Related
That sounds like I'm being a prick but I'm just trying to learn. I didn't find what I was looking for on Google but a friend suggested xda. I'm coming from a nexus and my wife has the iphone4. Now the I4 is a "retina display" with many more pixels than android phones and its I will concede that I can't see a pixel on its screen. As far as text and application icons and any lines in the UI, they are like nothing I've seen from a phone or even a desktop. I find it troubling that we haven't heard rumors about nice displays for upcoming androids. But the vibrant has a superamoled, what I do know is that I can easily see pixels in every image I look at, but android phones like this are at most just 800x480 so I guess its a given that the UI and text and lines and images in all applications will be fuzzy? And so where does the Super come in to play? Contrary to what i was told the vibrants display definitely doesn't look any better than my nexus which isn't really bad because the nexus absolutely has a respectable display. The one difference I've seen is that avatar looks very good on the vibrant. I had avatar downloaded on my nexus it was a 720p version and it became pixelated with lots of movement. Not so the vibrant. I noticed the vibrant skips or sort of hiccups during heavy action scenes which I'm guessing is reflective of the processor? But the picture looks good. So is superamoled strictly for media? I guess if it had decent resolution the UI would look slick like the iphone4 regardless the display being amoled samoled lcd slcd or whatever right? So i shouldnt expect that the SAMOLED is supposed to make the UI in general look particularly good is that correct? I realize it seems dumb but the only thing that looks a bit better than my old nexus is watching certain movies. The vibrant has a great processor and a super amoled. Can anyone explain some of the practical benefits of the vibrants hardware?
fandroid135 said:
That sounds like I'm being a prick but I'm just trying to learn. I didn't find what I was looking for on Google but a friend suggested xda. I'm coming from a nexus and my wife has the iphone4. Now the I4 is a "retina display" with many more pixels than android phones and its I will concede that I can't see a pixel on its screen. As far as text and application icons and any lines in the UI, they are like nothing I've seen from a phone or even a desktop. I find it troubling that we haven't heard rumors about nice displays for upcoming androids. But the vibrant has a superamoled, what I do know is that I can easily see pixels in every image I look at, but android phones like this are at most just 800x480 so I guess its a given that the UI and text and lines and images in all applications will be fuzzy? And so where does the Super come in to play? Contrary to what i was told the vibrants display definitely doesn't look any better than my nexus which isn't really bad because the nexus absolutely has a respectable display. The one difference I've seen is that avatar looks very good on the vibrant. I had avatar downloaded on my nexus it was a 720p version and it became pixelated with lots of movement. Not so the vibrant. I noticed the vibrant skips or sort of hiccups during heavy action scenes which I'm guessing is reflective of the processor? But the picture looks good. So is superamoled strictly for media? I guess if it had decent resolution the UI would look slick like the iphone4 regardless the display being amoled samoled lcd slcd or whatever right? So i shouldnt expect that the SAMOLED is supposed to make the UI in general look particularly good is that correct? I realize it seems dumb but the only thing that looks a bit better than my old nexus is watching certain movies. The vibrant has a great processor and a super amoled. Can anyone explain some of the practical benefits of the vibrants hardware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
samoled is better than the iphone 4's retina display. its about the screen technology. its colors and the way it looks in direct sunlight,looks better than the n1 & i4. although the i4 has a higher res doesnt eqaute to a better screen. vibrant has a better gpu than the i4 and better than any android out. the hardware on the vibrant is ahead of its time. 45n processor, 90million triangles per second by the gpu. all in all retina display focuses on pixels, while super amoled focuses on color and qaulity. vibrant and the galaxy s line are the best phones out hardware wise. not software wise. and by that i mean touchwiz and that rfs system.
I haven't been able to find any hardware specs...is the SAMOLED capable of higher resolution?
Sdobron said:
I haven't been able to find any hardware specs...is the SAMOLED capable of higher resolution?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/facepalm
http://www.google.com/m?gl=us&sourc...moled&ei=je3WTLDFN5yoqAPPxc5y&ved=0CEEQ1QIoBw
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Chalup said:
/facepalm
http://www.google.com/m?gl=us&sourc...moled&ei=je3WTLDFN5yoqAPPxc5y&ved=0CEEQ1QIoBw
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
blasian shadows said:
samoled is better than the iphone 4's retina display. its about the screen technology. its colors and the way it looks in direct sunlight,looks better than the n1 & i4. although the i4 has a higher res doesnt eqaute to a better screen. vibrant has a better gpu than the i4 and better than any android out. the hardware on the vibrant is ahead of its time. 45n processor, 90million triangles per second by the gpu. all in all retina display focuses on pixels, while super amoled focuses on color and qaulity. vibrant and the galaxy s line are the best phones out hardware wise. not software wise. and by that i mean touchwiz and that rfs system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, it a shame the pixels are so noticeable and blurry. This phones got hardware that could've kept me happy for at least a couple years. I watch a decent amount of media so I appreciate that aspect of the hardware. But even more I'm using the UI and the browesr and constantly seeing my wife's I4 really makes the fuzziness of the vibrant stand out. Samsung has media well in hand but everything revolves around the UI so persoanlly I'm impatiently waiting for a crisp I4-like UI. I would imagine higher Res is on deck, 800x480 has been done to death. I'm glad the iPhone exists be wise the competition benefits us, I just hate this period of waiting to catch up with what I consider a major portion of the OS. Especially since I use my wife's phone so often (T-Mobile doesn't work in many places like att does) its tough going from the iPhones perfect lines to my jagged blurry ones. But like I've read other people here explain., I'd have no idea how bad 800x480 is if I hadn't seen the 960x640 retina display. So really its my wife's fault : )
fandroid135 said:
Thanks, it a shame the pixels are so noticeable and blurry. This phones got hardware that could've kept me happy for at least a couple years. I watch a decent amount of media so I appreciate that aspect of the hardware. But even more I'm using the UI and the browesr and constantly seeing my wife's I4 really makes the fuzziness of the vibrant stand out. Samsung has media well in hand but everything revolves around the UI so persoanlly I'm impatiently waiting for a crisp I4-like UI. I would imagine higher Res is on deck, 800x480 has been done to death. I'm glad the iPhone exists be wise the competition benefits us, I just hate this period of waiting to catch up with what I consider a major portion of the OS. Especially since I use my wife's phone so often (T-Mobile doesn't work in many places like att does) its tough going from the iPhones perfect lines to my jagged blurry ones. But like I've read other people here explain., I'd have no idea how bad 800x480 is if I hadn't seen the 960x640 retina display. So really its my wife's fault : )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are LCD density "fixes" if you're fixated on the resolution...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
samoled is an interesting tradeoff. for people that really like video and media, the sgs line is spectacular.
no offense to the guy that says, "samoled is better than retina" but... really? its glaringly obvious that text is blurry/less crisp on amoled and samoled displays. most people might not see this, but for those of us with good eyes it sticks out like a sore thumb.
the display on the motorola droid, iphone 4 and the new slcd's from htc are a lot more readable. sure, you dont have the fake ass super contrast that samsung is giving you, but its MUCH crisper. there is a superb article on arstechnica that points out the flaws of amoled displays.
all that said, i don't mind samoled on my samsung focus. i just don't go out and bash the iphone because it makes me feel better about my purchase. the display apple put on the iphone is an industry marvel, and if it was on an android phone everyone would be talking **** on apple instead of downplaying it. its so tiring reading these weak ass posts. have a good day
Sdobron said:
I haven't been able to find any hardware specs...is the SAMOLED capable of higher resolution?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if we get androids gingerbread this is what i heard.
"New 1280×760 resolution available for the devices with displays of 4” and higher".
s10shane said:
if we get androids gingerbread this is what i heard.
"New 1280×760 resolution available for the devices with displays of 4” and higher".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
our device isn't capable of that resolution. that would be for newer phones lol.
nearblack said:
our device isn't capable of that resolution. that would be for newer phones lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh ok thats just what i heard. hopefully we can get froyo soon or they should jump to the gingerbread update and skip froyo lol. just coming from the mytouch 4g with 2.2 froyo big difference for me from this 2.1 and the lag on this phone is a joke. but i did use the lag fix which helped a bit.
Has anyone else seen the iphone 4 commercial saying the screen is the highest resolution screen ever on a phone?
I thought the vibrant had a better screen? It definitely looks better than the iphone four though.
The iPhone 4 does have the highest resolution ever. Samsung claims that the SAMOLED screens have better viewing angles and all that ****. Its really just what u think overall I guess.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
The pixels and the screen size on the iphone 4 have a better looking screen while the vibrant has a bigger screen but lesser pixels so yeah the iphone 4 screen is better but iOS sucks =]
the iPhone 4 has a 3.5 inch LCD screen has a resolution of 960 x 640
the vibrant has a 4 inch S-AMOLED screen that has a resolution of 800 x 480
the S-AMOLED screen displays colors clearer and truer and is easier to see in the sun, the iPhone 4 has an insane pixel density that makes things look cleaner
its a matter of preference really once you let an iPhone 4 owner watch Avatar on your vibrant they will be extremely jealous
That's pretty surprising.
The kid with the iphone 4 finally got pissed at me and quoted the commercial lmao.
But I still think the vibrant looks cleaner plus bigger screen=better.
We compared angry birds visuals on lowest brightness. I won
xSunny said:
The pixels and the screen size on the iphone 4 have a better looking screen while the vibrant has a bigger screen but lesser pixels so yeah the iphone 4 screen is better but iOS sucks =]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Better looking screen"?! Are you for real?
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?deskto...e.com/watch?v=xiO3s8NdQ34&v=xiO3s8NdQ34&gl=US
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
ive compared the I4 and Vibrant tirelessly after seeing my friends I4. I was blown away and confused by how good the I4 OS looks, its pretty shocking because there is nothing else like it, at least in the domestic mobile device arena. I was actually pissed off that my vibrant looked so much fuzzier, i almost stopped using it and just pulled out my old nexus I was so bummed.
But after I looked into it further it became clear that the I4's visual advantage is limited to the OS, which is definitely important but it doesnt include media, so the Vibrant's samoled does have an advantage in that department. Also, I think the I4 is much easier to see in daylight, the Vibrant is somewhat better than than the Nexus, which is virtually invisible under the sun, but the Vibrant is still no treat to use outside.
The I4 is far and away better looking as far as the operating system which basically includes all lines; apps and their icons, text, the browser, you cant see pixels, its not even close. Also, the old and new Iphones alike scroll without blurring like Android does (I believe its because of GPU acceleration which, if Im not mistaken, Android will add with Gingerbread?), it keeps its resolution while scrolling which makes a big difference visually, particularly in the browser. With Android phones, once you are pressing the screen to scroll in the browser, you can see a huge difference between pressing and not pressing, as soon as you let up the screen goes back to its optimal quality. But the Vibrant absolutely looks better with all media.
I4 has more pixels on a smaller screen with crazy pixel density, so that part really cant be personal preference, unless you prefer fuzzier lines/text. But it is relative, if the I4 didnt exist I would be wild for the Vibrants screen in media and the OS alike. But the I4 obviously has a better look in the OS alone, but not media.
tonomon said:
That's pretty surprising.
The kid with the iphone 4 finally got pissed at me and quoted the commercial lmao.
But I still think the vibrant looks cleaner plus bigger screen=better.
We compared angry birds visuals on lowest brightness. I won
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing Angry Birds is a bad comparison - the iPhone version is not optimized for the iPhone4 display, I don't think. It's a lower resolution than the Android version.
Retina display has higher pixel density, and you have to try real hard to distinguish between the pixels, however if you put two screens together and just look at them without digging your nose into your phone you can hardly see that SAMOLED is a bit washed out compared to the Retina, but once you fire up a high quality video SAMOLED will take it any day due to its brightness and dynamic contrast. I do think colors on Sammy are over saturated like with almost all of their LCD/LED panels.
tehmanmuffin said:
the iPhone 4 has a 3.5 inch LCD screen has a resolution of 960 x 640
the vibrant has a 4 inch S-AMOLED screen that has a resolution of 800 x 480
the S-AMOLED screen displays colors clearer and truer and is easier to see in the sun, the iPhone 4 has an insane pixel density that makes things look cleaner
its a matter of preference really once you let an iPhone 4 owner watch Avatar on your vibrant they will be extremely jealous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very true, my iphone 4 friends are jealous of my screen
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
yeah the iphone 4 have a better screen when we are talking about pixels but when it comes to watching video files, there's no way any other phone will beat our super duper amoled screen.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
DMaverick50 said:
ive compared the I4 and Vibrant tirelessly after seeing my friends I4. I was blown away and confused by how good the I4 OS looks, its pretty shocking because there is nothing else like it, at least in the domestic mobile device arena. I was actually pissed off that my vibrant looked so much fuzzier, i almost stopped using it and just pulled out my old nexus I was so bummed.
But after I looked into it further it became clear that the I4's visual advantage is limited to the OS, which is definitely important but it doesnt include media, so the Vibrant's samoled does have an advantage in that department. Also, I think the I4 is much easier to see in daylight, the Vibrant is somewhat better than than the Nexus, which is virtually invisible under the sun, but the Vibrant is still no treat to use outside.
The I4 is far and away better looking as far as the operating system which basically includes all lines; apps and their icons, text, the browser, you cant see pixels, its not even close. Also, the old and new Iphones alike scroll without blurring like Android does (I believe its because of GPU acceleration which, if Im not mistaken, Android will add with Gingerbread?), it keeps its resolution while scrolling which makes a big difference visually, particularly in the browser. With Android phones, once you are pressing the screen to scroll in the browser, you can see a huge difference between pressing and not pressing, as soon as you let up the screen goes back to its optimal quality. But the Vibrant absolutely looks better with all media.
I4 has more pixels on a smaller screen with crazy pixel density, so that part really cant be personal preference, unless you prefer fuzzier lines/text. But it is relative, if the I4 didnt exist I would be wild for the Vibrants screen in media and the OS alike. But the I4 obviously has a better look in the OS alone, but not media.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about, I've used my phone in direct sunlight in the middle of the day and the screen is easily readable with MINIMUM brightness, unless your screen is dirty and is being extra reflective because of it, this screen works amazing in the sun, on full its clear even with glare
Also, my vibrant's browser does not blur, I just tested it for a goods few mins and no bluring at all
And lastly on discussion, the i4's screen resolution + the smaller size of the screen kinda makes you think its sharper but its a smaller screen...does a higher resolution help it at all? Do you see any distinguishable difference from a lower res screen?
The only advantage i4 has is how dim and how bright the display can get because its an lcd however super amoled wins overall
Sent from my SXY-T959
Doesn't super-Amoled give a blueish tint on whites? on my i4 the browser sucks, it gives pattern checker board things when scrolling super fast, and on android i never got this.
IMHO overall the S-amoled is better, the colors are more vivid but it's funny how the maker of both displays is Samsung
Hexmaster93 said:
IMHO overall the S-amoled is better, the colors are more vivid but it's funny how the maker of both displays is Samsung
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol then samsung wins
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
kanwal236 said:
What are you talking about, I've used my phone in direct sunlight in the middle of the day and the screen is easily readable with MINIMUM brightness, unless your screen is dirty and is being extra reflective because of it, this screen works amazing in the sun, on full its clear even with glare
Also, my vibrant's browser does not blur, I just tested it for a goods few mins and no bluring at all
And lastly on discussion, the i4's screen resolution + the smaller size of the screen kinda makes you think its sharper but its a smaller screen...does a higher resolution help it at all? Do you see any distinguishable difference from a lower res screen?
The only advantage i4 has is how dim and how bright the display can get because its an lcd however super amoled wins overall
Sent from my SXY-T959
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had the blurry browser srolling on all my Google phones. Its more noticeable if you've used an iPhone for a while then used a Google phone for a while. Just go to this forum, and look at the arrows pointing right and the icons especially the envelopes to the left of the thread titles. Now slowly scroll, you'll notice the envelopes almost blinking, and the lines become jagged off and on. So when you scroll normally theres a subtle choppiness. But really its only annoying because iPhones don't do it they are smooth, I thinking its the gpu acceleration which we should have shortly. Android hadn't said why they have put off gpu acc so long. Or maqybe they have but I don't know about it. As far as sunlight it could he better but coming from a nexus I would say the vibrant is indeed a treat
I hope this isn't too off topic. I've over clocked and lag fixed my vibrant, I'm trying to show up this guy at my job that has iphone4 how do you run a benchmark test on iphone so we can compare? I'm at 1700 benchmark right now
Joshochoa187 said:
I hope this isn't too off topic. I've over clocked and lag fixed my vibrant, I'm trying to show up this guy at my job that has iphone4 how do you run a benchmark test on iphone so we can compare? I'm at 1700 benchmark right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's linpack for iPhone, but it isn't made by the same company, so I am not sure how *valid* the comparison would be. There isn't really any universal benchmarking tools that exists on both platforms. So you are SOL at the moment.
Dunno why this turned into a iphone vs galaxy s post but here is a link for an unbiased view on both of these phones screens (scroll to bottom);
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9000_galaxy_s_vs_apple_iphone_4-review-500p3.php
Most people won't be able to tell the difference in my opinion. Now if you are blowing up pics and text you will probably will see the difference. The super amoled blew me away the first time I saw avatar on it, Iphone can't do that.
Hi,
I was wondering if someone who has the S2 and has had or spent some time with an iPhone 4 can comment on how clear the screen/text is when reading web pages etc.
I have a Nexus One and the resolution is horrible compared to the iPhone 4.
Does the RGB vs Pentile make a big difference?
I don't have the galaxy yet, but yes text will look much sharper. The nexus one had the pentile pixel layout, new galaxy does not.
Just play with the inspire or thunderbolt. They have same size large screen with same proper pixel layout as the new galaxy s, but it will also have amoled ad well. Best of both worlds.
much much better than sgs pentile but it suffers from heavy aliasing on web pages.i did notice this as soon as i got the phone even engadget points this out. the screen is great but the text on web pages are not as sharp as i'd like them to be(i did take into consideration that iphone's ips display has higher res).i wish some dev's could start on fixing this I'd more than happy to buy them a few beers.
the screen over all is great.heck its the best out there.
I wonder why it would have worse aliasing than the nexus one or first galaxy s, since they have pentile pixels. This has higher resolution, more pixels, yet has an aliasing issue. Very strange, and disappointing...
RogerPodacter said:
I wonder why it would have worse aliasing than the nexus one or first galaxy s, since they have pentile pixels. This has higher resolution, more pixels, yet has an aliasing issue. Very strange, and disappointing...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably just a bug in Samsung's browser, it'll be fixed eventually.
maybe try opera or dolphin HD and see.
I wonder if the screen on the galaxy s ii will look the same as the galaxy s with voodoo color.
Super Amoled Plus = Super Amoled w/ voodoo color?
I hope supercurio cooks come kernels for this phone!
It will look better cause the galaxy s2 has physically more pixels than the super amoled.
Got an SGS2 last week and need to say I was quite deluded by text clarity. Not only does not compare to Iphone of gf (miles away) but it is even worse than Xperia Arc. I notice the aliasing on most letters not only in browser (stock or otherwise, tried several) but also on Gmail and Kindle, basically anywhere that there is a strong contrast between font color and background (ie black on white or viceversa). I'm not sure if the phone is victim of its own features like super contrast that makes jaggies more visible or there is a problem with my handset. Would appreciate if other people having the SGS2 and another phone (not pentile matrix based ofc) could report their experience.
Scaven said:
Hi,
I was wondering if someone who has the S2 and has had or spent some time with an iPhone 4 can comment on how clear the screen/text is when reading web pages etc.
I have a Nexus One and the resolution is horrible compared to the iPhone 4.
Does the RGB vs Pentile make a big difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not 100% but i believe so. The RGB has a 50% increase in sub-pixels which basically gives the appearance of having a higher resolution/ppi. (at least that's what I've been led to believe)
hello
i will buy a new android phone and i don't now which phone i should buy it !
GS2
SAMOLED Plus have some bad colors ??
in the future GS2 will get htc Sense 3.0 rom ??
how much avilable of RAM in GS2 ?? i know GS2 have 1GB RAM but how much available for user after using phone like 10 hours ??
anything else ??
Stop filling up this forum with the same old boring question!
Your in a GS2 forum, of course people are gonna say gs2
Spec wise S2 is better, and general internet reviews suggest it's also the better phone, however there's enough opinions in this and the Sensation's forums to know the pros and cons of each to make up your mind.
i also put a topic on sensation forum
The sensation sucks in comparision,
16gb of space, and the sensation only has about 1gb.
Also, the GS2 screen is simply awesome in comparision to the higher resolution qhd screen. Whilst text will look a 'little bit crisper' - the colours are ****e, and the whole screen has a 'washed out' look.
GS2 has higher HSPDA speeds, has a media player that can actually skip through tracks and a larger battery too.
GS2 is very light and ultra thin, whereas the sensation is built with plastic AND metal - so is thicker and heavier (personal choice)
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
After owning a htc hd2 and now the gs2 for w months i will say, the build quality of the gs2 is rubbish, gaps near the charging port lets dust in and speaker grill, also the phone for me is to light and tends to want to slip out when using it one handed. Also my device has the os battery bug for some time, it comes and goes randomly.
Sorry to be negative but its better to know the fauilts then to just hear this is the best phone and i love it.
So personaly id go for the sensation and wish i did. Just my opinion
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
I own both the Sensation and SGS2, and to put it bluntly, the Sensation is awful compared to the SGS2. I really tried to like the Sensation but it's just a poorly put together device. The Sensation does feel a bit more high quality but really what does that matter when the device your holding is a 2nd rate device. The SGS2 is not without it's flaws but at the moment, bar none, it's the best Android device on the market if not the best device period. You will not regret getting the SGS2 the same cannot be said of the Sensation
Ok. Both got 1,2Ghz Dual-core CPU.
Let's see...
Galaxy S 2 scored about 3500 in Quadrant. I know, it's not a big deal, but Sensation scores about 1200?
Well... the difference is.. 2300... That's a lot man.
Plus, the Galaxy S 2, has better CPU. AS for the GPU, I think the Sensation beats it(Adreno 220(Sensation) vs Mali400(S 2))
Ok, the sensation has a qHD resolution, but d'oh. You prefer the qHD res over the super duper amazing extra dynamic colors of the Super Amoled Plus?
I was between those two. Oh, and the S 2 has 250+ more RAM.
And I chose the Galaxy S 2. It's perfect, slim, awesome. ~~
NIK516 said:
After owning a htc hd2 and now the gs2 for w months i will say, the build quality of the gs2 is rubbish, gaps near the charging port lets dust in and speaker grill, also the phone for me is to light and tends to want to slip out when using it one handed. Also my device has the os battery bug for some time, it comes and goes randomly.
Sorry to be negative but its better to know the fauilts then to just hear this is the best phone and i love it.
So personaly id go for the sensation and wish i did. Just my opinion
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you owned the Sensation because the bugs you reference are minor in comparison to what you have on the Sensation.
-juanito- said:
hello
i will buy a new android phone and i don't now which phone i should buy it !
GS2
SAMOLED Plus have some bad colors ??
in the future GS2 will get htc Sense 3.0 rom ??
how much avilable of RAM in GS2 ?? i know GS2 have 1GB RAM but how much available for user after using phone like 10 hours ??
anything else ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SAMOLED plus is fantastic IMO, I prefer it over the Sensation screen.
Developers are working on Sense 3.0 port for SGS2
Current RAM on my SGS2 = 545MB
Current RAM on my Sensation = 252MB
Konstantinos said:
Ok. Both got 1,2Ghz Dual-core CPU.
Let's see...
Galaxy S 2 scored about 3500 in Quadrant. I know, it's not a big deal, but Sensation scores about 1200?
Well... the difference is.. 2300... That's a lot man.
Plus, the Galaxy S 2, has better CPU. AS for the GPU, I think the Sensation beats it(Adreno 220(Sensation) vs Mali400(S 2))
Ok, the sensation has a qHD resolution, but d'oh. You prefer the qHD res over the super duper amazing extra dynamic colors of the Super Amoled Plus?
I was between those two. Oh, and the S 2 has 250+ more RAM.
And I chose the Galaxy S 2. It's perfect, slim, awesome. ~~
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And lets not forget the Sensation lags like crazy. My Nexus S was faster than the Sensation
Galaxy S2 wins on:
Screen Quality (SA+ makes the higher resolution QHD screen look washed out)
Ram: 1GB vs 768mb
Storage: 16gb vs 1gb
Battery: 1650 vs 1540 - Not only does the GS2 include a larger battery, but the super amoled+ screen uses less power than the QHD screen.
HSPDA Speeds: 20.1mbps vs 14.4mbps ( i think )
GS2 wins on Video formats too, the inclusion of divx playback is fantastic.
Front facing camera on the GS2 is better.
Less lag: the sensation just does not operate as fast as the GS2, for what reason - i just dont know.
Quadrant: 3600 vs 1300 (big difference)
Camera: both phones offer 8mp, however the GS2 has a faster shutter speed, smoother action and more camera features. (both offer 1080p recording)
Call quality: both have dual microphones, but the sensation has extremely poor noise cancellation - hence the GS2 win.
Thiness/weight: GS2 is super thin and super light - no contest.
-----
Sensation wins on:
Build quality: plastic and metal is obviously a higher build quality than plastic.
..... Thats it.
Some ppl prefer HTC sense, but since using TW4 - it runs flawlessly for me (unlike TW3) - user preferance.
Not sure if ive missed anything, but sure others will chip in too
(it would be better to compare the sensation to the galaxy+ rather than GS2 - yet i feel, the sensation would still lose on many points from above)
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
The Sensation's time has come and gone. The Ruby and Holiday already far exceed its specs. Hell, even the E3D has more RAM. The Sensation was evolutionary for HTC while the SGS2 was revolutionary for Samsung. Not that the SGS2 isn't going to be superseded too, but not as dramatically and not as quickly.
HTC is very known for poor audio. Sensation has a very tiny sounding speaker just like the rest of them.
I hate when people are negative about sgs2 build quality. Ive had mine since launch and dropped it over 20 times now and besides a scuff on the bezel the rest of the phone is in great/perfect shape. I will never understand that people complain aobut how light it is when Samsung intended to make it as thin as possible. Any case fixes that issue also.
The Sensation gets dust under screen within a few days. Has the death grip(I think all phones have this) and have touch screen issues and horrible in direct sunlight.
If your getting the unlocked international sgs2, youll know that Samsung is updating the device like crazy. CM7 crew is supporting the device also.
If you happen to not like the sgs2 for any reason, and would rather go for a HTC device. I would advise you to wait until there next big device comes.
Well I had Galaxy S2 and at the moment have a sensation. While I had s2 I had 2 issues. Yellowish left side screen only noticeable até gray background and pink spot on photos and i replaced the unit, got rid of yellowish and almost gone pink spot but then had hd video recording frame rate drop at low light conditions... Well i thought, I payed 500 euro for this? So traded with sensation and this is the real thing that happened, even with the new 2.3.4 super fast ROM it doesn't compare with the speed of s2 but ok, is fast enough... Had touch screen issues already not responding to my command and having force closes with everyday apps and even now phone reboots itself when trying to play a game... Also phone calls sound thin and low volume, having a little distortion, audio recording also too thin. Already asked for a replace going back to S2 and pink spot and video problems since the rest just feels quick and perfect...
BUT I love sense, if anyone depends on it, don't go wrong, sensation and sense 3.0 is just so easy and complete, beautiful and with new update 2.3.4 no lag at all! I hope I had HTC build, responsiveness and speed of Samsung and sense... About the screen at the beginning I thought samoled+ was way better but now I think is a matter of taste and what we get used to...
Hope it helps
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA App
chrisjcks said:
Sensation wins on:
Build quality: plastic and metal is obviously a higher build quality than plastic.
..... Thats it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't galaxy plastic shell over metal body? I remember seeing the tear down showing metal skeletal structure
The only thing I noticed that grabbed my attention when testing out the sgs2 and sensation was it's weather animations and nice funky if a little busy lockscreen, other than that the sgs2 screen simply blows the slightly unnoticeable higher res screen that is ever so washed out, the sgs2 is noticeably faster to use, not entirely convinced by all the sense clutter myself but that's a personal opinion, the physical weight of the sgs2 is so much lighter in the hand pure bliss to hold up and read books while lying in bed arms never get tired, playing dungeon hunter 2 on the sgs2 is eyepopping joy compared to the drab looking dungeon world on the sensation, build quality of the sgs2 is always knocked, in my opinion how they plastic engineered so much ram, memory and CPU with such a large battery and screen into such a light package is astounding, being an ex plastic design engineer I guess I get excited about such twaddle, there you go my real world non spec view on the situation, just buy the sgs2
THUDUK said:
The only thing I noticed that grabbed my attention when testing out the sgs2 and sensation was it's weather animations and nice funky if a little busy lockscreen, other than that the sgs2 screen simply blows the slightly unnoticeable higher res screen that is ever so washed out, the sgs2 is noticeably faster to use, not entirely convinced by all the sense clutter myself but that's a personal opinion, the physical weight of the sgs2 is so much lighter in the hand pure bliss to hold up and read books while lying in bed arms never get tired, playing dungeon hunter 2 on the sgs2 is eyepopping joy compared to the drab looking dungeon world on the sensation, build quality of the sgs2 is always knocked, in my opinion how they plastic engineered so much ram, memory and CPU with such a large battery and screen into such a light package is astounding, being an ex plastic design engineer I guess I get excited about such twaddle, there you go my real world non spec view on the situation, just buy the sgs2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's true, no one does Weather better than HTC. As a matter of fact, no one comes close. If HTC sold their weather app on the market Beautiful Widgets would have to file for bankruptcy. The other area HTC does a good job on is their keyboard. The HTC IME is fantastic and their auto-correct function is as good if not better than the iPoo
Nokia 3310 so you don't fill these forums next with how do I root and install romzzz plzzzzz...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
My good god, same question every week:/
Sent from my Samsung Galactic Superstar S II
I thought this was very interesting, somewhat common sense to some of us geeks/nerds/smarties out there, and worth a share.
Origin: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/16554/is-the-samsung-galaxy-s4-really-worth-it/
Despite the amazing features in recent mobile phones that include, high speed quad core processors, large screen sizes, high-fidelity Graphic Processing Units (GPUs) and innovative designs, the mobile phones manufacturers are desperately trying to surpass each other.
A number of marketing tactics are being used to get us all excited, and persuade us to upgrade our phones.
Due to the tremendous advancements in hardware and software technology and the challenges posed by a very competitive market, the smart phone manufacturers are left only with the screen resolution to boast about and as an immediate eye-catching feature for a potential upgrade.
Samsung is already making a big deal about the full High Definition (HD) resolution of its Galaxy S4 introduced this month. Although the S4 is not the first phone to be equipped with an HD resolution, the terrific success of the S2 and S3 makes it an appealing get-as-soon-as-possible feature for Galaxy lovers.
If you are charmed by the HD resolution and intend on throwing extra money to upgrade your phone to S4, let us first analyse if a full HD smart phone screen is really worth draining your wallet.
Resolution is the prime determinant of a screen’s clarity. HD resolution refers to a High Definition screen having either 1280 x 720 pixels (720p) or 1920 x 1080 pixels (1080p/full-HD) spread along the width and height of the smart phone’s screen.
The pixel is the elementary area of illumination on the screen. The image displayed is composed of pixels. Therefore, higher the number of pixels, the sharper and crisper an image appears on the screen.
For an immediate comparison, you can check the resolution of your old smart phone (For example a Nokia 6600, 176 x 208 pixels) and that of a recent smart phone (like the Samsung Galaxy S3, 720 x 1280 pixels). You will immediately notice that the high resolution produces a much clearer and sharper image.
Nevertheless, resolution is not the only factor responsible for a sharper screen. Keeping the resolution the same and increasing the screen’s size separates the pixels, thus resulting in lost sharpness.
What really matters for determining a screen’s quality is the number of pixels packed in a given area. The term Pixel Per Inch (PPI) represents how many pixels there are in one inch of a screen’s area; the larger the number, the better the screen’s quality.
As an example, Nokia 6600 launched in 2003 has a PPI density of 130, whereas, Apple’s iPhone 4, sensationalised and marketed by the brand name Retina Display, has a PPI of 330. This produces a much sharper and vibrant image on the screen and makes other older phones look lacklustre.
Increasing the resolution does increase the PPI, provided that the screen size is not increased significantly. Two smart phones having the same screen sizes but different resolutions will have different figures for PPI.
Does it mean increasing the PPI indefinitely will produce even sharper images on the screen? The answer is no.
Our eyes can determine the quality of the contents on a screen if the pixels are distinguishable at the normal viewing distance. The reason why Apple called their iPhone 4 screen ‘Retina Display’ was that the 326 PPI pixel density was so high that individual pixels were indistinguishable to the human eye at the normal viewing distance. However, Retina Display is no longer an industry-leading figure.
HTC was one of the companies to develop a display beating that of the iPhone 4 with HTC Rezound (342 PPI). Nevertheless, if you compare the screens of Iphone 4 and HTC Rezound, I can bet you won’t be able to tell the difference.
The reason is that the human eye cannot distinguish the difference in PPI when the figure reaches a saturation point of about 300 (slightly exaggerated, otherwise some studies suggest a threshold of 250 PPI). Therefore, having a PPI of more than 300 will not make any difference to normal human eye unless you use a magnifying glass or have the screen pressed up against your eyeballs to see the subtle difference (of course you don’t want to do that).
Even for people with 20/20 vision, a full HD resolution would be a waste because most people’s eye can’t resolve sharpness above 250 PPI. The same goes for observing the photos quality. The pixel details in a photograph is always spread over more than one pixel and never perfectly aligned with the pixel structure of the display. So it will not matter whether you view the photographs on a 1080p or 720p display; they will appear the same. If you come across a smart phone having a PPI above 350, safely take it as a marketing stunt. It is not going to make the smart phone’s screen any sharper.
Consequently, a full HD (1080p) resolution is no better looking than 720p resolution in smart phones. A full HD resolution is only better for tablets, laptop screens, or monitors where the human eyes can resolve such a high resolution. The smart phones having 720p resolutions and sizes ranging from 4.3 to 4.7 inches have PPIs within the range 312 to 341. This PPI range is more than enough. Therefore, Samsung’s claim to give a sensational screen experience is pretty pompous.
Whereas, a full HD resolution necessitates using larger screen size (at least 5 inches) which is pretty annoying for small-sized phones lovers.
Another issue is the increased power consumption. The extra features in electronic devices don’t come for free. The price usually has to be paid in terms of high power consumption. A full HD display makes more demand from the processor and the GPU, which in turn needs more power to help it cope.
Although, the S4 has much improved battery (2600 mAh) as compared to the S3 (2100 mAh), it is still not sure if we can get improved battery life as well. We must not forget that the Apple iPad 4′s screen has a higher than 1080p resolution (2048 x 1536, but a PPI of 264), and a battery rated as 11666 mAh, while the iPad2 has a less than 720p resolution (1024 x 768, 132 PPI). Yet both provide the same 10-hours of use before needing a recharge.
The only advantage of a full HD screen in smart phone is that it gives more space for user interface elements such as button and text. For example, a webpage can fit to the screen, but the size of the contents decreases due to high resolution. In most of the cases, the viewer has to zoom in the contents to view them easily.
Due to these reasons, I still prefer to stick to my Xperia S with 720p resolution and a PPI of 341.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting read. Though I can definitely tell there is a difference when comparing my lte and the HTC one side by side. That being said when they aren't side by side I can't tell.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
scottspa74 said:
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see pixelation on my Evo's screen if I look closely. I can't see the same pixelation on the DNA's screen. There's a real difference, although you have to be a serious gadget nerd (like me) to care.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
scottspa74 said:
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly my thinking.
maxpower7 said:
I can see pixelation on my Evo's screen if I look closely. I can't see the same pixelation on the DNA's screen. There's a real difference, although you have to be a serious gadget nerd (like me) to care.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly cannot tell the difference at all. Although I saw a slight difference between my 3D and this EVO LTE. Maybe because I knew the specs though =p. I'm a big fan of sleeping at night. Lol.
... Sent from my 'Maybe the LTEvo wasn't such a bad idea afterall,' using the XDA Developers app.