On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 19:18:43 +0200 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> Hi, > (I try to cut out some citations). > > > this is my dilemma. win with dpi and sharpness, but then lose in > > smoothness/speed. i lean a bit to- smoothness myself, but i want to > > hear the > > "peanut gallery" so to speak :) (please don't take offence! i'm > > seriously about > > listening that's why i ask!) > > Someone has already pointed out that the dilemma is more on the > processor. > I.e. the problem should be solved by a faster processor with better > GPU rather > than challenging and and trying to redue user's expectations. Can you > build > container trucks smaller because then they need much less parking space? but when it has been determined that your cpu is not changing - and there are no other gpu options to improve things... you only can change resolution or speed. which is more important? > > pixels the freerunner/neo1973 have. *IF* we shipped the same screen > > - we'd have > > better performance. i find it interesting how so many peole rave > > about how > > great the iphone screen is - but its tech specs are not so hot. it's > > dpi is > > pretty bad compared to the standard these days. but that sure as > > hell has not > > stopped it selling. :) this is why i ask - actual products and > > reality seem to > > show that dpi is not a major factor. at least as best i can tell. > > I have now done some test with the mySTEP GUI stack which sits on X11. > The > one I have shown during LinuxTag. > > Some application I have choosen makes regular screen updates: > > Neo 1973 every 0.5 seconds (due to more work for the higher > number of pixels) > Acer n30 every 0.3 seconds (same CPU but QVGA) > Zaurus C3100 every 0.3 secons (with X/Qt on VGA) > > So, the difference is not that large by different architectures and > display resolutions. > The astonishing thing is that the C3100 is faster than the Neo with > the same display. > I.e. Display resolution by itself can not be the main issue with speed. > > Well, this is not transferrable to games or video players, but it > indicates the direction. yup. true. these will vary based on what you do. are you mostly memory bus bound or calculation bound, setup bound etc. if you're memory bound - which a lot of graphics is (blits, fills etc.) you'e going to see a big difference based just on pixel count. i.e - closer to 4x for qvga vs vga. > > but then we have the reverse too. the question is - which is more > > important? in > > the world of phones the mass market is as it is higher volume, but > > again - it > > depends. i am wondering what projects would not be possible at qvga? > > seriously? > > ones you can actually read and use? this is my point. try and actual > > 2.8" > > screen at qvga for a while - try apps on it. they are still quite > > usable and > > visible. you may need to just deal with coarser fonts etc. but - > > it's still all > > Yes, they are. But just "Quite". Not excellent. More difficult to > read. It is like > Porsche could reduce one or two gear levels. Can still be used as a > car :-) aah - but openmoko isn't porsche :) well not yet. > mySTEP has resolution independence so that the identical app binaries > work > on both resolutions and try to show the same size. So it is easy to > have both > (Acer n30 / Neo 1973) sitting next to each other. There are large > differences in > how the same application looks. It is much more crisp on the Neo VGA. > > Let's reverse the question - would you reduce the resolution of your > desktop system? > What do you currently have? 1024*1280 or more? > You can still do everything like writing software, e-mail, web > browsing, gaming. > Probably even faster. But how would it appear? Future oriented or old > fashioned? this is different - because it's me - my eyesight is better than 20/20 and i use the highest res i can get, when i can get it as i know i can read my miniscule 8pt or less fonts. but no one else can read my screen - they all complain that it's too hard and i am forever upping font sizes if i want anyone to read something on it. i know *I* am fine with it, but the vast majority of other people can't read my screen. this is why i am cutting myself out of this - trying to not be personal about it as i know already i'm an exception to the rule. > > there. :) i'm serious! if you have examples of projects that would > > ONLY work if > > we shipped a 2.8" 285dpi screen but would not work on the same > > screen at all > > at 143dpi... i want to know! i suspect the reason would just be "bad > > programming" is why it won't work. and then the next would be "it > > may display - > > but no one will be able to read it..." :) but again - i want to know. > > Some have already been mentioned. What I immediately see (which is not > at all exhaustive): > > * viewing pictures (320x240 has just room for a thumbnail but not a > viewer) > * rendering web pages > * maps / satellite pictures > * Terminal (QVGA just gives a 40*30 text display where all command > line things are used to x * 80 - and the Zaurus delivers that) > * On-Screen keyboard (without having too much layers) > * Good monthly overview in a Calendar application (one that says more > than some day is busy) > QVGA gives max. 46 square pixels per day. Including decoration. If > there are buttons to operate > the calendar, this reduces to much less, let's say 30 sqp. Quite > limited to show all the appointments > of one day. And clicking into each day to see if there is > something important is quite unfriendly. > BTW: that is the main reason why I personally did use a paper > calendar until I got a Zaurus with > VGA display (the 5500 did also have QGVA...). > > This brings me to a point not discussed so far. IMHO it also depends > on whether Finger or Pen > operation is used. With the finger, you have to reduce the display > content anyway - like the iPhone > working with many sheets moving from left to the right etc. But if you > operate by pen, you have a > much better precision so select something and you expect and can > handle a much higher information > density on a single page. So, a better screen reduces the number of > flipping/switching operations. we are going finger. we have no plans to provide a stylus holder (at this stage) and the stylus provided is kind of an after thought... :) thus we will have a grubby smudged screen with fingerprints and need to make buttons and things to hit big, so your finger can do it. > Finally, I think since the GTA03 platform should not rule out either > finger or pen operation, it must fulfill the higher requirements. we're aiming for finger. > I think I have made my reasons and comments clear. So, others should > also get a voice and vote... > > Nikolaus -- Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community