WM Team Blog: "Where did 240 come from?"

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/02/14/531972.aspx' target='_blank'>http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile.../14/531972.aspx</a><br /><br /></div><i>"You may have noticed a number of Windows Mobile devices coming out with 240x240 screens. And you're probably asking yourself, 'Who came up with this 240 number, anyway? Why aren't they doing 320x320?' Now, please don't interpret this entry as my trying to convince you that 240x240 is somehow better than 320x320. In almost all cases, it's not. I'm just trying to explain how we got here."</i><br /><br />Mike Calligaro addresses an oft-heard question since the release of the Treo 700w, especially as users compare it to the Treo 650's higher-res screen. The good news is that I've been playing with the 700w, and its screen is perfectly acceptable: as it's only 2", the lower resolution does not make for blocky type, and ClearType looks great. IE Mobile, Mobipocket (my favorite eBook reader) and basically all of my other "productivity" apps are perfectly useable. The one very serious downside, though, is the incompatibility of the screen resolution with games. I'll discuss this in much greater detail in an upcoming full review, but in my opinion, the 700w's one-handedness outweighs its disadvantages.

[AximMeister]

Hilarious. 240x240 sucks. Truly BACKWARD step. There is no software for it (barely) and less is rarely more when you make the screen smaller. Wherever it came from CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SEND IT BACK ... :twisted:

[rhelwig]

One-handedness is fine when you're talking/dialing on the phone while driving :devilboy:, but for every other use of the PDA/phone/camera I have both hands available. Basically, one-handed operability is vastly overrated, IMHO.

I'd much prefer a form factor like the HTC Universal.

[Ed Hansberry]

As someone that has actually used 240x240 with Windows Mobile 5 for productivity, it works well. I would like to see 480X480, but that is just higher res of the same stuff. The screen is smaller than most Pocket PCs, sort of on the order of the HTC wizard, so it is much more crisp than an Axim X30, iPAQ 3900/5400 or any of the larger 240X320 screens, so the DPI is high enough that it looks really good. And yes, I also have a 640X480 JasJar so I do know how good that high-res looks.

Remember, most of you with 240X320 are only using ~240X240 with the keyboard up. All of these devices have keyboards so the SIP stays down. Palm especially has done a great job with the keyboard. Onscreen indicators of when SHIFT, CAPS LOCK, FUNCTION and FUNCTION LOCK are on, something the K-Jam doesn't do unfortunately. :?

Ok, back to our regularly scheduled complaining. :wink:

[andyb]

Interesting article. It's something I've never really thought about but now I wonder what the maximum resolution could be on a handheld? How high could the resolution get before any extra dots are no longer perceptible to the human eye and so serve no purpose in being there? Could it be that something as low as 480x480 would be the upper limit for square screens - all the VGA devices are larger than I want to carry around on a day to day basis so have we already reached the limit there as well?

I guess the real challenge for everyone is to make the best use of what screen is there, and not just demand more screen.

[benyeap]

For god sake, shelf the whole 240 x 240 idea. Dun just think about maximizing profits &amp; cut costs. It should not be implemented in the 1st place. QVGA resolution wasn't enough for my taste even in a small &lt;3" screen, not to mention all these 240 x 240 square screens. We need improvements on the screen, not deprovements.

The irony part is that the regular mobile phones counterpart kept improving the screen resolution &amp; it is now up to VGA resolution for a mere 2" screen, which announced in 3GSM if I ain't wrong.

[Janak Parekh]

Hilarious. 240x240 sucks. Truly BACKWARD step. There is no software for it (barely) and less is rarely more when you make the screen smaller. Wherever it came from CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SEND IT BACK ... :twisted:
That's not true. I have not had trouble finding PIM and productivity software to work on my Treo 700w, without a hitch.

One-handedness is fine when you're talking/dialing on the phone while driving :devilboy:, but for every other use of the PDA/phone/camera I have both hands available. Basically, one-handed operability is vastly overrated, IMHO. I'd much prefer a form factor like the HTC Universal.
It's a personal preference, but having pocketed a HTC Universal for about a month, I do miss the screen resolution and large thumbboard but I really do like the one-handed-ness I gained in response. The Universal is extremely clumsy: you have to use both hands to do absolutely anything. And I'm not just talking about phone usage (at which the Universal is terrible without a BT headset), I'm talking about PIM and other operations. The 700w is also a lot lighter and more comfortable in the hand.

Overall, if I'd have to choose between the two now, I'd choose the 700w hands down, excepting gaming. I couldn't have imagined it before. 8O You really have to try it to see how useable it is. As Ed points out, ditching the SIP makes the experience nearly the same as 240x320.

--janak

[AximMeister]

Hilarious. 240x240 sucks. Truly BACKWARD step. There is no software for it (barely) and less is rarely more when you make the screen smaller. Wherever it came from CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SEND IT BACK ... :twisted:
That's not true. I have not had trouble finding PIM and productivity software to work on my Treo 700w, without a hitch.

One-handedness is fine when you're talking/dialing on the phone while driving :devilboy:, but for every other use of the PDA/phone/camera I have both hands available. Basically, one-handed operability is vastly overrated, IMHO. I'd much prefer a form factor like the HTC Universal.
It's a personal preference, but having pocketed a HTC Universal for about a month, I do miss the screen resolution and large thumbboard but I really do like the one-handed-ness I gained in response. The Universal is extremely clumsy: you have to use both hands to do absolutely anything. And I'm not just talking about phone usage (at which the Universal is terrible without a BT headset), I'm talking about PIM and other operations. The 700w is also a lot lighter and more comfortable in the hand.

Overall, if I'd have to choose between the two now, I'd choose the 700w hands down, excepting gaming. I couldn't have imagined it before. 8O You really have to try it to see how useable it is. As Ed points out, ditching the SIP makes the experience nearly the same as 240x320.

--janak
Of course you can find PIM software. Afterall PIM software is nearly always top of the best seller lists. But what about obscure stuff ? Or simply less popular stuff ? Sure, a 240x240 device is no different to a 320x240 device with black tape covering up part of the screen :D :D :D but give us a break with the 240x240 propaganda. Nobody likes it except for Microsoft Evangelists and the OEMs that make them ....
And yep I've got a 240x240 device in my collection.... rubbish.

[bigneeker]

I had a 240x240 device (hw6515) and besides the lack of compatibility of 3rd party software and blocky pixelated look, there was so much vertical scrolling involved.
Just imagine someone cutting off your pocket by 25% and you will understand how bad it is, almost every program including the core os required some form of vertical scrolling because it wouldnt fit on a square screen.

The benq p50 and now the anextek sp310 are proof that you can do a 240 x320 screen with a tumbboard and still manage to have a good size.

[mpaque]

Wow, some strong feelings on this topic! I have to agree with Janak on this one. I've had a 700w since the day it showed up in Verizon stores and I gotta say the whole 240x240 thing is way over blown. I don't use my PPC to play games so I couldn't care less what resolution they support. All other apps I use support 240x240 just fine. Clear type looks great. I set the text size to the smallest setting and all is good. I've had plenty of handheld devices from a Palm III to the original Windows CE Cassopeia devices to an Axim X50v. I'll take my 240x240 one handed operating Treo over those devices any day of the week!

[AximMeister]

Wow, some strong feelings on this topic! I have to agree with Janak on this one. I've had a 700w since the day it showed up in Verizon stores and I gotta say the whole 240x240 thing is way over blown. I don't use my PPC to play games so I couldn't care less what resolution they support. All other apps I use support 240x240 just fine. Clear type looks great. I set the text size to the smallest setting and all is good. I've had plenty of handheld devices from a Palm III to the original Windows CE Cassopeia devices to an Axim X50v. I'll take my 240x240 one handed operating Treo over those devices any day of the week!
You should contact Microsoft as there's a prize for anyone that admits liking the 240x240 format :D I guess if you don't play games, don't run apps, and don't need a Pocket PC atall then it's a great choice :lol:

[shindullin]

I got a cingular 2125 recently and it has a qvga display that's been squished together to make it clearer and smaller, and even it has some serious disadvantages over my Axim x51v. There just isn't enough screen real estate to see everything that you want. Especially when it comes to viewing web sites, larger documents, or dates on the macro-level. That said, the 2125 is so small, light, and functional that I find the x51v stays on my desk at work almost every day while the 2125 is turning into a sugical implant on my right hip. Prior to this "almost" two device systemm I had a palm 600 and Toshiba genio-e. The palm's low resolution, even when compared with the streached out genio's qvga screen eventually wore on me. It wasn't all that bad at first, but the more you use a device, the more you want to do new stuff with it. The lowly os and junky screen resolution made that really hard. Hence the two devices. I'm not saying that this won't happen to me and the qvga 2125, that's why I'm not selling my Axim. Because if experience holds true, the tiny screen will seem even smaller and smaller as time wears on. For now, I think that qvga is about as small as I'm willing to take.

[Raphael Salgado]

Their notion that 480x480 LCD screens are too expensive has not been justified, especially when 640x480 screens are out there. They make it sound like it's in a class all its own.

If they gave a dollar figure or percentage on how much more a 480x480 would have cost the manufacturer of the device, I'd probably be a little more understanding at this point. Other than that, I just can't touch a 240x240 device after being used to 320x240 for so long.

[KTamas]

Well, generally I don't feel that 240×240 would be a problem, at least not a that big one. With WM5, four hardware keys (start/ok/left softkey/right softkey) and a built-in keyboard, one-handed usage works like a dream. At these days, I hardly touch the screen of my PDA2K in the general usage (that does not include tweaking, trying out apps etc....that's a different story). One-handedness is indeed a personal preference, some ppl like it, some ppl not, I personally love it. What concerns me is the third-party compatibility. Productivity and lifestyle applications are mostly updated now to WM5 and square screen, but the games for example, oh, those games ;)

[Janak Parekh]

Of course you can find PIM software. Afterall PIM software is nearly always top of the best seller lists. But what about obscure stuff ? Or simply less popular stuff ?
Well, we have to start somewhere. Until WM2003SE came out, virtually no apps officially supported rotation. That's no longer the case. I've got eWallet, Mobipocket, Resco File Explorer, Virtual Earth Mobile, TCPMP, vxUtil, and a couple of games that all work great, in addition to the built-in apps. I haven't installed more yet primarily because I haven't had the time.

ure, a 240x240 device is no different to a 320x240 device with black tape covering up part of the screen :D :D :D but give us a break with the 240x240 propaganda. Nobody likes it except for Microsoft Evangelists and the OEMs that make them ....
It's rather insulting that you immediately label anyone who finds a 240x240 device useful. :? The device is shorter than a 240x320 device with a thumbboard, and is comfortably pocketable... unlike, say, my Jasjar, which fit fine in my pocket but was large, heavy, and unwieldy. It's great that I can walk down the street, pull out the device, and look up a contact without having to use my other hand, thumbing on the screen, or scrolling for ages. You're not obligated to use it, but don't assume that the rest of us are idiots. I've used nearly every Pocket PC form factor, so I've experienced the alternatives.

I had a 240x240 device (hw6515) and besides the lack of compatibility of 3rd party software and blocky pixelated look, there was so much vertical scrolling involved.
&lt;shrug> I guess it depends on what you use. Since I never use the SIP, I don't find the scrolling to be significant. In fact, I find it nicer that I don't have to "worry" about the SIP popping up and down and resizing my application window all the time. By the way, the hw6515 has a larger screen than the 700w. I would agree that the HP's screen is probably a bit too large for 240x240.

The benq p50 and now the anextek sp310 are proof that you can do a 240 x320 screen with a tumbboard and still manage to have a good size.
They're still a bit long for my taste, but I think the variety is great for the platform.

That said, the 2125 is so small, light, and functional that I find the x51v stays on my desk at work almost every day while the 2125 is turning into a sugical implant on my right hip.
That's my experience, but with the 700w. Everyone's going to have a different preferred size, and that's fine. Do note that the Smartphone platform doesn't squeeze quite as much information on the screen as the Pocket PC platform.

--janak

[alese]

What I find it funny is that smartphone models are getting full QVGA resolution on very small screens and cost considerably less than all this new Phone Edition devices having 240x240 screens.
Yes I know that Phone Editions have more features and screens are Touch Screens, but that is exactly the point. These are high end devices and they should not have features lower than their "smaller" cousins.

And one more thing - however you try to spin this, it's still 240x240 pixels compared to 320x240 and this is 30% less pixels. Also I don't know about the others, but I only use SIP when I try to enter some info, most of the time I use all the screen including the additional pixels.

[Janak Parekh]

What I find it funny is that smartphone models are getting full QVGA resolution on very small screens and cost considerably less than all this new Phone Edition devices having 240x240 screens.
Well, I think the Treo formfactor drove a square screen -- that is, a portrait screen makes the thumbboard too narrow -- which obviated the use of QVGA. The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do, with a landscape 320x240 screen to keep the thumbboard usable. It's possible it may be useable, or it's possible the UI would be too small to comfortably touch with a stylus. Do realize that Smartphone typically crams less info on the screen, uses larger fonts, and doesn't rely on a touchscreen input, so it's not a simple comparison. I'd love a higher-res screen, and I think 480x480 screens will come, but I'm simply saying that 240x240 is surprisingly useable.

Yes I know that Phone Editions have more features and screens are Touch Screens, but that is exactly the point. These are high end devices and they should not have features lower than their "smaller" cousins.
So, if you spend more on something, it should have more features in every regard than a lower model? That's not how the mobile industry works, or the consumer electronics industry in general.

And one more thing - however you try to spin this, it's still 240x240 pixels compared to 320x240 and this is 30% less pixels.
Er, I'm not spinning. I'm actually using the device. You're not obliged to. Not everyone does the exact same thing with their Pocket PC.

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

Their notion that 480x480 LCD screens are too expensive has not been justified, especially when 640x480 screens are out there. They make it sound like it's in a class all its own.
I don't know. Not all the screens are identical in size -- in particular, the Treo uses a 2" screen, for which 480x480 may not be mass-manufactured yet. The fact we're seeing higher-DPI screens coming out of 3GSM, however, heralds medium-term availability of 480x480 screens.

Other than that, I just can't touch a 240x240 device after being used to 320x240 for so long.
Even worse, I switched from a 480x640 screen to a 240x240 screen. 8O Sure, Bejeweled 2 (which can't handle square, and scales to 180x240) looks like crap on the 700w. It's a tradeoff. As technology gets better, the tradeoffs will improve.

--janak

[bigneeker]

Having owned almost every pocket pc phone in the past 2 years (imate jam, treo 650, hp hw6515, anextek sp230, xda IIs, motorola mpx, k-jam, universal,benq p50, o2 atom...) I have to say the best form factor was the Motorola mpx, it combined one handed phone functionality with pda functions so well: flip it open one way its a phone, flip it open the other way its a pda and it had a beautiful QVGA screen (not all qvga screens are created equal) with a surprisingly easy to use keyboard that to this day has not been replicated, plus to top it all off it was tiny. Plus the fact that it was a clamshell made sense because the screen was protected and had a nice external screen. unfortunately it had its famous issues by not having enough memory( that could have easily been fixed by motorola by updating the hardware)
So i guess that goes to show you that you can have QVGA, KB, a small form factor and one handed use all in one device. It is very unfortunate that motorola went away from this amazing and revolutionary design and came out with the motorola q which to me is 5 steps backwards except for the thinness of it.

[alese]

Well, I think the Treo formfactor drove a square screen -- that is, a portrait screen makes the thumbboard too narrow -- which obviated the use of QVGA.
I don't have a problem with the square shape - it's just that resolution should be 480x480...
The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do, with a landscape 320x240 screen to keep the thumbboard usable. It's possible it may be useable, or it's possible the UI would be too small to comfortably touch with a stylus.
I believe you are wrong here, Motorola Q will be Smartphone if I remember correctly.

Do realize that Smartphone typically crams less info on the screen, uses larger fonts, and doesn't rely on a touchscreen input, so it's not a simple comparison. I'd love a higher-res screen, and I think 480x480 screens will come, but I'm simply saying that 240x240 is surprisingly useable.

So, if you spend more on something, it should have more features in every regard than a lower model? That's not how the mobile industry works, or the consumer electronics industry in general.

I realize it's not simple and entirely fair comparision, but it's still strange that "little brother" smartphone is having 320x240 on pretty much every new device while the "big brother" Phone Edition is getting down to 240x240. Especially considering that Phone Editions beeing bigger and more powerfull would benefit more from higher resolution than Smartphones -> editing documents, mails, browsing the net or just viewing/reading stuff...
And yes if I spend more on something, I would expect certain important features (like screen) to be better not worse.


Er, I'm not spinning. I'm actually using the device. You're not obliged to. Not everyone does the exact same thing with their Pocket PC.
--janak
I'm sorry for the "spin" comment, it certainly was not targeted at you or anyone specific, it's just that even though the screen can be usable (I did use iPaq 65xx) it is still a downgrade from before...

[KTamas]

@alese: Janak said: "The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do"

[alese]

@alese: Janak said: "The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do"

True, my bad...
Unfortunatelly, given Motorola's track record we'll never know an answer to that :wink:

[KTamas]

@alese: Janak said: "The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do"

True, my bad...
Unfortunatelly, given Motorola's track record we'll never know an answer to that :wink:
Not by Motorola indeed. But there are those leaked FCC docs that shows us a new PPC with 320×240 landscape screen and built-in keyboard, possibly made for palm. That could be an interesting device.

[alese]

@alese: Janak said: "The million dollar question is how well a Motorola Q-style Pocket PC would do"

True, my bad...
Unfortunatelly, given Motorola's track record we'll never know an answer to that :wink:
Not by Motorola indeed. But there are those leaked FCC docs that shows us a new PPC with 320×240 landscape screen and built-in keyboard, possibly made for palm. That could be an interesting device.

Haven't seen these documents, but it could be interesting. Although my Wizard is basically having this allready...

[Janak Parekh]

I have to say the best form factor was the Motorola mpx, it combined one handed phone functionality with pda functions so well: flip it open one way its a phone, flip it open the other way its a pda and it had a beautiful QVGA screen (not all qvga screens are created equal) with a surprisingly easy to use keyboard that to this day has not been replicated, plus to top it all off it was tiny...So i guess that goes to show you that you can have QVGA, KB, a small form factor and one handed use all in one device. It is very unfortunate that motorola went away from this amazing and revolutionary design and came out with the motorola q which to me is 5 steps backwards except for the thinness of it.
What, Motorola, make bad mistakes? You can't be serious. ;)

Trust me, I was part of the crowd drooling over the MPx, and I actually had the opportunity to handle one at a MVP summit. The only criticism about size is that it was rather long for a flip-phone, and a bit thick, but yes, I think there could be some mileage in that form factor if tweaked properly. Right now, the HTC Wizard and its friends are the closest to that style, but without the screen flip, thereby making it clumsier to dial or look up information with one hand. Among the devices now, though, the Palm is a useable compromise between screen size and one-handability.

--janak

[benyeap]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.

Btw, a 240 x 240 resolution screen would not contribute any distinct advantages to one handed operation for god sake. It is bcoz of the some special today screen software included in the Treo 700w that actually makes the one handed operation possible. Instead a bigger screen with higher resolution can accomodate ur thumb size more for one handed operation.

Please do not confuse &amp; give wrong idea to the readers tat the a lower resolution screen makes one handed operation easier!

[Janak Parekh]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.

Btw, a 240 x 240 resolution screen would not contribute any distinct advantages to one handed operation for god sake. It is bcoz of the some special today screen software included in the Treo 700w that actually makes the one handed operation possible. Instead a bigger screen with higher resolution can accomodate ur thumb size more for one handed operation.
By using a 2" square screen, it is physically easy to grasp the device and manipulate the thumbboard. I do agree that it's not about the resolution per se, though, and I've revised my post slightly to reflect that.

--janak

[szamot]

"I've been playing with the 700w, and its screen is perfectly acceptable:"

This quote kills me, a new product everyone is all excited about yet the best that can be said is that one of the most important parts of it is "acceptable"

Is it really a big shock that Telcos are showing ****e down our throats because we are content with "acceptable".

At this pace we should be living in caves in not so distant future because that too will be acceptable. So, for all those of you who think that "acceptable" is good enough you really deserve everthing you get, or rather don't get if you know what I mean.

[Duddy]

I'm pretty sure square screens are going to take over. Especially since many OEMS are now producing them.

I think they Windows Mobile platform needs a complete overhaul of the interface . The Wizard is a step in the right direction though, as is the Treo 700w.

But, if WM phones are going to take over, they will require:

-The ability to use with one hand.

and

-Next generation software compatability


Basically, the WM Team needs to let developers know that they need to build software that supports both 320x240 screens and 240x240 screens.

This becomes a probem though, because right now, software developers are asked to create software that support: VGA, QVGA and Square screens.


The WM Team needs to stick with the Treo 700w platform and build from there.


Just my 3 cents. :?



I have had an iPAQ hw6515 for about a week now and I'm in love with it. When I use the phone functions, it can be used with one hand. Otherwise, both hands are required. When the Treo comes to Cingular, I'll switch though. :D

[benyeap]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.


Anyhow here is the msmobiles.com link about the news they got from 3GSM, http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4921.html

[Racer-X]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.


Anyhow here is the msmobiles.com link about the news they got from 3GSM, http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4921.htm
So, he gets it wrong about why with some comment about the keyboard not seeing 320X320 properly, and you still link to it? :roll: What a waste of bandwidth.

[benyeap]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.


Anyhow here is the msmobiles.com link about the news they got from 3GSM, http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4921.htm
So, he gets it wrong about why with some comment about the keyboard not seeing 320X320 properly, and you still link to it? :roll: What a waste of bandwidth.

Why not? Seeing they got a Microsoft employee commenting about it.

[Janak Parekh]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.

Anyhow here is the msmobiles.com link about the news they got from 3GSM, http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4921.html
Reread that article again, if you like -- it never mentions anything about an on-screen keyboard/SIP, and no Microsoft employee suggested it did. The screen was made square to accomodate a hardware QWERTY keyboard, as the article says, which is what I, and everyone else, has been suggesting all along.

This article provides nothing new over Mike Calligaro's post, which explains it far more extensively.

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

This quote kills me, a new product everyone is all excited about yet the best that can be said is that one of the most important parts of it is "acceptable"
I can't disagree more. The Treo is a carefully designed tradeoff: a smaller, lower-res screen for a much better one-handed experience.

At this pace we should be living in caves in not so distant future because that too will be acceptable.
That's a straw man argument. Are you suggesting we all give up midrange cars for Porsches, because the "acceleration" or "handling" on cheaper or smaller cars is merely "acceptable"? Oh, wait. We should throw out any device that has a screen smaller than 4". Nevermind that my Toshiba e805 was barely pocketable without a thumbboard. :roll:

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

I think they Windows Mobile platform needs a complete overhaul of the interface . The Wizard is a step in the right direction though, as is the Treo 700w.
This is a reasonable point, and I agree that the interface as it stands is still optimized primarily for touchscreens. WM5 + Palm customizations are a big step forward for the platform, but I'd love to see it get better -- especially places like WMP, where I still have to tap the screen. I do think that the techniques Palm has designed will somehow find it into other devices before long.

And, alas, I wish I could break my NDA and talk about future Microsoft efforts. I can't. :( I can say they are totally committed to improving the Pocket PC Phone experience, though.

--janak

[benyeap]

According to msmobiles.com, the 240 x 240 square screen is to accomodate the Windows Mobile on-screen keyboard seeing 320 x 320 is not supported while 480 x 480 would be too expensive at this point.
Not quite. 240x240 was picked as 320x320 would lead to uneven scaling. It had nothing to do with the SIP.

Anyhow here is the msmobiles.com link about the news they got from 3GSM, http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4921.html
Reread that article again, if you like -- it never mentions anything about an on-screen keyboard/SIP, and no Microsoft employee suggested it did. The screen was made square to accomodate a hardware QWERTY keyboard, as the article says, which is what I, and everyone else, has been suggesting all along.

This article provides nothing new over Mike Calligaro's post, which explains it far more extensively.

--janak

Frankly, it does not make sense at all that a square 240 x 240 screen was used to accomodate the hardware QWERTY keyboard on a device,

[Sven Johannsen]

Frankly, it does not make sense at all that a square 240 x 240 screen was used to accomodate the hardware QWERTY keyboard on a device,

Don't understand how that doesn't make sense. You start with a device that has a 240 wide by 320 tall screen and stick a keyboard under it. HP did that with the 4355. You wind up with a device that is too long for comfort. So you cut the height of the screen down. To what? Something that fits in with the original width and supports the built in rotation without getting funny scaling. 240 makes sense to me. Today we can point at 640x480 screens that are economical and hindsight that 480x480 might have been a good idea, but when these design decisions were likely made, those hi-res screens were likely a vision not a commonality. You can waste a lot of money and time designing software for hardware that might be available when the time comes.

[Janak Parekh]

And, in addition to Sven's point, OEMs have the option of creating a 240x320 device with a thumbboard if they want. HP created the 4355, and there's units like the BenQ P50 (well, if they get around to releasing it). You're not required to buy a 240x240 screen. It just so turns out having a square screen with a thumbboard underneath it makes for a very comfortable form-factor.

--janak

[benyeap]

Instead of reducing the resolution &amp; make it into a low resolution square screen, manufacturers should have reduce the screen size (seeing regular mobile phones already squeezed in such small QVGA screen nowadays) to accomodate for the keyboard since u guys explained that the device might be too long in dimension.

[Darius Wey]

Instead of reducing the resolution &amp; make it into a low resolution square screen, manufacturers should have reduce the screen size (seeing regular mobile phones already squeezed in such small QVGA screen nowadays) to accomodate for the keyboard since u guys explained that the device might be too long in dimension.

Producing different-sized screens isn't simply a matter of taking an existing one and making it squeeze to fit. There are limitations. LCDs have a defined quantity of pixels and a defined aspect ratio, so shoving a 240 x 320 resolution into a square screen would alter the proportionality factor and make the UI seem squashed. To overcome this, it's far better to lose the extra pixels and maintain a constant ratio by using 240 x 240 in a square screen.