>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> no 16M yet? its 2008!
Bookmark topic
On 2008-02-12 09:09:32, NightBlade wrote:
once again things change: color depth become more important as size and resolution increase. X1 has a supperb size and resolution yet it apparently lacked the hardware power to pull a 24 bit screen
As stated millions of times - it lacks the software power to do so.
a million times wrong!!!
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=164777&start=15
READ THE POSTS BEFORE POSTING!!!!!
it is hardware restrictions not software.
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 09:34:20
Edit :
Quote
It isn't even hw.
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 09:44:16
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-02-12 09:24:53, chombos1 wrote:
why is everybody is complaining about the X1 65k color screen.....
did you ever see 65k color on a (((((((WVGA - 800x480 3inch))))))) display????
you will never notice color banding in that pixel-density.... never!!!
i like to save the processor power to do more things than to show 16M colors on the screen like that that makes no difference...
so stop about color-depth complaining...!!!!!!!
EDIT: you'r right kenoby.. maybe i've been alittle bit aggressive.
sorry
I am almost certain the difference between 16bit and 24bit depth will be noticeable, specially when playing DVD quality movies. i am making this assumption based on the fact that i sometimes notice color banding on my k850(with its 18bit in a 320x240 and 2.2'' screen) can someone do the maths i am just too tired
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 09:46:24
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-02-12 09:44:16, kenoby wrote:
It isn't even hw.
i thought it was the HW sacrifice they have to make to keep up wit those many colors (memory, battery power, etc...) isn't it?
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 09:49:49
Edit :
Quote
As I understood it, X1 has strong enough platform to handle the colors. Now, you have your opinion, I respect that. AFAIC SE screens suffice my needs.
http://www.pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a4008
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 10:58:17
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-02-12 09:46:24, tonchy wrote:
On 2008-02-12 09:24:53, chombos1 wrote:
why is everybody is complaining about the X1 65k color screen.....
did you ever see 65k color on a (((((((WVGA - 800x480 3inch))))))) display????
you will never notice color banding in that pixel-density.... never!!!
i like to save the processor power to do more things than to show 16M colors on the screen like that that makes no difference...
so stop about color-depth complaining...!!!!!!!
EDIT: you'r right kenoby.. maybe i've been alittle bit aggressive.
sorry
I am almost certain the difference between 16bit and 24bit depth will be noticeable, specially when playing DVD quality movies. i am making this assumption based on the fact that i sometimes notice color banding on my k850(with its 18bit in a 320x240 and 2.2'' screen) can someone do the maths i am just too tired
K850i doesn't have problem with the color reproduction. It has with bugs in it OS + relatively weak processor to handle the quality of the videos, apart its immunity to sync video/audio.
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 11:01:59
Edit :
Quote
@tonchy
your K850 has a QVGA resolusion display... so seeing color banding there is not a surprise!!!
we are talking about WVGA resolution in 3inch !!!.... even hard to see the pixels....
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 11:05:31
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-02-12 10:58:17, kenoby wrote:
As I understood it, X1 has strong enough platform to handle the colors. Now, you have your opinion, I respect that. AFAIC SE screens suffice my needs.
http://www.pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a4008
Please read my post a few pages ago there is a link to official information about WinMo supporting up to 32 bit depth and also a link of to an article explaining why devices would not care to do the jump from16 bit.
the biggest sacrifice would be memory.
I base my opinions on these facts. i also respect yours.
I agree the color banding on my k850 is more likely a video problem. i still think there would be a noticeable difference in such a large display like the one the x1 has.
I will run some tests tonight and post the results.
--
Posted: 2008-02-12 19:28:32
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-02-12 06:06:20, kenoby wrote:
@ mischka, you seem to be very knowledgeable. I agree what you are saying, for the widescreen 15" or 17" monitor. But I cannot agree on many other ways. I cannot be persuaded that N95 is giving better user experience then K850i taking screen into consideration, or Moto A1200 for that matter. (Please, I do not compare the phones as they are, or saying which one is better in overall, just that I have these three modern samples of each color representation)
As far as I know, SE did a great job developing further their existing equipment. K850i, if anything, has a great display.
Ok ok, what I am saying is purely theoretical. If a screen is not well built, no matter if it is 65k or 16M, it will look like sh*t.
I was only trying to explain some basic facts, not the way that various companies translate them to reality. Sorry if this was not clear.
I did not want to enter the fight of which is best, only tell what the theory behind all this is and correct some misconceptions that I read in this topic about color definitions and the like. After all, if you want to compare things, better know exactly what you are talking about. Then, and only then, you can criticize what you see.
--
Posted: 2008-02-13 01:01:44
Edit :
Quote
16 M will look better, as you say, theoretically and technically speaking. But practically I do not see it as an advantage on the mobile phone. I do not need to know it's technical specs to give it an advantage or to earn me the right commenting it. As is, color number is enough to provide a gap between and made someone thinking "Wow, this one is displaying more colors, of course, it must be better."
--
Posted: 2008-02-13 05:08:58
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
