Why did Nokia went one step back with Lumia 1520

maverick786us

New member
Sep 17, 2012
956
0
0
I was shocked to see Lumia 1520 having Gorilla Glass 2 instead of 3 and LCD instead of AMOLED. 6 inch is a big screen, therefore will be more vulnurable to damage if falls. You need a stronger glass for a big screen
 
Every glass will break after a fall, it's about scratch resistance, not being indestructible.
 
Every glass will break after a fall, it's about scratch resistance, not being indestructible.

Bigger screen is more vulnerable compared to small screen. Whether its scratches or breakage. When they implemented Gorilla Glass 3 in 1020, there was no point of moving back to glass 2, with 1520.
 
I was shocked to see Lumia 1520 having Gorilla Glass 2 instead of 3 and LCD instead of AMOLED. 6 inch is a big screen, therefore will be more vulnurable to damage if falls. You need a stronger glass for a big screen
I consider LCD update. Especially as Lumia 1520 has been universally been said to be best or among the best screens they have ever seen.
 
Is GG3 really that much better than GG2? Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm not too well-informed about this kind of thing, but I really couldn't imagine it making that much of a difference for anyone.

Also, you can't say LCD is a backwards step from AMOLED. LCD vs AMOLED is a purely subjective matter.
 
Actually Gorilla Glass 3 improves only on weight and thinness, its not stronger. :)
LCD SCREENS ARE BETTER, they just are better specially on a 1080p because AMOLEDS consume so much batteries on full HD and almost all of them are PENTILE matrix.
Also LCD screens get colors better and get better low light readability (AMOLED scratch your eyes at night), its also better under sun light so there you have it on that front.

Also a protective cover will save your phone from a fall or two ?
 
Is GG3 really that much better than GG2? Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm not too well-informed about this kind of thing, but I really couldn't imagine it making that much of a difference for anyone.

Also, you can't say LCD is a backwards step from AMOLED. LCD vs AMOLED is a purely subjective matter.

GG3 is the current generation compared to previous generation GG2. So it has to be stronger, just like the way GG2 is stronger than GG1
 
Maybe I am crazy, but going with LCD, doesn't it make Nokia Glance pointless, since it cannot take advantage of lighting only the required pixels (like on an AMOLED)?
 
As mentioned GG2 and GG3's difference on lies in the physical properties of the displays, the weight and thickness. They are still equally more, or less prone to damage.

AMOLED displays are very expensive to produce, and start to get really expensive on displays larger than 5 inches, that is why we don't see any TV's with AMOLED technology, not even 15 inch laptops use AMOLED, to my knowledge.

Anyways AMOLED has it drawbacks. My 1020 has a couple of black blotches on the screen noticeable on the settings menu where there is a black background, but this is normal for any AMOLED display, its the way they are manufactured. Very noticeable on Samsung AMOLEDS.

LCD consumes less energy than AMOELD, I thought it was the other way round but if you are displaying a lot of colours on a display, then an LCD consumes less energy, which will make a big difference on a full HD 6 inch display.

And at the end of the day, if Nokia did decide to have the 1520 with an AMOLED display and GG3, it would push the price up even more.
 
GG3 is the current generation compared to previous generation GG2. So it has to be stronger, just like the way GG2 is stronger than GG1

Well obviously it's a generation ahead because one has the number 3 at the end and the other has the number 2 at the end lol. My question is, how do you know it's really that much better?
 
LCD on my 920 is better than the amoled on the 925. This will be my next device for sure :)

Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk
 
Well obviously it's a generation ahead because one has the number 3 at the end and the other has the number 2 at the end lol. My question is, how do you know it's really that much better?

That's how the world goes. Why would someone make new generation worst than the previous generation?
 
Maybe I am crazy, but going with LCD, doesn't it make Nokia Glance pointless, since it cannot take advantage of lighting only the required pixels (like on an AMOLED)?

no it doesnt make glance pointless. if you notice, glance is very dim. amoled and lcd both get dim. that is not specific to a display tech.