[saintforlife]

The Galaxy S3 was 306, the iPhone 5 is 326, and you can definitely make out the difference between the S3 and the iPhone 5 when you look at text. So more PPI is obviously better. Nobody should be able to discern individual pixels on a smart phone these days, especially not on a flag ship device. So 295 PPI is just a little bit disappointing IMHO.

[Bla1ze]

How's about you wait to see it before being disappointed? While PPI is relevant, so is the actual screen quality. The Galaxy Note II is only 267 PPI and I find nothing wrong with it. Do I dare even mention that the iPad 3/4 Gen with Retina display is only 264 PPI? Let's amp it up a notch. Even the Retina display MacBook pro is only 220 PPI.

[Pegon_Fighter]

Burn ahaha^

Posted via CB10

[BriniaSona]

666dpi or I won't buy it.

[saintforlife]

How's about you wait to see it before being disappointed? While PPI is relevant, so is the actual screen quality. The Galaxy Note II is only 267 PPI and I find nothing wrong with it. Do I dare even mention that the iPad 3/4 Gen with Retina display is only 264 PPI? Let's amp it up a notch. Even the Retina display MacBook pro is only 220 PPI.

Totally irrelevant. Don't bring tablets and laptops into the discussion. You hold those devices much farther away from your face. Not all PPI/Retina is the same. It depends on the viewing distance. A flagship smartphone should be well over 300 ppi. Period.

[Crackberrykills]

How's about you wait to see it before being disappointed? While PPI is relevant, so is the actual screen quality. The Galaxy Note II is only 267 PPI and I find nothing wrong with it. Do I dare even mention that the iPad 3/4 Gen with Retina display is only 264 PPI? Let's amp it up a notch. Even the Retina display MacBook pro is only 220 PPI.

Why wait when we can complain about it right now? Gah.

Posted via CB10

[offyoutoddle]

I don't buy based on marketing specs. I don't care about how many ppi my screen has, I care about how it looks and ppi is just 1 component of that. forgive me if I take no further interest in this ridiculous willy waving.

Sent from my Blackberry Playbook

[playbookster]

No one could tell the difference between 300ppi and 295. Its all in your head, like how $299 sounds cheaper than $300

Posted via CB10

[gen_accident]

OP, are you also of the opinion that a camera with a higher megapixel count is automatically better?

If so, you may need to research further.

Z10-4 .4687 via CB10

[saintforlife]

OP, are you also of the opinion that a camera with a higher megapixel count is automatically better?

If so, you may need to research further.

Z10-4 .4687 via CB10

What a bad assumption/generalization. Who the heck even mentioned anything about cameras or megapixels? What does that have to do with anything we are discussing here? Try to stay on topic.

[saintforlife]

No one could tell the difference between 300ppi and 295. Its all in your head, like how $299 sounds cheaper than $300

Posted via CB10

I certainly can tell the difference, however slight it may be, between 306 and 326 when I lie down at night on my bed and stare at my phone 6" from my face. 295 will definitely be noticeable to people used to high res screens.

[SuperionMaximus]

The screen resolution is disappointing no doubt but it's only one aspect of this phone really keeps it out of the high end for 2013.

You's also think that a decent respectable smartphone launched in Q4 of 2013 would also have a processor from 2013. But we get last years best.

You'd think that losing the removable battery would mean we get a nice thin phone. But we get one that's a mm fatter then the Z10

You'd think that we'd get a decent camera. But I fear that it's going to be identical to the Z10.

You'd think that when everyone else in 2013 is making phones with side bezels that are 2mm or less we'd get the same. Nope.

Every single thin about this phone is AT LEAST a year behind where the industry is today.

So like every other manufacturer, you'd think that BlackBerry would position such a phone as a mid range device where it would be a contender. But, it wont likely be priced there until everyone laughs their asses off and no one but Bla1ze and Kevin buys them.

[Saiga]

I agree with the above, while the 720p is disappointing, it isn't necessarily the deal-breaker for me.

Also, all of the people saying you can't tell a difference must be in need of glasses or inexperienced with high rez screens. I most certainly can tell a difference in even modest pixel density variations.

Since we are talking about BlackBerry phones here. Everyone take out their Q10, 9900/9930 and 9650.

The Q10 has 330 pixels per inch, the 99s have 284 ppi and the 9650 has 249 ppi.

So the Q10 has 46 more pixels per inch than a 99 and the 99 has 35 more pixels per inch than a 9650. So the difference in both comparisons is less than 50 ppi. Are people honestly going to say they couldn't tell the difference when they moved to the 99 from 9650 or from the 99 to the Q10? I have all three of these phones in front of me and I can easily tell the difference those extra pixels made.

Now let's compare the Z30 with another 5" screen. The Z30 has 295 ppi, while the soon to be free on contract, almost one year old, Droid DNA has 440 ppi. Making for a difference of 145 pixels per inch.

If 50 extra pixels per inch can make a noticeable difference, you would have to be a fool to think that 145 wouldn't.

Typed on my Dev Alpha C, Posted Via CB10

[gen_accident]

What a bad assumption/generalization. Who the heck even mentioned anything about cameras or megapixels? What does that have to do with anything we are discussing here? Try to stay on topic.

I rest my case, m'lud.

Z10-4 .4687 via CB10

[saintforlife]

I rest my case, m'lud.

Z10-4 .4687 via CB10

What case?

[GTiLeo]

How's about you wait to see it before being disappointed? While PPI is relevant, so is the actual screen quality. The Galaxy Note II is only 267 PPI and I find nothing wrong with it. Do I dare even mention that the iPad 3/4 Gen with Retina display is only 264 PPI? Let's amp it up a notch. Even the Retina display MacBook pro is only 220 PPI.

its because android vendors ruined the smartphone market pushing out irrelivent unneeded specs in order to sell more over their other android competition

and i'm sorry to say what most peopel think is pixel density is probably color rendition and contrast, even sharpness not exactly pixel density. can you really tell a difference between 1080p on a 42" tv or 1080p on a 52" tv. really the only time you can is when you're sittign to close maybe like 3 -4 feet away

on the iphone5 and sgs3 you're not noticing the pixel density, you're noticing the differences between OLED and LCD displays, the difference in vivid colors of the LCD compared to the OLED. there is a reason Apple chose to use LCD over LED, apple cares about how flashy their stuff looks and LCD gives a much clearer and more vibrant display. my honest opinion LED is an over rated fad, while it has better battery life it only does contrast better then LCD

[anon62607]

I agree with the above about it making a difference - i have a dna and an iphone 5 and much prefer reading and web browsing on the dna as smaller print is still easily readable.

that said, if my choice were a phone with 5 hour usable battery life and 400 dpi or 12 hours and 200 dpi I would probably take the longer battery life.



Sent from my BlackBerry 9315 using Tapatalk

[ubizmo]

The Galaxy S3 was 306, the iPhone 5 is 326, and you can definitely make out the difference between the S3 and the iPhone 5 when you look at text. So more PPI is obviously better. Nobody should be able to discern individual pixels on a smart phone these days, especially not on a flag ship device. So 295 PPI is just a little bit disappointing IMHO.

This is a non sequitur. The fact that people can "tell the difference" between ppi on two devices when switching from one to the other doesn't begin to show that they are discerning individual pixels. It also doesn't begin to show that the difference that is discernible under artificial comparison conditions makes an appreciable difference to the user experience under conditions of actual use.


Posted via CB10

[WArcher]

Well said, Bla1ze.

[RECOOL]

The Galaxy S3 was 306, the iPhone 5 is 326, and you can definitely make out the difference between the S3 and the iPhone 5 when you look at text. So more PPI is obviously better. Nobody should be able to discern individual pixels on a smart phone these days, especially not on a flag ship device. So 295 PPI is just a little bit disappointing IMHO.

What is this about?? What are you talking about the Z10 has 356 PPI. Where you going with this??

[Easy-G]

This is a non sequitur. The fact that people can "tell the difference" between ppi on two devices when switching from one to the other doesn't begin to show that they are discerning individual pixels. It also doesn't begin to show that the difference that is discernible under artificial comparison conditions makes an appreciable difference to the user experience under conditions of actual use.


Posted via CB10

... Googles definition of 'non sequitur'...

... agreed.

We'll have to wait and see what the screen looks like in action.

[saintforlife]

What is this about?? What are you talking about the Z10 has 356 PPI. Where you going with this??

The next Blackberry flagship 5" phone is rumored to come with a 720p screen (295ppi). We are discussing that.

[gillaz]

What is this about?? What are you talking about the Z10 has 356 PPI. Where you going with this??

I think he is talking about the z30.

[grover5]

Totally irrelevant. Don't bring tablets and laptops into the discussion. You hold those devices much farther away from your face. Not all PPI/Retina is the same. It depends on the viewing distance. A flagship smartphone should be well over 300 ppi. Period.

I'm pretty sure the 267 ppi Note II was and is considered a flagship smartphone given the price tag on it.

[Bla1ze]

A flagship smartphone should be well over 300 ppi. Period.

Oh well, I'm glad your word is gospel and final. Thanks. You'd make a great CEO.