Amongst all the current Windows Phones, which has the strongest specs?

[mdameron]

8X has a baby screen.

 

[metalchick719]

Lumia 920. No contest.

 

[X0LARIUM]

Like I mentioned before, I am not that concerned with ppi size. If you look/research some 'spec' sites, it will say that the 8X has a higher density ppi than the L920. Many may translate this as better. But ppi only matters to me if the screen diagnol size is the same. If you take the 8X from 4.3" to 4.5", its ppi density will be lower than the 920. Because of the resolution difference. Resolution matters, the screen size is personal preference.

Now what I was refering to in my post is the ratio and how 768 is a better resolution ratio wise than 720 if you consider all WP7 apps are in 800x480 resolution. Here is why.

800x480 (multiple 1.6) equals 1280x768

So the 1280x768 screens will faithfully represent old content of WP7 because the ratio is standard across the length and the width. The 1280x720 screens will have to introduce scale stretching across the width or black bars to show a lot of WP7 content. (Up untill developers are given SDK to update their app resolution; but since there is no all or nothing here, some apps will remain not updated)

Thank you very much...I get it now... man where do u read all this...all the sites I go to either are sucking up to Sammy or crying over the iPhone 5...




Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[X0LARIUM]

8X has a baby screen.

Not sure what u mean...

Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[brmiller1976]

Depends on what specs you're after. If you seek an aluminum-bodied phone with a smaller-than-4-inch screen, you're SOL.

 

[mdameron]

Not sure what u mean...

Sent from my RaZr on JB!

4.3" in a phone the size of the 4.7" Titan

 

[X0LARIUM]

4.3" in a phone the size of the 4.7" Titan

Oh OK...got it...yea..ur right...

Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[X0LARIUM]

Depends on what specs you're after. If you seek an aluminum-bodied phone with a smaller-than-4-inch screen, you're SOL.

Let's say, I'm looking st something other than 920. Simply because I have a feeling* its going to be very expensive.

Also, I kinda like HTC's design...it gives me that macho look coupled with a sleek design.

*the Lumia 800, 900 and the accessories prices have made me rethink about my decision of Nokia.
The 800 is 22k and the 900 is a whopping 31k as we speak. Im sure the 920 isnt going to come easy and It is going go be wayyyyyy beyond my budget.

My only two grouses against HTC 8x is memory and screen size.

I was looking for a screen-size upgrade from 4.3" to anything slightly bigger...

I can handle memory ...16+7 = 23 is enough... but screen size....??


Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[Villain]

for the main guts they are all pretty much the same (920, 8X, ATIV S).... each one has pluses ahead of the other.

920 - purview camera takes nice shots in the dark and takes a very stable video, super sensitive touch, wireless charging.

8X - higher PPI screen, Advanced audio, extremely fast camera with a dedicated image chip, sleek design.

ATIV S - bigger screen, micro SD slot that can accept a 64gb card, very thin and light.


those are the main pros IMO

 

[Coreldan]

In a way I find it misleading to say the 8X has a better PPI screen. It's true, but only cos it has a smaller screen than the others, the resolution is the same.

 

[AngryNil]

Really, there's no objective list of "specs". You can't just have a plain list - some features are simply more important than others - but by how much, and which are deal breakers? That's all up to the individual. The Lumia 920 probably brings the most innovation, but those who really need more than 32GB of storage or strongly prefer a thinner device will be better suited by the Ativ S. Those who use their phone speaker to blast music and need to take fast pictures will favour the 8X. Those without such extremes have a choice.

In a way I find it misleading to say the 8X has a better PPI screen. It's true, but only cos it has a smaller screen than the others, the resolution is the same.

PPI = pixels per inch, and pixel density does count for something. Some may favour the larger screen because it will be easier to see content, while others will like crisp text on the denser screen.

 

[poiman]

I will go for the 920 first, after would be the ATIV S and finally the 8X, although this one would never really be an option.

First I find the 8X too big for it's screen size (I made a post like a month ago where I concluded that almost 50% of the 8X front is bazel. Really don't like it). Second, I don't find beats audio built-in speakers very usefull as I never use them on a phone. Third, I don't need a fast camera, I need a good one. Forth, I know it's the phone with better ppi but I really doubt that the final effect when you look at the screen will be better than the 920's screen with ClearBlack and 60fps. So, the pros of the 8X aren't really something important to me.

The pros of the ATIV S are great. Bigger screen, and SD Card slot. Although I am sure that the 920's 32GB+Skydrive are more than enough for me for 2 years. I mean, my N8 has only 16GB and that was enough for me for the last 2 years, the Lumia more than doubles that, so I'm safe! The phone is thin and light, which I love, but I know that comes at the cost of using cheap materials and I'm not a fan of that. I refuse to use a bumper or a protective cover on a phone... it ruins its design, but with Nokia I know that I won't need them. I've had Nokias for like 10 years and I never used a cover or a bumper! I proudly say that.

The pros of the Lumia 920 can't be replaced by the other 2 competitors because they are innovations. And the support given by Nokia has no rival. The choice is easy for me.

 

[X0LARIUM]

I will go for the 920 first, after would be the ATIV S and finally the 8X, although this one would never really be an option.

First I find the 8X too big for it's screen size (I made a post like a month ago where I concluded that almost 50% of the 8X front is bazel. Really don't like it). Second, I don't find beats audio built-in speakers very usefull as I never use them on a phone. Third, I don't need a fast camera, I need a good one. Forth, I know it's the phone with better ppi but I really doubt that the final effect when you look at the screen will be better than the 920's screen with ClearBlack and 60fps. So, the pros of the 8X aren't really something important to me.

The pros of the ATIV S are great. Bigger screen, and SD Card slot. Although I am sure that the 920's 32GB+Skydrive are more than enough for me for 2 years. I mean, my N8 has only 16GB and that was enough for me for the last 2 years, the Lumia more than doubles that, so I'm safe! The phone is thin and light, which I love, but I know that comes at the cost of using cheap materials and I'm not a fan of that. I refuse to use a bumper or a protective cover on a phone... it ruins its design, but with Nokia I know that I won't need them. I've had Nokias for like 10 years and I never used a cover or a bumper! I proudly say that.

The pros of the Lumia 920 can't be replaced by the other 2 competitors because they are innovations. And the support given by Nokia has no rival. The choice is easy for me.

Thanx but what I find interesting is that u say the 8X screen is bigger whereas it's just 4.3".

And then immediately u say like a big screen in the Ativ... ??


Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[poiman]

Thanx but what I find interesting is that u say the 8X screen is bigger whereas it's just 4.3".

And then immediately u say like a big screen in the Ativ... ??


Sent from my RaZr on JB!

No, what I said is that the screen size of the 8X is to small for the dimensions of the hole device.
In other words, for such a big phone, the screen should be bigger.

 

[X0LARIUM]

No, what I said is that the screen size of the 8X is to small for the dimensions of the hole device.
In other words, for such a big phone, the screen should be bigger.

Oh my bad....didn't get you... now I do...

Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[a5cent]

When talking about these specs:

-PPI (pixel density)
-screen resolution (number of pixels in horizontal and vertical dimensions) [800x480 pixels]
-display diagonal (distance from bottom-right to top-left corner of the display) [4.3 inches]

one must first realize they are entirely interdependent. Given any two, you can calculate the third. So, if you've got a spec sheet with all three, you are really being given the same information more then once. As it turns out, one of those three values isn't just redundant, but also much less useful than the others... screen resolution.

Why? Because screen resolution simply can't be a metric of quality by itself, whereas the others can. For example, a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080 might be fine for a 17" Monitor, but it would be absolutely terrible for a 27" monitor. The point is, you also need to know the size of the screen to decide if the resolution is good or bad, while the other two metrics can stand on their own.

That is why it is often best to ignore screen resolution entirely. It might be nice to know, but the only two that really need consideration are display size and PPI. However, note that the human eye can no longer discern individual pixels at PPI values above 300 at normal smartphone viewing distances (that is why Apple calls any screen with a PPI value above 300 a retina display). So, provided two screens have display densities well above 300, any difference should only be of concern to theoreticians (a.k.a. spec whores) as nobody will be able to tell the difference during normal usage. Debating the very small differences in PPI between the Lumia 920 and the 8X is somewhat nonsensical for this reason.

I know it's the phone with better ppi [8X] but I really doubt that the final effect when you look at the screen will be better than the 920's screen with ClearBlack and 60fps.

I agree. Contrast, brightness, reflectivity, etc. are all much more important than PPI. PPI only needs to be of concern if it goes below 300.

PPI = pixels per inch, and pixel density does count for something.

PPI and pixel density are the same thing... yes, I like nitpicking stuff, sorry

Beyond that, I would also support everything you've said.

 

[brmiller1976]

ZTE Tania. It is the only Windows Phone with a real simulated carbon-fiber rear panel.

 

[Winterfang]

In a way I find it misleading to say the 8X has a better PPI screen. It's true, but only cos it has a smaller screen than the others, the resolution is the same.

How is that misleading? It has a better PPI because the screen is smaller. No one is saying it has a better resolution.

 

[brmiller1976]

A great example of how useless "specs" are. One man's "killer spec" is another man's "unfair comparison."

Thus, the second-dumbest statement in technology is "this phone is the best because it has the best specs."

(The dumbest was "color is only for games, nobody on a PC needs color.")

 

[Winterfang]

Care to expand on that miller. What do you mean by unfair comparison?