Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 21st Oct 2012 15:11 UTC
Google The Next Web: "Google has also been working with Samsung to launch a 10-inch tablet, confirming leaks which suggested Google had teamed up with the Korean manufacturer for another device. Our source tells us that internally the tablet goes under the name 'Codename Manta', runs Google's new Android 4.2 operating system (previously referred to as Key Lime Pie, but is set to retain the Jelly Bean branding), and will offer a 2560x1600 pixel (10:16) resolution, which we believe will offer around 300 pixels per inch compared to the new iPad's 264 PPI." Between the iPad and this supposed Android tablet... Poor Surface. Poor, poor Surface.
Thread beginning with comment 539387
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

Because eye strain is a real issue vs. minor clock speed bumps and bad glass with 10 mp sensors.

Readability at these resolutions and distances is a real benefit, far more so something like he video in a living room.


Alas, colour gamut, contrast and brightness affect readability much more than the occasional bump in PPI at these resolutions. You can cram 20 000 x 20 000 pixels in the screen if you want but it won't be readable and it will definitely cause eye strain if colours, contrast and brightness are subpar, ie. high pixel count is not a substitute for those. That's exactly why I am asking: why masturbate to high pixel count when concentrating on the other aspects is much more beneficial after a certain point?

This is just the minimum that all displays should have been pushing to for years...


I have to say that I disagree.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kholinar Member since:
2007-09-10



Alas, colour gamut, contrast and brightness affect readability much more than the occasional bump in PPI at these resolutions. You can cram 20 000 x 20 000 pixels in the screen if you want but it won't be readable and it will definitely cause eye strain if colours, contrast and brightness are subpar, ie. high pixel count is not a substitute for those. That's exactly why I am asking: why masturbate to high pixel count when concentrating on the other aspects is much more beneficial after a certain point?


Color gamut is only an issue if the developer chooses a bad color scheme if where reading is concerned. And color gamut is a real push as evidenced by the iPhone 5.

20000 x 20000 might be just as terrible if the device was powered off, but I haven't encountered an issue with brightness and contrast in the last four years. Whereas there are tons of sub-200 ppi displays that make small text unreadable. There's a reason why fonts have glyphs. Anytime they aren't print quality it's problematic.



I have to disagree


I'm glad to hear that there are people who were fine with twenty-some inch displays never passing 2000 a pixel width.

I don't know why printers ever bothered.

Reply Parent Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

You can cram 20 000 x 20 000 pixels in the screen if you want but it won't be readable [...] why masturbate to high pixel count when concentrating on the other aspects is much more beneficial after a certain point?

Well, I'd very much like 20k x 20k on a small device ...and further. It would probably mean we're on a path towards proper holographic screens ( http://www.osnews.com/thread?492454 basically: the need the size of pixels comparable to the wavelength of light; oh, and also processing power and memory we're nowhere near yet - but once there, a display can feel kinda like a mirror or window)

Edited 2012-10-29 00:07 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2