I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
In china you'll find a lot oft 4:3 android tablets
IMO 16:10 displays are the best, becuase they are not to high for movies (small black stripes) and not to slim for reading and surfing.
Just compare 10" Android Tablets with a n iPad and you'll know what's the best!
Gesendet von meinem S3 mit Android 4.1.2
I agree with you. One of the Lenovo tablets are 4:3 though. 16:10 is just weird to hold in portrait mode.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
slide83 said:
I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4:3 is objectively worse. Why? Because it isn't functional.
Here's the reasoning.
On a 8:5 screen, in portrait mode, you can view more information. (this is due to how tablets can zoom out) Therefore, it is more productive in portrait mode for that sole reason. Don't bother me with arguments of "it looks funny" or BS like that, it's childish. Form fits function, not your subjective opinions about what looks better. And functionally, 8:5 is better.
You might argue that 8:5 is less productive in landscape mode, but that's null and void because you shouldn't use a tablet in landscape mode if you're, say, browsing the web, or typing up a document. Portrait mode will fulfill your needs much better. Using landscape mode in such tasks is like trying to fit a square peg through a round hole.
With that out of the way, about landscape mode. Media in landscape mode is objectively better on 8:5 because there are less black bars. Granted, there still are some, but there are less than the gargantuan abominations you'll see on a 4:3 screen. Moreover, in the specific case of the nexus 10, 720p can be scaled perfectly at a ratio of 4:1 to fit the screen.
As for media, all the media I watch is in 16:9, maybe you should consider primarily watching chinese cartoons as well?
tl;dr : 4:3 is archaic and deprecated, don't know why you would want it.
/thread
In fact 16:9 (16:10 on tablet but a part is for the status bar so it's about 16:9) makes developers scale up the application from phone version easier.
Keion said:
4:3 is objectively worse. Why? Because it isn't functional.
Here's the reasoning.
On a 8:5 screen, in portrait mode, you can view more information. (this is due to how tablets can zoom out) Therefore, it is more productive in portrait mode for that sole reason. Don't bother me with arguments of "it looks funny" or BS like that, it's childish. Form fits function, not your subjective opinions about what looks better. And functionally, 8:5 is better.
You might argue that 8:5 is less productive in landscape mode, but that's null and void because you shouldn't use a tablet in landscape mode if you're, say, browsing the web, or typing up a document. Portrait mode will fulfill your needs much better. Using landscape mode in such tasks is like trying to fit a square peg through a round hole.
With that out of the way, about landscape mode. Media in landscape mode is objectively better on 8:5 because there are less black bars. Granted, there still are some, but there are less than the gargantuan abominations you'll see on a 4:3 screen. Moreover, in the specific case of the nexus 10, 720p can be scaled perfectly at a ratio of 4:1 to fit the screen.
As for media, all the media I watch is in 16:9, maybe you should consider primarily watching chinese cartoons as well?
tl;dr : 4:3 is archaic and deprecated, don't know why you would want it.
/thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/facepalm
Thanks for the good laugh.
4:3 is better for apps
16:10 is better for movies and potentially side by side apps. My hope is Google will add side by side apps in the future. 4:3 would be pretty useless for that use case.
slide83 said:
/facepalm
Thanks for the good laugh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
0/10 put some effort into your trolling.
You can't pretend to be stupid and fail at it too.
Seriously, back in my day, trolling used to mean something.
>I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet.
There's a few models, like Lenovo S2109, but yep, it's weird. I cry every time peeps try to use a 16:9 or 16:10 in portrait. It just looks so painful. All these sad tabs have their functionality halved by being restricted to landscape.
MS has standardized on 16:9, and looks like Goog has standardized on 16:10. Apple is the only one going with 4:3 on tablets. Not coincidentally, Apple is the only one who pays the most attention to detail and ergonomics. The iPad Mini w/ no-bezel sides has the perfect shape, especially when it gets the Retina treatment next year.
I can understand the no-4:3 for the larger size. Video-watching is a major use-case, and the stretched AR is better for vids. It's also a fashion thing, as display vendors have trained consumers to associate 4:3 with old fogey CRTs. What they don't bother to tell you is that 4:3 LCDs would cost more money to make since it has larger surface area.
The reality is that people want to watch videos more than reading.
I've found 16:10 to be pretty close to an A-spec sheet of paper (A4 in terms of size, and I have no clue about US sizes) and I often use it in portrait for viewing scanned in stuff. It also seems to make a sort of touch typing possible in landscape. That at least makes it more useful in the EU.
Also, I think the benefits of 16:10 in landscape far outweigh the advantages of 4:3 in portrait. Portrait doesn't really offer anything special, to be honest, it just rotates the app.
Tablet is for the multimedia content. and 16:10 (like the Nexus 10) is best of two worlds: great for movies and great for portrait browsing. Web pages have sidebars even on 4:3, but at 1600x2560 they fit perfectly showing more vertical content. I see no one complaining about newspapers having long columns, and 10:16 is nowhere near that.
slide83 said:
I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too each their own I guess. I much prefer the 16:9 ratio for my devices (monitor, TV, tablet, etc.)...
Still it would be nice to have choices for those that want something else.
Wish I could remember what it was called(thinking something like Golden View/Aspect) that explains one of the reasons for 16:10 and 16:9 aspects. The range of site a person has is more of a stretched rectangle than your standard 4:3 aspect ratio.
crash822 said:
Wish I could remember what it was called(thinking something like Golden View/Aspect) that explains one of the reasons for 16:10 and 16:9 aspects. The range of site a person has is more of a stretched rectangle than your standard 4:3 aspect ratio.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you'd expect, with two circular eyes. Also, 16:10 is no harder to hold or use than 4:3 (maybe in portrait?).
via Tapatalk
I like landscape mode better. Like e.more said, 4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such. 16:9/16:10 is the best of both worlds. I hardly use my tab in portrait unless an app forces it. Like instagram for example.
demandarin said:
I like landscape mode better. Like e.more said, 4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such. 16:9/16:10 is the best of both worlds. I hardly use my tab in portrait unless an app forces it. Like instagram for example.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ultimate Rotation Control. Find it on Google Play, will solve the issue with forced rotation.
Regards.
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Venekor said:
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think lots of people watching movies on their tab. For me, it seems more like a in your face experience. Since the tab is closer to your face vs. A television set. Throw on some headphones and watching movies on a tab can be very intense. Especially with horror movies.
Another great thing is having them stored on device then linking it to t.v. through HDMI port. For when you want to watch it on a big screen with surround sound or whatever.
demandarin said:
4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4:3 is 'dominant' in tablets because of the iPad. TV and monitors have been using widescreen as a standard for probably over a decade now. The only advantage 4:3 has is that it works well for the ecosystem Apple has made (ie. They don't want to 'fragment' and break apps), all other entertainment industries have moved away from 4:3
Venekor said:
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're just really conservative, because you're being a bit melodramatic. 16:9 doesn't suddenly force you to hold it sideways except with tablets.
Related
Hopefully someone can help! I have had the xoom, and now have the 32g Galaxy tab and got the wife a TF. The issue is gallery photo's always show as 4:3, with black bars on each side. This is the case if the pictures are taken with the tab or my digital camera, even set on 16:9 landscape mode! I have tried both resolutions on the tab with no luck, as well as almost every gallery app on the market. I do not want to crop every photo every time just to fill the 1280x800 screen.
I viewed the widescreen format as a big plus over apple's 4:3, but atleast the gallery on the ipad fills the whole screen. What i have been doing is using quick pic with 1 tap zom and centering the picture. I really bought this tablet to show off picture of the new baby. It's just very embarrasing and time consuming to spend $ 600 plus on a wide screen tablet only to lose 30% or so of the image, not to mention, this 10.1 bigger than ipad is actually smaller, about 9.6 when you account for the display loss taken by the soft keys.
I called both Motorola which was a huge waste of time..... clueless pure script! As well as Samsung, who verified my problem with one of theirs ....but had no suggestions. I havesearched high and low online for a fix to no avail, Im shocked more people aren't complaining about this, or im just doing something wrong......
I really hate stating the obvious here, but the tab camera takes photos in a 4:3 aspect ratio. Most cameras take 4:3 pictures by default so you might want to check the settings on whatever camera you're using.
Have you tried downloading a 16:9 photo off the internet and viewing it with the default gallery or QuickPic?
As i had stated, pictures taken on my camera were take in 16:9. They all show perfectly full screen on everything from my 17 laptop to my 160 inch screen in my theater...... Basically no issues anywhere but on an android tablet.
WOW...... Xda devolpers? and no one has a suggestion?
I assume the 4:3 gallery concern could be corrected with an application that forces gallery pictures to display in 1280x800 or whatever it is after subtracting the wasted soft key space, in 16:9/16:10. Im not the only one with the issue, It seems everyone does. With that being said, I see a great opportunity to make a great deal of income from a pretty basic app. Am I asking too much for my widescreen to display as widescreen should, in full screen?
try the General Android section
I'm feeling somewhat disappointed on Asus's decision to move the transformer towards the direction the ipad is taking by making slight hardware changes and massively bumping up the display.
I remember when apple invented the 'retina display' buzzword for ips panels a few years ago - marketing them as having the most pixels your eyes can see from a holding distance. Now apple is keeping the tablet the same size and bumping up the pixel density 4 times with suspected plans of marketing that as being better. How? They've already stated more pixels would be redundant.
At this point the tablet to buy isn't looking like the ipad 3 or the tf700, lenovo is sweeping in with the ideapad k2 to offer more hardware changes (usb on the tablet, 1.7ghz t3, fingerprint scanner, possible keyboard dock) as well as a high def display.
What kind of change will these displays provide? Drastic?
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly decreased performance..
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly!
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet!
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Can you actually see the pixel difference on a 1920x1200 screen over the primes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've counted them (the pixels) and the difference is that the count took two times as long!
But seriously, there is a point when it would be hard to see a difference, where more pixels would NOT really make a clearer screen.
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Wordlywisewiz said:
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Useless post...
Sent from my ROOTED Transformer Prime
Yes
10char
Wordlywisewiz said:
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am sorry that you are having problems with the Prime. However nothing you have said is actually relevant to the conversation that this thread was started with. Please try to keep on-topic, there are plenty of other threads where you can discus your tablet problems.
With regards to pixel density... it very much depends on how you use your Prime. If you read a lot on the Prime and have noticed pixelation in small text, then yes, upping the pixel density would improve your tablet experience. If you mainly watch videos then you probably won't notice the extra pixels on the size of screen that the Prime has.
The exact same debate took place when 1080P TV's came out. People that already bought 720P used the same defenses as to why 1080P TV's are overkill. 80% of high-def TV's sold last year were 1080P. Does anyone not think Apple's going to spend a gazillion dollars convincing the world life as we know will end if you don't have a retina (HD) display? Asus, Acer, and Samsung aren't introducing HD displays because it's practical, it's to combat Apple. How many of you expect your next phone to be qHD or 720P? And its only got a 4-5" display. Whether you personally care or not, tablets with HD displays are going to become the norm (potentially impacting the resale value of those that don't have it).
Wordlywisewiz said:
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly decreased performance..
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly!
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet!
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is 1920x1200 = 2k?
And because the prime has that resolution doesn't mean there will be a lot of content using the extra 120 pixels lol.
it will be 1080p content with black bars on top and bottom, no difference in file sizes at all.
I guess it depends. In my opinion its all about what you're used to. For example, i'm used to gaming on a PC. There you use Anti-Aliasing on the games in 1080p, so i'm used to perfectly sharp images without any jagged edges. If I see the same games on a Xbox i always think the graphics are horrible, while most people think there are some amazing looking games on the xbox...
And i used to play Tomb Raider 1 on my old PC in 320x240 on a 15" CRT monitor. That was bad dpi. I still enjoyed it very much
So atm i have a 27" PC/TV combo monitor with 1080p. Thats what my eyes are used to. So my prime looks sharper to me than my PC monitor, and i think my PC monitor is more than sharp enough i hope you see now where i'm getting. I also cant tell the difference in dpi from my 800x480 4.3" phone to the iphone display...
What i'm trying to say, no one needs that kind of resolution. Its just nice to have, and once you got used to it, you probably dont wanna go back. All things aside, I think the Prime's screen is absolutely beautiful.
So if I had to compare 2 devices with different resolution the one very sharp, the other very very sharp I would look on all the other features first.
For example if the TF700T would have like 1 hour less battery life and would be heavier i'd still go for the Prime.
If we're talking RUMOURED ipad 3 resolution, well just think about this. Watching movies in that resolution (you first had to get them somehow, as far as i know all movies are max 1920x1080 today?) would be pretty sharp right. But because of a screen format that hasnt been used anymore since 10 years you will only be using a very small part of that screen to actually watch that movie.
Now everyone has to decide for themselfs, but for me there are FAR FAR more important features than resolution (especially if the difference is barely visable for me).
But people have spent huge amount of money on unuseful tech for lesser reasons
Off course yu can see the difference. Just take a look at your phone display(800*480 or higher), you'll notice that it's much sharper than any tablet screen.
The biggest "problem" of resolutions that high is that the graphics processor has to deal with much more pixels(in our case 2304000(1920*1200)/10024000(1280*800)=2,25 times).
In the case of games this could mean games running at less than half the speed(FPS), assuming it has the same CPU/GPU combination.
YoMarK said:
Off course yu can see the difference. Just take a look at your phone display(800*480 or higher), you'll notice that it's much sharper than any tablet screen.
The biggest "problem" of resolutions that high is that the graphics processor has to deal with much more pixels(in our case 2304000(1920*1200)/10024000(1280*800)=2,25 times).
In the case of games this could mean games running at less than half the speed(FPS), assuming it has the same CPU/GPU combination.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it won't have the exact same GPU, and the iPad 2 has a pretty ridiculously powerful PowerVR GPU. However I question Apple's choice to use GPUs that tend to focus on polygon performance instead of fill rate performance particularly when they're looking to dramatically increase screen resolution.
Apple is running out of things to say is best with the iPad / iPhone short of gimmicks like Siri and "retina" displays. They're going to pay for it in other areas though, they're going to need to have a GPU with a killer fill rate, and though the current SGX543MP2 can probably manage, doubtless they'll cram something that eats even more power into the iPad 3.
The thing that most Apple users don't know is that most of the tablet apps they'll be buying off the market won't make use of the high resolution or the processor, as the majority will have been built to run on the now-comparatively-pathetic iPad 1. At least we're seeing THD apps that make use of the additional processing power our tablets have to offer. I've yet to hear of Apple app developers doing the same, though I assume it'll have to happen at some point.
And finally, to answer the question of the OP, I highly doubt there will be any noticeable difference at the distance most of us hold a tablet. It's a little different for the iPhone; with a 3.5 inch screen you have to hold it a lot closer if you're reading text because it's that much smaller. Comparing smartphone display resolution to tablet display resolution is rather pointless as we hold them at different distances from our face depending upon the size of the display and the text / images on the screen.
Holding my TFP at its general 2-foot viewing distance, I'm hard pressed to make out any individual pixels, and my vision is 20/20. I won't be trading in my TFP for an iPad because of of difference in pixel density I may never even notice!
ickkii said:
I'm feeling somewhat disappointed on Asus's decision to move the transformer towards the direction the ipad is taking by making slight hardware changes and massively bumping up the display.
I remember when apple invented the 'retina display' buzzword for ips panels a few years ago - marketing them as having the most pixels your eyes can see from a holding distance. Now apple is keeping the tablet the same size and bumping up the pixel density 4 times with suspected plans of marketing that as being better. How? They've already stated more pixels would be redundant.
At this point the tablet to buy isn't looking like the ipad 3 or the tf700, lenovo is sweeping in with the ideapad k2 to offer more hardware changes (usb on the tablet, 1.7ghz t3, fingerprint scanner, possible keyboard dock) as well as a high def display.
What kind of change will these displays provide? Drastic?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I personally think that for most people these super high resolutions on small screens are pretty pointless. Maybe it's because I'm 35 and don't have the same vision I did 15 years ago
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Of course you can... but who cares?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
pdanders said:
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Think from what distance you look at your TV. And then think from what distance you look at your tablet. Compare the relative sizes of the devices in your field of view. I use 23 inch screen for movies but I look at it from 50cm - it's bigger then than typical cinema screen (I'm nearsighted so I like it that way).
pdanders said:
I personally think that for most people these super high resolutions on small screens are pretty pointless. Maybe it's because I'm 35 and don't have the same vision I did 15 years ago
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man you have the 70 lol? I was happy as hell when i got my 60" Samsung Smart TV a few months ago. Then they had to go and introduce the 70" & 80" Sharp LED's! Damn you Sharp hahaha!
I told my GF 60" is the biggest ill ever have to go. WRONG!
Wordlywisewiz said:
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly heavily decreased performance (compared to smaller displays)
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly! I think there is not even any 2K media (like cinema films) for end users available.
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet! You won't see that at "movie-distance"
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Corrected for you
Vcolassi said:
Man you have the 70 lol? I was happy as hell when i got my 60" Samsung Smart TV a few months ago. Then they had to go and introduce the 70" & 80" Sharp LED's! Damn you Sharp hahaha!
I told my GF 60" is the biggest ill ever have to go. WRONG!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now imagine if a TV of those size existed in the 1990s. It would weigh nearly a ton, resolution would be 640x480, and would probably cost about $3,999 dollars since anything over 36 inches was unheard of.
removed
10characters
The difference will be noticeable, but it's up to you whether you care enough to pay another 100 [insert currency here]. Was actually slightly disappointed with the display quality when viewing text on the TFP, but perhaps I'm just being ultra-picky. Can't be bothered to wait another 6 months at this point though.
I just sold my transformer prime infinity...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Well I was just looking around here and I don't have a Nexus 10. I got a Galaxy Note 10.1 and from my experience the picture matters a lot.
I mean there are a lot of wallpaper sites with ultra HD and optimized wallpapers for retina display, but the same resolution is not always the same sharpness. some are crappy cropped or zoomed.
Use quickpic to set your background picture. The stock gallery app sometimes crops the pictures false.
And pictures with a resolution below the maximum resolution will always look a bit crappy. that means that when you are using a fullHD picture, which was nice for transformer prime, it can look less sharp on a display with higher resolution like nexus 10
I too come from Prime and there is no contest, this screen is sharper than Prime by miles.
How stuff looks will depend on what you are seeing.
If you have set regular wallpaper, it will look all blurry thanks to resolution. Even so called HD wallpapers will look blurry on this. You need to go search for wallpapers for MacBook Pro retina and use those on this tablet using quickpic. None of the apps from Android market have good wallpapers that are having native resolution of this tablet.
Text is sharp and crisp on this.
Most arcade games are not optimised for this screen and look terrible or blurry. That is not screen's fault.
Desktop web pages look nice full and crisp. So only real issue of lack of sharpness comes into picture when the content is not ready for screen. That includes apps, images and games.
I also come from Prime.
I wouldn't say the Prime screen looks sharper than the Nexus 10. Reading text on the N10, for example, the resolution is really amazing, very nice on the Nexus 10.
The colors and brightness and blacks is a different story. The Prime had those 3 much nicer than the Nexus 10. I loved playing Marble Blast on the Prime, the graphics looked amazingly vivid. On the Nexus 10 they appear as meh.
Its the prime infinity. Drastic difference. What a shame. Gonna put the nex up 4sale.
suzook said:
I just sold my transformer prime...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
404 ERROR said:
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually have to disagree with you a little bit here. 720p video should look just as good on the Nexus 10 as it does on the Note 10.1. 1280x800 times 2 is 2560x1600. Because of that each pixel of a 720p video will take up exactly 4 pixels on the Nexus 10; however those 4 pixels on the N10 are the same area that would be a single pixel on the Note 10.1. This is a clean ratio. On the TF700 you got to 1920x1200 which is 1.5 times 1280x800. This is not a whole ratio and means that pixels of a 720p video will take up between 1 and 4 pixels on the TF700 display (determined by a fancy algorithm for scaling images).
The Nexus 10 playing 1080p video should have about the same blurriness as the TF700 playing 720p video.
Nitemare3219 said:
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol as a former owner of both (returned Prime C1 for 700 a C6 then returned that, and I started the thread in Prime forums for users who Asus lost our first mailed GPS dongles)- your fooling yourself or you got a N10 with a bad screen
Sent from my SCH-I535 using XDA
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
The problem with this screen is calibration and black levels.
Colors are extremely washed, red is a poor red, same with blue. This totally kills the screen. If you compare this with ipad screen, you will cry. Not because of viewing angles, not because of brightness, because of colours. Google was really smart when they decided not to calibrate their screens, same with nexus 4, while other OEMs take care of this thing deeply.
And black, despite numbers of the reviews, its quite poor, mostly because every single unit has light bleed (some with a hard mess, others this problem is smaller)
As a result, a top screen with such a poor implementation. This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one, with many pixels, but nothing else. And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Straf said:
And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
light bleed is not a software issue
Techie2012 said:
light bleed is not a software issue
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, meant the calibration thing, it's about software. Black thing is because a bad manufacturing process, probably because of low price tag., or crappy manufacturers.
blackhand1001 said:
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow...that blows. Maybe we need a 4.1 ROM??
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Yep, I completely agree with one of the previous posters, this is definetly a black level issue. I put the iPad with a Retina Display right against a Nexus 10 both playing the same 1080i MKV. The iPad clearly won.
I still like the Nexus 10 a lot and I find it very comfortable to use because of how thin it is and how light it is, but to improve the product I think Google missed it some here. They could lowered the resolution considerably (1920 x 1080 is more than fine), improved on black level, and used the same processor. The lower resolution would have allowed that processor to scream since it wouldn't have been as taxed to interpolate so many pixels.
I don't know if it is a software issue or not, but if it is I really hope Google releases a fix. If there was a way to adjust Gamma or Contrast it might help considerably.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way on earth text (or other computer generated content like the UI and icons) will look better on a 147PPI display (Prime) vs. 224PPI (TF700) or 300PPI (N10). The reason is as 404 Error did a great job of explaining is that text is a 1:1 match pixel wise; the more pixels the sharper the image. Photos and videos display even the clearest content over multiple pixels so the advantage of a higher PPI becomes less pronounced. And the human eye (even yours) can't resolve sharpness over 229PPI beyond 15". So, your 20/20 eyes are decieving you. The N10 has less contrast and isn't as bright as older displays so that might be what you're reacting to.
Straf said:
This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well lets hope this guy will change that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ9H-TtObBY
tacitust said:
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine has this problem and so do at least a few others. See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2007676
I'm still debating if it annoys me enough to justify an exchange.
Hey,
I got my Galaxy Tab S3 today and to my surprise, Youtube videos and Twitch streams have black bars on top and bottom of the video. I knew the S3 had a 4:3 ratio before I purchased it, but I didn't think that it would affect video playback.
My question is if there is a way to make it show 16:9 videos without black bars at top and bottom?
You could chop off some of the stuff on the sides and convertting the video to a 4:3 format. Shouldn't have any bars that way...
I guess I just bought the wrong tab for viewing videos. The black bars is annoying as hell for me.
Stonga said:
Hey,
I got my Galaxy Tab S3 today and to my surprise, Youtube videos and Twitch streams have black bars on top and bottom of the video. I knew the S3 had a 4:3 ratio before I purchased it, but I didn't think that it would affect video playback.
My question is if there is a way to make it show 16:9 videos without black bars at top and bottom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Surely you realise it's impossible to fit a 16:9 image within a 4:3 screen without either compressing the image vertically or chopping the sides off?
Mxplayer will let you adjust the ratio to whatever you want if you wish to fill the screen.
If you want true 16:10 then the Tab S is still the best option.
Stonga said:
The black bars is annoying as hell for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try this:
* Jedi hand-wave* These are not the black bars you are looking for.
In the event of a sub-par connection to The Force, you could try watching in a sufficiently dark room to trick your mind into not seeing the black bars.
Zimus said:
Try this:
* Jedi hand-wave* These are not the black bars you are looking for.
In the event of a sub-par connection to The Force, you could try watching in a sufficiently dark room to trick your mind into not seeing the black bars.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That didn't work.
I went with Ashyx's suggestion and found a cheap used Tab S. The screen is about the same just with 16:9 aspect ratio.
I'm only going to use it for movies/series, watching streams and Youtube. Don't need all the other fancy specs the S3 has for that.
ashyx said:
Surely you realise it's impossible to fit a 16:9 image within a 4:3 screen without either compressing the image vertically or chopping the sides off?
Mxplayer will let you adjust the ratio to whatever you want if you wish to fill the screen.
If you want true 16:10 then the Tab S is still the best option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly didn't think it would matter. I thought it was just a matter of using a program to change the aspect ratio and resolution to go with it and it would work. Like on a PC monitor or TV. Tried that and didn't work like I thought it would.
I went with your suggestion and found myself a Tab S 10.5 for cheap. I only care about the screen and not the other specs. Only difference between the S3 and S is the aspect ratio and HDR capable. I get my HDR fix on my TV.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Stonga said:
I honestly didn't think it would matter. I thought it was just a matter of using a program to change the aspect ratio and resolution to go with it and it would work. Like on a PC monitor or TV. Tried that and didn't work like I thought it would.
I went with your suggestion and found myself a Tab S 10.5 for cheap. I only care about the screen and not the other specs. Only difference between the S3 and S is the aspect ratio and HDR capable. I get my HDR fix on my TV.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dont play the the Tab S down too much it is still a formidable device and still the best looking tablet of all the Tab S line.
ashyx said:
Dont play the the Tab S down too much it is still a formidable device and still the best looking tablet of all the Tab S line.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably the best 16:9 screen of all the tablets out today as well. I take amoled over lcd any day with a tablet.
Stonga said:
That didn't work.
I went with Ashyx's suggestion and found a cheap used Tab S. The screen is about the same just with 16:9 aspect ratio.
I'm only going to use it for movies/series, watching streams and Youtube. Don't need all the other fancy specs the S3 has for that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Tab S is still a great tablet, with a plethora of custom ROMs. If the battery in mine could hold a charge for more than 30min of light usage I wouldn't have upgraded to the S3
Zimus said:
The Tab S is still a great tablet, with a plethora of custom ROMs. If the battery in mine could hold a charge for more than 30min of light usage I wouldn't have upgraded to the S3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is exactly the reason I decided on the tab s3. My tab s 8.4 is a great unit plugged in, but dead within an hour or so doing anything other than playing poweramp with the screen/wifi off. It does amuse me that 16:9 content on the S3 is only a little bigger than on my 8.4, but the faster specs are nice for casting Kodi or Amazon Video content to the tele.
zetajunkie said:
This is exactly the reason I decided on the tab s3. My tab s 8.4 is a great unit plugged in, but dead within an hour or so doing anything other than playing poweramp with the screen/wifi off. It does amuse me that 16:9 content on the S3 is only a little bigger than on my 8.4, but the faster specs are nice for casting Kodi or Amazon Video content to the tele.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You own both tabs. Is there a noticeable difference between the quality of the screens?
Stonga said:
You own both tabs. Is there a noticeable difference between the quality of the screens?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I prefer the screen on my old Tab S 10.5 to the one on my Tab S3. It has a higher resolution (2560x1600 vs 2048x1536) and pixel density (288ppi vs 264ppi).
Stonga said:
You own both tabs. Is there a noticeable difference between the quality of the screens?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they both look good. I can't say I notice the ppi difference, but I don't exactly bury my face into the screen. I prefer the 16:10 ratio and the tab s 8.4 size, but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any decent spec'd tablets currently available.
I have both now.
Side by side when playing a 60fps youtube video, the image movement is smoother on the S3 compared to the Tab S, but the black bars is gone.
All,
The one thing irritating me about the V30 is the screen during YouTube... The 18:9 resolution is a issue... .. YouTube has a pinch to zoom thing to fix this issue for full screen videos scaling properly... Samsung crops the videos... Is there something we can do for the LG V30?
Thanks,
Sean
What exactly is the issue here?
I've read your post 5 times trying to look for the problem
berezker said:
What exactly is the issue here?
I've read your post 5 times trying to look for the problem
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umgh the issue is there are black bars in the full screen videos in Youtube as the videos are 16:9 aspect ratio and V30 is 18:9... Samsung has a fix for the S8 which has a similar aspect ratio of cropping the video to fit the screen... Youtube's app supposedly fit videos to the screen with a pinch to zoom for 18:9 aspect ratio phones but doesn't seem to be working for V30.... Asking if anyone has a solution to this...
This pinch to zoom (or rather crop?) feature seems to be exclusive to the Pixel 2 XL at the moment.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-g6/help/screen-youtube-t3583449
This works for the v30
cazcryy said:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-g6/help/screen-youtube-t3583449
This works for the v30
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, what method in that thread exactly works? I see people talking about a hidden menu, but I couldn't get that to activate, and I also see people talking about a modded YouTube. app. Which one did you mean?
MaxusValtron said:
Sorry, what method in that thread exactly works? I see people talking about a hidden menu, but I couldn't get that to activate, and I also see people talking about a modded YouTube. app. Which one did you mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The last couple of pages explaining the 2 apk files (modded YouTube app)
cazcryy said:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-g6/help/screen-youtube-t3583449
This works for the v30
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for this! Now if we could only get hdr support.
berezker said:
What exactly is the issue here?
I've read your post 5 times trying to look for the problem
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
basically he dislikes correct aspect ratios on the video and wants the video to fill the entire messed up ratio of the physical screen cause he doesn't like black bars.
it's the equivalent of "stretching" a 4:3 image to fit full screen on a 16:9 TV.
I've never comprehended why people prefer this. The video aspect ratio is how it was recorded. doing anything to it either crops out part of the image (old pan and scan style) or distorts the image making circles into ovals and such.
teknomedic said:
basically he dislikes correct aspect ratios on the video and wants the video to fill the entire messed up ratio of the physical screen cause he doesn't like black bars.
it's the equivalent of "stretching" a 4:3 image to fit full screen on a 16:9 TV.
I've never comprehended why people prefer this. The video aspect ratio is how it was recorded. doing anything to it either crops out part of the image (old pan and scan style) or distorts the image making circles into ovals and such.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well it's a matter of personal preference. Some people want to watch content as it was meant to be, others want the full screen experience. Personally I would never stretch as it causes too much distortion, but I don't mind crop...for me the small loss in the edges of the picture is worth the more immersive experience. I do this on my PC monitor as well, I have an ultra wide monitor (21:9) and crop most 16:9 TV shows to fill the entire screen. I know some people would disagree, but who cares to each his own lol.
cazcryy said:
Well it's a matter of personal preference. Some people want to watch content as it was meant to be, others want the full screen experience. Personally I would never stretch as it causes too much distortion, but I don't mind crop...for me the small loss in the edges of the picture is worth the more immersive experience. I do this on my PC monitor as well, I have an ultra wide monitor (21:9) and crop most 16:9 TV shows to fill the entire screen. I know some people would disagree, but who cares to each his own lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
absolutely it's personal preference, I don't fault you or anyone for that. Do what you like.
I've just never understood why filling a screen fully at the expense of lost information from the video is worth it. Even zooming in and cropping (no stretch) isn't benign. If the video is a certain resolution and aspect ratio, zooming and cropping misaligns the image's pixels to the screen's pixels causing a slight blurring. On a small mobile screen you'll likely not notice without grids and reference points though.
It's just the tech geek in me. Overscan is my bane... living through the age of curved CRTs and 16:9 movies chopped down to 4:3....gross... along with my arcade machine collection constantly fighting image geometry over the years...bleh. we finally get flat screens with one to one parity with the displayed images and then we back track to curved and cropping out things again. Lol.
You can do whatever... I'm just saying I'll never get it, lol.
New version fixes it. I tried and it works as intended.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/1...ngs-pinch-zoom-devices-like-galaxy-s8-lg-v30/
qualitymove13 said:
New version fixes it. I tried and it works as intended.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/1...ngs-pinch-zoom-devices-like-galaxy-s8-lg-v30/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, awesome, thanks!
Got the update last night and you're right, as advertised, pinch to fill works!
https://youtu.be/8y7XGmORIXM
As an example of the preceding discussion, any V30 owner can now easily see for themselves the tradeoff of filling the screen.
Watching Electroboom's latest video, where he's ranting about YouTube demonetization, when I pinch to fill I cut off his forehead and his pants. Nothing is "stretched." (Also, "pan 'n scan" is the incorrect term to use here -- that's when a film is shot in a wide aspect ration but cut down, say for a 4:3 television, and since both characters can't fit on the narrower aspect ratio screen the view virtually "pans" between the two characters, whereas in the theater they'd both fit on the wide screen and there would be no panning.)
qualitymove13 said:
New version fixes it. I tried and it works as intended.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/1...ngs-pinch-zoom-devices-like-galaxy-s8-lg-v30/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nay Tyzon said:
Hey, awesome, thanks!
Got the update last night and you're right, as advertised, pinch to fill works!
https://youtu.be/8y7XGmORIXM
As an example of the preceding discussion, any V30 owner can now easily see for themselves the tradeoff of filling the screen.
Watching Electroboom's latest video, where he's ranting about YouTube demonetization, when I pinch to fill I cut off his forehead and his pants. Nothing is "stretched." (Also, "pan 'n scan" is the incorrect term to use here -- that's when a film is shot in a wide aspect ration but cut down, say for a 4:3 television, and since both characters can't fit on the narrower aspect ratio screen the view virtually "pans" between the two characters, whereas in the theater they'd both fit on the wide screen and there would be no panning.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, I have just updated Youtube and it works perfectly for me.
Thanks folks for your help with this
For the ones like me that want to keep aspect ratios as they are, they can always look for "21:9" or "18:9" clips on YouTube, they will fill their screen all right without distortion.
Today's Youtube app update has the pinch to zoom feature.