Database Users

Non square pixels ?

I've noticed that Leo is somewhat wide, and still it has same resolution as other phones.
It has resolution 480x800, which is width=0.6 * height.
That huge Russian review states that Leo has display dimensions 88x56 mm. That makes it 0.63 * height. Which would mean the pixels are not square, it is 5% wider.
That is not much and it would be hardly noticeable. But if you rotate the screen, it will be 5% in other direction, and the difference would be 10%.
Question is .. is it noticeable ?
At least it should be measurable. If you have Leo, could you recheck my theory ? Display perfect circle or square (such bitmap should be easy to make on PC), and use ruler to measure the width and height on Leo's display. Also try that in landscape mode.
If indeed the pixels are not square, I'm interested how is it noticeable. Especially on people it should be visible, especially if you switch from landscape to portrait and back. On portrait all should be wider, on landscape all should be thinner.

88x56 cant be correct cause it is not 5:3 and this also imply a 4,1" display and not a 4,3" one ^^. Conclusion: The values arent correct . The pixel are squared.

It's probably not that noticable, or rather doesn't matter as soon as you get used to it. The pixels on my laptop (Thinkpad SL500) aren't square either, but as soon as you get used to it it's no problem

NetDwarf said:
88x56 cant be correct cause it is not 5:3 and this also imply a 4,1" display and not a 4,3" one ^^. Conclusion: The values arent correct . The pixel are squared.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point. Still .. what is the real display size ?
Leo surely seems wider aspect ratio then my current Xperia, which has the same resolution, and perfect 0.6 ratio.

I searched for some pictures on google and measured the aspect ratio on them, and it looks ok. So the impression comes probably just from the fact that Leo does not have hardware keys and the part above display is quite short too.
Good ! Eh .. now I simply HAVE to buy it, right ?

to be 4.3in diagonal (109.22mm) AND be square pixel at 800x480 the lcd size has to be 93.65mm X 56mm.
Is is that? i don't know, but it would fit in the frame reported at 120.5mm x 67mm.

I just held a ruler next to my screen and measured the screen. The size is 56x94. The are approximate sizes no exact measurements...

Thanx, that makes this non-issue.

Exact Screen Size?

I'm trying to figure out exactly how much larger the viewable screen area is versus a Nexus One. (I.E. a percentage)
I know it's 3.7 vs 4.0 but that doesn't tell the exact dimensions (i.e. square inches).
Does anyone know the actual width and height of just the screen for the Nexus S? (Is it the exact same screen as the Galaxy S series?)

Paul22000 said:
I'm trying to figure out exactly how much larger the viewable screen area is versus a Nexus One. (I.E. a percentage)
I know it's 3.7 vs 4.0 but that doesn't tell the exact dimensions (i.e. square inches).
Does anyone know the actual width and height of just the screen for the Nexus S? (Is it the exact same screen as the Galaxy S series?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it *is* the exact screen size as a galaxy s.

HAH! That's funny, if I put in galaxy s exact screen size into google, the top result is this thread!!
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=galaxy s exact screen size&fp=1&cad=b
Too bad none of the results actually show the dimensions...

Paul22000 said:
HAH! That's funny, if I put in galaxy s exact screen size into google, the top result is this thread!!
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=galaxy s exact screen size&fp=1&cad=b
Too bad none of the results actually show the dimensions...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, my trig is quite rusty, but given that the screen is 16x9, and the diagonal measurement is 4", then the length and width are calculable:
length: 3.4862"
width: 1.9612"
Compare that to a 4.3" display (evo or droid x)
length: 3.7477
width: 2.1083
Does that help?

rhca50 said:
Okay, my trig is quite rusty, but given that the screen is 16x9, and the diagonal measurement is 4", then the length and width are calculable:
length: 3.4862"
width: 1.9612"
Compare that to a 4.3" display (evo or droid x)
length: 3.7477
width: 2.1083
Does that help?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Forgot to measure the Nexus 1:
length: 3.2248"
width: 1.8141"

Where did you find that the aspect ratio is 16:9? 16/9 != 800/480...
Assuming the pixels are perfectly square, then a 4" diagonal would yield: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+16%3Dx^2%2B%28800%2F480*x%29^2
So the shorter end is ~2.058 inches and the longer is just 2.058*800/480 ~= 3.43

dinan said:
Where did you find that the aspect ratio is 16:9? 16/9 != 800/480...
Assuming the pixels are perfectly square, then a 4" diagonal would yield: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+16%3Dx^2%2B%28800%2F480*x%29^2
So the shorter end is ~2.058 inches and the longer is just 2.058*800/480 ~= 3.43
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The pixels aren't square. That's why you can't use them as a measurement.
Check out this magnification of an ipad display to see the example: They're likely a rectangle in the 3x2 ratio (or something close to that ratio).
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/08/pictures-kindle-and-ipad-screens-under-microscope/

Ok well I don't know then. The pixels on this screen aren't the same as the iPad's since the iPad is an RGB LCD, and SAMOLED is RGBG where the blue and red pixels are larger than the greens. I suppose I'll have to do it the old fashioned way and use a ruler on my Vibrant screen lol
rhca50 said:
The pixels aren't square. That's why you can't use them as a measurement.
Check out this magnification of an ipad display to see the example: They're likely a rectangle in the 3x2 ratio (or something close to that ratio).
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/08/pictures-kindle-and-ipad-screens-under-microscope/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

dinan said:
Ok well I don't know then. The pixels on this screen aren't the same as the iPad's since the iPad is an RGB LCD, and SAMOLED is RGBG where the blue and red pixels are larger than the greens. I suppose I'll have to do it the old fashioned way and use a ruler on my Vibrant screen lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good point... I'm assuming the SAMOLED still uses the 3 color system where some combination of RGB are lit up per pixel. Based solely on magified LCDs, it looks like the width of the column of pixels is about as wide as the height of two of the 3 colors... I'm guessing a the 3:2 ratio based on eyeballing it. Either way, I still think the pixels aren't perfectly square, hence 16X9 being 800x480 pixels...
Really, we're talking about a difference that is so small that I would think the OP would have a good idea of the difference in screen size whether the ratio was 16x9 or 15x9...

rhca50 said:
Okay, my trig is quite rusty, but given that the screen is 16x9, and the diagonal measurement is 4", then the length and width are calculable:
length: 3.4862"
width: 1.9612"
Compare that to a 4.3" display (evo or droid x)
length: 3.7477
width: 2.1083
Does that help?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no standard regarding ratios for phones.

I ended up going to Best Buy and actually measuring out the screen size with a tape measure...
Here's what I found:
Nexus One: 80.5mm x 48mm = 3864 sq mm
Nexus S: 86mm x 52mm = 4472 sq mm
4472 / 3864 = 15.735% larger viewing area
(Contrast this to 4.0 / 3.7 = "8.11%" larger, which is clearly nowhere near the actual viewable area difference, which is why I was looking for the exact dimensions.)
In any case, there you have it: The screen on the Nexus S has almost 16% more viewable space than the Nexus One.
Now to decide if it's significant enough to warrant the purchase?...
I know the LG Optimus 2X's screen probably won't come anywhere near the quality of the Super AMOLED on the Nexus S...

Note 1 vs. Note 2 vs. S3 "SPPI" Comparison

So before I post this i'd just like to say this is my 1st post, and because of that I was not able to share links to the websites that I wanted to. So if you would like to visit the websites that I point to where I have only quotes with no links, just Google "oled-info note 2 display" and the first website to come up should be where I posted essentially the same thing and you can see the websites I am pointing to. Thanks!
Ok so all of the talk on different articles and forums about the Note 2's display about it not being a pentile, but also not being the SAMOLED+ with the typical RGB stripe got me thinking. Before the pentile discussion began to get heated all over the web, everyone was concerned about their phones' PPI. But obviously once the pentile displays came out and veered away from the typical RGB stripe (maybe there have been other display types b4 the pentile but that’s kind of irrelevant to the point I am going to make) there became a whole ‘nother thing to consider when it came to display clarity. IMHO this clarity comes down to the smallest part that makes up the picture, and that, for all intents and purposes, is the sub-pixel, not the pixel itself.
Now personally when the Note 2 was 1st announced I was pissed that Samsung decided to make the screen bigger and lower the pixel count because I currently have the S3 with Sprint and for me personally, the bigger the screen the better because I use my phone for TV and movies all the time. Now I understood that they wanted to have a 16:9 aspect ratio, but then why not just increase the horizontal, or both, resolution, not decrease the vertical! Especially since it was not a SAMOLED+, but just a regular SAMOLED which obviously meant another pentile right? But then I started reading into the screen and found out that even though it does not follow the typical RGB stripe, it does in fact have all 3 red, green & blue sub-pixels in each pixel instead of sharing pixels like the pentile does, which is shown very clearly in this picture:"".
So this got me curious because as I stated before, at least to my eyes, the sub-pixel count seems to have a greater affect on image quality than just the pixel count itself, which to me was proven when I got my Sprint Galaxy S2 and even though it had the same number of pixels with a .52" larger screen than my original Galaxy S, the screen clarity on my S2 was noticeably better which, if you dont consider the sub-pixel difference, should not be true. So I decided to do a comparison between what I am going to call the "SPPI" (Sub-Pixels Per Inch) of the original Note, the S3, and the Note 2 as I own a S3 and as much as I would love to have a larger screen, I really would not be happy with the huge loss of quality that would normally come when you stretch the same amount of pixels by .7" as the S2 has a 4.8" screen and the Note 2's display is 5.5", and what I found out really surprised me.
So here's the math of how I got to my conclusions. 1st of all according to the information from Samsung that can be found here: "" the sub-pixel count on the SAMOLED WVGA screen is 768,000 and for the SAMOLED+ WVGA screen it is 1,152,000. Now a WVGA screen is 800x480, which comes to 384,000 total pixels, the Note 1 is 1280x800 which = 1,024,000 and the S3 and Note 2 both are 1280x720 equaling 921,600. Now at this point I needed to figure out the number of sub-pixels on each phone by doing a simple algebraic comparison of the number of pixels to sub-pixels between the WVGA screen and each one of the other phones, which is done here:
Note 1: 384,000/768,000=1,024,000/x and x = 2,048,000 sub-pixels
Galaxy S3: 384,000/768,000=921,600/x and x = 1,843,200 sub-pixels
Note 2: 384,000/1,152,000=921,600/x and x= 2,764,800 sub-pixels
Now at his point I needed to take the aspect ratio of each phone, which is 16:10 for the 1st Note and 16:9 for the other 2 phones, and use the formula on this website to get the horizontal and vertical “sub-pixel resolution”: "". In doing this I came up with the following resolutions:
Note 1: 1,810 x 1,131
Galaxy S3: 1,810 x 1,018
Note 2: 2,217 x 1,247
I then put that information in with the screen sizes in this website: "" and came up with the following “SPPI” results:
Note 1: 402.7 “SPPI”
Galaxy S3: 432.6 “SPPI”
Note 2: 462.5 “SPPI”
So in a similar scenario as the Galaxy S vs. S2 screen clarity comparison, as long as my calculations are correct, theoretically not only should the Note 2 have a better clarity than the original one despite having a larger screen and lower resolution, it should also be clearer than the Galaxy S3! I have to say I was shocked at that and very much look forward to actually holding one in my hand to compare against my S3. I’d like to hear some opinions as to whether in general people agree or disagree with what I came up with here and for anyone that has held the S3 and Note 2 side by side if these calculations hold up in the real world.
Thanks!
-Brian
**Quick edit: as someone on a different site pointed out to me, the screen size on the Note 2 is actually 5.55", not 5.5". So according to the members.ping.de dpi/ppi calculator that I used for this calculation, the "SPPI" for that device would actually be 458.3. Not that it really makes any difference, but if I'm gonna do all this work I might as well do it right

In the words of Mythbusters.... "myth, plausible" lol
Swyped from my finger to your face, on my Samsung Galaxy Note.

What you say it's completely true... What you call sub pixel its just a diode led... So adding more leds per pixel gives you better quality.. Indeed the pixels are Rgb and not pentile as someone will try to say here... Does not matters how are they arranged a red/green/blue pixel its an Rgb pixel... That said your math are to complicated and it's easier..
It's 1280x720 =921600 pixels note 2
For Rgb its 921600x3= 2764800 sub pixels or leds but distributed in 921600 leds of each color
It's 1280x800 = 1024000 pixels note 1
For pentile its 1024000x2=2048000 sub pixels or leds because it's 2 leds per pixel distributed in 2048000x¼ red + 2048000x¼ blue + 2048000x ½green
So clearly Rgb arrangement has way more leds than pentile arrangements and finally as easy as
2764800÷5.55=498162 leds per inch in the Rgb arrangement and
2048000÷5.3=386415 leds per inch in the pentile arrangement
So that's why note 2 screen its way better than note 1 screen
Enviado desde mi GT-P7500 usando Tapatalk 2

This makes me even more excited to get my hands on one
How would it compare to the Galaxy nexus screen though?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Balsta said:
This makes me even more excited to get my hands on one
How would it compare to the Galaxy nexus screen though?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the S3 and Nexus are both pentile displays with a 1280x720 res, they both have 1,843,200 sub-pixels and if u put that into the same ppi calculator as I used b4, inputting the same horizontal and vertical resolutions and just changing the screen size to 4.65", it comes out to 446.6 "SPPI" which is still less than the note 2

c'est bien ça.

How many sspi does my so old galaxy s have?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium

Awesome read
Sent from my Nexus S using xda app-developers app

Not bothered.
Will you honestly notice the difference? At a glance I doubt it very much. If you are in a dark room and staring at it for long periods I'd start thinking about the refresh rate than the pxl density what is the refresh on all of these anyway?

GramiFIN said:
How many sspi does my so old galaxy s have?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The original Galaxy S has a total of 768,000 sub-pixels and an aspect ratio of 5:3, making the number of horizontal & vertical sub-pixels 1,131x679 on a 4" screen which once again according to members.ping.de ppi/dpi calculator the "SPPI" would be 329.8. So the difference between that and the Note 2 should be pretty significant!

briang8510 said:
So before I post this i'd just like to say this is my 1st post, and because of that I was not able to share links to the websites that I wanted to. So if you would like to visit the websites that I point to where I have only quotes with no links, just Google "oled-info note 2 display" and the first website to come up should be where I posted essentially the same thing and you can see the websites I am pointing to. Thanks!
Ok so all of the talk on different articles and forums about the Note 2's display about it not being a pentile, but also not being the SAMOLED+ with the typical RGB stripe got me thinking. Before the pentile discussion began to get heated all over the web, everyone was concerned about their phones' PPI. But obviously once the pentile displays came out and veered away from the typical RGB stripe (maybe there have been other display types b4 the pentile but that’s kind of irrelevant to the point I am going to make) there became a whole ‘nother thing to consider when it came to display clarity. IMHO this clarity comes down to the smallest part that makes up the picture, and that, for all intents and purposes, is the sub-pixel, not the pixel itself.
Now personally when the Note 2 was 1st announced I was pissed that Samsung decided to make the screen bigger and lower the pixel count because I currently have the S3 with Sprint and for me personally, the bigger the screen the better because I use my phone for TV and movies all the time. Now I understood that they wanted to have a 16:9 aspect ratio, but then why not just increase the horizontal, or both, resolution, not decrease the vertical! Especially since it was not a SAMOLED+, but just a regular SAMOLED which obviously meant another pentile right? But then I started reading into the screen and found out that even though it does not follow the typical RGB stripe, it does in fact have all 3 red, green & blue sub-pixels in each pixel instead of sharing pixels like the pentile does, which is shown very clearly in this picture:"".
So this got me curious because as I stated before, at least to my eyes, the sub-pixel count seems to have a greater affect on image quality than just the pixel count itself, which to me was proven when I got my Sprint Galaxy S2 and even though it had the same number of pixels with a .52" larger screen than my original Galaxy S, the screen clarity on my S2 was noticeably better which, if you dont consider the sub-pixel difference, should not be true. So I decided to do a comparison between what I am going to call the "SPPI" (Sub-Pixels Per Inch) of the original Note, the S3, and the Note 2 as I own a S3 and as much as I would love to have a larger screen, I really would not be happy with the huge loss of quality that would normally come when you stretch the same amount of pixels by .7" as the S2 has a 4.8" screen and the Note 2's display is 5.5", and what I found out really surprised me.
So here's the math of how I got to my conclusions. 1st of all according to the information from Samsung that can be found here: "" the sub-pixel count on the SAMOLED WVGA screen is 768,000 and for the SAMOLED+ WVGA screen it is 1,152,000. Now a WVGA screen is 800x480, which comes to 384,000 total pixels, the Note 1 is 1280x800 which = 1,024,000 and the S3 and Note 2 both are 1280x720 equaling 921,600. Now at this point I needed to figure out the number of sub-pixels on each phone by doing a simple algebraic comparison of the number of pixels to sub-pixels between the WVGA screen and each one of the other phones, which is done here:
Note 1: 384,000/768,000=1,024,000/x and x = 2,048,000 sub-pixels
Galaxy S3: 384,000/768,000=921,600/x and x = 1,843,200 sub-pixels
Note 2: 384,000/1,152,000=921,600/x and x= 2,764,800 sub-pixels
Now at his point I needed to take the aspect ratio of each phone, which is 16:10 for the 1st Note and 16:9 for the other 2 phones, and use the formula on this website to get the horizontal and vertical “sub-pixel resolution”: "". In doing this I came up with the following resolutions:
Note 1: 1,810 x 1,131
Galaxy S3: 1,810 x 1,018
Note 2: 2,217 x 1,247
I then put that information in with the screen sizes in this website: "" and came up with the following “SPPI” results:
Note 1: 402.7 “SPPI”
Galaxy S3: 432.6 “SPPI”
Note 2: 462.5 “SPPI”
So in a similar scenario as the Galaxy S vs. S2 screen clarity comparison, as long as my calculations are correct, theoretically not only should the Note 2 have a better clarity than the original one despite having a larger screen and lower resolution, it should also be clearer than the Galaxy S3! I have to say I was shocked at that and very much look forward to actually holding one in my hand to compare against my S3. I’d like to hear some opinions as to whether in general people agree or disagree with what I came up with here and for anyone that has held the S3 and Note 2 side by side if these calculations hold up in the real world.
Thanks!
-Brian
**Quick edit: as someone on a different site pointed out to me, the screen size on the Note 2 is actually 5.55", not 5.5". So according to the members.ping.de dpi/ppi calculator that I used for this calculation, the "SPPI" for that device would actually be 458.3. Not that it really makes any difference, but if I'm gonna do all this work I might as well do it right
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i calculated this back in august:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=30908958#post30908958
tml1504 said:
right, pentile is not limited to RGBG
BUT: as the pics from verve showed it looks like we get a real RGB matrix (not the regular stripe, but still RGB)!
for us this means that the note 2 will have 50% (2x1,5=3) more subpixels (actually lesser because of the lesser resolution, see calc afterwards), and due to this fact it's almost sure that the "disadvantage" (in terms of DPI) of having a slightly bigger screen will be overcompensated by this fact!
some maths:
note 1: 1.280x800x2 = 2.048.000 subpixels
note 2: 1280x720x3= 2.764.800 subpixels
in total this is an increase of exactly 35% in terms of subpixels!
additionally the manufacturing quality of OLED screens from samsung increased during the last year, so i guess that at least the screen will be a real improvement! and i tend to say that 2gb ram will also make a feel-able difference!
don't get me wrong, i'm also a little bit disappointed about the specs,
but over all they are worth upgrading, at least from my point of view!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

TML1504 said:
i calculated this back in august:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=30908958#post30908958
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My apologies, I would have given you credit for finding out the total number of sub-pixels for those 2 phones in my post if I had seen it. It would have eliminated the need for me to have to figure it out to get to my conclusion. But I was more looking to find how many sub-pixels per inch there were more so than just how many total because I feel like having that allows for a good mental idea of how the screen clarity will compare to peoples' current phones. For example I have the S3 right now so I wanted to do this comparison so I could have some idea of whether or not the clarity will be comparable to that phone since it has a .75" smaller screen with the same resolution. Come to find out that theoretically it should be better and. Thats more why I created this post.. Once again though I apologize for not giving you credit where deserved

What about HTC ONE X? I am afraid of changing HOX for Note2 because the screen of HOX is perfect

Castellano2 said:
What about HTC ONE X? I am afraid of changing HOX for Note2 because the screen of HOX is perfect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well before I give you the figure I have to say first that all the screens I have been comparing so far have been Super AMOLED screens. And organic LED screens are VERY different than regular IPS LCD screens. I actually owned a HTC ONE X for a little while because I didn't want to have another pentile display because I was worried that the S3 would look kind of grainy like the original Galaxy S. So I upgraded from the S2 to the One X and within 2 days I couldn't take it and returned it for an S3(which ended up looking amazing). But when I had the HTC I even missed the 800x480 display on my S2, and that's because even though the One X has a VERY clear screen as far as not having any pixelation, the LED screens on the Samsung, IMHO, blow away the LCDs on One X. The blacks are actually totally black, not just dark gray lol, the colors are sooo much brighter and saturated because the contrast ratio is technically infinite as compared to I believe 1400:1 on the One X. So compared to the S3 the colors just look washed out. Now there are some people out there who don't like the colors being so intense, but I believe that it just makes everything you watch on your phone just so much more enjoyable. And as I said not everyone agrees but if you never used an S3, go to the store and put your phone side by side and you will notice a TINY bit more pixelation (I mean your nose basically has to be touching the phone lol) but MUCH brighter colors and MUCH deeper blacks. And because of the difference of how the LED screens display as compared to the LCDs just the numbers really aren't going to tell the whole story. So I would STRONGLY recommend not letting the numbers deter you from at least checking the Note 2 out in person. (If you couldn't tell by now I'm a strong advocate of Samsung's LED screens lol, but for good reason) So after that long-winded speech the simple answer is the One X has a "SPPI" of 541.2 lol

S3 #1

hell ya, i just wan the new Note 2...
but will it be Kernel Brick-free?... zzzz.....
btw the screen should be awesome... long live Super Amoled

Very interesting information.
Just want to get my hands on the Note 2!

I was only disappointed by the screen resolution But this thread changed my mind, might switch to note 2 from S2, I still think the screen is big but the S-Pen and it's features are too much attractive :silly:

{
"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"
}

briang8510 said:
My apologies, I would have given you credit for finding out the total number of sub-pixels for those 2 phones in my post if I had seen it. It would have eliminated the need for me to have to figure it out to get to my conclusion. But I was more looking to find how many sub-pixels per inch there were more so than just how many total because I feel like having that allows for a good mental idea of how the screen clarity will compare to peoples' current phones. For example I have the S3 right now so I wanted to do this comparison so I could have some idea of whether or not the clarity will be comparable to that phone since it has a .75" smaller screen with the same resolution. Come to find out that theoretically it should be better and. Thats more why I created this post.. Once again though I apologize for not giving you credit where deserved
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no probs, i just wanted to tell you...
briang8510 said:
Well before I give you the figure I have to say first that all the screens I have been comparing so far have been Super AMOLED screens. And organic LED screens are VERY different than regular IPS LCD screens. I actually owned a HTC ONE X for a little while because I didn't want to have another pentile display because I was worried that the S3 would look kind of grainy like the original Galaxy S. So I upgraded from the S2 to the One X and within 2 days I couldn't take it and returned it for an S3(which ended up looking amazing). But when I had the HTC I even missed the 800x480 display on my S2, and that's because even though the One X has a VERY clear screen as far as not having any pixelation, the LED screens on the Samsung, IMHO, blow away the LCDs on One X. The blacks are actually totally black, not just dark gray lol, the colors are sooo much brighter and saturated because the contrast ratio is technically infinite as compared to I believe 1400:1 on the One X. So compared to the S3 the colors just look washed out. Now there are some people out there who don't like the colors being so intense, but I believe that it just makes everything you watch on your phone just so much more enjoyable. And as I said not everyone agrees but if you never used an S3, go to the store and put your phone side by side and you will notice a TINY bit more pixelation (I mean your nose basically has to be touching the phone lol) but MUCH brighter colors and MUCH deeper blacks. And because of the difference of how the LED screens display as compared to the LCDs just the numbers really aren't going to tell the whole story. So I would STRONGLY recommend not letting the numbers deter you from at least checking the Note 2 out in person. (If you couldn't tell by now I'm a strong advocate of Samsung's LED screens lol, but for good reason) So after that long-winded speech the simple answer is the One X has a "SPPI" of 541.2 lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
another thing:
i'm with you that amoled is superb to lcd,
but few things about their disadvantages:
possible burn-ins
much more energy consumption as most people think
almost all displays have some tint (mostly yellowish or blueish), due to
big production (quality) differences between screens (had to cherry-pick my perfect one out of over ten (!) devices), there are a lot of threads about this. in short: screens from the middle of the 'wafer' are best, the more from the off-center your screen got cut out the more tint and uneveness you would have). this is due to the 'old' lithography process used, the new one (hope they used it with note 2 screens) with fine metal masks and perhaps lasers should improve this dramatically!
litte oversaturated, almost ever a not so good low grey level seperation (and often a bad gamma or mdnie factory calibration as well), search for gamma.png and or 'black crush' where low greys got cut-off
about contrast:
technically impossible to be oo!
black is NOT 100% black, as every (!) active oled screen emits a very small amount of light when active! also lots of threads regarding that, try it out: go into a totaly dark environment, display a black image and,VERY IMPORTANT, let your eyes accomodate for 1min! then look at the screen also with this method you will notice the uneveness and lithography projected dirt (dust) particles as with a microscope!
don't get me wrong, i love my amoled screen and i do not want to sound like a teacher!
but one has to be aware about this things as well...
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

6.3" screen on the Note 3!? Some thoughts and perspectives:

Personally, after having done a little number crunching, I don't think it's really all too far fetched to imagine the Note 3 having a 6.3" screen, assuming certain things happen. Here's my thinking:
The physical dimensions of the current Note 2 (not the screen) are 151mm tall by 80.5mm wide, which yields a hypotenuse of ~173.3mm.
A ~6.3" (160mm diag) 16:9 ratio screen would be about 139.5mm tall by ~78.4mm wide, which can just about squeeze into the current body's form factor, if you remove the physical buttons and go with a ~1mm bezel on the sides (compared to the current ~5.7mm bezel).
A ~1mm bezel is insane, and honestly I doubt it's a realistic expectation. However, if the Note 3 returns to the original Note's width of ~83mm, that would make room for a ~2.3mm bezel on a 6.3" screen. That's still insanely thin, but maybe just about doable.
Now, here's another thing to consider: Screen Resolution.
As it currently stands, it's much easier to make a higher resolution LCD display than an AMOLED display (which is why our 5.55" AMOLED displays are only 720p when there are 5" 1080p LCD's). It's currently difficult for AMOLED to match those levels of pixel density before running into quality issues like we've seen in previous AMOLED generations. That's to be expected; AMOLED technology is still relatively new compared to LCD, so we're still working on perfecting it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think we've yet seen an RGB (not PenTile) AMOLED display break the 300ppi barrier yet. So far, the Note 2's display has the highest RGB pixel density that we've ever seen yet (again, the key here is RGB, not PenTile).
If the Note 3 has a 6.3" screen, and if indeed it's going to be 1080p, then that would mean a pixel density of ~350ppi. I believe that jumping from the current ~265ppi (RGB) to ~350ppi (RBG) is incredibly significant, and possibly unrealistic actually... So this, to me, suggests one of two likely possibilities:
A.) A 6.3" 1080p PenTile display.
or
B.) An RGB (using the current sub-pixel layout in the Note 2) display, but at lower than 1080p resolution; perhaps something like 1600x900 instead.
Option B would yield a ~291ppi density, and seems like a realistic and reasonable improvement from the current generation.
Either option is seems like a reasonable possibility, however, in my personal opinion, I would bet that the 1080p PenTile option seems more likely.
So, to sum everything up, here's what I would predict for the Note 3 for dimensions and screen:
Chassis:
151 - 155 mm Height
83 - 85 mm Width
8 - 10 mm Depth
Buttonless/Full touch screen design
Screen:
6.3" (160mm) Diagonal, 16:9
1080p PenTile SAMOLED (More likely)
or
1600x900 RGB SAMOLED (Less likely)
maybe
1080p RGB SAMOLED (Least likely, but who knows!)
I know a lot of this may have been boring, but I hope it was informative, and perhaps brings some more clarity to the rumors that have been floating around.
Let me know your thoughts!

My thoughts are there is already a thread about this.
Sent from my GT-N7100

i would really want a non pentile screen and a 1080p screen...

Nice thorough post.
I personally won't buy a larger form factor. So, whatever the max screen size is within the current physical dimension is what it should be.
If the form factor goes larger I might as well buy a 7" tablet.

Most said that the Note 2 size was too large.
After, was considered a normal phone size for them.
Note 3, might have the same procedure.

My thoughts are that if it actually turns out to be 6.3" then they better call it 'Galaxy tab mini'

The note 2's screen at first was a bit of a handful but I've gotten used to it now I've had it for a few months but 6.3".....that's a bit over the top in my opinion.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium

If the display isn't downgrade from rgb, and is close to 6inches without much dimensions bigger then i will upgrade to it.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium

The problem with a 6.3" device, IMO, would be:
Should one hold it like a phone (one-handed) or like a tablet (two-handed)?
I guess the design of the device should hold the answer (bevel and of course dimensions).
I believe this is yet again a wait-and-see moment for Samsung. When the original Note was launched, everyone had their comments. But the sales proved, one way or another, that "phablet" is feasible. 5.3" isn't really too big! Now we stretched it to 5.5" and the sales are now even stronger! So if they can find a way to make the user experience feasible for a 6.3" phone-tablet hybrid (or whatever marketing they employ for that device), then who's to say now that it's good or not?
I'm happy with my 5.5" Note II. If the Note III proves to be successful at 6.3", that's a nice feat. But I'm sticking to my Note II (for the next two years!)

I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2

Simple..
Penta-Core Processor
3 Gigabyte of RAM
..
Profit!
I don't know why but I want it..

EP2008 said:
I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1

@rbiter said:
My thoughts are there is already a thread about this.
Sent from my GT-N7100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I respectfully disagree. Whereas the other thread talking about the Note III merely links to an outside source regarding potential screen size, and then asks the simple "Will you buy it?" question, my thread here, though on a related topic, goes into much greater detail behind the speculations for the Note III, and encourages a much broader discussion about the screen technology in particular.

If Samsung does go with a 6.3" screen design for the Note III, I hope that they finally stop using the Phone UI across the whole platform and instead go with something more like the Phablet UI (like on the Nexus 7). Maybe even incorporate certain PA features like per-app-density and per-app-layout etc.

Gof fig they would want to make it bigger. :silly: I like the 5.5 and would love to see them work bettering the guts of the phone. More power!!!!!!!!!

EP2008 said:
I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
great

I like idea of a bigger screen, but remember the Note 1 was uncomfortable to hold (in one hand) for me. Although the Note 2 was only slightly narrower it was a massive difference and I have never had issues holding it in one hand. The slight curvature change also helped here. 6" might be my comfort limit

No thanks

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
So, to sum everything up, here's what I would predict for the Note 3 for dimensions and screen:
Chassis:
151 - 155 mm Height
83 - 85 mm Width
8 - 10 mm Depth
Buttonless/Full touch screen design
Screen:
6.3" (160mm) Diagonal, 16:9
1080p PenTile SAMOLED (More likely)
or
1600x900 RGB SAMOLED (Less likely)
maybe
1080p RGB SAMOLED (Least likely, but who knows!)
I know a lot of this may have been boring, but I hope it was informative, and perhaps brings some more clarity to the rumors that have been floating around.
Let me know your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly IMHO I think they would keep their button layout. They are trying to make their product lineup using standard elements.
Secondly, I doubt that they would go back to pentile AMOLED. they have faced too much heat with that piece of tech. And also doing 1080p on a non-pentile AMOLED is way tough for a new tech like it is. So lower res is the way they'll go.
Other than that I agree with your predictions.

The phone is already too big for most people.. would be crazy if they make the phone any bigger.

Galaxy Tab Pro 12.2

Thinking about buying one.
Why?
1) Getting blind in my old age, well not blind but I need reading glasses
2) Bigger screen should be more natural with magazines
3) Has Android 4.4 (now I know I can root install custom ROMs etc... but I also had bad luck doing this with tablets)
Two questions,
It is only 2 inches bigger does that two inches make it much harder to travel with?
It runs the latest Android, does it run better?
It is expensive and I which when I bought my Note 10.1 (2014) .... what 3 months ago I knew this was coming.

has crossed my mind as well, I do a lot of reading/surfing/viewing and I don't really take it out much
saw one in a shop ...not exactly cheap not sure worth the extra coin being asked

spacecat said:
has crossed my mind as well, I do a lot of reading/surfing/viewing and I don't really take it out much
saw one in a shop ...not exactly cheap not sure worth the extra coin being asked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personal preference of course. Some things to consider.
It's huge and comparatively heavy.
The N10.1-14 is getting 4.4 and M-UX; it's already listed as a feature on Samsung's commerce sites. It won't get the Pro features but you can download the most meaningful, Hancom Office, in the app sub-forum here. There was some question about a modified version of the Tab/Note|Pro s/w because we have a menu button and those devices have replaced it with a task button. N12 owners have reported that long-pressing the task button provides the menu function we have which means it's one set of s/w with different button function mapping. Other than the remainder of missing Pro features the only two other unique features to the N12 are four multiview windows (vs. our two) and an expanded keyboard with FN, ALT, CTRL keys.
The N12 has an inferior display because the same pixel count that's on the N10.1-14 is stretched out over a larger area. The N12 has a gross PPI of 247 compared to 299 on the N10.1-14. Both use a RGBW PenTile display which means the net RGB pixel count is 227 and the N10.1-14's is at 274. The iPad Air is 264. A couple of reviewers have mentioned seeing a difference between the Tab|Pro 8.4/10.1 and N10.1-14's displays when compared to the N12.
It's got a bigger battery and will outlast the N10.1-14. But the Exynos N10.1-14's take forever to charge so increase that even more for the N12.
It's got USB 3.0 but it does nothing to improve charging time and increases data transfer rates on Windows (only) PCs that are USB 3.0 equipped.
So in the end, especially after the N10.1-14 gets its updates, there's not a lot of difference between the two h/w and s/w wise with the biggest exception being a fairly low (for a 1080P display) net RGB pixel count of 227 on the N12. For reference the N2's 720P display had a net PPI of 267.
Happy deciding.

Where is the downloads of the hanscom?
Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

AstroDigital said:
Thinking about buying one.
Why?
1) Getting blind in my old age, well not blind but I need reading glasses
2) Bigger screen should be more natural with magazines
3) Has Android 4.4 (now I know I can root install custom ROMs etc... but I also had bad luck doing this with tablets)
Two questions,
It is only 2 inches bigger does that two inches make it much harder to travel with?
It runs the latest Android, does it run better?
It is expensive and I which when I bought my Note 10.1 (2014) .... what 3 months ago I knew this was coming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really nice. I don't think the extra size makes it harder to travel with. It is noticeably larger, and you see it the most when holding it with one hand while tapping and navigating with the other. Because it is larger and heavier, there's a lopsided weight to it to where it feels like it's trying to twist out of your hand. Nothing overly dramatic, but you do notice it every time. Unlike the Note 10.1 where your hand covers a larger part of the device and so there is less / none of that feeling. Any type of case etc would most likely mitigate the issue. Other than that the screen is beautiful, sure it may be lower density but nothing I ever noticed after using the Note 12.2. You'll really appreciate the larger nature of text and graphics however, and that is priceless.

BarryH_GEG said:
[*]The N12 has an inferior display because the same pixel count that's on the N10.1-14 is stretched out over a larger area. The N12 has a gross PPI of 247 compared to 299 on the N10.1-14. Both use a RGBW PenTile display which means the net RGB pixel count is 227 and the N10.1-14's is at 274. The iPad Air is 264. A couple of reviewers have mentioned seeing a difference between the Tab|Pro 8.4/10.1 and N10.1-14's displays when compared to the N12.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
May I ask how did you get the net PPI figure?
Note 10.1 has an RGBW matrix made of ~4 Mpixels (2560x1600).
This equals to the same subpixel count as a ~2.7 Mpixel RGB panel (PenTile only have 2 subpixels per pixel compared to RGB's full 3 subpixels)
Which means that our Note's effective resolution is 1306x2090.
So the hypotenuse of the panel (via the pythahorean theorem) equals to the equivalent of 2464 RGB pixels
Which finally means that we have an effective 244 PPI (2464.5/10.1)
Which is lower than Ipad's but higher than other 10.1 inch android's. iPad's screen also consumes far less battery has (arguably) better colours and most importantly does not suffer from the grayish blacks we suffer. In short if you want the best "large" panel in the market you have to go to Apple, for everything else our note is the best deal.

Stevethegreat said:
So the hypotenuse of the panel (via the pythahorean theorem).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously?
The effective PPI of the N10.1-14's display is 299 PPI. It's achieved somewhat by slight of hand by using combinations of sub-pixels to create the illusion of more. That's the very definition of PenTile whose impact varies greatly based on implementation. My simple formula is essentially just factoring in the loss of 25% of the RGB sub-pixels to the added white ones and distributing the lost pixels across each of red, green, and blue. .
From WiKi...
PenTile RGBW technology, used in LCD, adds an extra subpixel to the traditional red, green and blue subpixels that is a clear area without color filtering material and with the only purpose of letting backlight come through, hence W for white. This makes it possible to produce a brighter image compared to an RGB-matrix while using the same amount of power, or produce an equally bright image while using less power.
The PenTile RGBW layout uses each red, green, blue and white subpixel to present high-resolution luminance information to the human eyes' red-sensing and green-sensing cone cells, while using the combined effect of all the color subpixels to present lower-resolution chroma (color) information to all three cone cell types. Combined, this optimizes the match of display technology to the biological mechanisms of human vision.[13] The layout uses one third fewer subpixels for the same resolution as the RGB stripe (RGB-RGB) layout, in spite of having four color primaries instead of the conventional three, using subpixel rendering combined with metamer rendering. Metamer rendering optimizes the energy distribution between the white subpixel and the combined red, green, and blue subpixels: W <> RGB, to improve image sharpness.
The display driver chip has an RGB to RGBW color vector space converter and gamut mapping algorithm, followed by metamer and subpixel rendering algorithms. In order to maintain saturated color quality, to avoid simultaneous contrast error between saturated colors and peak white brightness, while simultaneously reducing backlight power requirements, the display backlight brightness is under control of the PenTile driver engine. When the image is mostly desaturated colors, those near white or grey, the backlight brightness is significantly reduced, often to less than 50% peak, while the LCD levels are increased to compensate. When the image has very bright saturated colors, the backlight brightness is maintained at higher levels. The PenTile RGBW also has an optional high brightness mode that doubles the brightness of the desaturated color image areas, such as black&white text, for improved outdoor view-ability.​RGBW is funky in that when displaying certain fully saturated colors (yellow and green have been given as examples) on a white background there's some granularity issues on hard graphics edges.
Also from WiKi...
However, for the same resolution and size the PenTile screen can appear grainy, pixelated, speckled, with blurred text on some saturated colors and backgrounds when compared to RGB stripe color. This effect is understood to be caused by the restriction of the number of subpixels that may participate in the image reconstruction when the color is fully saturated. In the RGBW case, this is caused as the W subpixel will not be available in order to maintain the saturated color. For all other cases, text and especially full color images are fully reconstructed.​The impact of PenTile depends on PPI and even more so on visual acuity - the point at which the viewer's vision intersects one arcminute. For people with 20/20 vision holding a device the typical 10-12" away you can't see that the N10.1-14's display is PenTile; at least from a clarity perspective. Some people here with 20/10 vision have seen the RGBW saturation issue. I, with 20/20 vision, haven't.
Here's an interesting article talking about PPI and its impact on various content...
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/1080p-on-a-smartphone-screencan-it-possibly-matter/
Here's an interesting article talking about visual acuity in the context of Apple naming their display "retina"...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4-review/4
The pixel race explored...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7743/the-pixel-density-race-and-its-technical-merits

BarryH_GEG said:
Seriously?
The effective PPI of the N10.1-14's display is 299 PPI. It's achieved somewhat by slight of hand by using combinations of sub-pixels to create the illusion of more. That's the very definition of PenTile whose impact varies greatly based on implementation. My simple formula is essentially just factoring in the loss of 25% of the RGB sub-pixels to the added white ones and distributing the lost pixels across each of red, green, and blue. .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly don't get your point, a rectangle is made of two triangles whose hypotenuse is the diagonal of said rectangle, which is why one can use the pythagorean theorem to find the diagonal's pixel count.
As for the rest I calculated what's the effective PPI of our device is in RGB terms, again I don't see where I'm wrong. I called it effective because most screens use an RGB panel. A 1306x2090 panel produces exactly the same sub-pixel count as our note. Now due to subpixels' placing one may see a different picture altogether, but holding our note side by side with an Ipad it is more pixilated, which shows to me that the 299 number is literally meaningless since we are talking about a different screen tech...

Stevethegreat said:
I honestly don't get your point, a rectangle is made of two triangles whose hypotenuse is the diagonal of said rectangle, which is why one can use the pythagorean theorem to find the diagonal's pixel count.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I would have done it the same way Stevethegreat did. But I'm not familiar with how they create the illusion of more subpixels.

I am debating which one to get- the note 10.1 2014 or the tab pro 12.2. Does the screen size make it a must have?
Sent from my LG-VS980 using xda app-developers app

I wanted to get the Note Pro 12.2 until I saw the price (am in Bangkok):
29,900 baht (~$930). I love my Note 10.1 2014.

Stevethegreat said:
May I ask how did you get the net PPI figure?
Note 10.1 has an RGBW matrix made of ~4 Mpixels (2560x1600).
This equals to the same subpixel count as a ~2.7 Mpixel RGB panel (PenTile only have 2 subpixels per pixel compared to RGB's full 3 subpixels)
Which means that our Note's effective resolution is 1306x2090.
So the hypotenuse of the panel (via the pythahorean theorem) equals to the equivalent of 2464 RGB pixels
Which finally means that we have an effective 244 PPI (2464.5/10.1)
Which is lower than Ipad's but higher than other 10.1 inch android's. iPad's screen also consumes far less battery has (arguably) better colours and most importantly does not suffer from the grayish blacks we suffer. In short if you want the best "large" panel in the market you have to go to Apple, for everything else our note is the best deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stevethegreat said:
I honestly don't get your point, a rectangle is made of two triangles whose hypotenuse is the diagonal of said rectangle, which is why one can use the pythagorean theorem to find the diagonal's pixel count.
As for the rest I calculated what's the effective PPI of our device is in RGB terms, again I don't see where I'm wrong. I called it effective because most screens use an RGB panel. A 1306x2090 panel produces exactly the same sub-pixel count as our note. Now due to subpixels' placing one may see a different picture altogether, but holding our note side by side with an Ipad it is more pixilated, which shows to me that the 299 number is literally meaningless since we are talking about a different screen tech...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys do know that a rgbw pentile display doesnt render images in full pixels like a rgb panel right? Thus making a comparison of the two technologies a pissing contest at best. A rgbw panel renders images at the subpixel level using any arrangement of the subpixels to achieve the desired image (in a way more natural and easier on the human eye) whereas a rgb renders images using the entire pixel (all 3 subpixels as a solid unit) it takes a rgbw display 1/3 less subpixels to display the same resolution image with no loss of image quality. Yes if you jam your face into the thing you will notice the pixels slightly sooner than a rgb. All that means is you look less like an idiot while pixel peeping with the rgbw. On text you will never notice a difference. One of the biggest electronics companies of all time keeps using pentile panels and keeps getting great screen reviews in its products. Shut the stupid pentile assault down. I cant even recall a reviewer knocking any of these screens. At normal viewing distance they are marvelous. If you dont use it at a normal distance congratulations your the minority that uses his tablet pressed to his face. Oh the and the "slight" loss of sharpness on the display in comparison to the note 2014 is made up for by a larger screen used FARTHER AWAY meaning that with normal vision no discernable difference. And lastly in what universe have you compared the note 10.1 to the ipad air and found the note more pixelated? Even factoring the lost pixel count (BarryH_GEG is right) the note is superior to the ipad. The rgbw panel doesnt need the extra pixels because it looks just as good without them. And if it looks just as good whats your problem?
Op the 12.2 offers alot more screen real estate. It is a bit heavier but unless you have lost tge ability to wipe yourself you will easily be able to carry it around. My 90 year old grandmother still carries an ipad 3 (same weight). The screen is very efficient and this tablet is consistently beating the ipad air in battery tests. It will take awhile to charge if you allow it to drain all the way. Which you shouldn't do. Charge it when not in use and you will be fine. 4.4 is smoother and the pro features are nice. I would also point out that the charging port is on the side making use while charging much easier. If you are intrigued by its size try it out. Worst case you return it.
Sorry guys for ranting but I keep seeing the same false information over and over again. Your splitting hairs between ridiculously good and slightly more ridiculously good and smaller.......just like that stupid 4:3 is better for reading thing. (IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY BETTER)
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
---------- Post added at 02:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:14 AM ----------
Oh please notice the only time you can tell the difference is text against a fully saturated background.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 AM ----------
Also from Nouvoyance (a company owned by samsung doing their r&d for rgbw pentile displays) the are pursuing pentile because it relies on technology that tskes advantage of the human eyes natural mechanisms. Samsung obviously believes that pentile is the way of the future. they seem to be selling the idea very well.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

@ Duly.noted: OK I get you dislike of ipad and it is not without merit but I was comparing the sub pixel count of our device with that of ipad's and unlike what BarryH_GEG said my calculations are not wrong, you said it yourself we have 1/3rd less subpixels. Now I often keep my tablet at a distance of 8-10 inches close to my eyes. Granted I keep it closer than most people, and also -granted- text looks better but everything else *doesn't* and *that's* my point, technically we have a worse screen but to most people it is just fine. It is not splitting hairs though, I would much prefer ipad's panel but then I would lose android's flexibility and the spen
As an experiment put a red text in a yellow background and *tell* me that it looks the same to you (same clarity) as in an ipad, because it sure as hell doesn't to me.
Anyway, this thread is about Note 12.2, so imagine it as a thought experiment in an even larger more spread out fashion. Again to many people this is splitting hairs but I think it is more important to let more people learn of the impact of pentile technology than simply call the panel a 2560 x1600 panel and be done with it. I'm surely not as happy to learn about it *after* I bought the tablet, but you're right it may not be that big of a deal, the biggest deal by far (for me) was/is the "milky" blacks and the atrocious gamma raise when looked at from different angles, both not expected from a panel of this calibre. I sure hope that note 12.2 have/had this issue fixed, because especially in such a large panel it would make quite an impact to its picture quality. Much more than the pentile arrangement would (even in principle) be able to make.

Duly.noted said:
Sorry guys for ranting but I keep seeing the same false information over and over again. Your splitting hairs between ridiculously good and slightly more ridiculously good and smaller.......just like that stupid 4:3 is better for reading thing. (IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY BETTER)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes you are ranting, fine if you want to do that, but your rant has almost nothing to do with the post you quoted. It it not about false information, whether the screen was good enough, nor 4:3 ratio. It is about methodology for calculating PPI. That may be interesting for someone comparing a Tab Pro 12.2, Note 10.1 2014, or an ipad.

ddzado said:
I am debating which one to get- the note 10.1 2014 or the tab pro 12.2. Does the screen size make it a must have?
Sent from my LG-VS980 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's my input. I had the Note 12.2 for about a week. I returned it without hesitation for the Note 10.1 (14). Why?
1. It's heavier. I came from an original Tab 10.1 and one would think that 4 ounces more isn't a big deal. That's what I kept telling myself. Yet it is. My hand got tired holding it very quickly where it never got tired holding the 10.1.
2. It's larger. Well, you say, that's the point isn't it? Yeah, but there's an odd thing about it being larger, it's harder to hold it. If you remember your physics class then you'll understand that the center of gravity for the 12.2 moves further from the hand than the 10.1. Throw in 4 ounces more weight and the torque applied to the hand makes it uncomfortable to hold in one hand.
3. The screen is just bigger, not better. The apps don't use the real estate better. They're just larger. It's like putting larger buttons on a pushbutton phone. You don't get more buttons, you just get larger ones. It's the same with your TV. A 50" screen has the exact same number of pixels and resolution as a 40" screen, just larger. Now, for us folks getting older one would think that this would be a good thing. It wasn't. It just didn't feel right.
4. Magazine UX. It was fun. For about 30 minutes. Because it was so limited I found it to be boring after a short period of time. I installed Apex.
5. When I combined it with a Zagg hard keyboard case it did a fine job as a desktop device. The keyboard was full sized and easy to use. Felt great. But, then I found myself pulling out my 15.6" laptop for those times instead. After all, if 12.2 is good on the desktop 15.6 is better.
6. One thing that I really liked on the larger screen was the ability to have up to 4 apps running at once. Mult-apps feels cramped on the 10.1" screen and it felt much better on the 12.2" screen.
My comments here are very personal and may only apply to me. They're intended to be a "heads up." Here's what I'd recommend to anyone thinking about getting a 12.2" tablet. Buy it at Best Buy or any other brick and mortar store that permits easy returns. Try it out, you'll know in a few days if it's for you. If you don't like it just return it. No harm done. (Don't do this at Fry's, they charge a 15% restocking fee.)
---------- Post added at 07:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 AM ----------
Side note on PPI:
PPI doesn't matter. Look at the screen. Run the apps you normally use. Do you like what you see? Yes? That's all that matters. Period.

TabGuy said:
Here's my input. I had the Note 12.2 for about a week. I returned it without hesitation for the Note 10.1 (14). Why?
1. It's heavier. I came from an original Tab 10.1 and one would think that 4 ounces more isn't a big deal. That's what I kept telling myself. Yet it is. My hand got tired holding it very quickly where it never got tired holding the 10.1.
2. It's larger. Well, you say, that's the point isn't it? Yeah, but there's an odd thing about it being larger, it's harder to hold it. If you remember your physics class then you'll understand that the center of gravity for the 12.2 moves further from the hand than the 10.1. Throw in 4 ounces more weight and the torque applied to the hand makes it uncomfortable to hold in one hand.
3. The screen is just bigger, not better. The apps don't use the real estate better. They're just larger. It's like putting larger buttons on a pushbutton phone. You don't get more buttons, you just get larger ones. It's the same with your TV. A 50" screen has the exact same number of pixels and resolution as a 40" screen, just larger. Now, for us folks getting older one would think that this would be a good thing. It wasn't. It just didn't feel right.
4. Magazine UX. It was fun. For about 30 minutes. Because it was so limited I found it to be boring after a short period of time. I installed Apex.
5. When I combined it with a Zagg hard keyboard case it did a fine job as a desktop device. The keyboard was full sized and easy to use. Felt great. But, then I found myself pulling out my 15.6" laptop for those times instead. After all, if 12.2 is good on the desktop 15.6 is better.
6. One thing that I really liked on the larger screen was the ability to have up to 4 apps running at once. Mult-apps feels cramped on the 10.1" screen and it felt much better on the 12.2" screen.
My comments here are very personal and may only apply to me. They're intended to be a "heads up." Here's what I'd recommend to anyone thinking about getting a 12.2" tablet. Buy it at Best Buy or any other brick and mortar store that permits easy returns. Try it out, you'll know in a few days if it's for you. If you don't like it just return it. No harm done. (Don't do this at Fry's, they charge a 15% restocking fee.)
---------- Post added at 07:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 AM ----------
Side note on PPI:
PPI doesn't matter. Look at the screen. Run the apps you normally use. Do you like what you see? Yes? That's all that matters. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I'm hoping to try all this out and see if it bothers me. I've never had a tablet before, but I've used the tablets of others.
I am hoping that I can root the thing and change a couple of the things you were mentioning. For example, I'm on a G2 right now, having the same issues with a bigger screen/apps are just bigger. I changed my LCD density (effectively the screen resolution) and now have a much better use of the real estate on the screen.
Another big test would be if the S-Pen works well on the Tab Pro (yes that's right Tab Pro). You would instantly save $100 minus the difference for buying a stylus. I don't care for the S-Pen software, just the handwriting capability.
I am also nervous about all the bloatware/UX that comes with it... I'm a guy that buys a phone and has it rooted/ROM'd before I go to bed. We'll see how long I last....

TabGuy said:
[/COLOR]Side note on PPI:
PPI doesn't matter. Look at the screen. Run the apps you normally use. Do you like what you see? Yes? That's all that matters. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are many of us who like to read , for many hours. Be it literature, articles, long emails. While a screen may look beautiful at first glance after long hours it can and will become tiresome if the PPI is below some threshold. As a reader PPI is the first I look for when buying a new tablet. Fortunately note's pentile handles text beautifully so I suspect it would not be a problem for note 12.2 either

ddzado said:
Another big test would be if the S-Pen works well on the Tab Pro (yes that's right Tab Pro). You would instantly save $100 minus the difference for buying a stylus. I don't care for the S-Pen software, just the handwriting capability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It won't work. The tab pro doesn't have an active digitizer. It wouldn't even work as a capacitive stylus. You'd just get nothing.

mustbepbs said:
It won't work. The tab pro doesn't have an active digitizer. It wouldn't even work as a capacitive stylus. You'd just get nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that blows. I mean.. you can draw with your finger... so why wouldn't any stylus work?

ddzado said:
Well that blows. I mean.. you can draw with your finger... so why wouldn't any stylus work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A capacitive stylus is made with a material that effects the electrical current of the touchscreen causing it to register as a touch in the same way a finger does. Pieces of metal will register as well. The spen is a active stylus. The tip is a nonconductive rubber or plastic tip and it affects the touchscreen using a magnetic field detected by the digitizer layer. This allows much greater accuracy and by increasing the magnetic force with a button sensitive to pressure allows pressure sensing. However, it would not function on any device that did not have either a resistive touchscreen or digitizer layer.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app