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

[a5cent]

Because the human eye has no chance of discerning the difference in PPI between those two devices. If the human eye can't discern a difference, than the 8X is only "better" on paper.

Do you know what's wrong with this argument?

No, and I still don't. But likely we are just debating "around the edges" anyway.

We were discussing a difference of 10 PPI, on displays that are already well over 300 PPI (3.3%). Beyond 300 PPI, you need much larger bumps in PPI for the human eye to notice any difference whatsoever. In this case, the benefit is only apparent on the spec sheet and nowhere else, which is why one can't necessarily argue that one display is "better" than the other (at least not based on PPI alone). For something to be "better", it must offer a perceptible benefit. That was my main point, and as far as I can tell, we don't disagree on that.

Yes, you're not meant to count the pixels. But can you notice if the text is slightly crisper?

No. You won't notice the text is crisper.

Even when viewing very high contrast (black and white) prints under the best possible lighting conditions, the human eye is limited to around 600 PPI (even when the image is held right under your nose). At least for humans, their is no difference between two images printed at 600 PPI and 6000 PPI.

Current display tech is a far cry from the quality of a high contrast print though (refresh rates, reflectivity, back lighting etc.). Due to these limitations, and that it just isn't necessary to optimize for viewing distances far below normal, > 300 PPI is sufficient to keep humans from discerning individual pixels in the vast majority of cases, which means higher pixel densities won't get you perceptively crisper text.

Yes, I agree that 300 is a somewhat arbitrary number and it isn't quite that simple. However, it is still true that beyond 300 PPI small differences become entirely irrelevant. Probably even differences of 100 PPI would be impossible for most to see during normal usage.

I'm not against higher PPI values (at least not until we reach 600 PPI). I'm just against weighing differences in PPI values against each other that make no difference to the human eye.

Edit: I agree with Miller that this means squat when it comes to determining if the 8X or the 920 has a "better" screen. So far all we have is marketing material and no real measurements.

 

[AngryNil]

AMOLED screens draw 3x the power of LCD screens when displaying white. With the poor battery life on my Omnia 7, especially when web browsing, I'm looking forward to an LCD screen (LG Nexus / HTC 8X / Nokia 920).

Probably even differences of 100 PPI would be impossible for most to see during normal usage.

You're welcome to hold that position. I'll straight up call it that the 5" 1080p display will be visibly better. You're welcome to disagree, but I'm confident that time will tell otherwise.

 

[a5cent]

I'll straight up call it that the 5" 1080p display will be visibly better. You're welcome to disagree, but I'm confident that time will tell otherwise.

Than we shall agree to disagree. Just note that I really am talking only about PPI though. Future displays might bring other benefits like higher refresh rates or more natural color reproduction (OLED's problem), which surly will make a visible difference.

 

[X0LARIUM]

My dad has an Xperia S and the resolution mind blowing...I think better than my RaZr, in spite if both being 4.3"...

Sent from my RaZr on JB!

 

[Aykazu]

Screens are important but we should face the facts, every one of these high end devices have a really good ppi, Ativ S the 8X and the Lumia 920, all have more than 300ppi. That is so high density that you will not see the difference and even if you do it will not be anything game breaking. There are other more appealing differences between the phones than that, one important factor being the design, 8X and Lumia 920 being my personal favorites. The Ativ taking the cake with its SD-card slot and biggest screen. Lumia 920 with its camera and supersensitive touch. 8X with its beats audio and so forth.

What I'm trying to say is that all of these devices have ups and downs. Overall I'm set for the Lumia 920...

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express

 

[thejoyofsobe]

Nokia's been cranking out homegrown apps and striking exclusive deals, while in comparison, HTC and Samsung have not nor yet announced major plans to do so.

given that you purchase a smartphone instead of a basic phone because you can run apps Nokia's my choice. hardware performance and build quality are my next considerations and that only confirms the Lumia 920 as the winner in my mind.

i'd even take the Lumia 820's lesser screen over the HTC 8X due to the software advantage (though admittedly removable battery and SD slot play significantly into the decision) and all of the above over the Ativ S due to build quality concerns after using my friend's Galaxy S3.