720p? 1080p? 1440p?

[matzesu]

I mean: to delifer a Screen whit 1440p Images, you need more CPU Power to scale, so if the OS can be changed to 720p, this would be need less Akku Power..

Like on a Car: If you have a Ferarri whit 600 Horse Power, and you use all of they, you need a lot fuel,

but if you only use 60 Horse Power of the same engine (if you ditnt drive that fast), its ditnt needs that much fuel..

EDIT: Could be, that i missunderstand how a Screen work...

 

[ekianjo]

doesnt work this way. what consume the most is the screen and the need to light up 1440p pixels. even if you upscale a 720p resolution to 1440p. plus upscaling looks like horse shit on LCD.

 

[Binky]

Surely backlighting power depends on the screen area, not pixel count?

We could pixel double everything from 540x960 - giving around the same PD as the pandora, four times the rendering speed and a clean, sharp image.

 

[klapse]

Also remember that the pandora Omap3 has hardware scaling. You can render at lower resolutions (saving cpu) and let the hardware scale up to 800x480.

It is possible that newer SoCs also have ths feature, though I don't personally know whether any do. Maybe Exophase knows?

 

[fusion_power]

Does Pixel Qi finaly make 5" Screens? Just out of curiosity. Their low power dual mode Screens could be a great feature for a handheld.

 

[bsp]

Surely backlighting power depends on the screen area, not pixel count?

It depends on the pixel count, too. The higher the pixel density, the brighter the backlight needs to be (=> increased power consumption)

Also remember that the pandora Omap3 has hardware scaling. You can render at lower resolutions (saving cpu) and let the hardware scale up to 800x480.

yep, it would be a terrible waste of battery life if the SOC did not have a hardware scaler and all scaling would need to be done by SW or the GPU (increased RAM usage = increased battery consumption and that's not even considering the increased processor power).


Assuming an ARM based SOC is chosen for compatibility reasons, not having a hardware scaler would probably kill the compatibility with Pandora software. Just picture e.g. a SNES emulator w/o scaling on a HD screen.. the emulated screen will not be much larger than a post stamp.

 

[WizardStan]

doesnt work this way. what consume the most is the screen and the need to light up 1440p pixels. even if you upscale a 720p resolution to 1440p. plus upscaling looks like horse shit on LCD.

720 is integer scaled to 1440. There should be no visible difference between a 720 image displayed on a 720 screen or doubled to a 1440 screen With the hardware scaler the power cost should be negligible.

 

[ThinkPad]

Yeah 720 р is more than enough. But Please use capacitive screen instead of resestive

 

[Binky]

Yeah 720 р is more than enough. But Please use capacitive screen instead of resestive

Quote--

 

[EssoAir]

Yeah 720 р is more than enough. But Please use capacitive screen instead of resestive

If we could get a Samsung S - Pen or ither Wacom equivalent, then J would agree. But otherwise we have sto stick with resistive since so many people use the stylus for navigating a desktop OS

 

[Klumpen]

since so many people use the stylus for navigating a desktop OS

I'd rather use a touchpad.

 

[bzar]

Please use capacitive screen instead of resestive

IFF you can get it to the pixel-precision of resistive. Otherwise: nope.

720p is enough for most stuff I think. If power use all things considered is within 1.5x one could consider higher resolutions.

 

[WizardStan]

But Please use capacitive screen instead of resestive

 
Why?

 

[Exophase]

Why?

I guess because in spite of how many times you've said that resistive doesn't mean single touch, I haven't found any resource that shows how multitouch works in a viable resistive solution you can get today.

Granted, on something with gaming controls single touch is less of a problem, but it'd still suck to end up with Android stuff that flat out doesn't work because of it.

 

[FaeMinx]

^ Alright then, but if it's going to be capacitive...

... then please oh please, we have to have a digitizer layer as well. 

 

[WizardStan]

I guess because in spite of how many times you've said that resistive doesn't mean single touch, I haven't found any resource that shows how multi-touch works in a viable resistive solution you can get today.

It is disappointing that despite it being several years since multi-touch resistive layers were invented they haven't shown up in commercial products.That being said, if the argument is that he wants multi-touch and you can't get multi-touch in resistive screens at the moment I'd still want to get that opinion from him, because that isn't the only thing that separates resistive and capacitive.

 

[Mr_Loon]

Why?

I guess because in spite of how many times you've said that resistive doesn't mean single touch, I haven't found any resource that shows how multitouch works in a viable resistive solution you can get today.


Granted, on something with gaming controls single touch is less of a problem, but it'd still suck to end up with Android stuff that flat out doesn't work because of it.

The Android multi touch consideration does make the resistive vs capacitive decision a little more difficult.

I'd prefer a resistive screen for the added precision this brings.

Makes me wonder if a software solution could be used for resistive screens, where certain key/button press would simulate a touch in the centre of the screen and the stylus could be used for the second touch point to allow pinch zoom. Hopefully the hardware gaming controls would eliminate the problem of not being able to use multiple on screen buttons simultaneously.

 

[Exophase]

It is disappointing that despite it being several years since multi-touch resistive layers were invented they haven't shown up in commercial products.

I think you read too much into the hype. You can't do real multitouch with a traditional resistive touchscreen that involves two electrodes and four sense points (one for each side). Oddly, when Engadget was gushing over Stantum for having multitouch they didn't even show it in their video..

Here's some information on an actual multi-touch resistive screen. http://touchinternational.com/downloads/DeliverySpecifications/6500452-48-F-MARS-104-MDL-01D-Module-Specification.pdf It's accomplished by using several electrodes along X and Y axes. They only offer a 10.1" version which makes me wonder how well you can even scale this approach to 5" displays. The zones are pretty big, and it has some limitations like not being able to detect 4+ presses in a rectangular zone pattern. It's pretty easy to see why this is the case - it's basically using multiple electrodes on the other axis to disambiguate the two axis presses. But here you end up with ambiguity on both axes.

What I wonder is if you even get precise coordinates with the multitouch or if you just get a report of which zone it's in once you have more than one touch. Their demos only seem to show the latter - if you could show something like two people writing on it simultaneously I think they would because that'd be a lot more impressive. But I don't see how that'd even work with this technology.

It's also pretty easy to see why this wouldn't be cheaper than capacitive and why it hasn't caught on.

 

[EssoAir]

It is disappointing that despite it being several years since multi-touch resistive layers were invented they haven't shown up in commercial products.

I think you read too much into the hype. You can't do real multitouch with a traditional resistive touchscreen that involves two electrodes and four sense points (one for each side). Oddly, when Engadget was gushing over Stantum for having multitouch they didn't even show it in their video..

Here's some information on an actual multi-touch resistive screen. http://touchinternational.com/downloads/DeliverySpecifications/6500452-48-F-MARS-104-MDL-01D-Module-Specification.pdf It's accomplished by using several electrodes along X and Y axes. They only offer a 10.1" version which makes me wonder how well you can even scale this approach to 5" displays. The zones are pretty big, and it has some limitations like not being able to detect 4+ presses in a rectangular zone pattern. It's pretty easy to see why this is the case - it's basically using multiple electrodes on the other axis to disambiguate the two axis presses. But here you end up with ambiguity on both axes.


What I wonder is if you even get precise coordinates with the multitouch or if you just get a report of which zone it's in once you have more than one touch. Their demos only seem to show the latter - if you could show something like two people writing on it simultaneously I think they would because that'd be a lot more impressive. But I don't see how that'd even work with this technology.


It's also pretty easy to see why this wouldn't be cheaper than capacitive and why it hasn't caught on.

Is a Wacom digitizer out of the question?Note sure if anyone here has used a Galaxy Note but its a wonderful experience. Far bettet than a resistive touch screen

 

[mcobit]

A digitizer pen would be great but would add a lot of cost to the product. Especially if you can't calculate for millions of sold units.