The long road to a final unit


And how do you know it's a TN panel?

According to BOE, the display uses their own technology to lessen the response time - and as it's an industrial display, response time in the datasheet is in worst working conditions.

(And checking the internet, BOE develops technology that's better than IPS, known as AFFS or Hydis).

Pandoras display claims to have a better response time, for example, but when you test it, it's horrible.... the BOE display has no visible ghosting.

I have no idea what they use (it's not mentioned in the datasheet), but it looks better than any phones I have...
 
And how do you know it's a TN panel?


According to BOE, the display uses their own technology to lessen the response time - and as it's an industrial display, response time in the datasheet is in worst working conditions.


(And checking the internet, BOE develops technology that's better than IPS, known as AFFS or Hydis).


Pandoras display claims to have a better response time, for example, but when you test it, it's horrible.... the BOE display has no visible ghosting.


I have no idea what they use (it's not mentioned in the datasheet), but it looks better than any phones I have...
Ah, I just compared the viewing angle of the BOE panel with some IPS panel and they are equal. As soon as I read TFT I was assuming it to be a less-than-IPS-panel, probably TN in mind. But yes, it's ADS - sounds to me like a disease. :)

Maybe the successor of the Pyra should be named after BOE's display technology - DragonBox Hydis. :D

I should have known you got everything under control, ED. I better get back playing some X-Com: UFO Defense on my pandora (I'm close to getting to the final mission) and restore my health.
 
As long as it has a fast response time and especialy will not be a pocket mirror(!) I'm fine with whatever they will use as Display. However, I have a nice IPS PC Monitor and I'm pretty happy with it's colours, viewing angle and response time. It was not cheap but worth every Euro and it's of course not a Samsung display. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As long as it has a fast response time and especialy will not be a pocket mirror(!) I'm fine with whatever they will use as Display.
But I need to regularly check my beard in it!11! Are you crazy? Everyone needs an expensive pocket mirror.
 
i was kind of supprised as i have seen little girls using their smart phones as a pocket mirror replacement .... i was scrared.
 
i was kind of supprised as i have seen little girls using their smart phones as a pocket mirror replacement .... i was scrared.
I have seriously used my Nexus 4 as a mirror too. Not often, but I have. It's not a really good pocket mirror (a bit dark), but it works. When the screen is black it's a mirror, when it's not black it's not, it works pretty well. It doesn't make the screen any worse, wide viewing angles, etc., the only downside is when you want to look at something really dark (can't really think of an example right now, in some games there would be scenes like that, I guess, but not in any I've played recently) in bright sun light, then sometimes it might be annoying, but other than that? Nope.
 
And how do you know it's a TN panel?


According to BOE, the display uses their own technology to lessen the response time - and as it's an industrial display, response time in the datasheet is in worst working conditions.


(And checking the internet, BOE develops technology that's better than IPS, known as AFFS or Hydis).


Pandoras display claims to have a better response time, for example, but when you test it, it's horrible.... the BOE display has no visible ghosting.


I have no idea what they use (it's not mentioned in the datasheet), but it looks better than any phones I have...
Ghosting is actually the least of my concerns - I remember back in the 90s trying to play Quake on a laptop LCD with ~60-100ms response times! Now THAT was some ghosting...

I've never (to my knowledge) used an FFS/HFFS panel, but I did some reading on it and it definitely sounds better than TN overall, and the specs on the W677L list viewing angles of 80deg, which should be acceptable for a portable device.  I have some cheap chinese tablets/game consoles that all use terrible panels with viewing angles of 70 or 75 and it's just awful - they have such a narrow "sweet spot" before color bleed occurs that it makes them so frustrating to play at times.

Thanks to whoever pointed out that the model number was on that picture - I didn't think to check there, and this definitely alleviates most of the concerns that I had about the LCD.

Now if only I could convince ED to use a capacitive touch screen instead of resistive...or at least to make this an option
 
Now if only I could convince ED to use a capacitive touch screen instead of resistive...or at least to make this an option
that argument again...


Most people here are against capacitive screens.. they're too inaccurate for a device that uses a proper linux desktop with small menus, icons and such, sure phones can get away with it because they have a gui that works well for fat finger tapping... Also before someone mentions the galaxy note series and their fancy active digitizer.. we prob can't get that for cheap or at all..  EvilDragon is hoping to have a touch screen layer that will give us simple multi-touch on a resistive touch screen layer. so it still should be some what better than the Pandora's touch screen in that regard. 
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And how do you know it's a TN panel?


According to BOE, the display uses their own technology to lessen the response time - and as it's an industrial display, response time in the datasheet is in worst working conditions.


(And checking the internet, BOE develops technology that's better than IPS, known as AFFS or Hydis).


Pandoras display claims to have a better response time, for example, but when you test it, it's horrible.... the BOE display has no visible ghosting.


I have no idea what they use (it's not mentioned in the datasheet), but it looks better than any phones I have...
Ah, I just compared the viewing angle of the BOE panel with some IPS panel and they are equal. As soon as I read TFT I was assuming it to be a less-than-IPS-panel, probably TN in mind. But yes, it's ADS - sounds to me like a disease. :)

Maybe the successor of the Pyra should be named after BOE's display technology - DragonBox Hydis. :D

I should have known you got everything under control, ED. I better get back playing some X-Com: UFO Defense on my pandora (I'm close to getting to the final mission) and restore my health.
Just FYI - pretty much all LCD display panels are TFT whether they're IPS, VA, or TN.

According to Panelook this panel is actually ADS, though ED said that BOE told him it's an FFS panel (I trust ED, it probably is FFS or some variant) - either way, those are all above "TN-grade" panels and technologies, so we can be assured of good color and view angles, and ED's stated several times that he will ensure the response time (IPS-class displays' only real weakness) will be very good.

So my concerns are all settled - I am very confident that the Pyra's display will be very good or excellent, and it's further proof that ED and his team are working very hard to ensure that NO part of the Pyra is substandard :)

Now I just need to start saving up money for it...
 
Now if only I could convince ED to use a capacitive touch screen instead of resistive...or at least to make this an option
If you could come up with a convincing argument why capacitive is actually better than resistive we'd all love to hear it. As it is, most arguments in favour of capacitive conveniently ignore the benefits of resisitive such as accuracy and simplicity.Both have their good and bad points, they serve different needs, and the needs of the Pyra suggests that a resisitive screen with simulated dual touch is the right choice.
 
Now if only I could convince ED to use a capacitive touch screen instead of resistive...or at least to make this an option
that argument again...


Most people here are against capacitive screens.. they're too inaccurate for a device that uses a proper linux desktop with small menus, icons and such, sure phones can get away with it because they have a gui that works well for fat finger tapping... Also before someone mentions the galaxy note series and their fancy active digitizer.. we prob can't get that for cheap or at all..  EvilDragon is hoping to have a touch screen layer that will give us simple multi-touch on a resistive touch screen layer. so it still should be some what better than the Pandora's touch screen in that regard. 
Don't get me wrong - I understand WHY the decision was made for a resistive digitizer on the Pyra - and yes you are correct, a capacitive digi (even with a stylus) has far lower precision than a resisitive one, and I know I'm in the minority here.  

The thing is - I'm one of the people who would prefer a "touch-based" OS like Android - I'm not a huge fan of running a "standard" Linux desktop on a 5" screen - if I don't load Android onto my Pyra I will very likely run some kind of customization or GUI that allows me to operate most of the OS with my fingers (in fact, I'm now going to go look into if Linux has any window managers that are touch-friendly...)  From a purely philosophical standpoint as to why I prefer capicitive, it boils down to the impact of the resistive digi on the screen's image quality.  I'm also very likely to load (or dual boot) Android since I have a bunch of content/games for Android that I couldn't otherwise run in Linux - stuff that will probably never get a Linux port (ironic, since Android IS Linux for the most part)

I'm sure that Team Pyra will choose a very high quality digi with minimal impact on the display's performance, but I have *never* failed to see the (slight) visual degredation caused by a resistive digi - that extra layer of plastic just never has enough transparency for my taste.  Yes it's nitpicking - I'm fully aware of this, which is why I'm not about to lobby ED or rally the Pyra community against it, it's just a matter of personal preference.  I've used a lot of portable devices in my 32 years on this planet, and of the touch-screened ones, I vastly prefer capacitive.

And yes, I would *totally* love the "active digitizer" like the Galaxy Note has - it really is the best of both worlds, but it's far too expensive due to the patents on it - you're absolutely right, it'll never happen for the Pyra.

Who knows, maybe the Pyra will be the device that changes my mind on this subject, but if I had a choice I would choose capacitive and slap Android on the Pyra and never look back, no question.
 
Now if only I could convince ED to use a capacitive touch screen instead of resistive...or at least to make this an option
If you could come up with a convincing argument why capacitive is actually better than resistive we'd all love to hear it. As it is, most arguments in favour of capacitive conveniently ignore the benefits of resisitive such as accuracy and simplicity.
Both have their good and bad points, they serve different needs, and the needs of the Pyra suggests that a resisitive screen with simulated dual touch is the right choice.
I can come up with a arguments for myself, but at the end of the day this is something that boils down to preference.  As you said, the two different screens serve different needs.  I would prefer to run Android (or even Ubuntu Touch) on my Pyra - and both of those OSes are easily operated by fingers (or stylus) so I would prefer capacitive.  Also I dislike how resistive screens dull over time due to the stylus causing physical wear on the resistive layer, but again, this is a preference thing since if careful you can prolong this or even avoid it entirely - I just dislike the lower level of resiliency that resistive layers introduce into the mix.  Meanwhile, a capacitive screen with a hardened outer layer (sapphire, gorilla glass, etc) is much harder to scratch/mar/damage (albeit more expensive).

But again, this is all a matter of preference - the community voted and the community wanted Resistive Screen+Linux on the Pyra (in fact if I recall Android got among the lowest amount of votes and is generally hated by the Pyra community, for some reason)

The only actual argument I would make in favor of capacitive is economic; if Team Pyra ever released a version with a capacitive screen and Android, I think it could sell better than the Linux version.  While this community prefers Linux, the market as a whole prefers Android, so it would be more marketable (whether or not it actually would sell more is debatable).  But this is all irrelevant - the Pyra is not a product intended to generate revenue for a company - the Pyra is being made to satisfy the desires of its community, and the votes have been cast.

Also, please understand - I'm NOT trying to reawaken this debate.  I accept that this is a done issue, it does not need to be revisited.  I'm just stating my personal positions and opinions, but I understand and accept that the Pyra will be resistive and nothing will change that.  And I'm not an inflexible guy - I might not be the biggest fan of resistive touch, but I'm ok with it - I love my DS and 3DS systems, so I know I'm more than capable of liking resistive touch - I just like capacitive *more*.
 
I am kinda curious why you want a device that is being made to, amongst other things, provide physical controls instead of the touchscreen only devices that are prevalent, just to turn around and interact with it primarily with the touchscreen.

I nearly never use the touchscreen on my Pandora.  For me it is mostly d-pad, nub and buttons.
 
I am kinda curious why you want a device that is being made to, amongst other things, provide physical controls instead of the touchscreen only devices that are prevalent, just to turn around and interact with it primarily with the touchscreen.

I nearly never use the touchscreen on my Pandora.  For me it is mostly d-pad, nub and buttons.
There is value for me - I use DraStic a lot, though I don't play that many touchscreen games.  

The resistive screen has always felt fragile (to me).  Capacitive screens have obvious disadvantages, but build quality 'feels' better.
 
The thing is - I'm one of the people who would prefer a "touch-based" OS like Android - I'm not a huge fan of running a "standard" Linux desktop on a 5" screen - if I don't load Android onto my Pyra I will very likely run some kind of customization or GUI that allows me to operate most of the OS with my fingers
I really like the concept of having a real PC in my pocket. The Pandora / Pyra comes with a full keyboard and gaming controls. I do my spreadsheet work on my pandora as well as creating PDF-documents and other office-like jobs thanks to the desktop environment and the real tactile controls.

If I want to use a touch operation-optimized device (mostly for mild entertaining needs like casual games, messaging and web browsing), I grab my android phone. But if I want to be really productive, really creative or get to serious gaming, I grab my Pandora. So I'm glad it has no touch operation-optimized UI, but rather a full PC-like desktop with a tactile keyboard and controls.
 
The resistive screen has always felt fragile (to me).  Capacitive screens have obvious disadvantages, but build quality 'feels' better.
capacitive screens are no less fragile.. it's just that glass substrates are used on most phones and tablets. however build quality wise my old pre-android samsung Omnia smartphone has a resistive touch screen with a glass or hard plastic substrate that feels comparable to current phones..
 
Why have a really nice screen and really nice keyboard and game controls, if you're then going to put an OS on it that assumes your only input method is ten sausages? Why do people so badly want to cover their screen with finger grease?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top