Database Users

Almost left Athena for another device...

I'll make this short and sweet since I'm @work and need to well, work...
I was growing tired of the burden of having the Athena with me all the time so I went down to at&t and got a Tilt... Nice phone (except for video issues which will be fixed hopefully) but I simply could not get used to a small screen again, especially for finger typing. Athena's big screen really reduces the need to use a stylus. In fact, I only use it for actually writing notes on the screen.
So, I thought, maybe 2 devices again? I could go to the Moto Q9 Global and the HP iPAQ 210/211 (release iminent if not out already...) But, the lack of wi-fi on the Moto was a deal-breaker for me since I sometimes spend 2 or 3 days at a time in a location with wi-fi only. I had the Q for a week and returned it.
I simply could not adapt to either device; I have adapted to the Athena. It's been covered before how this is not a proper phone and I agree but with my Jabra BT8010 and LG Style-I (I have and use both) it works well enough for me. I'm more of a data user than a talker.
Of course, your mileage may vary...

Yes, it is hard to leave the Athena especially when you are a custom to the screen and other aspects we take for granted. I tried the Tilt as well, and it was no match. In the end, I am still perfectly happy with the Athena until another big screen slimmer device with more capabilities.

Almost same here.
- Had a Universal -> happy;
- Universal dead, replaced with Hermes by operator -> *very* unhappy;
- Hermes eBayed, Athena bought -> happy.
Can't understand how people now how people can browse the web, play video and stuff on smallish QVGA screens.

lpsi2000 said:
Yes, it is hard to leave the Athena especially when you are a custom to the screen and other aspects we take for granted. I tried the Tilt as well, and it was no match. In the end, I am still perfectly happy with the Athena until another big screen slimmer device with more capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More capabilities - like being able to fly??
I agree with you and HeartofDarkness - the screen (and built-in GPS) make it invaluable. Now if only they would produce a version that didn't have the microdrive but just had a large solid state drive......

Came from an atom. Did all you mentioned. Damaged my eyes in the process. Fortunately damage was temporary. I'm very happy with my athena. Heavy and big compared to the atom but for now, it works for me and I love it. Until a better PPC comes out, I don't think I will consider replacing it.

Things I would look for in a new device:
thinner but wider display to improve web browsing and enable a 'narrower' device. The only REAL thing I miss about the Athena is the big screen, but with a little design alteration the size could be more-or-less maintained without making the device as bulky as at present.
Slimmer profile, rounded at the edges and no keyboard. I think the look of the device is spoiled by the hardware keyboard and I much preferred to leave it at home and use Fingertouch.
Ability to use as a handset like the Iphone for when needed (bt works but some people don't like using bluetooth/wired headsets all of the time)
Full ATI chip support.
Vueflo improvements such as auto-rotation
FlashLite 3.0 to enable full embedded flash site support!
This is what i'll be looking for. I'm sure if HTC don't release a device like this someone will.

leoni1980 said:
Things I would look for in a new device:
thinner but wider display to improve web browsing and enable a 'narrower' device. The only REAL thing I miss about the Athena is the big screen, but with a little design alteration the size could be more-or-less maintained without making the device as bulky as at present.
Slimmer profile, rounded at the edges and no keyboard. I think the look of the device is spoiled by the hardware keyboard and I much preferred to leave it at home and use Fingertouch.
Ability to use as a handset like the Iphone for when needed (bt works but some people don't like using bluetooth/wired headsets all of the time)
Full ATI chip support.
Vueflo improvements such as auto-rotation
FlashLite 3.0 to enable full embedded flash site support!
This is what i'll be looking for. I'm sure if HTC don't release a device like this someone will.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amen to all these.
Would just add what it should still be on winCE platform for the sake of software availability.
Also, camera taking indoor could improve.
Don't forget to replace microdrive with an SSD.
If possible, I prefer regular size SDHC. It's capacity seems to be always ahead of minisdhc and microsdhc.
But for now, Athena is still the only option meeting my needs most closely.

Despite what the cosmic feline has spewed all over xda (I hope he is banned indefinitely), I still consider the Athena a single-device solution since anything as easy to carry as a BT headset or Style-i is not burdensome as separate phone and PDA. I did the 2-device thing awhile back with an iPAQ 4705 and Nokia 6230b and I found myself without the PDA on too many occasions. Future onverged devices will mean fewer compromises than we have to make now but for now the Athena is as good as it gets and that's good enough for me. And as good as it gets has only gotten better with the AP team and xda input and development.

calm down now. let's be nice please, each to their own and all that......i use two devices at the moment as it suits my needs: am i an idiot?

the athena might get even better within a few days/weeks. im seeing if it could be a first device with something.... cant reveal what yet but oh well we'll see if it will be possible.

leoni1980 said:
Things I would look for in a new device:
thinner but wider display to improve web browsing and enable a 'narrower' device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Leoni,
I've given more thought to the issue of aspect ratio.
I think that we should not go for a narrower screen. Narrower screen is suitable for portrait use. Also, most applications will not be able to use it properly. Think about the problems square screens are having. Also, think about your wide screen television playing most videos, which requires the image to be flattened in order to cover the entire screen, or having to leave the two sides margin unused.
I think the aspect ratio should just stick to the standard ones because of this.
Am I making sense?

eaglesteve said:
Leoni,
I've given more thought to the issue of aspect ratio.
I think that we should not go for a narrower screen. Narrower screen is suitable for portrait use. Also, most applications will not be able to use it properly. Think about the problems square screens are having. Also, think about your wide screen television playing most videos, which requires the image to be flattened in order to cover the entire screen, or having to leave the two sides margin unused.
I think the aspect ratio should just stick to the standard ones because of this.
Am I making sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Narrower screen will suit movie playback better as it is more in fitting with the widescreen standards, whereas the Athena's aspect ration necessitates more cropping to fill the screen as it is quite square. 800*480 is becoming more common on pocket pc's and moble devices so I don't think compatibility will be any more of a problem than it is with VGA. Also web browsing will be significantly improved as there will only be a minimal need for horizontal scrolling. This in turn will make remote desktop and things such as Pocket Excel, Pocket Word and any other graphical/chart app look a lot better.
What do you think?

leoni1980 said:
Narrower screen will suit movie playback better as it is more in fitting with the widescreen standards, whereas the Athena's aspect ration necessitates more cropping to fill the screen as it is quite square. 800*480 is becoming more common on pocket pc's and moble devices so I don't think compatibility will be any more of a problem than it is with VGA. Also web browsing will be significantly improved as there will only be a minimal need for horizontal scrolling. This in turn will make remote desktop and things such as Pocket Excel, Pocket Word and any other graphical/chart app look a lot better.
What do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would be like what you see on television. Basically the extra space would not be used for many years until all movies are made in the new format. It would only happen if there is widespread adoption of wide screen TV.
Similarly, unless all PDA moves in the same direction, software vendor is not going to start coding their applications for wide screen just for a small market.
A long and narrow screen will also be unsuitable for portrait use.
I think with the 96 dpi, ability to see is not an issue with Athena's size and aspect ratio. With excel, one cannot completely eliminate need for horizontal scrolling. A narrower screen would give less visibility height wise, so I'm not sure that is better or not. But the key issue, as I mentioned, is the availability of software, which is not up to us, or the hardware vendor. To go wide and short screen is going against the de facto standard in the PDA industry, and would have to overcome too much problems to be worth it.

eaglesteve said:
It would be like what you see on television. Basically the extra space would not be used for many years until all movies are made in the new format. It would only happen if there is widespread adoption of wide screen TV.
Similarly, unless all PDA moves in the same direction, software vendor is not going to start coding their applications for wide screen just for a small market.
A long and narrow screen will also be unsuitable for portrait use.
I think with the 96 dpi, ability to see is not an issue with Athena's size and aspect ratio. With excel, one cannot completely eliminate need for horizontal scrolling. A narrower screen would give less visibility height wise, so I'm not sure that is better or not. But the key issue, as I mentioned, is the availability of software, which is not up to us, or the hardware vendor. To go wide and short screen is going against the de facto standard in the PDA industry, and would have to overcome too much problems to be worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are already windows mobile devices with 800 by 480 screens. It would be interesting to see if there are any compatibiity issues versus standard VGA, however I doubt there are. The widescreen ratio here in britain is standard in all broadcasts of the last 3 years or so and is certainly standard in Movies, meaning that for movie and tv applications at least some of the Athena's screen height is wasted unless cropping the image. The 800 by 480 ratio is also more in keeping with the typical ratio of photography. Portrait orientation is not really an issue since the .480 resolution is the same as it would be on the Athena, though marginally scalled down in size. Overall there will be an improvement in screen real-estate and a more pocket-able device would be possible

leoni1980 said:
There are already windows mobile devices with 800 by 480 screens. It would be interesting to see if there are any compatibiity issues versus standard VGA, however I doubt there are. The widescreen ratio here in britain is standard in all broadcasts of the last 3 years or so and is certainly standard in Movies, meaning that for movie and tv applications at least some of the Athena's screen height is wasted unless cropping the image. The 800 by 480 ratio is also more in keeping with the typical ratio of photography. Portrait orientation is not really an issue since the .480 resolution is the same as it would be on the Athena, though marginally scalled down in size. Overall there will be an improvement in screen real-estate and a more pocket-able device would be possible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not the expert on this area. I just know the square screen devices had problem running many normal software, and its just my educated guess, not based on any hard research, that it might encounter similar issues in another aspect ratio.
Someone with more knowledge might want to comment on this, as I feel that I'm begining to comment based on speculations now. I'd rather not do that.
Other than this concern, I think 800x480 would be great.
Cheers.

Its a matter of choosing to stay with the past, or go with the future. In the past the 4:3 ratio was most common both for TV and computer monitor formats. Now with HD getting ready to become mainstream in many countries, the 16:9 ratio is becoming the new TV standard. Computer monitors are also quickly taking on that ratio with all the "widescreen" versions now on the market. I'm betting within 2 years 16:9 will be the definitive standard for TV and computers, especially since 4:3 content on a 16:9 screen is more useable than the reverse (watching a widescreen movie on a 4:3 screen sucks).
Now resolution is another matter, and some seem to be getting that mixed up with the physical dimention ratio. You can squish 800X480 on a 4:3 screen, or a 16:9 screen, you just need elongated pixels. Not that any company would do that, I'm just saying. So after going with 16:9, an appropriate resolution would have to go with it like 960x540.
I think the best form factor for the next version would be a 16:9 screen, which would elongate it somewhat and reduce the height. Not only would this allow for 4:3 and 16:9 content, it would make it easier to hold as a real phone (and then make sure it has a standard private earpiece so it can be used as a phone). By making it a little longer it should be able to be thinned out a little, too, since there would be more internal volume for components. Add vibrate and all the hold-outs will buy it - the ones that love every spec except the fact that its not quite a phone. The mass market won't buy it unless it has vibrate and a private earpiece. Adding the widescreen will appeal to the iphone crowd and many others looking for the next big thing.
Widescreen, a little thinner, a private earpiece and vibrate and HTC will have an instant hit.

techntrek said:
Its a matter of choosing to stay with the past, or go with the future. In the past the 4:3 ratio was most common both for TV and computer monitor formats. Now with HD getting ready to become mainstream in many countries, the 16:9 ratio is becoming the new TV standard. Computer monitors are also quickly taking on that ratio with all the "widescreen" versions now on the market. I'm betting within 2 years 16:9 will be the definitive standard for TV and computers, especially since 4:3 content on a 16:9 screen is more useable than the reverse.
Now resolution is another matter, and some seem to be getting that mixed up with the physical dimention ratio. You can squish 800X480 on a 4:3 screen, or a 16:9 screen, you just need elongated pixels.
I think the best form factor for the next version would be a 16:9 screen, which would elongate it somewhat and thin out the height. Not only would this allow for 4:3 and 16:9 content, it would make it easier to hold as a real phone (and then make sure it has a standard private earpiece so it can be used as a phone). By making it a little longer it should be able to be thinned out a little, too. Add vibrate and all the hold-outs will buy it - the ones that love every spec except the fact that its not quite a phone. The mass market won't buy it unless it has vibrate and a private earpiece. Adding the widescreen will appeal to the iphone crowd and many others looking for the next big thing.
Widescreen, a little thinner, a private earpiece and vibrate and HTC will have an instant hit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, indeed the longer but narrower phone will be easier to hold.
Do you reckon there will be problem running existing applications on 800x480 screen?

I doubt it, although if they go 16:9 the resolution would have to be something like 960x540 or some other similar 16:9 format (I edited my post above to include this). Well-written applications like Word or GPS should already be built to handle any resolution. I know on desktop Windows any resolution change triggers a system event, which apps are supposed to monitor and adapt to. I assume since RealVGA requires a reboot Windows Mobile doesn't support resolution changes on the fly, but it should at least have an API to tell apps what the current resolution is when they first run, and most apps should already be built to adjust accordingly - there are just too many different screen sizes on the market for them not to.

techntrek said:
I doubt it, although if they go 16:9 the resolution would have to be something like 960x540 or some other similar 16:9 format (I edited my post above to include this). Well-written applications like Word or GPS should already be built to handle any resolution. I know on desktop Windows any resolution change triggers a system event, which apps are supposed to monitor and adapt to. I assume since RealVGA requires a reboot Windows Mobile doesn't support resolution changes on the fly, but it should at least have an API to tell apps what the current resolution is when they first run, and most apps should already be built to adjust accordingly - there are just too many different screen sizes on the market for them not to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, they cannot afford to not cater to all the different resolutions and aspect ratios. What I'm worried is what in reality many programs are written by lazy programmers who had not made their applications as smart as the likes of microsoft office. Games, for example. But, I'm hopeful that more and more people would become aware of the need to make their applications aspect ratio as wellas resolution aware.
Anyway, by the time we get our next device, wm7 should be out. Then, many developers might need to go through some adaptation. Who knows, wm7 may allows resolution change without the need to reset?

leoni1980 said:
calm down now. let's be nice please, each to their own and all that......i use two devices at the moment as it suits my needs: am i an idiot?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@me? I am perfectly calm, damnit!!! (just kidding...) Anyone who carries 2 devices is fine with me; to each his or her own, it just didn't work for me. As for spacecat, he was always picking a fight and I grew weary of his drivel cluttering xda. He's entitled to his opinion as well but stepped over the line by attacking others. 'Nuff said.

Can someone post a video comparison of coreplayer on HD2 another WindowsMobile phone?

Hello, I know that there are hundreds of you who have coreplayer, an HD2, and another Windows Mobile phone.
Can some of you post videos of coreplaying on action on both the HD2 and another phone?
I would prefer a simultaneous comparison on the same footage being played roughly at the same time (volume can be muted).
I would prefer a comparison between a 4 inch screen to a 3 inch screen.
Please please please post a video! It would be awesome and I need it to make a certain life changing decision!!!!!

What's the point? Coreplayer works better on the hd2 than on any other (except maybe that couple of phones for which it has hardware acceleration) thanks to the 1ghz cpu. Not much more to say...

kilrah said:
What's the point? Coreplayer works better on the hd2 than on any other (except maybe that couple of phones for which it has hardware acceleration) thanks to the 1ghz cpu. Not much more to say...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I want to see clearness and screen size, and to see if the size is actually worth it. Just saying that it is clear and big does no justice. Video representation is the best method to show you how big an object in a film really is.
People on the Xperia X1 board used to say that the screen was very big, and many enjoyed the video experience but there was no actual comparison to prove to naive people like me that 3 inches is utterly useless.

I agree with kilrah... works better than it did on my nokia e71 and my htc touch pro2
video comparison is moot, its the same program with the same features, on a faster phone with a bigger screen

What do you like and hate about your E71?
And I still want to see a video comparison, nonetheless.

poetryrocksalot said:
People on the Xperia X1 board used to say that the screen was very big, and many enjoyed the video experience but there was no actual comparison to prove to naive people like me that 3 inches is utterly useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell me why the 3 inch screen is useless?? I have crystal clear images and video on my x1... is a great little phone for vid... however the hd2 is much better in terms of size... same clarity and quality, just bigger...

So you hope to see a difference in playing a video on 2 phones with different screen sizes on a video of both? Good luck.
I could film my 37 inch tv and send you the video, it wouldn't look different to you than if I did it with my 2.8 inch phone.
Go in a store that has phones on display, and compare yourself in real life. It's the only way to get an accurate idea.

kilrah said:
So you hope to see a difference in playing a video on 2 phones with different screen sizes on a video of both? Good luck.
I could film my 37 inch tv and send you the video, it wouldn't look different to you than if I did it with my 2.8 inch phone.
Go in a store that has phones on display, and compare yourself in real life. It's the only way to get an accurate idea.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't have HD2 on display in America. Look at where I am from.
I got to compare my brother's HTC Touch Pro2 to my Xperia X1 and learned that even 3.5 inch screen is not good enough for me to watch a movie on the plane. And guess what, damn it, before I get to compare the damn devices, I was 100% certain that the 3.5 inch display would be enough for me.
Nope.
Even my brother said that the screen size for video playback was awesome. Nope, not for me. But I do enjoy watching movies on my laptop, I just want to know what the minimal size for me is.
So.......I wish I could have the damn HD2 so that I can compare to the Touch Pro2 and Xperia...but no, it's not in America....yet...and besides that, damn it, once the HD2 hit T-mobile stores, there probably won't be any video to compare to other phones, and if there is, the videos are different.
I am looking for details in film, because when I watch a movie on the go, I still enjoy the little details in the background. The little easter eggs, and stuff that you are meant to see but not on the first screening. A big but minimalistic screen is vital for such details.
If I see a basketball of the same color and shade on the basketball court because it is from the same film, I can compare that in-motion footage on two different screens. I can see if a 4.1 inch is perfect for such details, because I already have experience with 3.5 inch screens with actual video playback. And with the implication that I have experienced testing 3.5 inch screen, you should know that if I see two same objects, I can roughly imagine myself seeing the actual visual representation in real life. I am not just talking about comparing a windows icon to an apple shortcut icon. Nope, if I compare a windows icon, I must compare it to the same windows icon.
If I compare films I must compare the same films at roughly the same moment.
This is a true comparison of visuals.
And your TV argument is pointless; the contrast in size is way too apparent. And guess what, I can test that on my own.
I can no longer just listen to what people have to say about the devices, for example--my brother or the person who said that 3 inch screens are awesome. A truly unbiased review does not praise an object, but it does compare it to relevant ones.
The HD2 screen is so big that the video experience is awesome, because this fits in the reviewer's criteria. If the review simply states that the HD2 screen is bigger than the Xperia or Touch Pro2, there is no preference in the criteria. But if one gives a careful visual comparison, he can let the beholder make the decision (not the reviewer himself).
I feel like some of you are implying that I am stupid, but I wish you could understand my reasons.

poetryrocksalot said:
I wish you could understand my reasons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I wish you would understand why even if someone shot a video of 2 devices next to each other it wouldn't do any justice to how it actually looks like.
poetryrocksalot said:
I am looking for details in film, because when I watch a movie on the go, I still enjoy the little details in the background. The little easter eggs, and stuff that you are meant to see but not on the first screening.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A compressed youtube video of the 2 will just show some half blurry screens on which you can't see anything of the little details that interest you, even if they were actually there. All you'll be able to see is that the HD2's screen is bigger, but you already know that.
Apparently we can say all we can, you seem to not have the same expectations than most of us if you were disappointed following the advice you were given with the X1. So even if we say that properly encoded video looks extremely crisp on the HD2 you'll have to see for yourself on the real thing. So wait until it hits the store, take your current phone with a short clip, go there, grab an HD2 on display, send the clip to the HD2 via bluetooth, with a coreplayer cab if needed, and do your test... that's what I did with my usual programs, spent 2 hours at the store doing what I usually do on my phone on the HD2 before buying it
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=582122
The "modded video" in the first post is a good example of good quality video for the hd2, best played with the built-in player.

7.7 screen vs ipad 3?

Obviously, the ipad 3's new retina screen resolution can't be topped, whereas samsung's super amoled has better contrast ratios. Which screen will be more impressive in your opinion once the ipad 3 arrives in stores this friday?

I was kinda wondering this too. I watched a live feed about the reveal, and Im more than happy with my 7.7. Its still the best 7" tablet out there, and Ive never been an apple fan. And doubt I ever will be.

I have an iPad 3 on the way because I have more money than sense. If people are nice I will do a side by side screen comparison.

burhanistan said:
I have an iPad 3 on the way because I have more money than sense. If people are nice I will do a side by side screen comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rofl, I felt like I had more money than sense when I bought the 7.7 to replace my 8.9, but even though the iPad3 is probably going to look amazing, I can't stomach the Apple ecosystem. I got rid of my iPod, which was my first ever mp3 player, maybe six years ago after a four year run or so. I can only pray that some day, iTunes will rot in the special hell it deserves.
Whether people are nice enough for the comparison, thanks for a good laugh.

I love the 7.7 screen, I mostly use it for movie/tv watching, cant see myself ever going back to lcd panels. I had an ipad 2 and some archos devices before but they dont come close to the display quality of the 7.7.
And the 7.7 formfactor is perfect for me.
Look forward to seeing the ipad 3 screen in action

High resolution is nice, but almost all content will be blown up, not native. The dummied up examples that tech sites keep using are full of crap. Until 2048*1536 becomes default standard, i'll take amoled & native.

Wish I had more money than sense, LOL. I had to return my 7.0 plus, and a blackberry playbook to afford my 7.7. And it was worth every cent!

CBONE said:
High resolution is nice, but almost all content will be blown up, not native. The dummied up examples that tech sites keep using are full of crap. Until 2048*1536 becomes default standard, i'll take amoled & native.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We shall see, but I think older apps will just display in their native resolution rather than be upscaled. Where the "Retina" display will shine will be with text and photos.
I won't have time to video a proper comparison until maybe the week after the new iPad comes in, but I will show them both with a PDF, the XDA website, a 1080p video, and maybe Osmos HD or something. Any requests?

burhanistan said:
We shall see, but I think older apps will just display in their native resolution rather than be upscaled. Where the "Retina" display will shine will be with text and photos.
I won't have time to video a proper comparison until maybe the week after the new iPad comes in, but I will show them both with a PDF, the XDA website, a 1080p video, and maybe Osmos HD or something. Any requests?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe a side by side comparison under direct sunlight?

CBONE said:
High resolution is nice, but almost all content will be blown up, not native. The dummied up examples that tech sites keep using are full of crap. Until 2048*1536 becomes default standard, i'll take amoled & native.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What content are you talking about? Certainly games for iPad2 will not be rendered at the full resolution, and it will probably be a while before many games are actually written for 2048x1536. Still, images and video--whose most common resolution nowadays, 1280x720, is already larger than the iPad2, not to mention 1080p blu-ray-sourced video--will certainly be able to take advantage. That's not even to mention the massive readability benefit for small text on web pages and documents.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to buy an iPad3 and I am never going to give up my Super AMOLED+ on my 7.7 until there is a WUXGA or better 8-9" tablet, but downplaying the benefit of a high-res screen just strikes me as foolish.

I wonder if a 720p content would still look good on that really high resolution

Last few week I've almost sell-off my iPad2 for a Galaxy TAB 7.7.
Now I'm stucked and in the same situation like lots of other people.
If Samsung could replace all their Galaxy TAB 8.9 & 10.1 LCD screen with a Super AMOLED FHD screen, then I'll buy 1. Until then, I'm getting the new iPad this weekend.

NewForce said:
Last few week I've almost sell-off my iPad2 for a Galaxy TAB 7.7.
Now I'm stucked and in the same situation like lots of other people.
If Samsung could replace all their Galaxy TAB 8.9 & 10.1 LCD screen with a Super AMOLED FHD screen, then I'll buy 1. Until then, I'm getting the new iPad this weekend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can only imagine the possible technical difficulties when making 8.9 and 10.1 SuperAMOLED screens, they are even having issues with the 4.65 on the Nexus, 5.3 on the Note. All are quality related issues.
Although I really hate the closed system of iOS, but after using my friends ipad2 for a week, Im starting to like the tablet specific apps it has as compared to andriod.
At least with IPS, I only need to check for backlight bleeding, though Im worried what will happen to the 720p playback of my files since they are now going to be upscaled.

IMO, the New iPad's huge screen resolution is a cool idea and all, but for me, the 7.7's form factor and colour/contrast ratio are the biggest selling points (apart from NOT being Apple of course!).
I mean, if Apple is stating that a "Retina" display is determined by a ratio of viewing distance vs the ability to discern individual pixels, well then by that right (at least for me), the 7.7 already fit's that category under most viewing scenarios (again, for me).
In other words, under most circumstances, I already can't discern individual pixels on my 7.7 anyway, so just adding more of them isn't going to make a difference to me.
What does make a difference, is the superior contrast ratio of SAMOLED. Being that the New iPad's retina display is still an LCD, it is therefore very unlikely that it will be able to compete with SAMOLED in the contrast ratio department.
I suppose the ultimate display would be something of a hybrid of SAMOLED and IPS LCD, where you might have each individual pixel backlit by a single LED.

obviously it's going to be the new ipad there is no contest. I love android thats why i have a the 7.7 but i also love the ipad infact ill be getting my new ipad 64gb 3g at&t and a white 16gb wifi for my wife.
With that insane resolution and a quadcore gpu with buttery smooth OS i'll be a one happy camper.

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
IMO, the New iPad's huge screen resolution is a cool idea and all, but for me, the 7.7's form factor and colour/contrast ratio are the biggest selling points (apart from NOT being Apple of course!).
I mean, if Apple is stating that a "Retina" display is determined by a ratio of viewing distance vs the ability to discern individual pixels, well then by that right (at least for me), the 7.7 already fit's that category under most viewing scenarios (again, for me).
In other words, under most circumstances, I already can't discern individual pixels on my 7.7 anyway, so just adding more of them isn't going to make a difference to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For you, maybe. The pixels and rasterized fonts are quite visible to me on the 7.7 from arm's length.
Mind you, I quite like the 7.7 and am not going to get rid of it (Heck, I'll probably keep my now "old" 10.1). But, there will be lots of areas where it simply won't hold a candle to the new screen on the iPad.

burhanistan said:
For you, maybe. The pixels and rasterized fonts are quite visible to me on the 7.7 from arm's length.
Mind you, I quite like the 7.7 and am not going to get rid of it (Heck, I'll probably keep my now "old" 10.1). But, there will be lots of areas where it simply won't hold a candle to the new screen on the iPad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough. I guess my point was that contrast, colour, and brightness are more important factors to me than sheer resolution. In that sense, especially with contrast, the new iPad display can't hold a candle up to SAMOLED+. Each one has its advantages I suppose.

teiglin said:
What content are you talking about? Certainly games for iPad2 will not be rendered at the full resolution, and it will probably be a while before many games are actually written for 2048x1536. Still, images and video--whose most common resolution nowadays, 1280x720, is already larger than the iPad2, not to mention 1080p blu-ray-sourced video--will certainly be able to take advantage. That's not even to mention the massive readability benefit for small text on web pages and documents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Web pages and flowable documents should look great, as should images. Video will have to be scaled or be too small. The algorithm for stretching video won't be perfect. Same situation as SD video on an HDTV. They won't look the way they were meant to be viewed (inferior IMO) and will need adjustments. Games will need to have the increased resolution taken into account or look crap when they get stretched. Apps will be in the same situation.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to buy an iPad3 and I am never going to give up my Super AMOLED+ on my 7.7 until there is a WUXGA or better 8-9" tablet, but downplaying the benefit of a high-res screen just strikes me as foolish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
High-res is great when everything takes it into account or content that isn't resolution dependent. There is this assumption with ipad3 that everything will just automagically look incredible.

Well, all of this is just speculation anyway. We shall see soon enough.

7.7 : Super AMOLED Plus
ipad3 : Retina Display (same as Iphone 4)
7.7 : 1280 x 800 pixels, 7.7 inches - (~ 196 ppi density)
ipad 3 : 1536 x 2048 pixels, 9.7 inches (~264 ppi density)
7.7 : Single Core GPU Mali-400
ipad 3 : Quad Core PowerVR SGX543MP4
i think we should say (even it's hard) apple bite Samsung now *sobbing
=============================================
but i'm still loyal with my GT-P6800
this is my first tablet and i love the size, the screen, the premium of silver metal back side

Screen Aspect Ratio

Hi all,
Can anyone confirm the screens actual aspect ratio? Given the resolution is exactly double the Xoom I was expecting 16:10 which I find breast for comics...
Description on play store seems to suggest 16:9 which I think would be a little too wide for the average comic. Any ideas which is right? I suspect the 16:9 figure takes into account the screen space lost by the navigation bar.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Haha... .love that auto correction
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

2560 x 1600 is a 16:10 resolution.

How can Google advertise it as having a 16:9 screen? Not doubting you, just seems like false advertising
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

cyberkid2002 said:
How can Google advertise it as having a 16:9 screen? Not doubting you, just seems like false advertising
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I presume this is the blurb you are referring to?
Stream hit movies instantly on Nexus 10 in full HD – there’s no waiting for downloads and syncing, or worrying about storage space. And because Nexus 10 has a stunning high-resolution 16:9 screen, you’ll be watching your favorite content the way it was meant to be seen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can think of 3 explanations:
A) Someone in marketing screwed up (doubtful).
B) Non-square pixels (incredibly unlikely)
C) Google knows that the average consumer has no clue and only knows two things when it comes to TV/movies: HD and 16:9.
Had Google actually put 16:10 I imagine the vast majority of consumers would be scratching their heads. They could have also stated it was WQXGA but I imagine that would have thrown probably 99% of people for a loop, including me.
As it stands, 16:9 is a subset of 16:10 and it was probably smart on Google's part to advertise it as a 16:9 screen when speaking specifically about TV/movies. The hilarious thing though is the vast majority of modern movies are in 2.35:1 which will have pretty significant letterboxing regardless. I doubt anyone wants to carry around a 21:9 tablet though.

cyberkid2002 said:
How can Google advertise it as having a 16:9 screen? Not doubting you, just seems like false advertising
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably because the useable screen area is 16:9, as the soft keys at the bottom of the screen takes up space.

[Q] Poor Video Quality?

I just received my Google Nexus 10 yesterday. After reading all the great reviews about the video quality I must admit I was shocked how poor it was. Don't get me wrong, it isn't awful by any stretch. The detail is certainly there and there is so much detail it might actually be detriment to the product because I can pick up compression artifacts and pixelization I didn't even know was there on some of my videos. However, this really leads in to what I think the source of the problem is on this device, that is, the black level. The first video I took a look at was Ice Age since it came with the N10. If black level is off on animations they can look washed out and it certainly did in this case. My projector on a 100" screen could actually reflect a better image in my opinion. Moving over to other videos like a 1080p MKV of Battleship displayed some improvement, but the poor black levels were still there. Oh, and I should mention this was with using MX Player.
So, are others seeing something similar? Again, I'm not trying to really downplay the image entirely because the detail is certainly there, but again, I'm disappointed by the black level. Is there possibly a way to adjust it that I'm not aware of? All I can seemingly find is Brightness and that doesn't do enough. Perhaps a gamma control would help? Any guidance from others is appreciated.

U get ice age free with N10?
Sent from my Nexus 10 using XDA Premium HD app

verusevo said:
U get ice age free with N10?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.

2 posts? Troll?

Techie2012 said:
2 posts? Troll?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the welcome. Did people say the same about you when you had 2 posts? Trust me, your accusation is utterly ridiculous. This is simply my first Android device and this was my initial impression. I hoped that there might be some kind of workaround or fix so I simply did a Google search for a Nexus 10 forum and wound up here. As I allued to in my initial post there are plenty of things I like about the device and black level might not be a deal killer, but if there was a way to resolve it, why not pursue it?

Techie2012 said:
2 posts? Troll?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only 245 posts and a member since February of this year? You must clearly have very little to contribute anywhere since you don't have at least a 1k post count or year+ membership (sarcasm btw; post count and join dates means absolutely nothing in determining a person's status lol)
I believe a few others have mentioned black levels not being optimal on the N10. I myself don't really see it as a problem, but then again I rarely watch videos. I believe Contrast itself might be a better option to modify over Brightness, but I'm pretty sure Contrast isn't adjustable currently.
Possibly when Kernel development matures enough, we may be able to modify screen settings, but I don't think we're there quite yet. Maybe some video players might have an option for adjustments?

Those frequenting here have varying social skills. Be tolerant.
Suggest posting some pics of screen's black level, alongside another device used as a baseline. A thousand words and all that.
Also suggest searching Play store for "display settings" and try out the various widget/apps available.

That's seriously put me off buying this tablet now.
A poor black level can ruin video quality. I know this because my laptops black level is shocking bad, picture below.
Now I might either get a Note 10.1 or wait for something with a high res screen and a good black level.

Haha you guys are funny.
Anyway back to the original question, this device has a LCD screen, and like most LCD TVs, the black is not as black as you'd like or you would see on a PlasmaTV or Amoled screen.
If black levels are highly important to you, i'm sorry to say you bought the wrong device.

Ok, so I took a previous poster's advice and got a hold of an iPad3 with Retina Display and compared it against the N10. The difference was not as significant as I thought it might be. Ultimately, I didn't think either producing razor sharp images with inky blacks and that is because they don't my own HDTV's (LED) in my home along with my home theater projector crush both devices. Why? Well, first, I wasn't aware that the contrast ratio was so poor on all the tablet devices. Most of my other products have something like a 50,000:1 contrast ratio whereas the tablets are around 1000:1, a very big difference. Also, I'm accustomed to watching BluRays on those displays. BluRay quality just doesn't seem to exist on these tablets right now. So was I expecting too much from the N10? Yes.
Spending some time with both devices side-by-side allowed me to sort of critique both on my own terms and decide which one I like best. I'm probably an atypical user so my opinions here are my own and I don't expect others to find the same items valuable.
1. Display - the iPad wins here, but not by as much as I might have thought. Whites are more warm and not as bright on the N10 when compared to the iPad. Blacks are also better on the iPad, but I expected it to be a dramatic difference. It wasn't. I've included some images to this post that will help you see the difference a bit more. There are some images where the difference looks very pronounced, but that is the digital camera really exposing the faults of the N10 and making them appear more significant. I wouldn't say that is the case in reality. Also, something you'll notice from the images is the light leak. It is there on the N10, but not on the iPad. Too bad Samsung couldn't have done a better job here. It would have made it appear as a more quality product.
2. Form Factor - I find the form factor of the iPad better than the N10. I like to use portrait mode more often than most I think and the iPad gives you more space to work from horizontally when doing so. This makes web browsing much easier and I actually feel more cramped using the N10 to browse via landscape. I would MUCH prefer the N10 to have the iPad's shape.
3. Weight - I would have never thought 50 grams or whatever it is would make a difference, but to me it does and the N10 is a clear winner here. After handling both devices for some time I simply enjoyed holding the N10 more. The lightness made for a more enjoyable experience.
4. Rubber Backing - When I saw on this on the N10 I thought it was sort of a gimmick, but I really like it. Again, it just seems to feel more comfortable holding it.
5. Heat - I have no idea why, but the back of the iPad got pretty hot while using it. The N10 had some slight warmth, but ever since I've used it it has stayed relatively cool.
6. Speakers - The N10 really crushes the iPad here. The front two speakers are awesome and can push out good volume. Going back to the iPad with its rear mono speaker almost feels silly in comparison.
7. Web Browsing - The winner here is the iPad. Pages came up more quickly, they are easier to scroll through (only slightly), and are displayed better. In portrait mode the clear winner is the iPad since you have more horizontal space to work with, something I like.
8. Off-axis viewing - Not that you ever really need this because tablets are really made for a one person audience to be looking at the device head-on, but I did notice it. For whatever reason the iPad had a better image once you move off-axis from the device. The N10 was washed out more quickly as you moved off-axis.
9. Bugs - Oh man, Jelly Bean has them. I have essentially the base image on the N10 and I've already seen the battery information incorrect (stuck), freezes, my folders just disappearing after the device becoming frozen, and some other very quirky things. The iPad in comparison was stable. The iPad just feels a bit like driving a Lexus. It doesn't really do much to excite you, but it does what it is designed to do and does it well. The N10 is probably more like a BMW X6. Is it a sports car or an SUV? No one really knows. It does some things that are really neat, but in other categories it sort of falls apart. Just my own silly analogy.
So which will I keep. Based on all the criteria above I would say it is very close and probably a tie in my mind, but I'm leaning toward the N10. I'm not sure why, but I struggle a great deal with going to a closed environment like the iPad is. It feels boring to me and I just think I might enjoy tinkering with the N10 more. If I give it more thought I might change my mind, but for the moment this is where my head is.
I hope all this might help someone. If anyone has any questions about the comparison or the images please feel free to ask.

A lot people seem to crank the brightness even when they don't need it. The N10 with the back light turned up definitely has poor black levels but it's actually pretty decent when below 40%(more comfortable to view also)

I agree. I'm totally unimpressed by the video quality of Nexus 10. Maybe I'm doing something wrong here, but my older Galaxy Tab 2 P3100 had much better video quality than this. The colors are totally messed up and the it just seems bland and boring.
Frankly, I don't think this is an iPad killer in anyway, and I'm not an apple fanboy either. I had to download apps just to get the Volume to a reasonable level eventhough it has stereo. Wow, the ipad claims much less but delivers more, Nexus 10 claims tall but falls short.
Thinking about getting back the iPad 4 if the Nexus doesn't grow on me. Sorry, Nexus. Android has failed you :crying:

JPW1 said:
Most of my other products have something like a 50,000:1 contrast ratio whereas the tablets are around 1000:1, a very big difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 50,000:1 contrast ratio is actually dynamic contrast ratio. How dark the screen is at it's lowest brightness and how bright the screen is at it's highest brightness. It's really just a marketing gimmick.
The real static contrast ratio could be anywhere between 1000-5000:1. Not a huge difference at all.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23137918

Looking at your screenshots I can definitely say you have the brightness set waaaayyy to high on the Nexus 10. Turn it down and the picture will be drastically better.

And for the other little problems you have to wait some time. Most of them will be gone with the first good custom roms/kernels. The device is still brand new.

I tried both the Transformers and Ice Age films streaming from google play, and I thought the video was pretty poor. Wifi signal was strong.

Video quality from all the streaming services I've used on Android have relatively poor quality. If you are attempting to benchmark the device's fidelity then I suggest making a high bit rate rip of a Blu-Ray
The high bit rate 1080p and 1440p videos I've seen look pretty great, but I agree videos from streaming services look pretty awful in terms of both blurriness and contrast.
Also, the hardware decoders like most devices do not have as high of picture quality as some software decoder. For instance, for the same video the hw decoder will look softer than the sw decoder in MX Player