More E71 ruminations - the argument for QVGA and why Nokia got this one dead right

[slitchfield]

With the release of the 2.4"-screened, QVGA E71, some naive bloggers were shouting down Nokia for not putting in a VGA display. Here's why the bloggers got this one wrong - in my humble opinion, of course! Comments welcome. And at what point in the future do you think VGA will become practical and affordable in 'phones'?

Read on in the full article.

Absolutely agree with you on this. It is not silly, but downright stupid to ask for VGA resolution display in E71. Higher production cost, lower battery life, slower interface. And despite all this no significant advantage of using VGA over QVGA. Why on Earth should've Nokia used VGA in E71 when the disadvantages outweigh the advantages by 10:1?! Make some sense, people!

Also I'm sure if Nokia indeed had used VGA resolution display in a 2.4" area on the E71 then these same people would've cried out loud over how expensive the device is and how much battery it would consume.

[brendan]

If you increase to VGA it's only a win, win situation. Why not increase the zoom capability as well to up to 300%? Use bigger fonts if you can't read it.
But for the people with good eyesite or for photos, games, or non textual websites it would be great! To me its just better all round - I can't really think of anything wrong with it. Your article is just based around things that could and should be part of the implementation of a VGA screen.

[brendan]

interesting. unregistered comes up with a couple of reasonable points not cover in your article steve.... but then unregistered doesn't actually say the screen would be bad just expensive and power hungry but in use excellent?

but still cost - is everything that is included in the E71 totally 100% necessary? Could it be a case of a slightly more expensive phone with slightly less profit for nokia but a great tool for the user? In a discussion cost is a factor but not the only factor.

With regard power consumption - that's up to nokia to innovate! Come on consumers be more demanding - Nokia aren't in this game for love... What about one of those oled screens that use less power. When using a conventional screen what are the differences in power usage for more resolution? I have no idea - do you?

I think saying - there is no point to a VGA screen is just not true. It would be very nice, thank you! I bet if the E71 had one you guys would be all over it saying how great it was I find web browsing on my phone really useful and I really like a bigger screen - its one of the reasons why I am looking at the iPhone 3g.

[RadicalSatDude]

I agree with AAS.

Just like its no use to have a HiDef TV in sizes less than 40 inches. The same logic applies here.

Physical screens should match pixels. Else they endup downscaling if the physical screen is smaller, and upscaling if the physical screen is larger. All this means undue CPU cycles & waste of battery life as AAS pointed out.

I suppose next they'll ask for a 1080p or 720p res on their mobiles, Bloggers need to get their basics right!

Refs:
1. Display resolution.
2. Pixel density.
3. Resolution independence.

I've yet to submit my article on screen resolution to AAS but there is no question - an increase in screen resolution is a better thing period. How can it not be?? That's like saying why have standard def TV when you can have HD? Ok I get the point that we're dealing with tiny screen real estate here but there ARE specific instances where an increase in screen res would be super useful on most Nokia smartphones.

Forget the web browser, the screen is too small to acceptably use ANY screen res. to assist here. Where VGA or better resolutions would be fantastic is in MESSAGING. I hate the way Nokia have limited email / message header viewing on my N95 8GB to 2 lines. This means I can only ever see 5 email headers! Insane!!! And when opening up emails the fonts are so big (even with the font setting at it's smallest) it makes email reading tedious.

Pictures would look sharper, fonts smoother...I could go on.

Being stuck at 320x240 is now decidedly OLD SCHOOL and I am just desperate for Nokia to move with the times or even possibly take the lead here in implementing higher res screens in their smartphones.

Justin

[bartmanekul]

Originally Posted by brendan

What about one of those oled screens that use less power.

I imagine that would raise the cost considerably. Its always a juggle balencing cost with features, and I think the payoff of that against the cost would be bad indeed.

I think we should be looking at seperate solutions. Smartphones are powerful enough now to be able to do things most laptop travellers do - edit and view documents, browse the web and email. However the input and viewing is never going to be right on a mobile phone sized device.

I have the iGo keyboard, and its really quite amazing how small it folds up to, and its extremely usable.

However, I am finding it largely pointless without a decent viewing option. And no phone display, no matter if its VGA or what is going to solve that. A maximum of 3" screen (4 if you want a brick) will always stop this from being possible.

There needs to be something portable, along the same lines as the iGo keyboard. It could be an oled screen, one of those that can actually be rolled up.

Maybe something that attaches to glasses, or is a pair of glasses. Being so close to the eye it could be possible to replicate a 8" - 15" screen.

Or, what seems the best portable solution for me - http://www.unplggd.com/unplggd/proje...ojector-054019

Either way, Im hoping theres more research done into a solution. While a mobile can never truely replace a laptop, I think for a vast majority it could be possible to eliminate the need to carry the oh so obvious laptop bag on their travels.

After all, with the N95 (and others) you have wifi, you have IM, you have the ability to view and edit Word, Excell and Powerpoint, email, web, and all the other things most people do on laptops.

[cirrus]

I'm not sure tose text comparison pictures are fair. Really you should have had the QVGA one scaled up (but without interpolation, so each QVGA pixel is a block of four pixels) next to the VGA version which effectively would be showing the real thing with 4 times as many pixels. By scaling the VGA version down you've thrown away the benefit of the extra pixels so of course they'll look the same.

Technicalities aside, I hear what you're saying and I think QVGA is adequate for E71. However, I do think VGA would be better and the sooner we get it (or even higher resolutions) the better.

Judging by comments I see in forums and the like there is some confusion over resolutions. Upping the screen resolution (which generally means reducing the physical size of each pixel) doesn't necessarily give you more info on the screen (though, you can if you want to of course). True, it could be used that way (which is what usually happens on PCs), but as you pointed out, teeny tiny text isn't usually helpful no matter how sharply it is rendered. What generally happens is that you have more or less the same screen contents except that everything is rendered with more detail. Edges of fonts and graphics appear smoother for example.

Anyone who remembers the "double res" screens Nokia used on some devices (like N80 or E60) before QVGA took over will remember how crisp everything looked. When viewed side by side, the text on a QVGA device looked decidedly blocky in comparison to the double res screen. I thought this was especially noticable in the web browser and when viewing maps.

IMHO the smoother text and graphics are easier on the eyes because it's almost like looking at printed paper. If you ever get to see some of the Japanese MOAP devices (e.g. at the Smartphone Show) you must check out their Wide-VGA (864x480) screens - text, graphics and video look absolutely gorgeous on them. Given the choice I would definitely take a device with a higher-res screen over a lower one. I might even be willing to pay a premium for it.

[slitchfield]

I was trying to keep the screenshot 'mockups' at approximately real world size - if I'd done both at VGA, each would be 8" across on your screen and it would be utterly unlike the real thing. At approx actual size, I contend that text blockiness isn't a problem.

I do agree that VGA *can be* better, just not enough better to warrant the rejigging, the recoding of all the apps, the extra expense etc. In time, these things will happen and get bundled into hardware designs. But not yet.

Screen resolution is not all. Good example is the difference in how much information that appears on the screens in menus and lists. With QVGA always one or two more rows are shown compared to 352x416, probably because 352x416 is 4 times larger than the first S60 resolution 176x208 and therefore only got improvement nicer fonts due to the higher resolution. If VGA is implemented in the same way as 352x416 was in the first 3rd edition devices we probably would see no difference more than nicer fonts compared to QVGA.
In Web the difference between the 352x416 and QVGA are quit big, I personally appreciate the higher resolution really much. The higher resolution in N80 have for me made the finding off a replacement until now unsuccessful.

[AVR4000]

In my opinion an E61-sized E71 with VGA display (2,8-3") would be a nice device. But on the released E71 the QVGA is perfect. On the E51 and E90 external display QVGA is very good. The problem is when the size is 2,8" or bigger as on the N95 8 GB or E61. That´s were the QVGA is a limit and pixels are very visible. But not on the E71.

I think Nokia does the right thing: QVGA on smaller displays (up to 2,4") and then VGA on bigger displays (up to 3") and then 800 x 352/480 on the big ones (4-5").

VGA is nice - on a bigger display. The E71 is too small for a really good VGA display. I would use 416 x 352 instead.

As the TV-Out for non video/photo stuff uses the internal phone display resolution, a higher res display would be most helpful when operating the phone on a hotel TV whilst travelling thanks.

follow the history of mobile screen evolution, notice it is clear Japanese handset always 2-3 ahead from the Global market, which also give a clear market direction of what our screen would be. They was and still is the leader on screen technology. Check out there DoCoMo 905i series and Softbank handset.
The 2.9 to 3.2 inch WVGA screen has become the stand. So with the cost etc in mind, believe in about 1 or 2 year, we should see some thing smiler on the Nokia hand set.

What a load of rubbish! Having a higher resolution display will always make a device's screen look better.

Firstly, the HTC Touch Diamond only has a 2.8" screen, not a full size screen, yet every review written for it so far has praised the VGA screen as being the strongest elliment. Secondly, where you show the picture of the VGA and QVGA webpage....the simple truth is when a page is viewed at distance it is unreadable on a QVGA screen. Using Safari or Opera 9.1 gives you the option of scrolling to a level where you feel comfortable. The first picture is also misleading as you are viewing it on a monitor, if you saw the two images on a VGA/QVGA screen you would see the difference.

Unfortunately Nokia tend to stick with QVGA screens on 95% of their phones, and as this website is written by Nokia fanboys they decide to attack something which they can't have. I find it a shame as this website has some genuinely interesting news, but the fanboy nature really puts me off. I currently have a Symbian based phone, but I'm not interested in showing loyalty to an OS.

[slitchfield]

"Firstly, the HTC Touch Diamond only has a 2.8" screen, not a full size screen, yet every review written for it so far has praised the VGA screen as being the strongest elliment. "

True, but 2.4" to 2.8" is actually a big gap. Think N82 to N95 8GB. I agree VGA would be more desirable at 2.8". E71 is 2.4.

"Secondly, where you show the picture of the VGA and QVGA webpage....the simple truth is when a page is viewed at distance it is unreadable on a QVGA screen. Using Safari or Opera 9.1 gives you the option of scrolling to a level where you feel comfortable. "

We're talking mobile though. S60 Web only lets you zoom to 125%. Now, if Nokia would fix it so that bigger zoom levels were possible.....?

"and as this website is written by Nokia fanboys they decide to attack something which they can't have. I find it a shame as this website has some genuinely interesting news, but the fanboy nature really puts me off.

Rubbish. We call things as we see them. And Nokia have had the E90 with a 800 pixel wide screen for ages. And plenty of other devices with 352 by 416 pixel displays. So we've had plenty of time to try them all out for real.

Yes, in an ideal world, VGA would be better. But at the moment there's no proper OS/app/electronics support, at least not in the Symbian OS world... The E90 struggles on many sites and in some apps because they're not expecting the screen size and things get unusably tiny. More work needed on all fronts.