Related
Hey guys
I'm thinking to buy the 7" Tab Plus or the 7.7" one(when they will appear ) and I was wondering if any of you have any experience with PLS LCD and Super Amoled Plus displays.
Which one is better,in terms of quality,power usage,etc
I googled for that but it didn't help much,and i'd prefer to hear from someone who saw in real life both displays
As we know both are made bu samsungand both are the best in market (even better than the ipad IPS Screen ) but Pls screen has more natural colours like what we see with our eye in real world . Amoled colours are so vivid like animation movies ,etc but it is very good in power saving and better in black color . Finally it depends on your taste and how you prefere to see colors and you should see both side by side to decide but personally I hated my friends galaxy s2 after I compared it to my galaxy tab 10.1
advice : (buy galaxy tab 7.7 higher resolution , better processor ,thinner and easier to handle )
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
thanks for your answer
seems it will be a tough choice,and i will have to wait till both will be on stores so i can compare myself although the 7.7 price is kinda much..around 700 euros
I like the natural colours so i guess i will go with 7 plus
Anyway,in the meantime if someone else has other opinions pls share
I would say Super AMOLED Plus hands down. It's true that the AMOLED displays portray images more vivid and with very deep contrast, but I wouldn't say that the colors are unnatural, in fact I find it to be a major advantage of the 7.7, it will make movies that much better. The Super AMOLED Plus displays also don't have a backlight so they are much thinner and use less power. This is technology much more advanced than the panels in today's TVs. The Super PLS displays Samsung makes (what the 7.0 Plus has) are also very good, some say better than the IPS displays in tablets, but it's still an LCD, not quite as good as the Super AMOLED Plus in my opinion.
Also do not forget that the 7.7 display is higher resolution at 1280 x 800, the 7.0 Plus is 1024 x 600, and in my opinion it will make a big difference especially in Honeycomb. But don't let any of us persuade you in your decision, if you can, go look at them side by side in person and decide for yourself. We don't know what the 7.7 will cost yet, but I imagine the 7.0 Plus will be cheaper so if that is an important factor for you then it wouldn't be unwise to consider it.
As far as other specs go, the 7.7 is a bit thinner and lighter and has a bigger battery, a slightly faster processor, and a 64GB option.
Ok,thank you both for answer
Well yeah the price is an important factor..the 7 plus will cost 300 euros and the 7.7 will cost almost 700 euros so I will stick with the 7 plus for now
Here is a video which shows both side by side if someone else is interested to see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHOxPJBgieg
My first conclusion is that the super amoled looks brighter and colours are different than the ips pls one,but they ask too much..i will get it in a year or so when it will be half of price
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
the answer is :
"
Who
Gives
A
####
"
Great another iphone thread
From the big ole Note
miko3d said:
the answer is :
"
Who
Gives
A
####
"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly +1
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
steveblue said:
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting.. Although I would think you wouldn't need to plot viewing distances. I would think you would need to either know the algorithm in which apple uses to make this "retina" claim or you would just go by the viewing distances specified by the manufacturer.
I could be wrong but that was my thought. Definitely an interesting idea though.
steveblue said:
While the 'New iPad''s resolution and display are incredibly impressive, but with the announcements, I noticed that Apple is using the term "Retina Display" (it's term for a display that in some pseudo science way is exactly right for the human eyes) in a different way. That is this new iPad's 'Retina Display" has a completely different ppi (pixels per inch) than the iPhone's Retina Display. Because you look at the iPad from farther away is Apple's rational. (see macworld quote below *)
So Apple now changed (updated?) the definition of their "Retina Display" term to some viewing distance / ppi equation, that they seems to be able to pretend has meaning scientifically (I am a researcher in vision and tech, so I hate to see marketing just crap on science). Can't Apple just stick with size/res at ppi like everyone else. Or maybe science (hence us geeks) should be able to use the term for anything that fits Apple's now new pseudo equation -- Hmm doing the 'math' it looks like the Samsung Galaxy Note would generally fit in the wishy washy definition of retina display:
iPhone 4s: 3.5-inch 960 x 640 pixels, 326 ppi
Galaxy Note: 5.3-inch 800 x 1280 pixels, 285 ppi
New iPad: 9.7-inch 2048 x 1536 pixel, 264 ppi
So all this bears the question, according to Apple's own definition, does the Galaxy Note phone have a Retina Display? Can someone with more time than me right now, maybe chart out the 3 devices and viewing distances - then we can send our findings to David Pogue of the NYTimes ( tech gadget writer).
-steveblue
-----------
* Here is macworld explaining why the retina display term changed:
"Apple first introduced the concept of a “Retina display” in the iPhone 4, which packed 326 pixels per inch into its 3.5-inch display. Rather than refer to a specific level of pixel density, the term defines how the average person sees a screen—at a certain distance away, the human eye can no longer distinguish the individual pixels on a device.
Although the new iPad has a lower pixel density (264 versus 326) than the iPhone 4 or 4S, that’s largely due to screen size and relative distance—users hold the iPad further away from their faces than they might an iPhone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ignore the others lol... This is a great post as I was thinking the same thing. You explained it much more impressively that I ever could though...
I like this thread. Steve definitely sounds like an expert on the subject.
So according to apple, we do have retina display! !
DPMAce said:
I like this thread. Steve definitely sounds like an expert on the subject.
So according to apple, we do have retina display! !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should lead to some great Samsung ads.
its all marketing by the great apple. Only company I know that can be late to a party, create a new word, and then set the standard. Its becoming dead around these parts.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
There's nothing "pseudo science" about the resolution of the human eye. It's nothing but a ratio between ppi and viewing distance. It could be argued whether apple's phones and tablets are below the ratio and whether their official viewing distances make sense, but the concept itself is sound science. If you increase the pixel density or view the screen from further away, you won't be able to distinguish individual pixels.
Nice to know.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
I would say it's exactly on the fuzzy edge of retina display - for 285 ppi, the shortest distance from the screen that the user is still unable to discern the pixel difference is about 12 inch. (for iPhone 4s it's 10.5 inch)
For normal usage of the Note (my usage), it's about 11-12 inch or larger, so it's on the verge of retina display.
Before i prove your theory, let me see if I can care less about this exercise.
---------------------------
Yeah it's a Galaxy Note, are you jealous?
I disagree that the Note has a retina display. it looks considerably more grainy than my wife's iPhone 4. it doesn't bother me, but I know it's there
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
deymayor said:
Before i prove your theory, let me see if I can care less about this exercise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can definitely care less about this exercise - by ignoring it and not posting a reply at all. I guess you do care about it a bit.
leppo said:
I disagree that the Note has a retina display. it looks considerably more grainy than my wife's iPhone 4. it doesn't bother me, but I know it's there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but the new ipad also has a retina display - and it has lower ppi than the Note.
but .....
freemini said:
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, PenTile RGBG is the dirty word here. I wish they went with an RGB matrix. I can definitely see the dotted edges on small text. That said, the dots are far smaller than the terribly-obvious ones on older screens like on the Nexus One, so I can easily ignore it.
tytung2020 said:
I would say it's exactly on the fuzzy edge of retina display - for 285 ppi, the shortest distance from the screen that the user is still unable to discern the pixel difference is about 12 inch. (for iPhone 4s it's 10.5 inch)
For normal usage of the Note (my usage), it's about 11-12 inch or larger, so it's on the verge of retina display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this is true, then for me I can't see the individual pixels from my regular viewing distance. Yes, I actually held a ruler up to eye level and put my phone at the end and honestly 1ft is kind of close.
On a side note, I have always loved my Note's screen. If it is not the pinnacle, it sure is sitting on top w/ only a few other phones atop the Android ecosystem.
freemini said:
You do realize Note is PenTile right? That pretty much means 1/3 less pixels. The resolution is high so it isn't that obvious but it reduces the sub pixel density noticeably(which is ultimately more important). Whatever, you either like the screen or not, Retina Display is just a name Apple invented for high density screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is only 1/6 (~17%) not 1/3 less!
And the macbook is just another laptop but if you call it the latter, apple drones get their panties in a bunch.
To start with, "Retina display" is a marketing term, created by Apple. It has no formal definition or "standard". It's only meaningful in terms dictated by Apple relative to their own products.
It's also (as mentioned at the bottom of the OP) based on the distance you're holding the device from your face, you're not likely to be using a 5.3" device at the same distance as a 9.7" device. It's this distance relative to the ppi that they're using to determine if it's a "retina" display or not.
Don't adopt proprietary marketing terms as a meaningful identifier.
I would imagine that since it's a term created, by Apple, to describe a feature of Apple products, it's irrelevant when applied to non-Apple products. They might've lost their "reality distortion field", but they've still got one of the more heavily backed marketing teams in the world.
UPDATE: I had to take the videos down for the moment at Samsung's request. There is information that they are about to change some design features and specs, but I don't know when and what exactly. I'm sorry for the situation, but I assure you I'll post them back as soon as I get word of it! Thank you for your interest and patience
I've had the chance to play around with the Note 10.1, that's the tablet with the S Pen. The reason they've delayed the release is that they've changed it dramatically since the preview at the MWC. It now has a 1.4GHz quadcore processor (I think it's the Exynos on the SIII), a 5 MP camera (instead of the 3.15) and the back got a hyperglazed finish just as the SIII. I've had the pebble blue one and I'm not sure if there is a marble white one.
The S Pen is much bigger than the Note 5.3 (looks EXACTLY the same), but smaller than the model shown at the MWC and it now fits inside a vertical hole in the lower left side. An amazing software feature is the Photoshop Touch app which is brilliant (as you may see in my video).
Here are my videos:
Short hands on presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eueOIjW5cIo
S Pen and Photoshop Touch review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0b0SRT_D74
It's an astonishing device, clearly stepping way higher in the high end line and it works like a charm. If you have questions feel free to ask, but unfortunately I no longer have it to do extra demos.
Which is the resolution? Still stuck at that 1280x800??
Yes, but I had no problem with it. At 150 ppi it's quite ok in my opinion.
If the resolution will be the same it will not compete with the ipad and will not sell well and i will not buy it either.
Thanks for the videos! This is a first day purchase for me. Any news on the release date?
Even 1920x1080 are too low for a 10.1. To compete with ipad visual quality they can barely put this resolution into a 8.9, but for a 10.1... no way it's too low.
Omg, Samsung is fond of low ppi especially if fullRGB, yes it's cheaper to build but OMG!
Unfortunately I have no such info, but given the fact that *I* (not some hotshot official) had access to one, it can't be far.
zooster said:
Even 1920x1080 are too low for a 10.1. To compete with ipad visual quality they can barely put this resolution into a 8.9, but for a 10.1... no way it's too low.
Omg, Samsung is fond of low ppi especially if fullRGB, yes it's cheaper to build but OMG!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BS.
1920x1080 is normal-sized monitor HD resolution, to say it's too low for a 10.1" screen is beyond ridiculous.
iPhone's "Retina" resolution is completely worthless on a useless 3.5", iPad's "Retina" display is overkill. The higher the resolution the better... up to a point.
Beyond that you are just paying a weight and power consumption (and also brightness in the case of the Ipad) penalty without getting your worth (the higher the resolutions the less your eye is able to see the difference).
Full HD resolution on a 10.1" would be ideal.
P.S. "Samsung is fond of low ppi"??
The Galaxy Tab 10.1's PPI is over 10% higher than the iPad2's.
Great. Thanks for the videos. I really look forward to a launch. Hopefully very soon. I aim for this to be my note-taken tool at work. I hope it will live up to that and be usefull. (Not hand click when using the pen etc.).
xdapao3 said:
BS.
1920x1080 is normal-sized monitor HD resolution, to say it's too low for a 10.1" screen is beyond ridiculous.
iPhone's "Retina" resolution is completely worthless on a useless 3.5", iPad's "Retina" display is overkill. The higher the resolution the better... up to a point.
Beyond that you are just paying a weight and power consumption (and also brightness in the case of the Ipad) penalty without getting your worth (the higher the resolutions the less your eye is able to see the difference).
Full HD resolution on a 10.1" would be ideal.
P.S. "Samsung is fond of low ppi"??
The Galaxy Tab 10.1's PPI is over 10% higher than the iPad2's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Normal sized monitor is not meant to be used as close as a tablet.
The closer a device is used the higher the ppi should be. For a smartphone pixels start beeing unnoticeable from 320-330ppi. Actually the best job is made by lg with 1280x720 on a 4.3" and 342ppi, higher than apple.
The tablet is meant to be used less close than a phone, so the ppi can be lower, around 250... the value adopted by apple in ipad3.
So for an optimal view the ppi has to be higher. 1280x800 on a 10.1 does mean a too low ppi (maybe not for a monitor, but surely for a tablet).
And yes, I confirm that samsung is fond of low ppi devices. You tell me the higest ppi of a fullRGB display of a Samsung device. FullRGB only, because the pentile matrix trash doesn't worth any talk, you know that at ppi being equal the visual quality of a pentile is much lower due to less subpixels, so i.e. the actual ppi of a 300ppi samoled hd is around 250, but this is something already well known.
Do you have any information about battery life?
i'm thinking about buying a tablet .. and i was comparing between this one and the galaxy tab 2 10.1 .. i'm going to buy it for college use .. to be honest .. i haven't had any tablet before .. it's my first .. and i want recommendations .. which one should i buy .. galaxy note 10.1 or tab 10.1 or go for an ipad 3 ?
AmrEl-Shazly said:
i'm thinking about buying a tablet .. and i was comparing between this one and the galaxy tab 2 10.1 .. i'm going to buy it for college use .. to be honest .. i haven't had any tablet before .. it's my first .. and i want recommendations .. which one should i buy .. galaxy note 10.1 or tab 10.1 or go for an ipad 3 ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tab 2 10.1 is painfully slow. It's disappointing because it could have been a much better option if they had just put in a better processor (I know the tablet is supposed to be entry level, but the year-old exynos from the s2 would have been better). I'm not a huge gamer, but I do want a tablet that runs without much lag out of the box. I also want to play HD video files without frame skipping and the tab 2 10.1 isn't very good for this either.
As far as the other 2, it depends on you. The new ipad is nice. It's fast and has a fantastic display. My brother in law has one and absolutely loves it.
Personally, I usually gravitate towards android (and samsung). The note 10.1 doesn't have the PPI of the ipad, but it can fully display 720p hd video which is good enough for me. The screen is also a little bigger (than the ipad). Memory expansion is nice through microsd and the US version should have the IR blaster to use as a universal remote. The potential of using the s-pen for note taking and drawing is also a big plus for me. The quad core processor should also be able to handle just about whatever you throw at it (at least for a couple of years).
I wish the resolution was higher. I hate the display on my Tab 10.1, there's a distinct lack of clarity.
Probably gonna exchange my tab10.1 for the Note10.1
Hope it will launch soon, any rumours on that subject?
Sent from my GT-P3110 using xda premium
That ppi is still ridiculous. Either they increase it till around 250, or sammy will get only low end customers.
But since they still use that crappy ppi on high end smartphones, I guess they are not able to increase the ppi in a tablet.
How close do you hold a tablet? How far do you sit from a monitor? For me it's only a few inches difference in usage? i sit approx arms length away from my monitors and hold my tablet only a few inches closer than that (arms slightly bent)
jaaka78 said:
The tab 2 10.1 is painfully slow. It's disappointing because it could have been a much better option if they had just put in a better processor (I know the tablet is supposed to be entry level, but the year-old exynos from the s2 would have been better). I'm not a huge gamer, but I do want a tablet that runs without much lag out of the box. I also want to play HD video files without frame skipping and the tab 2 10.1 isn't very good for this either.
As far as the other 2, it depends on you. The new ipad is nice. It's fast and has a fantastic display. My brother in law has one and absolutely loves it.
Personally, I usually gravitate towards android (and samsung). The note 10.1 doesn't have the PPI of the ipad, but it can fully display 720p hd video which is good enough for me. The screen is also a little bigger (than the ipad). Memory expansion is nice through microsd and the US version should have the IR blaster to use as a universal remote. The potential of using the s-pen for note taking and drawing is also a big plus for me. The quad core processor should also be able to handle just about whatever you throw at it (at least for a couple of years).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well then the tab 2 10.1 is out of the race .. now the iPad 3 And The Note 10.1 .. so your recommendation is to have the note 10.1 right?
That's what I'm going with, but i don't think there's really a wrong choice
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I'm amused by all the comments linking the tablet to the low end of the market simply due to the low ppi. Clearly, everyone has different requirements out of a device. By putting a stylus on a 10" tablet, Samsung attained my personal "Shut up and take my money!" threshold. **** PPI, do you know how incredibly, mind blowingly useful a stylus is? As soon as I can figure out where to buy this thing, I'm buying it. I've been begging for a full sized tablet with a stylus ever since the original Note came out. This is my actual dream come true.
Samsung may be working on an 8-inch panel with a full HD 1080p display to combat the likely arrival of an updated Apple iPad mini with Retina Display later this year. According to Sam Mobile, Samsung’s Super AMOLED display with a 1920 X 1200 resolution will debut this fall at the IFA 2013 conference in Germany. The 8-inch tablet, potentially named the Galaxy Tab 8.0, would become Samsung’s second tablet to utilize the company’s Super AMOLED panel after the original Galaxy Tab 7.7.
Though Samsung currently is positioning the recently launched Galaxy Note 8.0, a device with a 1280 X 800 (720p) display against Apple’s current iPad mini, the new 8-inch panel with full HD resolution will be used to combat a potential 7.9-inch screen used by Apple for the iPad mini successor. The Retina Display will have a resolution of 2048 X 1536, which would mean it will still have more pixels than a full HD panel by Samsung. However, Samsung will likely leverage the high contrast, vivid colors, and power efficiency of its Super AMOLED technology as key selling points when fighting the marketing behind Retina Display.:laugh:
Press THANKS if i have helped you
If only android apps could be updated to support the higher pixel density vs stretching their mobile apps. :banghead:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747
Domoo said:
If only android apps could be updated to support the higher pixel density vs stretching their mobile apps. :banghead:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess that they will do so
I think it cant combat with xperia z tablet........super HD with BE-2 +water proof.....
links below....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bysy_RDS1XE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my GT-P3100 using xda premium
Hello all,
I am very interested in trading in my Nexus 6 (shamu) for a OnePlus 6T. Hard to pass up the $300 trade-in on a 4 year old device
My main concern is the display, mainly pixel density. From GSMArena:
Nexus 6: 1440 x 2560 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~493 ppi density)
OnePlus 6T: 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~402 ppi density)
Is this drastic of a drop going to be noticeable? Is there something about "Optic AMOLED" that makes up for this discrepancy? It just shocked me to see a 4 year old device with display specs that outperformed a brand-new "flagship killer" (not looking for a flame war here )
I don't really have any T-Mobile stores in the area where I can go and compare myself. I was hoping I could get some anecdotal evidence so I could make a decision. Any ex-shamu users out there with a 6T that care to weigh in?
Thanks a lot!
shiftymccool said:
Hello all,
I am very interested in trading in my Nexus 6 (shamu) for a OnePlus 6T. Hard to pass up the $300 trade-in on a 4 year old device
My main concern is the display, mainly pixel density. From GSMArena:
Nexus 6: 1440 x 2560 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~493 ppi density)
OnePlus 6T: 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~402 ppi density)
Is this drastic of a drop going to be noticeable? Is there something about "Optic AMOLED" that makes up for this discrepancy? It just shocked me to see a 4 year old device with display specs that outperformed a brand-new "flagship killer" (not looking for a flame war here )
I don't really have any T-Mobile stores in the area where I can go and compare myself. I was hoping I could get some anecdotal evidence so I could make a decision. Any ex-shamu users out there with a 6T that care to weigh in?
Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To each their own, but I came from a pixel 3xl which has a pretty nice screen and have no complaints.
I came from the Nexus 6p which has an even higher pixel density.
I honestly can't tell any difference, in fact the 6T looks even better. The home screen icons and fonts are tighter than on the 6p.
Also if you're wanting the deal, tomorrow is the last day.
mpetruzz said:
To each their own, but I came from a pixel 3xl which has a pretty nice screen and have no complaints.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. The pixel density is just fine on this. If it dropped to 720p then that would be a problem, but 1080p is just fine (unless you do VR with your phone, then it will be kinda crappy and you will miss the higher density).
I came from a combo of PH-1, P2XL, and Pixel 3 (mini), all of which higher pixel densities.
I came from a Moto X Pure and I haven't been bothered. It is a slight less crisp, but not a deal breaker for me.
shiftymccool said:
Hello all,
I am very interested in trading in my Nexus 6 (shamu) for a OnePlus 6T. Hard to pass up the $300 trade-in on a 4 year old device
My main concern is the display, mainly pixel density. From GSMArena:
Nexus 6: 1440 x 2560 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~493 ppi density)
OnePlus 6T: 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~402 ppi density)
Is this drastic of a drop going to be noticeable? Is there something about "Optic AMOLED" that makes up for this discrepancy? It just shocked me to see a 4 year old device with display specs that outperformed a brand-new "flagship killer" (not looking for a flame war here )
I don't really have any T-Mobile stores in the area where I can go and compare myself. I was hoping I could get some anecdotal evidence so I could make a decision. Any ex-shamu users out there with a 6T that care to weigh in?
Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I came from an Essential. No complaints.
My daughter has a Galaxy S8 and looked at the 6T screen and her first impression was that the screen was incredible.
Yeah I came from the Note 8 and I was very concerned... I've always used Notes - and I love this screen. Plus the phone just destroys the Note 8. Battery life and speed and thank goodness for the UI... so nice.
The screen is great! Better get it quick, I hear tomorrow is the last day for the promotion.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk
Sounds like a winner Thanks a lot everyone!
I came from the Note 8 as well, zero complaints as far as the screen is concerned. And the 6T really does kick the Note's ass when it comes to battery life and buttery smoothness. The fact that I paid $280 for this phone should be a crime. Actually, the fact that Sammy charges a grand for the Note 9 is the real crime. Do yourself a favor and pick up the 6T...even at full price its well worth it.
I came from a Pixel 2XL and the OnePlus 6T screen is much nicer. Pixel density may be less but you will never notice it unless you are doing VR with it.
Oneplus screen flickers makes my eyes ache and get blurry after extended use. Does anyone else have this experience?
Screen looks good to me although sometimes I think the top half has a very slight red look compared to the bottom half, other times it looks fine and I think it's just my eyes. I came from the Nexus 6P and galaxy S8+ which both have higher resolutions and I'm not noticing the difference if I'm honest.
I have note 9 and 6T, 6T isnt quite as bright and no 2k quality but for a 1080p amoled panel it is very good and very sharp. hard to tell between the two except for higher res and brightness
I came from google pixel ,so the screen looks amazing for me. I use the screen at 75% brightness ,and it makes watching videos pleasant for long duration.
hartleyshc said:
I came from the Nexus 6p which has an even higher pixel density.
I honestly can't tell any difference, in fact the 6T looks even better. The home screen icons and fonts are tighter than on the 6p.
Also if you're wanting the deal, tomorrow is the last day.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This was also my worry but I really think the 6t is definitely more colorful
I'll chime in just to reinforce what others have already said. I haven't had a none quadHD display on a device in 4 or 5 years so I was very concerned about if I would notice pixels on the OP6T. I even almost didn't buy one because I was telling myself 1080p wouldn't be good enough. I currently own the Pixel2XL as well and the display on the OP6T destroys it. Side by side the OP6T is far better than the Pixel2XL display. The OP6T is bright, crisp, sharp, great colors, lots of color options to tune the display to your liking, and it is just as good if not better than any quadHD display I've used.