MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   iPhone, iPad & iPod (http://forums.macnn.com/iphone-ipad-and-ipod/)
-   -   Galaxy Note II vs. iPhone 5 (http://forums.macnn.com/103/iphone-ipad-and-ipod/498161/galaxy-note-ii-vs-iphone-5-a/)

 
freudling Feb 16, 2013 06:47 PM
Galaxy Note II vs. iPhone 5
Anybody have anything to say about it?

I really like the Note II. I just played with it. It's a bit large to hold but man is that screen nice and it's pretty snappy too. Am I crazy?
 
shifuimam Feb 16, 2013 10:40 PM
I'm up for a new phone this month. I've been seriously considering Samsung this time around. I think HTC is falling behind on hardware specs and quality.

How was the stylus on it? It is super precise, or is it more like a crappy spongy capacitive stylus?
 
freudling Feb 17, 2013 02:56 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by shifuimam (Post 4217703)
I'm up for a new phone this month. I've been seriously considering Samsung this time around. I think HTC is falling behind on hardware specs and quality.

How was the stylus on it? It is super precise, or is it more like a crappy spongy capacitive stylus?
The stylus is good. Way better than the crappy spongy ones. It's pressure sensitive man! Fine detail and everything. I put the phone through its paces today. I love it!
 
ajprice Feb 17, 2013 07:45 AM
Galaxy S4 will be out soon too
 
shifuimam Feb 17, 2013 02:22 PM
Played with the Note II and the S3 at the Sprint store today. The Note II's display is just too big for a phone for me, especially given how impossibly small my hands are.

I suppose I should do the responsible thing and just wait until I get a job before I buy a new phone, though. Sigh.

Oh - looked at both the iPad Mini and the iPhone 5 while I was there. What a joke. There's nothing compelling about the iPad Mini (last generation hardware and a too-wide-for-one-hand form factor, especially compared to widescreen tablets like the Nexus 7), and the iPhone 5's interface just feels incredibly dated compared to Android.
 
freudling Feb 17, 2013 03:20 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by shifuimam (Post 4217777)
Played with the Note II and the S3 at the Sprint store today. The Note II's display is just too big for a phone for me, especially given how impossibly small my hands are.

I suppose I should do the responsible thing and just wait until I get a job before I buy a new phone, though. Sigh.

Oh - looked at both the iPad Mini and the iPhone 5 while I was there. What a joke. There's nothing compelling about the iPad Mini (last generation hardware and a too-wide-for-one-hand form factor, especially compared to widescreen tablets like the Nexus 7), and the iPhone 5's interface just feels incredibly dated compared to Android.
:thumbsup:
 
P Feb 18, 2013 04:44 AM
Main problem with the Note is the crowds laughing and pointing at you when holding it to your ear... Seriously, though: what's the battery life on one of those things?

Quote, Originally Posted by shifuimam (Post 4217777)
Oh - looked at both the iPad Mini and the iPhone 5 while I was there. What a joke. There's nothing compelling about the iPad Mini (last generation hardware and a too-wide-for-one-hand form factor, especially compared to widescreen tablets like the Nexus 7), and the iPhone 5's interface just feels incredibly dated compared to Android.
Actually I quite like the iPad mini, but then I can comfortably hold it in one hand - that's probably the main draw of it to me. Graphics performance per pixel is almost as good as the iPad 4, and significantly better than the iPad 3. CPU performance is indeed a good chunk lower than the iPad 4 theoretically, but I don't think I've ever waited on the iPad to do anything. The only potential complaint is that the display is not Retina, but that display would come at a high price in terms of GPU power and battery requirements.
 
cgc Feb 18, 2013 04:58 PM
I think some of these new phones are just a little big. I don't have small hands but I want a phone that I don't need to have a holster for...one I can slip into my pocket and one I can use one-handed for the most part.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 19, 2013 07:02 AM
Yep. Both of us have expiring contracts this winter, and we tried out the "large" phones - not for me. Unless you carry a purse/murse/backpack around with you at all times, where do you put the damn thing?? (And if you do, why not just get an iPad/mini for it, and have an even better "screen" computing experience?) It won't fit it any ordinary pocket, and I'd be deathly afraid of cracking it in half if I did have large pockets - you certainly would not be able to sit down.

If you don't see the great features of the iPad mini, then I'm not sure what to say. Yes, I won't buy one until it has at least iPad 3 power and Retina, but it's incredibly easy to hold the bezel with one hand - far easier to hold for long periods of time than the iPad. I'm going to get one to use as a dedicated remote for the HTPC. :D

I agree that Apple needs to start being innovative with the iOS interface, though; it's been basically the same for a long time now. Those screenshots Shif and Phileas posted in the Lounge made me pretty excited for the customization options of a good Android phone.
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 19, 2013 08:42 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by shifuimam (Post 4217777)
There's nothing compelling about the iPad Mini (last generation hardware and a too-wide-for-one-hand form factor, especially compared to widescreen tablets like the Nexus 7),
I dunno. I'm no longer in sales (got out just before the iPad mini was delivered), but the feedback I've heard is that it's pretty ideal. It's an iPad that's light enough for one-handed reading, cheap enough to be an on-a-whim purchase, and (in contrast to the widescreen tablets, which just look silly) can be sensibly used in portrait mode. And it's an iPad, which is (for now) still a compelling argument.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 19, 2013 09:45 AM
Yeah, exactly - the widescreen form factor is great for viewing video, but it's very awkward in other situations - like portrait, where everything seems too narrowly squished, or when viewing objects that "extend" below the screen in landscape mode. Viewing web pages in landscape on widescreen tablets feels like you don't have enough vertical real estate; in portrait, you don't have enough horizontal real estate.
 
shifuimam Feb 19, 2013 10:34 AM
I can definitely agree with that for low-resolution tablets, like the really budget ones that use 1024x600 screens. My Asus Transformer, on the other hand, has a 1280x800 display, and it's pretty rad. I primarily use it in landscape, but it works well in portrait, too.
 
cgc Feb 19, 2013 05:48 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton (Post 4218077)
...I won't buy one until it has at least iPad 3 power and Retina, but it's incredibly easy to hold the bezel with one hand - far easier to hold for long periods of time than the iPad. I'm going to get one to use as a dedicated remote for the HTPC. :D
...
I too am waiting for an iPad Mini with Retina display and an A5X or faster CPU. For my HTPC I had used my iPod Touch but dropped $25 and bought an infrared remote control (got the RC-6 MCE type) and it's fantastic...works out of the box with XBMC in Linux and worked with the right software in Windows 7 (but I prefer Linux because it boots faster).
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 20, 2013 10:28 AM
Meh, we got one iPhone 5, anyway. Despite both sale reps insisting that the Galaxy SIII was definitely faster and had a better camera. :confused:

We'll see whether the other phone turns out to be Android-based. But it was great to get home and immediately control the multimedia via Remote and Plex.
 
Brien Feb 20, 2013 10:48 AM
I wouldn't count on Apple radically altering iOS' UI - at least not to the extent that Android has gone through (there's a photo comparing iOS and Android since 2007, pretty interesting). OS X hasn't really changed much since 10.3 when we got tab bars, so I'm holding my breath.

However, I will say the Galaxy Note is a sexy piece of kit. Huge screen, 1024 levels of pressure sensitivity - and real Wacom pens work on it. It's like a mini-Cintiq, and that alone is a compelling reason to switch. However, I'll wait on either the Note III or the rumored 5" iPhone +.

That being said, the rumors point to the Note III having a 1080p or higher 6.3" display, 8 CPU cores, 4 GPU cores, 3 or 4 GB or RAM. That seems absurd, but maybe in person it'll still be usable as a phone. I like the larger displays, but now that 5" is beginning to be the norm and 6" are 'large' phones - it's a bit silly.
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 20, 2013 10:56 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton (Post 4218340)
Meh, we got one iPhone 5, anyway. Despite both sale reps insisting that the Galaxy SIII was definitely faster and had a better camera. :confused:
Samsung electronics spent an estimated 13 billion dollars on advertising, promotions, kick-backs, and sales commissions in 2012.

Sales reps will tell you ANYTHING to sell one.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 20, 2013 01:04 PM
Yeah I guess that could be it? The iPhone was double the price, so I would have thought they'd be pushing it from a sales perspective.

I just don't get the love for the Note. It's ginormous; I can't figure out how someone would carry it around on a daily basis, unless they had a purse. Honestly, how does one carry it? It would not fit it any of my pockets except the seat (and you obv. would not want it there).

Putting it up to my face just felt completely odd - if you had smaller-than-North American-average-sized hands (which I would think many people do), it would be completely awkward to hold.

I personally think the idea size is somewhere in the 4"-5" range - perhaps slightly bigger than the iPhone 5.
 
Valetinea Feb 22, 2013 02:56 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by ajprice (Post 4217747)
Galaxy S4 will be out soon too
Yea, I'm also waiting for it. Hope it will stand against iphone 5 :rolleyes:
 
freudling Feb 23, 2013 03:15 PM
The design of the iPhone really has to radically change. In order to widen the screen and make it comfortable in your hand... the edges need to be much softer and rounded... and the device thinner... this will offset the increased size making it very similar to holding and using it with one hand as it is at its current size.

Apple has really locked themselves into a design language though. With all of their litigation against industry about copying look and feel... I wonder where their design can go next? The problem is, if they even remotely produce something that looks like the Galaxy SIII, they're going to be doomed because Samsung might feel like suing and they'll tarnish their brand: they'll lose respect from consumers. It's so hard to come up with an innovative design for what are essentially calculators - smartphones.

And now that the HTC One is coming out, they better think of something else than just a larger iPhone 5...

They've got some serious work ahead of them on this.

New HTC One with aluminum unibody design... it looks like something Apple would do for a larger iPhone 5:

HTC One Overview - HTC Smartphones

Sony Xperia Z water resistant! Floats it in water for half an hour, works great! 443 ppi! More than 100 more ppi than the iPhone 5:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/20/s...eria-z-review/

It's no longer one really good Android phone anymore. The market is starting to get flooded with really nice, super high res, high quality, top end smartphones.

The HTC One has over 400 ppi!
 
freudling Feb 25, 2013 03:14 AM
The Mobile World Conference 2013 is on now. I do believe that Apple has officially just been eclipsed by the competition within a matter of just the past few days.

My god the new array of tablets and super smartphones coming out is staggering. 1080p smartphones are now the norm. Apple's iPhone 5 resolution is officially very dated.

Sony announces a new Xperia tablet today. Nokia announces new smartphones. HTC announces their new 1080p flagship smartphone the other day. Sony announces the new flagship 1080p smartphone the other day. Samsung announces yesterday a new 8" tablet with stylus with a higher resolution screen than the Mini. HP announces today a new 7" tablet at $170 running Android. Samsung announces a special event for March 14 for the S4 rumoured to be a 1080p screen with eight cores of processor no the CPU and ditto for the GPU.

When Key Lime comes out...

All I can say is that if Apple doesn't release a radically new iPhone this year with a major update and redesigned iOS... they're going to get left behind big time.

What I want to see in the iPhone 6:

1. Real wireless charging, no stupid jackets to put on. It just works.
2. Much better camera... bigger light sensor, higher resolution with more optical zoom... that finally puts point and shoots out of business.
3. A much more organic design. Something with rounded edges, unibody, thinner, and lighter.
4. A wider screen, but with the right design, it won't feel like it's really any wider in your hand than an iPhone 5. Looking to something in the range of 4.7"
5. An almost SHORTER device than the iPhone 5! That's right, get rid of the home button altogether. Imagine the marketing: Smaller, yet bigger!
6. Much better sound from two speakers in stereo.
7. Higher res front facing camera.
8. iOS 7! Totally revamped with more efficient userflows and a more modern UI that takes advantage of the latest gestures. I'm down with the rounded icons found on the current iPod Nano! Eye scroll and Siri on steroids with better voice recognition. Let's do this!
 
P Feb 25, 2013 05:42 AM
What's the point about a 400 dpi phone? So you can use a magnifying glass to see the smallest features? If your eyes can't see the improvement, why make it?

See also this article about smartphone camera optics. The entire thing is worth a read, but the short version is that camera resolutions are already too high - higher than what the optics can resolve. I'm sure Apple will go to 13 MP or whatever the next standard level is, but there is no gain in it. And they've killed point-and-shoots already - they don't sell anymore.

Wireless charging would be great, but I don't think Apple would have bothered with Lightning if they were one generation away from it.

Rounded edges is a definite possibility, given what the iPads look like.

Personally I'm strongly opposed to bigger screens - quite frankly I want them even smaller than the iPhone 4 - but I see no problem in them widening the range a bit to include a bigger phone as well.

The Home button has one massive advantage - it's the one thing a newbie knows to push. I think it stays for that reason only.
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 25, 2013 06:13 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by P (Post 4219082)
What's the point about a 400 dpi phone? So you can use a magnifying glass to see the smallest features? If your eyes can't see the improvement, why make it?
It's for people who buy electronics by feature checklists. Which, as we know, has always been *exactly* how Apple markets their brand.

Quote, Originally Posted by P (Post 4219082)
The Home button has one massive advantage - it's the one thing a newbie knows to push. I think it stays for that reason only.
If there's a SINGLE feature that defines the user-friendliness of iOS, it's the ever-present hardware "panic" button.
It makes it impossible for anybody, regardless of proficiency, to ever get lost.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 25, 2013 09:02 AM
I simply don't understand the hate for the square/box/sharp design of the iPhone 5. I always think it feels very "there" in my hand and makes for a sharp, classic design shape. I really like it.

As for changes, I'd agree with freudling that shaving a quarter-inch off the length would be great (not by eliminating the Home button, but it could still be done), and widening it slightly. The existing screen length, widened slightly for something like a 4.5" total size, would mean widescreen movies stay the same large size, but you get more real estate for other things - height in landscape and width in portrait modes.
 
freudling Feb 25, 2013 11:40 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by P (Post 4219082)
What's the point about a 400 dpi phone? So you can use a magnifying glass to see the smallest features? If your eyes can't see the improvement, why make it?
This doesn't make much sense. The HTC One has 468 ppi. Android scales itself properly in relation to ppi. Things don't look smaller at all. Therefore, you don't need a "magnifying glass" to see things. What you get is a screen that is incredibly sharp.

HTC One takes display pixel density crown | Mobile - CNET News

Quote
See also this article about smartphone camera optics. The entire thing is worth a read, but the short version is that camera resolutions are already too high - higher than what the optics can resolve. I'm sure Apple will go to 13 MP or whatever the next standard level is, but there is no gain in it. And they've killed point-and-shoots already - they don't sell anymore.
My wife's a professional photographer. She uses a point and shoot when she can. The pictures are much better than what the iPhone 5 takes. We're talking optical zoom, ISO, colour depth, resolution, and many other things. They have significantly better optics still... when compared to smartphones. I agree though they've been dying. What I think we'll see is mirrorless DSLR cameras that come in much more portable packages become the standard professional camera, and smartphones the other category of camera. Apple still has a long way to go to get the optics as good as something like the Sony or Canon's top end point and shoots.

Quote
Wireless charging would be great, but I don't think Apple would have bothered with Lightning if they were one generation away from it.
Ya, you're probably right.

Quote
Personally I'm strongly opposed to bigger screens - quite frankly I want them even smaller than the iPhone 4 - but I see no problem in them widening the range a bit to include a bigger phone as well.
I'd say you're probably in the minority these days if you want a smaller screen. HP Verge anyone? I used to love the iPhone 4 screen and didn't want anything bigger. Now I'm elated with the Galaxy S3 size and even the Note. The larger screens allow you to do so much more. Like reading books and surfing the web... the larger screen just shows more content (less pinching and zooming). I find the iPhone 5 to be a bit odd... it's just too damn skinny. I barely want to use it other than basic use.

Quote
The Home button has one massive advantage - it's the one thing a newbie knows to push. I think it stays for that reason only.
Gotta move forward...
 
Atheist Feb 25, 2013 02:22 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219109)
This doesn't make much sense. The HTC One has 468 ppi. Android scales itself properly in relation to ppi. Things don't look smaller at all. Therefore, you don't need a "magnifying glass" to see things. What you get is a screen that is incredibly sharp.

HTC One takes display pixel density crown | Mobile - CNET News
I think what he means is that as far as the human eye is concerned, once you get over 300 PPI it really doesn't matter. Thus 468 PPI is overkill and seemingly unnecessary.
 
P Feb 25, 2013 03:01 PM
Yes, what Atheist said. It also costs a lot of battery power to the GPU to increase the resolution like that. Honestly, I think that if Apple thought the text could be any sharper, they would add subpixel rendering first (yes, I know it would only work in one direction). I wonder if anyone has added that to a reading app? Would be interesting to test.

As for cameras: Yes, I know that point&shoots still have much better optics, but I don't see that changing in future smartphones - there simply isn't more depth to add to them to improve the optics. I agree with your opinions on where the market is moving as well - mirror-less dSLRs are the way forward. I think I saw a new Sony model somewhere that looked great, until I saw the price tag.
 
freudling Feb 25, 2013 04:31 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by P (Post 4219141)
Yes, what Atheist said. It also costs a lot of battery power to the GPU to increase the resolution like that. Honestly, I think that if Apple thought the text could be any sharper, they would add subpixel rendering first (yes, I know it would only work in one direction). I wonder if anyone has added that to a reading app? Would be interesting to test.
If you guys think anything over 300 ppi doesn't matter... I'd say you're in the minority. If that's what you really believe, then why is Apple's iPhone 26 ppi over 300 ppi? The answer actually is to account for variability in terms of the distance a person holds the device from their face. The closer an average 20/20 visioned person holds it, the more you can discern the individual pixels.

PPI does matter. Things like 1080p movies, text rendering, image quality...

I agree though I think what's implicit in what ya'll are saying is it's not just ppi. And that's true. It's viewing angles, colour saturation, colour accuracy, etc.

Can you please tell me more about what you mean by subpixel rendering and reading apps?
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 25, 2013 05:56 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219150)
If you guys think anything over 300 ppi doesn't matter... I'd say you're in the minority. If that's what you really believe, then why is Apple's iPhone 26 ppi over 300 ppi? The answer actually is to account for variability in terms of the distance a person holds the device from their face.
No. The answer is that that is quite simply what quadrupling the original resolution turned out to be, screen size remaining identical.

A purely technical reason.
 
freudling Feb 25, 2013 08:07 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot (Post 4219165)
No. The answer is that that is quite simply what quadrupling the original resolution turned out to be, screen size remaining identical.

A purely technical reason.
No. The answer is more complex.

They doubled the PPI from 165 ppi on the iPhone 3GS to 330 ppi on the iPhone 4. This allowed them to implement an easy 2x scale within iOS without any UI changes. Developers just name their files blah2x.png and Apps work with Retina. The result is no UI redesigns: just way more pixels packed into the same size screen and same aspect ratio. The physical size of screen elements are identical to the previous iPhones.

In order for something to qualify as Retina, it must be 300 dpi at arms length, because that's the exact dpi determined from multiple sources, including Apple, where a person can't discern individual pixels at ~11" away, or arms length.

Apple stumbled upon a genius solution by simplifying the engineering implementation of this fact. They simply doubled the ppi and played into this beautifully. They ended up with something that was a perfect scenario for developers and one that benefited the consumer: a true "Retina display". If it were less than Retina resolution, this wouldn't have worked.

In other words, Apple didn't just arbitrarily quadruple resolution. There's a bunch of reasons behind it.
 
Laminar Feb 25, 2013 10:46 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219109)
I'd say you're probably in the minority these days if you want a smaller screen. HP Verge anyone? I used to love the iPhone 4 screen and didn't want anything bigger. Now I'm elated with the Galaxy S3 size and even the Note. The larger screens allow you to do so much more. Like reading books and surfing the web... the larger screen just shows more content (less pinching and zooming). I find the iPhone 5 to be a bit odd... it's just too damn skinny. I barely want to use it other than basic use.
I have an iPhone 5 and a Galaxy S2. I hate hate hate the S2. The iPhone makes it feel bulky and cumbersome. It's a pain to fit in my jeans pocket, and it's a bother to use one-handed. And that's not even getting into the crippled software that my carrier has decided to bless me with, the absolute garbage that passes for a stock email app (still haven't found a decent email client that supports IMAP and Exchange and doesn't cost a ridiculous amount). I feel like "wrapping text" and "displaying emails properly" are things that everyone else had figured out in about 1996, not sure why my device can't do that today.
 
freudling Feb 25, 2013 11:12 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4219194)
I have an iPhone 5 and a Galaxy S2. I hate hate hate the S2. The iPhone makes it feel bulky and cumbersome. It's a pain to fit in my jeans pocket, and it's a bother to use one-handed. And that's not even getting into the crippled software that my carrier has decided to bless me with, the absolute garbage that passes for a stock email app (still haven't found a decent email client that supports IMAP and Exchange and doesn't cost a ridiculous amount). I feel like "wrapping text" and "displaying emails properly" are things that everyone else had figured out in about 1996, not sure why my device can't do that today.
You've got an old phone. What relevance does this have to this discussion?
 
OreoCookie Feb 26, 2013 12:13 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4219194)
I have an iPhone 5 and a Galaxy S2. I hate hate hate the S2. The iPhone makes it feel bulky and cumbersome.
I agree, it's a bit sad that there is a bit of a dearth of »small« (4.3" and smaller) Android top-of-the-line phones. Not always is bigger = better. It's the same with notebooks: a 13" MacBook Pro is simply a different beast than a 15" MacBook Pro and people usually prefer one over the other. My brother has a 4.3" Motorola Razr i which is close enough in size to an iPhone 5. This is about as big as I would want to go, although I'd really want to shave off a few tenths of an inch (I currently have a 4S and I'm very happy with the form factor).
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 26, 2013 01:53 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219179)
In other words, Apple didn't just arbitrarily quadruple resolution. There's a bunch of reasons behind it.
Yes, I know all that.

It was vital that they could just exactly quadruple the resolution, for all the reasons you mention.

I'm saying that given all that, if quadrupling would have put the display at 250 or 400 dpi, they would have sold us that.

The fact that it was 326 is purely a technical result of the quadrupling.
 
P Feb 26, 2013 11:03 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219150)
Can you please tell me more about what you mean by subpixel rendering and reading apps?
In a nutshell: An LCD pixel is a crystal that twists to increase or decrease the amount of light that gets through. To make a color "pixel", you have to actually make three narrow pixels side by side and control the amount of red light, the amount of green light and the amount of blue light separately. When making a black pixel, all three colors are off, and when making a white pixel, all three colors are on - all three colors are controlled together.

The resolution is mostly visible when making aline at an angle. That line would have to be adapted to the grid of pixels, so it would be like a staircase. The smaller the pixels, the finer the grid, the more even the line. Here's the clever bit - if you know that the pixels are always in the order R-G-B, you can make the effective pixels smaller. If your white line would only cover the rightmost third of the pixel, you turn that pixel blue. Instead of RGBRGBRGB, the white line would be BRGBRGBRGB - that blue pixel is right next to a red and a green pixel, so it doesn't show up.

Sub-pixel rendering is doing exactly this when rendering text. In effect, the horizontal resolution is tripled while the vertical resolution is the same as it was before. Fortunately, text is mostly lines that are between 45 degrees and vertical, so the horizontal resolution isn't that important. This was a big deal some 10-15 years ago - Mac OS X has done it since 10.2, and Windows since slightly before (called ClearType), but before both of them Adobe implemented that feature into Acrobat Reader (called CoolType).

iOS doesn't do sub-pixel rendering. Presumably this is because it only works when the pixels are lined up, and an iPhone or iPad is frequently tilted on its side. iOS would then have to switch to regular text rendering when the iPad was on its side, and probably Apple didn't want to bother when they knew the higher resolution screens were coming. Android also doesn't do it, partially for this reason and partially because of the pentile screens that some Android phones have - they would need a special rendering algorithm to work with this. It would be possible to do this in an app, though - as long as you didn't bother rotating the text when someone tilted the screen - but I can't find any examples of anyone bothering with that.
 
freudling Feb 26, 2013 05:02 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by P (Post 4219248)
In a nutshell: An LCD pixel is a crystal that twists to increase or decrease the amount of light that gets through. To make a color "pixel", you have to actually make three narrow pixels side by side and control the amount of red light, the amount of green light and the amount of blue light separately. When making a black pixel, all three colors are off, and when making a white pixel, all three colors are on - all three colors are controlled together.

The resolution is mostly visible when making aline at an angle. That line would have to be adapted to the grid of pixels, so it would be like a staircase. The smaller the pixels, the finer the grid, the more even the line. Here's the clever bit - if you know that the pixels are always in the order R-G-B, you can make the effective pixels smaller. If your white line would only cover the rightmost third of the pixel, you turn that pixel blue. Instead of RGBRGBRGB, the white line would be BRGBRGBRGB - that blue pixel is right next to a red and a green pixel, so it doesn't show up.

Sub-pixel rendering is doing exactly this when rendering text. In effect, the horizontal resolution is tripled while the vertical resolution is the same as it was before. Fortunately, text is mostly lines that are between 45 degrees and vertical, so the horizontal resolution isn't that important. This was a big deal some 10-15 years ago - Mac OS X has done it since 10.2, and Windows since slightly before (called ClearType), but before both of them Adobe implemented that feature into Acrobat Reader (called CoolType).

iOS doesn't do sub-pixel rendering. Presumably this is because it only works when the pixels are lined up, and an iPhone or iPad is frequently tilted on its side. iOS would then have to switch to regular text rendering when the iPad was on its side, and probably Apple didn't want to bother when they knew the higher resolution screens were coming. Android also doesn't do it, partially for this reason and partially because of the pentile screens that some Android phones have - they would need a special rendering algorithm to work with this. It would be possible to do this in an app, though - as long as you didn't bother rotating the text when someone tilted the screen - but I can't find any examples of anyone bothering with that.
Interesting. Still trying to digest what you've said.
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 26, 2013 05:52 PM
Freudling: could you please trim the posts you're responding to, rather than quoting an entire wall of text?

The unnecessary scrolling makes threads a bit of a chore to read.
 
Laminar Feb 26, 2013 06:24 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219198)
You've got an old phone. What relevance does this have to this discussion?
We're talking screen size, no?
 
OreoCookie Feb 26, 2013 10:21 PM
To add to P's very nice explanation: Sub-pixel rendering its use was to effectively increase the resolution (at least in the horizontal direction) to make letter shapes appear more smoothly, so on a high-res screen with 260+ dpi the benefit is much smaller.
 
freudling Feb 27, 2013 02:32 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4219317)
We're talking screen size, no?
Nope. He's talking about something feeling bulky. And he's talking about a Galaxy S2: a phone that is radically different than the S3. The S3 is incredibly well designed: it's very thin, rounded edges. The two phones are much different. The S3 is what has propelled Samsung into its current dominant position, and we're already moving onto the S4. Quite frankly, I think the S2 is a bulky piece of crap. The S3 is beautiful and feels much better in the hand. Amazing what design can do.
 
angelmb Feb 27, 2013 03:18 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219371)
The S3 is beautiful and feels much better in the hand. Amazing what design can do.
I guess someone at Samsung liked the white iPhone 3GS very much. ;)
 
freudling Feb 27, 2013 03:56 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by angelmb (Post 4219375)
I guess someone at Samsung liked the white iPhone 3GS very much. ;)
Really? I would agree on their earlier phones they got sued for... But even on those I don't agree they totally ripped off Apple.

To my eye, the Galaxy S3 is totally unique in design, with its 4.8" screen and asymmetrically curved top and bottom. I'd actually say it's an iconic design at this point, and one that is serving as the basis for all of their mobile products now.

What do you guys think?
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 27, 2013 06:48 AM
I think the term "iconic" is completely overused lately. "Iconic" means that something is instantly recognizable as representative of a whole trend, or a cultural landmark.

The original iMac was iconic. The scroll-wheel iPod (literally; it's been used to signify generic music players on all sorts of buttons and pictograms) was iconic.

The Samsung is certainly unique, arguably beautiful, but "iconic", it is not. I'm not sure even the original iPhone qualifies.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 27, 2013 07:55 AM
Iconic? The S3? The iPhone 5 is more recognizable in a generic smartphone lineup. :rolleyes:

Honestly, both my wife and I played around with the S3 last weekend and both of us preferred the 5 from a hardware perspective. She ended up getting it because it plays very well/easily with our existing Apple ecosystem.

I'd definitely love some sort of always-visible Calendar integration (I've think I've seen it used as the Background screen in Android, amongst other things). No question that iOS has to change......but simply from picking up and looking at a phone, the iPhone 5 still feels like King of the Heap to be honest.
 
P Feb 27, 2013 11:51 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219303)
Interesting. Still trying to digest what you've said.
Perhaps some pictures would help. This page has some and is worth a look. Note that it is quite old (I remember reading it back around the CoolType patent controversy) but I believe it is still relevant.
 
Laminar Feb 27, 2013 01:16 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219371)
Nope. He's talking about something feeling bulky.
WTF?

Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219109)
I'd say you're probably in the minority these days if you want a smaller screen..
 
Laminar Feb 27, 2013 02:10 PM
Also,

Quote, Originally Posted by freudling (Post 4219371)
I think the S2 is a bulky piece of crap. The S3 is beautiful and feels much better in the hand. Amazing what design can do.
Quote
Like the Galaxy S2, the new S3 is a neatly designed, beautiful-looking handset that measures 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6mm compared to the S2's 125.3 x 66.1 x 8.49mm. Yes, note the size has gone up across all the dimensions, but the plastic remains which means the weight doesn't reflect the bulk. The S3 weighs in at a respectable 133g compared to the S2's 116g which, if you've held one, you'll have thought was very light indeed.
Samsung Galaxy S3 vs Galaxy S2 | News | TechRadar
 
freudling Feb 27, 2013 02:54 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4219469)
You realize that the S3 has a 4.8" screen vs. the S2's 4.3" screen?

Also, the S3 has hit like hot cakes.

Samsung Galaxy S3 breezes past 40 million sales mark | CNET UK
 
ShortcutToMoncton Feb 27, 2013 02:57 PM
You're just proving freudling's point. The S3 looks to be larger and heavier in all physical respects, but feels smaller. That is an iconic design achievement
 
Spheric Harlot Feb 27, 2013 03:07 PM
No. That's a remarkable design achievement.

That doesn't make a device or design "iconic".

An "icon" is something that stands representative or symbolic for an entire category of whateveritisits. An "iconic" device would be the first one that comes to mind for the overwhelming majority of people when you mention the word "smartphone". The way the scroll-wheel iPod represents the whole decade of "mp3 players".

The Galaxy S3 may well turn out to be that. But it's FAR too early to tell at the moment.
 
Laminar Feb 27, 2013 03:33 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton (Post 4219478)
You're just proving freudling's point. The S3 looks to be larger and heavier in all physical respects, but feels smaller. That is an iconic design achievement
I just thought it was funny that he called a smaller, thinner phone a "bulky piece of crap." Their "iconic" design achievement doesn't make it fit in my pocket any better.
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 AM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2