New PDA Technology on the Way

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10471' target='_blank'>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10471</a><br /><br /></div>"A new Fujitsu high pixel screen has been developed, which enables PDAs, or personal digital assistants, to receive high quality broadcasts, digital TV. The device has three times the number of pixels as existing LCD screens, which will improve the average PDA resolution 60-70%. The technology used quickly changes the color of backlights of the three primary colors - that is, red, blue and green - while already existing LCD screens use individual dots, in any one of the primary colours."<br /><br />800 x 600? Wow. 8O Hopefully with pressure like this from manufacturers, Microsoft will respond by giving us higher resolutions on the Pocket PC. My excitement waned when I read this however:<br /><br />"Sources say that Fujitsu hopes to commercialize the new LCD in a few years after the defect rate during mass production is reduced to an acceptable level."<br /><br />It looks like we'll be waiting a bit longer. But maybe that means that 640 x 480 screens are closer than we think... :wink:

[Cortex]

why would anyone want anything more than a 320x240 screen?

heck, i think i would do just fine with 8 Mb even....

8O

[MooseMaster]

640x480 would be a 400% increase over 320x240. I really doubt that this 65% increase in pixel density will be important at all, except allow devices to be slightly smaller. I'd recommend thinking of it as a 65% decrease in screen size, not a 65% increase in resolution (because that's really not that much).

[donkthemagicllama]

maybe that means that 640 x 480 screens are closer than we think...
do you know something about this? with the hp2210, resolution is the last thing stopping me from upgrading from my reliable e125

[ricksfiona]

And I thought this technology was right around the corner. Silly me :cry:

When this screen technology is released, Pocket PC's should be up in the 1GHZ range by then.... Will we ever get to the perfect PDA?

[Jason Dunn]

640x480 would be a 400% increase over 320x240. I really doubt that this 65% increase in pixel density will be important at all, except allow devices to be slightly smaller. I'd recommend thinking of it as a 65% decrease in screen size, not a 65% increase in resolution (because that's really not that much).

This has inspired me to finish a post I started a while back - saying that more pixels on the same size screen won't help is a little ignorant of how important the issue of PPI is to screen clarity. Look for my post tomorrow...

[T-Will]

why would anyone want anything more than a 320x240 screen?

heck, i think i would do just fine with 8 Mb even....

8O

Yeah who needs anything more than a 320x240 screen and 8 MB's of RAM on a PDA? No one would ever need more than that. Plus who wants to play high res videos on a PDA? This high rez screen idea is just crazy talk or the boose talkin'... :drinking: :D

[beq]

This has inspired me to finish a post I started a while back - saying that more pixels on the same size screen won't help is a little ignorant of how important the issue of PPI is to screen clarity. Look for my post tomorrow...

Preaching to the converted here :)

[hotweiss]

http://pda.nate.com/pdazone/pdazone04/review/read.jsp?pg=23&bbs=hwreview&num=9&sItem=&sWord=

The first version of this was released over 3 years ago... Old technology...

[jnunn]

Every day I want for 480x640 screen on my beloved iPAQ. I use Word and Excel every day and Word all thoughout the day. I like to see several columns in Excel and I outline at several placements (i.e. I.A.1.a.1.a, etc) so 480 width is necessary.

I often keep my iPAQ in landscape mode at 480x240 resolution for input; I change it back to normal 240x320 for reading, etc. I also view Word at 75% during input at this resolution and it is manageable but not pretty. The iPAQ 3600 screen dissociates the colors at this subpixel level and it can give you a headache if you were to read it that way. But for input, I am mostly looking at Fitaly and just keeping track of my position on the screen.

The upshot is that the characters will not be too small at higher resolution but the screen must support that resolution. I have seen digital cameras with 320x320 resolution screens with a size of about three to four centimeters so I think that increasing screen resolution is not so expensive. Frankly, I would pay a lot more for a device that gave me the resolution that need.

[Jason Dunn]

The first version of this was released over 3 years ago... Old technology...

It looks like the device you linked to is an HPC, which is probably closer to being an 6" screen - that's not the same thing as having 800 x 600 in a 3.5" inch screen. Cramming a higher resolution into a smaller screen is what makes this an interesting announcement. If this technology really was three years old, why would they be saying they were several years away from releasing it due to yield issues?

[kuyars]

I'm a bit confused here...

The Sharp SL-Cxx sports a resolution of 640x480...so doesn't this mean that we know that such a thing is possible in a pda right here and right now? The only thing stopping it happening on PPC is the Windows OS, right?

[Jason Dunn]

The Sharp SL-Cxx sports a resolution of 640x480...so doesn't this mean that we know that such a thing is possible in a pda right here and right now? The only thing stopping it happening on PPC is the Windows OS, right?

Depends - what's the size of the screen on the Sharp? I know there are some 640 x 480 3.5" screens kicking around, so yes, you're right that the only thing holding us back is Windows Mobile, and the fact that we'll need an OEM/ODM with the guts to do it. :wink:

[kuyars]

It says that Sharp's screen is 3.7 inches...so yeah, I guess that confirms it. We just need MS to get on top of things and some OEM to follow through.

[jnunn]

Gosh, with the parts out there it makes you just want to draw up a grass roots PPC: send the forum's best design for a PPC to some manufacturer in Taiwan and order our own. Then HP or someone will get the hint.

If we users are still rumbling about the screen by Bastille Day next year then it may be Redmond that is stormed.

Liberty, Fraternity, Equality (and a 480x640 screen) for All !

[droppedd]

why would anyone want anything more than a 320x240 screen?

heck, i think i would do just fine with 8 Mb even....

8O

&lt;insert quote from Bill Gates, 1983 about 640 KB of RAM should be enough for anybody> :lol:

[hotweiss]

Just do a search for the ePhone. It's been around for a long time and it has a beautiful crisp screen. When I tested it, it was unfortunately very slow. It was running Windows CE 3.0, with a slow CPU that I cannot recall. Maybe with the advent of 400 MHz CPU's hi-res screens on PDA's will be practical.

[Bichcake]

No one has mentioned OLED screens as a future tech here. i think there will probably be out with pda's with them by this time next year.

at this pace oled screens will be out long before these lcd's get out

[hotweiss]

It looks like the device you linked to is an HPC, which is probably closer to being an 6" screen - that's not the same thing as having 800 x 600 in a 3.5" inch screen. Cramming a higher resolution into a smaller screen is what makes this an interesting announcement. If this technology really was three years old, why would they be saying they were several years away from releasing it due to yield issues?

Here are the English specs (http://www.pc-ephone.com/tech.html). As you see the ePhone has a 4" screen not a 6" screen. I saw this phone 3 years ago in Japan...

Processor Intel®StrongARM SA-1110-processor

Analog CODEC PHILPS UCB1200
(Sound & Touch Screen)

Memory 32MB ROM(Flash) / 32 MB RAM

Sound Internal MIC/ PDA & CDMA Internal Speaker
External Ear/ MIC Jack

Input Device Touch Panel/ Stylus Pen

Switch Power/ Reset/ Record/ Telephone/ Enter
Navigator(Top, Bottom, Left, Right)

Cellular Standards MSM 3000 Chip for CDMA mobile communication

Screen Details 640 x 480 dots, 4" 256 color TFT LCD,
touch panel

Dimensions 127H x 102W x 22D (mm)/ 299g

Communication CDMA/ RS232C x 1/ IrDA x 1
CompactFlash Slot Type II

External Memory Yes. Compact Flash Card Slot

Main Battery Li-Ion Rechargeable Battery

Back-Up Battery Ni-Mh 3.6V 90mA Battery

OS WindowsCE 3.0

Cradle Main Battery/ Handset Battery
2nd Battery/ Data communication

Power Management Normal/ Idle/ Sleep

Multimedia Standards MPEG for video; MP3 for audio

Serial Port RS-232C

Adapter 12V / 1.3A (Free Voltage)


[ Software Specification ]

Rom Calculator/ Voice Recorder/ Phone/ SMS/ Mail Client/ Web Browser(IE4.0)/ Calendar/ Tasks, Contacts/ Memo/ Handwriting Recognition/ Mine Sweeper(Game)/ System Font Manager/ bBackup Utility/ Pocket Word/ BSPreadsheet

CD-Rom Primer(PDF Viewer)/ PIMS Sync/ ZIOgolf(Game)/ AvantGo Client

Download Game(Tetris, etc.), Terminal Server Client

[Mark Johnson]

Microsoft's strategy for the PocketPC is really starting to confuse me. I used to think I understood it (but didn't like it) and that it revolved around making sure that PocketPC sales (i.e., cheap Windows CE licenses) never reduced ntoebook sales (expensive Windows XP licenses.) It was like they were trying to make sure that the PocketPC never really stood on it's own, but always was limited to being a partner device.

Rumors (but credible ones) that in volume the licenses for both operating systems are not that different (what does Dell pay MS per Latitude notebook vs. per Axim PocketPC?) make that seem less of an issue. Except for the idea that by making the PPC always a "slave" to a full XP desktop, they get to sell one of each instead of one or the other.

This seems to explain the lack of Bluetooth keyboard support for the new iPaq's even though PPC 2003 supposedly has bluetooth support. It's like MS is saying "sure, we support bluetooth, to make it easier for your PPC to sync with your XP desktop. Of course, the idea that we might make PPC use bluetooth to give you keyboard and mouse support is just absurd. No one would ever want that. Everyone needs XP. Just keep repeating the mantra: 'I can't live without an XP desktop, it's the center of my universe.' "

That's the same logic that seems to be keeping us from advances in display resolution. What if you could use 640x480 Excel spreasheets in you PPC? People like use who are techno-freaks enough to read these forums will always want a PPC, a notebook (or a few) and a couple of desktops, but what about students and your aunt who just does some email and keeps her cooking recipies on a PC. There could be a fairly large number of people that just decide they don't need a desktop or a notebook if they can use a bluetooth hub in their living room to connect a bluetooth PPC to their DSL line and a bluetooth keyboard and mouse to navigate a 640x480 screen on the PPC.

Microsoft won't let it happen. We'll have to switch to linux. The clamshell Zaurus looks pretty nice, but the keyboard is too small to really be good for data entry, and the device is too large to really fit in your pocket.

Who would go for a "tiny tablet pc" slate design with linux? Give me a 640x480 or 800x600 unit perhaps the size of a 3x5 card, or a 4x6 card with linux and a Stowaway XT type keyboard using bluetooth that supports the HID profiles or whichever ones we need to have BOTH a keyboard and mouse support. Give it some digital-ink software like on my Toshiba TabletPC (which I love, but is really big) and I'd pay $1,000 for it easily. I don't really care if it has a hard drive or not. I don't have more than 1GB of data I need anywhere, so I can just use an SD card.

I can understand why Microsoft doesn't bring this to market, but it's strange to me that no one is "keeping them honest" anymore. Palm is just gasping for breath when it comes to innovation and unless Apple brings back the Newton, I think we've only got Sharp to look to.

[droppedd]

There are small lap PCs running Windows CE, mostly in Japan since there's not much of a market here.

I think primarily they market the PPC as a PDA (personal digital assistant) and not a desktop replacement is because they're competing with Palm. There's a middle ground between pocket size and lap sized with a huge market in Asia but not much of one here (eg. look at the Sigmarion III in Asia and the more or less failure of the form factor here). I actually just bought the boss a little laptop for his "mobile office" (a fujitsu, weighs 2 pounds, 800 mhz Crusoe)... but even that's at the lowest end of the size the manufacturers will release in the US.

There is next to no market for a PDA with a larger than 4" screen - too big to fit in your pocket, too small for serious spreadsheet work... I agree it would be a great thing to have as an option, but few Americans would buy one at this point.

what about students and your aunt who just does some email and keeps her cooking recipies on a PC.
I think my aunt would have a very hard time using a 3.5-4" screen to browse the web, with her eyesight :). Look - resolution would be nice to increase for the purposes of readability and for prettier photos (the 320x320 on my clie was quite pretty), but to try to use 800x600 as you want to (that is, to zoom way out on a spreadsheet) would render the thing useless without a magnifying glass. Screen size is a limiting factor, not screen resolution.

[Jason Dunn]

...As you see the ePhone has a 4" screen not a 6" screen. I saw this phone 3 years ago in Japan...Screen Details 640 x 480 dots, 4" 256 color TFT LCD, touch panel

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but an 8-bit 640 x 480 screen is not the same thing as a 16-bit 800 x 600 screen. :wink: I sure would like to see 640 x 480 on a 4" screen though...that would be sweet! :mrgreen:

[Jason Dunn]

I think my aunt would have a very hard time using a 3.5-4" screen to browse the web, with her eyesight :). Look - resolution would be nice to increase for the purposes of readability and for prettier photos (the 320x320 on my clie was quite pretty), but to try to use 800x600 as you want to (that is, to zoom way out on a spreadsheet) would render the thing useless without a magnifying glass. Screen size is a limiting factor, not screen resolution.

No, no - my post today will explain why this isn't the case. You certainly couldn't slap a 640 x 480 screen on a Pocket PC with Windows Mobile 2003 and have it be usable, but with the right OS changes, 640 x 480 simply means everything get sharper and easier to read, not necessarily smaller.

[droppedd]

I think my aunt would have a very hard time using a 3.5-4" screen to browse the web, with her eyesight :). Look - resolution would be nice to increase for the purposes of readability and for prettier photos (the 320x320 on my clie was quite pretty), but to try to use 800x600 as you want to (that is, to zoom way out on a spreadsheet) would render the thing useless without a magnifying glass. Screen size is a limiting factor, not screen resolution.

No, no - my post today will explain why this isn't the case. You certainly couldn't slap a 640 x 480 screen on a Pocket PC with Windows Mobile 2003 and have it be usable, but with the right OS changes, 640 x 480 simply means everything get sharper and easier to read, not necessarily smaller.

No, no... i'm fully aware of that, Jason :). i was quite happy with the 320x320 improvement to readability on my clie from palm's 160x160. But his argument for higher resolution was in order to fit more on the screen specifically, for example to make it an adequate full replacement for a desktop web browser or spreadsheet. My point is, it would be prettier, yes, but web browsing and the like on handhelds is limited by screen size - there's only so much you can fit usefully on a 3.5-4" screen, no matter what resolution you're at.

I'm not arguing that 640x480 would make the screen unreadable by nature; I'm aware you can use it to look like 320x240 or whatever but with smoothing on the edges of fonts and such (again, like my old clie), and maybe to get slightly more readable information into IE or Excel because of that... but it doesn't fix all the things some people think it would, and it certainly doesn't just allow you to have functional Excel work at double the width and height (at least as long as most of us have eyesight below 20/10 :D).

Now if they had an AMAZING 640x480 screen with super-low pitch, they could package a magnifier to make it a good 6" or so screen when it's plugged into a cradle or keyboard or whatever... THAT would be worth getting really excited about. It could automatically switch to real 640x480 (as opposed to the 640x480 where everything looks like 320x240, only prettier) and it would be a very nice experience. That way you can slip it in your pocket, but when you need a more laptop-y experience, you could stick the keyboard+magnifier in your bag.

I wouldn't hold my breath, based on what they're putting into handhelds today... imagine doubling the ugliness with high dot pitch (or whatever they call it on LCDs as opposed to CRT) lines-between-pixels on the 2210 and you'll see why no one uses magnifiers on their PPC yet :). And that has one of the better PPC screens.

[Janak Parekh]

there's only so much you can fit usefully on a 3.5-4" screen, no matter what resolution you're at
True -- but note that Sony already has 320x480 on a similar-sized screen without any problems, and I don't see why we couldn't make 640x480 useful for things like web browsing, even on a 3.5" display. Try Thunderhawk, and you'll see what I mean. They emulate a 640x480 or 800x600 "experience" on a 320x240 display (by using very compact fonts, etc.), and it's really quite useable.

--janak

[Jeff Rutledge]

Microsoft's strategy for the PocketPC is really starting to confuse me.

You and me both. Until the resolution situation improves, Pocket Word and Pocket Excel are all but useless. You'd think MS would prioritize these apps as they're the companion to its Office flagship.

I don't get it either (I think we need a head-scratching emoticon).

[droppedd]

True -- but note that Sony already has 320x480 on a similar-sized screen without any problems,

Well, that's the same resolution as my Clie that has 320x320, just with soft graffiti. And I can tell you that it's quite pretty, but i keep the font at a medium size anywas so i can read it. In fact, I had to install a very popular hack for the t415 to make the font bolder in the system (called the "Thin Font Fix" because, well, the font was too THIN at 320 wide, even if it took less space). I'd also hardly say it was "without any problems" - the thing needed a separate app with its own setup just to make a lot of 160x160 native programs to run without crashing (and even that couldn't make some software work). Again, not the end of the world, but there's more issues than just hardware and OS support here. But I still would love higher resolution on my iPaq, I just don't expect any miracles from it (it ain't gonna make a substitute for a 19" monitor when I need to use AutoCAD for floor plans at work, even if they made a 1024x768 LCD in 3.5").

And particularly when you have it at arms length, if it's using a keyboard, for example, or for comfortable tablet-stle writing as Mark suggests, you'd need it at least 1.5-2' away from your face to type or write comfortably. This makes the size (not resolution) of the screen even more of a limiting factor. Without a magnifier, I think 640x480 is exactly right, and would usefully allow you to fit maybe 10-15% more on the screen over 240x320, which is great. but you'll not get anything at all out of an increase to 800x600, for example.

I think we need foldable LCDs :).

[Gen-M]

I think we need foldable LCDs :).

Or VGA/SVGA Head Mounted Display 8)
- that way the issue of how large the physical display is goes away.
- the only reason for a physical display is to share the display or to use as an input device (touch screen).

How often do you actually need to share the display (not using a projector)?

Bluetooth and/or USB Host makes alternative input mechanisms more desirable (if MS or others will implement the profiles or drivers!)

[Jonathon Watkins]

This has inspired me to finish a post I started a while back - saying that more pixels on the same size screen won't help is a little ignorant of how important the issue of PPI is to screen clarity. Look for my post tomorrow...

Preaching to the converted here :)

Darn right - Darn right. :|