[trublue]

Hello Everyone.

I am starting this thread to try and reach an understanding about our new PowerBook screens. I have a very limited technical knowledge, but in the following thread we seemed to uncover some data suggesting that we are NOT actually viewing millions of colors on our screens.

Have a look:
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=178712

I think that this is important enough to warrant it's own thread and not remain under the thread "Response time of 17' screen? (ghosting in games?)" which is not related.

Please respond in this thread.

Basically, it was concluded that the 17" powerbook uses the following displays:

17.1" Wide LP171W01

17.1" Wide LM171W02

Note "Number of Colors" is equal to "262,144 (6bit)".

I am under the presumption from the previous thread that 6 bit is (2^6)^3 as there are three color channels (Red, Green & Blue)...this also corresponds to the figure on the site.

Here's how the numbers break down using that logic.

Thousands of Colors:
4 bit (2^4)^3 = 4096 colors
5 bit (2^5)^3 = 32768 colors
6 bit (2^6)^3 = 262,144 colors (PB 17" LCD)

Millions of Colors
7 bit (2^7)^3 = 2,097,152 colors
8 bit (2^8)^3 = 16,777,216 colors

I am also under the presumption that adjusting the "Displays" section under "System Preferences" controls the graphics card driver and not direct screen output through the LCD.

Therefore my theory goes like this:

1) A user could adjust their setting to "millions" of colors in System Preferences and not be restricted by their operating system and graphics card to anything less than millions of colors, BUT that does not necessarily mean that their display can render the data given.

2) In the case of the 17" Powerbook displays, if the links provided are true, these 6 bit LCD's are NOT CAPABLE of DISPLAYING millions of colors.

3) That "thousands" of colors refers to 4 or 5 bit color rendering under "System Preferences -> Displays." In the case of 4 bit, 4096 colors. In the case of 5 bit, 32768 colors.

4) That a user could be "duped" into believing that they are experiencing "millions" of colors by experiencing a disproportionate change from "thousands" to "millions" of colors in System Preferences.

That is to say that if one were to set the System Preferences to "thousands" of colors, then the graphics driver (not the LCD) limits the color rendering to 4 bit (4096 colors) or 5 bit (32768 colors). When a user "lifts" this restriction and sets the graphic driver to render "millions" of colors (8 bit or 16,777,216 colors) then an increase in color depth is experienced. This experience IS LIMITED to your LCD's color display capability however. So even though your graphics card/system is sending data in millions of colors, doesn't mean that a 6 bit screen, capable of displaying ONLY 262,144 colors, can display all of the colors given. THE SCREEN THEN LIMITS THE COLOR EXPERIENCE...and you are never told so. Or something to that effect.

5) That a shift from 4 bit (4096 colors) or 5 bit (32768 colors) to 6 bit (262,144 colors) is large enough to allow a user to *believe* that they are experiencing "millions" of colors...even though they are not.

Well this is basically where I am at with my research/theories. And I only have data in regards to the 17" powerbook LCD. Could someone knowledgeable in this area please aid this forum in understanding our displays capabilities and limitations.

I sure would hate to think that they couldn't display millions of colors.

Someone prove me wrong.

(That said, I am still buying and they are still beautiful )

-Ian

[Liquidity X]

call apple, see what they say.

[peppermg]

17-inch (diagonal) TFT display (17-inch model)
Support for millions of colors at 1440-by-900-pixel resolution

15.2-inch (diagonal) TFT display (15-inch models)
Support for millions of colors at 1280-by-854-pixel resolution

12.1-inch (diagonal) TFT display (12-inch models)
Support for millions of colors at 1024-by-768-pixel resolution

Apple isn't gonna lie to the whole world about what their displays can actually display. If they say it can support millions of colors then it can. Though they might be misleading us a bit...

TFT LCD panels support either 6-bit or 8-bit RGB color output. This allows them to display 262K or 16.7M distinct colors. Using so-called dithering techniques, an analog-to-digital signal processor can simulate 8-bit RGB color output on an LCD panel that actually supports only 6-bit color.

I wasn't able to access the LG site so I couldn't read anything on the lcds apple suposedly uses. And further more, I could care less ive seen the new displays and they look great. I can't wait till my 15.2 gets here.

[JustinD]

Don't be so sure. HP told the world it's PDA could display 16m colors when it could only display 32k. they were forced to refund a lotta $ and provide new models.

(i believe that's how it went).

[trublue]

"17-inch (diagonal) TFT display (17-inch model). Support for millions of colors at 1440-by-900-pixel resolution."

All they say is "support for". They never said that the LCD display in the laptop actually delivers millions of colors. They are correct in what they say also...the ATI 9600 and OS X in the "17-inch model" provide support for millions of colors (i.e. if you hook it up to an external LCD that can display 8 bit millions of colors...then you get 8 bit millions of colors).

My research leads me to believe that the LCD's featured in their laptops do not deliver 8 bit "millions of colors."

17.1" Wide LP171W01

17.1" Wide LM171W02

Furthermore, Apple's marketing department has lied in the past. Don't think too far back...how about Apple UK's site promoting Level 3 cache on the new powerbooks the day they were announced. The only reason that they were taken off was because people noticed and demanded an answer.

I don't think that Apple is above misleading people by only publishing part of the truth...especially if it drives sales. This issue is also complicated, and the average person wouldn't question it. I doubt that the average person can even tell the difference between a 6 bit and 8 bit display...even if they saw one...it's rather esoteric knowledge.

Maybe nobody has challenged Apple on this.

[trublue]

Apple's stand alone displays that they sell, 17-inch, 20-inch, and 23-inch apparently are 8-bit *true* million color displays and this is marketed.

From Apple's site:

Display Data Sheet

Tech Overview

In the Tech Overview PDF, on page 4 under "Benefits of Apple Flat-Panel Display's", you will find the following:

"Support for a true 16.7 million saturated colors."

This verifies to me that they are marketing this as a special feature...notice the word *true* in the sentence above. Hmm, is something different here?

Also, something rather humerous on page 10 of the Tech Overview PDF (at the bottom, where the section on color starts for the next 4 pages...the largest section!), Apple writes:

"Color Quality

For many Mac users, color quality is a critical factor--one that affects their very livelihood. Traditionally, CRTs have been an important link in the color proofing system for content ultimately destined for print, web, or video distribution. So flat-panel displays must provide equal or better results in these color-critical applications if media professionals are to accept them."

Hmmm...then why does the new PowerBook 17"...the most full featured notebook that Apple makes ("built for professionals")...only feature a 6 bit screen that is unable to display "true" millions of colors???

And furthermore, why don't they tell us this?!?!?!
-----------------------------
BTW JustinD, it seems that the HP PDA that you mentioned was only 5 bit:

5 bit (2^5)^3 = 32768 colors

32k makes sense now doesn't it


-Ian

[coolmacdude]

Your confusion comes from a misunderstanding as to what "millions" means. It is referring to the fact that the graphics card is capable of rendering that many different shades of color. It is not a statement of how many colors can be displayed at the same time. You would never need the ability to display even remotely close to 16 million colors at the same time. Indeed, even if every pixel on your screen was a different color (which would result in a fairly garbled picture), at 1440 x 900 that is only slightly over 1 million. The actual limit that can be shown on screen is a limitation of the graphics card memory which requires more space for each unique shade. However typically, a large number of pixels have the same color at any specific time, so many values are repeated. So no Apple is not lying when it says its displays support millions. They do, just not in the way you are defining it.

[trublue]

I am sorry...I don't follow your logic.

coolmacdude wrote:

"Your confusion comes from a misunderstanding as to what "millions" means. It is referring to the fact that the graphics card is capable of rendering that many different shades of color. It is not a statement of how many colors can be displayed at the same time."

I understand that you are speaking about the graphics card...but say the ATI 9600 graphics card, that comes with the 17"powerbook, renders a shade that your LCD cannot reproduce.

LCD used for 17 inch

The 17" LCDs are only 6 bit.

Perhaps I am drastically confused. Please explain your concept more coolmacdude citing more examples.

[trublue]

Oops...I edited any post I made with a link to fix the links (that is all that has been changed).

They should work now. Sorry about that.

[Crusoe]

First off this is a good discovery and here are my views and suggestions.

I got a refund off that lawsuit after two years of using my Jornada. There were a few stipulations, the screen was advertised at 32K and it could only display 4096k (or something). They also mislead about wireless internet in that on the box they presented the Jornada with the Stylus sticking out to look like an antenna (or so the claim went). I filed my claim for the screen and a got full refund. The wireless thing was flaky but was found to be misleading.

I generally am against lawsuits where folks are just looking for a free ride or to profit off anothers ill-fortunes (McDonalds made my kids fat, he tried to save my family members life but failed so I'll sue him for incompetence, etc.

The aforementioned isn't the case here. CA lawsuits can be won on misleading or hiding facts which is the case here. CA lawsuits, among other things, serve their purpose to keep marketers in check. Some are perhaps just typos (UK website for example), problems with cut and paste society, but some are intentionally not disclosed.

The facts:
Spec Sheet says "Support for millions of colors at 1440-by-900-pixel resolution." under the Display Section. "Support for" provides a loophole
but
.... both at millions of colors." under the video and graphics support does not.


My questions are:
Are we sure these are the diplays being used? Does this info show up in the HW profiler?
In the powerbook packages/spec sheets/etc do they state anywhere these limitations of the built-in display? If not, their marketing is at least misleading if not blatant disception.

Does it matter? Yes, 3K for a laptop that you are told and expect to present millions of color and doesn't is unacceptable. Even if you can only squeeze 1 million on the screen at once, the flexiblity to present a huge range of colors at different times is expected and makes a difference.

What can be done:
Feedback to Apple to disclose these limitations.
Inform the community.
Request for a refund and send it back if you so desire.
If Apple refuses, a CA lawsuit could be started and likely won.

What will I do:
I'm going to buy a new powerbook within the next month regardless. (Any idea who makes the 15"s LCD?)
I'm going to provide feedback to Apple and inform the community.

What I hope:
Apple will at least update their spec sheets and/or use more capable LCDs.

I love Apple products but their marketing is seedy.

[skipjack]

Originally posted by Crusoe:
There were a few stipulations, the screen was advertised at 32K and it could only display 4096k (or something).

The issue is that the screen was advertised at 64K colors but could only display about 59K colors. Each pixel could display 4K colors, but with a technique called dithering (or time multiplexing), the pixels could be combined so that combinations of pixels gave many more colors than each individual pixel could have.

The specifications of some modern graphics cards state that using dithering, they can extend the range of 6 bit per RGB channel LCD displays to display "true color", or 24-bit color (16.7 million colors).

This has been an accepted technique for years (with regard to PowerBooks, since the G3 Bronze keyboard edition, which, according to current documents on Apple's website, was the first PowerBook to claim a display capability of millions of colors). I suppose you can call it creative marketing if you want, but it is an industry wide practice to consider the number of colors that the screen can display rather than the number of colors that each pixel can display.

[CorpITGuy]

If your screeen was only displaying thousands of colors instead of millions, you'd know it.

[Neptar]

If your screen was displaying the standard mac "thousands" (only 32,000 from memory) then yes, you notice it.

260,000 though, does make for a much finer display. It's not so much a dithering thing but a "flicking" between two colours thing... for example if your powerbook could display the RGB triplets of

128,128,128

and

130,130,130

but couldn't display 129,129,129, it could approximate the 129 129 129 by flickering through the previous two colours. This is exactly what PowerBook 540c screens do for some of their colours. From memory there's only a certain amount of colours that screen can do fullscreen, and it has to do that multiplexing biz to get 256 normally.

Combine a high number of thousands (260,000+) and the multiplexing I find it highly likely that MANY people wouldn't notice the difference. Of course that still doesn't mean you're getting a 16million colour display. Whether you notice or NEED that or the approximation is enough is a matter for a user to decide based on one thing only;

"How does the screen look to you?"

[nagromme]

Do PowerBook owners running Millions actually SEE any flickering or banding or other problems?

(Desktop pictures are not a good judge--even on my CRT some of Apple's included ones have banding in the actual image itself.)

16.7 million colors is outside the range of human perception. Which is good: you don't WANT to be able to tell two nearest colors apart, or a gradation might not look smooth. But how much LESS than 16.7 million is still imperceptible for practical purposes? I seem to recall reading years ago that 18 bits (6 per channel) was was the limit--less than that and you can sometimes perceive the difference. I don't know that for a fact. And I'm sure other factors--like gamma shifts--make a difference to complicate matters.

In any case, what we SEE is what matters. Are PowerBook owners finding themselves unable to view smooth color that Windows laptops can show? I highly doubt it's an issue.

I DO find the technical discussion interesting, though, and would be interested in the true bit depth of a PowerBook (same as 17" iMac) LCD.

I'd also like to know, out of curiosity... what is the MECHANISM for varying the brightness of a subpixel on an LCD? What, physically, makes the red subpixel, say, brighter or darker? (I know how early color LCDs worked--a grid would blacken more or fewer squares WITHIN the red area, letting more or less red show through--but with a magnifying lens I see no such subdivision within my PBG3's subpixels. I see the red subpixel, but no elements with that--it just looks smoothly lighter or darker like CRT--but sharper.)

[RayX]

^

[Cincojoe]

good lord...

[Amorya]

BTW, 8 bit is not millions of colours. 8 bit is 256 colours.

8 bits per colour channel (i.e. 8 bits for red, 8 bits for green, 8 for blue) would be millions of colours. But that's referred to as 24 bit colour.


Amorya

[James L]

I'm just going to look at the display when I buy mine... if it looks as bright and beautiful as the display on my partners 17", and even on my iBook, then I'll be buying it!

[trublue]

Amoraya wrote:

"BTW, 8 bit is not millions of colours. 8 bit is 256 colours.

8 bits per colour channel (i.e. 8 bits for red, 8 bits for green, 8 for blue) would be millions of colours. But that's referred to as 24 bit colour."
----------

Thanks, that makes sense (I was wondering how they arrived at 24 bit)...

For everyone to see:

(2^8)^3=16,777,216
so
(2^8)=256 (or the amount of colors that can be displayed per color channel Red, Green or Blue).
256^3=16,777,216 (or the total amount of possible combinations of the three color channels).

24 bit = All 3 8 bit channels added together.

[Uday's Carcass]

so what are you trying to do, drum up support for another lame class action lawsuit against Apple?

if so: get a life.

[Earth Mk. II]

Originally posted by trublue:
Thanks, that makes sense (I was wondering how they arrived at 24 bit)...

For everyone to see:

(2^8)^3=16,777,216
so
(2^8)=256 (or the amount of colors that can be displayed per color channel Red, Green or Blue).
256^3=16,777,216 (or the total amount of possible combinations of the three color channels).

24 bit = All 3 8 bit channels added together.

Actually, the math is simpler than that.

When an exponent is raised by another exponent, the base is effectively raised by the product of the two exponents.

i.e.

(2^8)^3 = 2^(8*3) = 2^24 = 16,777,216

[abrody]

Originally posted by skipjack:
The issue is that the screen was advertised at 64K colors but could only display about 59K colors. Each pixel could display 4K colors, but with a technique called dithering (or time multiplexing), the pixels could be combined so that combinations of pixels gave many more colors than each individual pixel could have.

The specifications of some modern graphics cards state that using dithering, they can extend the range of 6 bit per RGB channel LCD displays to display "true color", or 24-bit color (16.7 million colors).

This has been an accepted technique for years (with regard to PowerBooks, since the G3 Bronze keyboard edition, which, according to current documents on Apple's website, was the first PowerBook to claim a display capability of millions of colors). I suppose you can call it creative marketing if you want, but it is an industry wide practice to consider the number of colors that the screen can display rather than the number of colors that each pixel can display.

The G3 Bronze was not the first to claim to support millions of colors. The Wallstreet was. How do I know? I had that as an option. Also all the advertisements showed it was possible. The G3 Bronze was released a year after the Wallstreet. And this was just with 4 MB of VRAM. Now with 64 MB of VRAM, I think we definitely have the possibility of millions of colors on the screen. In addition, if you look at the spinwheel of colors in the colorpicker on those Powerbooks all have a smooth gradation same as shown on CRTs with millions. CRTs with thousands had bands of colors instead of a smooth gradation of colors in the colorpicker pinwheel. Given that, I think we can safely assume all Powerbooks since the Powerbook G3 Walstreet have been capable of displaying millions of colors on the screen at the same time since the behavior of the color picker is the same as a CRT that can as well, and CRTs that could do that since the first 24 bit color cards in the 1980s. To say that a PDA can display millions of colors is a bit misleading since few PDAs have millions of pixels with which to do it with. But all Powerbooks starting with the Wallstreet 14" have had at millions of pixels, and also the possibility of millions of colors if you so chose.

[trublue]

Well...I still don't think that it is safe to assume anything.

The system behaviour can remain the same as any other system that has a graphics card capable of 24 bit (3*8 bit) resolution...what is important, and the whole point of this thread, is the *LCD* on powerbooks (at least the 17"). They are only capable of displaying (3*6bit)...no matter what the graphics card does.

The behaviour of color picker is probably the same...but that doesn't mean that you are actually seeing the same colors. For that matter, perhaps none of us could even differentiate between a 6 bit and *true* 8 bit screen. But I doubt it. I think that we must be very discerning in this regard.

As for dithering to achieve results...to me that is no different than advertising a 6 mega pixel camera and using a 3 mega pixel CCD and interpolation to acomplish what you've advertised. The quality is just not the same.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by trublue:
Well...I still don't think that it is safe to assume anything.

The system behaviour can remain the same as any other system that has a graphics card capable of 24 bit (3*8 bit) resolution...what is important, and the whole point of this thread, is the *LCD* on powerbooks (at least the 17"). They are only capable of displaying (3*6bit)...no matter what the graphics card does.

The behaviour of color picker is probably the same...but that doesn't mean that you are actually seeing the same colors. For that matter, perhaps none of us could even differentiate between a 6 bit and *true* 8 bit screen. But I doubt it. I think that we must be very discerning in this regard.

As for dithering to achieve results...to me that is no different than advertising a 6 mega pixel camera and using a 3 mega pixel CCD and interpolation to acomplish what you've advertised. The quality is just not the same.

Not only are you confused and clueless, but you're compulsive about being confused and clueless. Please, take a step down a let some other lackey have a chance at the mike.

[nagromme]

The best (most high-contrast) visual test would be a left-to-right gradient across the whole screen, from pure black to pure white, with the screen set to Millions.

For the sake of fair comparison, I suggest using Photoshop--not a vector program that naturally bands to create a blend--and turning OFF the dithering option for the gradient tool.

My PowerBook G3 shows some SLIGHT banding. Nothing like Thousands, but you can notice it. My eMac CRT shows a bit too! But VERY slight. I think that effect is likely some side effect of the color profile's gamma adjustment. I find both perfectly acceptable--but I do doubt that the G3 is truly showing millions. (I have a different gamma on the PowerBook, and it's remotely possible that the issue I see on the eMac CRT is the same one as on the LCD--but I don't think it is.)

What do you see on a new 17" PowerBook? Anyone want to try?

[skipjack]

Originally posted by abrody:
The G3 Bronze was not the first to claim to support millions of colors. The Wallstreet was. ... But all Powerbooks starting with the Wallstreet 14" have had at millions of pixels, and also the possibility of millions of colors if you so chose.

Thank you for the clarification. In my haste to provide an explanation for the apparent discrepancy on which this thread is based, I misread the Apple technical document (Knowledge Base Article ID: 12958). That document states that the first G3 PowerBook with an active matrix display was the first that could display millions of colors.

Originally posted by trublue: The system behaviour can remain the same as any other system that has a graphics card capable of 24 bit (3*8 bit) resolution...what is important, and the whole point of this thread, is the *LCD* on powerbooks (at least the 17"). They are only capable of displaying (3*6bit)...no matter what the graphics card does.

Since you refuse to distinguish between the color which can be displayed by a pixel and the color which is seen on the screen, there is no hope.

Go ahead and file your silly lawsuit, or whatever you want to do, but be sure you include all PowerBooks back to the G3 with an active matrix display and don't limit yourself to the current G4 PowerBooks. And go look at your thread in AppleInsider. I didn't feel the need to duplicate the response, but since you insist that Apple is misleading the consumer, you had better read the specifications claimed on current video cards, which, in fact, do claim that through dithering and other time multiplexing techniques, they can display the equivalent of "true" color from 6-bit per channel RGB LCD displays. To repeat, IF YOU LOOK AT DOCUMENTS FROM ATI, THEY CLAIM THAT THEIR GRAPHIC PROCESSORS ARE CAPABLE OF DISPLAYING 24-BIT COLOR ON 6-BIT PER CHANNEL LCD DISPLAYS. I'm not going to take the time again to find the exact sources. They are quoted in the AppleInsider reply and I'm sure that if you wanted to, you could use Google just as well as I did.

[trublue]

RELAX GUYS!

No need to personally insult me...that's not very polite. I am just trying to do my best to make sense of all this. If I have not fully understood a concept it was because somebody did not take the time to *be clear* and properly describe what they wanted to say.

I have no intentions upon filing any lawsuits.

I just want to get to the bottom of this with a thorough understanding of all the necessary concepts.

I am not *hogging* anything...sorry if I actually read these boards frequently and respond. And by the way...I am probing concepts not degrading people here.

Thanks.

-Ian

[mrtew]

I see a huge difference between the thousands and millions of colors settings on my TiBook screen. If we are not seeing millions on our screens ever, then what accounts for that difference?

[nagromme]

The difference could be that in Millions you are seeing many MORE colors than in Thousands--but possibly still LESS than a CRT could show in Millions. I'm not saying that's the case, but that's my impression on my old PBG3. I don't find it a problem though.