News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Reply
< Esato Forum Index > Sony Ericsson / Sony > General > New SE phones lack of 16M colour screen Bookmark topic

no different in UI view but try to see a video or photo and you will see different.
--
Posted: 2007-06-15 16:19:36
Edit : Quote


Well, I did and still really no difference. Plus that I have a Panasonic VS3 which also has a 16M screen...
--
Posted: 2007-06-15 16:33:54
Edit : Quote


I have to say a 16m colour screen doesn't sell a phone for me, I'ev had a few and there's no noticable difference with those and a 262k.
If you look hard there is a a slight improvement in banding but that's it, vibrancy and contrast are more down to how well the screen is built and used than to how many colours it can show.
--
Posted: 2007-06-15 17:40:17
Edit : Quote


personally i think it is something that SE should address. That's why i put it as a thread. I would have thought they have gone 16 million colors back then when they were about to release K800. To my dissapointment it wasnt. It is a natural thing that the successor would, right? if it doesn't, it will just make the dissapointment bigger, that's what i think. have you guys seen nokia 6300's screen? damm.. i couldnt believe that's the screen, it is unbelievable sharp and bright and rich in colors (on top of that, it looks very unreal to me and seemed to be overcoloured, but if you compare it to K800, K800's screen looks dull)
--
Posted: 2007-06-15 18:14:41
Edit : Quote


Here's the reasoning:
- 16 million colour screens are more expensive. Simple as that. SE wants to save money. Who doesn't?

But that can't be the only reason:
- They waste much more power, for a somewhat negligible increase in quality. Remember these are 2"-2.4" screens, not large HDTVs.
- And if they wanted to equal the battery life of 262k displays vs 16mil displays, then they'd need larger batteries, adding to the bulk. Really, what would the public really want? Smaller phones rather than an incremental step up in picture quality.
- The difference isn't as great as say 256
Look at past examples of under-achieving phones in regards to battery life from Nokia:
-N95
-6300
-6131
--
Posted: 2007-06-16 04:06:01
Edit : Quote


before SE could decide to put 16M screens on their phone they should bear those factors in their mind:

>>first, Battery - the essential thing on all phones, they should discover a new type of battery to success the Lithium-Polymer type which will bring us longer life span and lesser discharge rate and of course smaller the size, but at this moment this is just a dream yet

>>>second is the size - if they used a higher capacity battery it will increase the size, thus will make it more bulky just like E61 to achieve good battery life(imagine if W910 and K850 would have 16M screen and larger capacity battery, then how thick will it be?
--
Posted: 2007-06-16 04:19:44
Edit : Quote


@701

Well all I a can say is if your HTC is screen is no better than your M600 screen it must be one bad screen then as the M600 screen is in no way brilliant which is why they have upgraded it on the P1. In sunlight it is just magical it completely disappears great trick just not for using it though.

Also you really need to all get over this great theory you all have that it just eats battery life also because it may be a little more energy hungry but not anywhere near what you all seem to think.

Marc

_________________
Nokia N95, 2gb Sandisk, Shure EC2g
Nokia E61 2gb Sandisk, Fring, Tom Tom 6


[ This Message was edited by: Dogmann on 2007-06-16 03:26 ]
--
Posted: 2007-06-16 04:23:59
Edit : Quote



How can one call the N95, 6300 and such "under achievers"? Just because the N95 needs to be charged daily? I admire Nokia for being leaders and innovators, this is something I can't say about SE of late.

I own a p990i along with an N73. Everyone calls the p990 a failure and all. Even I get frustrated at time but will not call it an "under achiever". I would kill to have an N95 but can't really get one ATM.

Back on topic now:

I think 16M screen would make the SE line up more desirable and, may I say, highend (to me at least) like Nokia's "N" serie.



--
Posted: 2007-06-16 04:24:50
Edit : Quote


Yes, to you at least. You are a minority.

But in case it is not obvious enough, SE has pretty much given up the highly technological market and is focusing more on the mass market side where people don't care if their phone really has 16 mil or 256k, they just go for looks and whatever offer they can get from it.

Which is why I have mentioned it a few times earlier how not everyone would notice the difference during every day usage, and not everyone will download videos/movies on their phone for viewing.

With regards to Mobile TV, the compression on those are bad enough that even on a 16mil screen it'll look bad.
--
Posted: 2007-06-16 05:10:47
Edit : Quote




1.not necessary shorter. in fact the display shows the same number of pixels, but different colors.it should be any significant difference

2.oh yes it does. maybe your eyes cannot see the difference but the human eye CAN make the difference!
--
Posted: 2007-06-16 09:56:26
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Reply

Forum Index