHD, it has a very respectable 259ppi that is at least as sharp as a Galaxy S3, and maybe slightly sharper. I'd almost as soon have RGB qHD as 720p pentile, so at least I know for sure what I'm getting. It comes with air view and multiwindow, which is kinda surprising.
http://www.androidbeat.com/2013/05/gs4-mini-720p/
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_mini-review-932.php
If this is $300, I'm gonna be very happy. If $350, I'm gonna be a little happy. If $400, I'm gonna be not very happy, but might get it anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I saw it in a video (closely), and it's not as sharp as S3.
I don't know but it's clueless to compare the number of subpixels to say which is sharper.
With the lower ppi, Note 2 is still a little bit sharper than S3 because they scale it the same as S3 (by adjusting ppi) and no pentile effect on Note 2. But they cannot do the same on a smaller screen like S4 mini-

hung2900 said:
I saw it in a video (closely), and it's not as sharp as S3.
I don't know but it's clueless to compare the number of subpixels to say which is sharper.
With the lower ppi, Note 2 is still a little bit sharper than S3 because they scale it the same as S3 (by adjusting ppi) and no pentile effect on Note 2. But they cannot do the same on a smaller screen like S4 mini-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's clueless to think you can make a screen sharper through scaling (presumably, you meant adjusting "dpi"). And to claim subpixels have nothing to do with sharpness but still hail the Note 2's lack of a pentile effect as responsible for it's sharpness. What do you think the pentile effect is? And to think you can divine screen sharpness through an encoded web video. Trust me, you can't.
You can pixelate software elements through improper scaling, but you can't sharpen a low density screen through software scaling. For example if you zoom in enough (a form of 'scaling') on a small image even viewing it on a super sharp screen, yeah, it'll look bad, but that's not the screen's problem. If you've got a low density screen, the sharpest of images will look crappy no matter how you scale them. The S4 mini is sharp for the same reason the Note 2 looks sharp: because they share the same complete RGB matrix and almost the same density.
Pentile is nothing more or less than false advertising, a way of artificially inflating the raw spec. It's not the worst thing in the world, it just requires a much higher purported ppi to reach the same sharpness as an RGB matrix screen.

Again like the S3 mini, Samsung is trying to milk more money out of the S4 series but now targeting the mid-range side. Average consumers will probably buy this as there is an "S4" tag on it and is much cheaper than it's big brother.

fortunz said:
It's clueless to think you can make a screen sharper through scaling (presumably, you meant adjusting "dpi"). And to claim subpixels have nothing to do with sharpness but still hail the Note 2's lack of a pentile effect as responsible for it's sharpness. What do you think the pentile effect is? And to think you can divine screen sharpness through an encoded web video. Trust me, you can't.
You can pixelate software elements through improper scaling, but you can't sharpen a low density screen through software scaling. For example if you zoom in enough (a form of 'scaling') on a small image even viewing it on a super sharp screen, yeah, it'll look bad, but that's not the screen's problem. If you've got a low density screen, the sharpest of images will look crappy no matter how you scale them. The S4 mini is sharp for the same reason the Note 2 looks sharp: because they share the same complete RGB matrix and almost the same density.
Pentile is nothing more or less than false advertising, a way of artificially inflating the raw spec. It's not the worst thing in the world, it just requires a much higher purported ppi to reach the same sharpness as an RGB matrix screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you understand my opinion, maybe due to my bad English. To say clearer, what I mean is the Note 2's screen's scale is basically the same as Galaxy S3 with the same 320 dpi - zooming from 4.8 to 5.55 inch. This means, a same font of texts, a word with a length of 120 pixels on S3 (1/6 of the total length) is still 120 pixels on Note 2 (also 1/6 of the total length), but 15.625% bigger in real-size (what you actually see). So is the result is what you can see clear on S3, you can see it CLEARER on Note 2. That's is the technichque Samsung usually implements, like on Note 8.0 that make it much more sharper than iPad mini in browsing. If we compare a same line of texts with 5mm of "real size", the result from a screen like One X basically has 18% more pixels to illustrate the detail of the text, which results in being clearer than Note 2. And if you really have a Note 2 (i'm using it), when visiting some websites in desktop mode (like xda forum, lol), the text is very small and not crisp anymore.
But how about Galaxy S4 Mini? "The S4 mini is sharp for the same reason the Note 2 looks sharp"? OK, now we will consider the same thing as Note 2 above. For a line of texts equivalent to 1/6 total length of the screen, it takes only 93.33 pixels, which means noticeably less than S3 and Note 2 with smaller "real size" also, so it cannot be as sharp as S3. And in fact, Samsung did rescale from 320dpi to 240 dpi on Galaxy S4 Mini, which also means for a same font of texts, the number of pixels for displaying increases about 15.3%, so from 93.33 pixels I said above now it is appox. 108 pixels, which is not too far from Galaxy S3, and the payoff is the screen is cramped. So we cannot say "because Note 2 is sharp so Galaxy S4 Mini is also sharp"
About Pentile screen, it is not totally "nothing more or less than false advertising", but more like "false understanding of the major and the misleading criticisms". Why? Because most of people don't understand what is "Pentile". In fact, this "technology" can ONLY be used on OLED (AMOLED) technogy, which has the uneven luminance and lumious time of different color subpixels. Even experts cannot show the "exactly" ppi of an Pentile Amoled screen (because even with Pentile, different stripes layout leads to different result), while some people try to do an easier way that comparing the total number of subpixels, which is totally false. In fact, Galaxy S4 has 623 subpixels/inch, slightly higher than Blackberry Z10 (615) and iPhone 5 (565), but it is MUCH more sharper and not really different from the normal RGB 1080p screen like Xperia Z.
With Pentile screen, the main culprit of all criticism is not the lack of subpixels, but the uneven scale of pixels (because they're not real pixels) and uneven big-small gaps redundant. That's why they call the subpixels layout of S4 is innovative while still Pentile, because it is much much better than the traditional matrix on Galaxy S3 and together with the high ppi reduces most of Pentile problem (in fact, with traditional matrix, even with 441 ppi probably there will be something there)

Does or can S4 Mini have stock or by a custom rom have Air & Motion gestures ??

AndyTimE said:
Does or can S4 Mini have stock or by a custom rom have Air & Motion gestures ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the sensor isn't there.

i wish this could be my next phone

I'm considering this too as my next phone.
Compact, powerful, enough RAM and a non-pentile qHD display.

mpokwsths said:
I'm considering this too as my next phone.
Compact, powerful, enough RAM and a non-pentile qHD display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was recently announced that CM10.1 is being prepared for i9195 version. Is there any info of whether it will also be supported for i9190 international version (without LTE and NFC)?
I also suppose we need a separate ROOT thread for it as nor 9192 neither 9195 procedures might fit.

mpokwsths said:
I'm considering this too as my next phone.
Compact, powerful, enough RAM and a non-pentile qHD display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Me too
But only if i will find it around to 300€ in next months, and if there will be a good support on XDA

Hi Is there usb otg on galaxy s4 mini ?

KaptanJack026 said:
Hi Is there usb otg on galaxy s4 mini ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at the moment. MHL isn't supported either.
metaxaos said:
It was recently announced that CM10.1 is being prepared for i9195 version. Is there any info of whether it will also be supported for i9190 international version (without LTE and NFC)?
I also suppose we need a separate ROOT thread for it as nor 9192 neither 9195 procedures might fit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No info. There isn't a root for the 9190 yet - the 9192 and 9195 procedures do not work on the 9190 and will probably brick your device.

hello, does anyone know when this phone will be available in the usa? can not find any info on this
if this is in the wrong forum please move, thanks

Which phone should i buy? sIII or s4 mini

Get the S4 mini if you want to future-proof yourself.
The S3 mini specifications are quite outdated

Whosat said:
Get the S4 mini if you want to future-proof yourself.
The S3 mini specifications are quite outdated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, i said between the normal s3 4.7" and s4mini. S3is cheaper here and has more ROMs and development

soraxx said:
No, i said between the normal s3 4.7" and s4mini. S3is cheaper here and has more ROMs and development
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, you've mentioned the main benefit of getting the S3 I guess.
Also, the S3 has quad-core as opposed to the dual-core S4 mini. S3 has 1 GB of ram only though.
There are also more accessories for the S3 than for the S4 mini because the mini has a smaller market and is also a newer device.

Happy with the 720p screen?

I've seen a couple of articles talking about the Samsung Galaxy S5, which is rumored to have a QHD 2k screen ( 2560 x 1440).
Just curious what others thought. Personally, I went from the HTC Rezound (which was also a 720p screen, but smaller at 4.3", so a higher PPI) to the Moto X, but I love the Moto X screen. I honestly can't imagine having a screen that's any sharper. I almost don't want a higer-rez screen, since it would probably just be a waste of battery power.
I'm sure there are some folks who are spec-oriented, but I feel all of the trade-offs made by the Moto X (720p screen, dual core, etc) were exactly right. Great screen, great battery, responsive UI, etc.

The newer SOCs well be more efficient, it won't have issues delivering fast performance for 1080p while getting good battery if well optimized, especially if reduced to dual core like the MotoX.
The MotoX screen have RGB matrix so it would have more subpixels than a Pentile and Diamond matrix AMOLED screen of the same resolution.
sent via tapatalk

I switched from the HTC One which had the most amazing screen. The Moto X is fine by all means though, it's vibrant and clear and 720P is more than adequate. I think I'm a sucker for AMOLED as well, the blackest of blacks, I'll never go backs. I've owned a GNex and a Note 1 and I feel this AMOLED is calibrated very well. Not quite as cartoony looking as my brother's Note 3.

The screen is 4.x" diagonally. If you can see a difference between 720p and 1080p, you need to take off your magnifying glasses and move the phone away from your face. While I'm all about bigger and better specs, a 2k res screen on a phone isn't necessary.

Yes

Yes. Samsung can make a millionp screen and I still wouldn't touch them. Lol
Sent from my Moto X cellular telephone...

The Moto X was engineered to be the best balance of hardware/screen/size/battery etc available. To that end the 720p screen is perfect. When the same balance can be achieved with a higher resolution screen then I will want it.
You will notice this is very similar to how Apple engineers a phone, no hardware is included that isn't optimized and balanced. They don't force a feature into the phone for the sake of marketing that really hurts the overall product balance.

The MotoX screen is fine but not as good as other Android like S4. I am happy with battery life and screen on time though so its a trade off.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

someguyatx said:
The MotoX screen is fine but not as good as other Android like S4. I am happy with battery life and screen on time though so its a trade off.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My only reference is my GS3 and the screen on the X is every bit as nice.
Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

Yes the X screen is nicer than GS3
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

I'm OK with it. But really wish it had a 1080. Want from htc one to moto x and can tell the difference

c19932 said:
I'm OK with it. But really wish it had a 1080. Want from htc one to moto x and can tell the difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? My son has the HTC One and we compared them, and I preferred the Moto X
KCJunkman

Ya know if the Moto x had a 1080 screen....battery wouldn't be as good. Personally I'll take the extra battery life. Screen looks good to me.
Sent from my Moto X cellular telephone...

I have the note 3 and honestly, the difference between the 1080p screen of the Note 3 isn't that much better than the 720p screen of the Moto X. They are both very sharp and as was stated above, I would rather the increased battery life than the sharper display. But in all fairness, I'm no pixel junkie so the 720p screen doesn't bother me at all.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using xda app-developers app

The only reason I was even remotely interested in the Moto X was because it carried an HD display-size: was AMOLED and was RGB-like matrix. The rest like usability and one-handed nature was icing on the cake. A FHD display is stupid and impractical for most common cases: the rare exception for me is reading textbooks and other small-font paragraphs: in which case, you're using the wrong tool for the task. Get a tablet or the 5.5"+ displays. The only other phone with a similar display is the Note 2 and that phone completely contradicts what makes the Moto X attractive.
However though, food for thought, anyone looking for a backup phone should consider a Note 2.

Yes, because I can't see the difference between this and a 1080p on a screen of this size (and probably neither can you).

I've never had a 1080p screen but I can't imagine anything being noticeably sharper than the Moto X's. That aside, the vast majority of the time you're not thinking about whether or not you can see traces of pixels when staring at the thing, you're just using it to actually do things and in that context brightness, color balance/saturation, and contrast are what you actually notice. All of those are great on the Moto, now every LCD screen I see looks washed-out to me!
Until batteries get a whole lot better, I don't see the point in 1080p for anything less than a 5" screen. It's like buying a 40" 4K TV... Just an opinion of course!

These resolution comparisons on screens smaller than five inches are getting ridiculous. 720 or 1080 really makes no difference on a screen this small. Unless you look at your phone with a magnifying glass or microscope the human eye can't really tell the difference. Backlight makes a bigger difference than anything. Anyway here is an article from professionals that will give a little more insight.
http://lifehacker.com/do-i-need-a-1080p-display-in-my-smartphone-1450793273

Samsung = e-penis enlarger...

I think the 720p screen is a big part of the reason the device is as snappy as it is, as well as good on battery. I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p but it's tough without a side-by-side. The resolution is perfect IMO.