Thoughts Media.com

 


Windows Phone Thoughts

Loading feed...

Digital Home Thoughts

Loading feed...

Apple Thoughts

Loading feed...




Go Back   Thoughts Media Forums > Thoughts Media Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-06-2005, 03:44 PM
NLS
Intellectual
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 139
Send a message via MSN to NLS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekkie Tepsupornchai
(though you're the first person I've seen to state "less DPI" as a minus for a 4" VGA screen). For me, it is a huge plus and one of the biggest reasons why I bought the 4700.
Less DPI IS a fact right?
And although yes I guess personal preference is the reason beyond reasons and nobody can argument, nevertheless can you tell me why would someone (erm, you) prefer a 4" screen than a 3.6" screen on a PDA? (the key phrase is "on a PDA")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekkie Tepsupornchai
Well saying it's a "marketing trick" seems to imply that the GPU is not real. The GPU is real which is why BetaPlayer benchmarks the Dell x50v, hx4700, and Toshiba 800 series faster than any other PPC. But you bring up a great point, for the videos you play, you get great playback. But this is also highly dependent on the video bitrate you're using. I do actually have a number of short videos that are encoded at around 1300-1500Kbps (music videos), 30fps (not 24), w/ some videos that require smooth-resizing for full-screen playback (GPU intensive).
No, seems to imply that it came cheap to them, they won't bother optimising the OS for the GPU or anything, nor pressure any developer in fact use it (to much trouble for a device that the company themselves will have killed in six months - like they do for years).

1.3-1.5Mbps are fine on LOOX 720, in fact the guy in the article I linked above, mentions 1.8 is fine on LOOX 720. If this ISN'T enough, then ok I don't know what is. I understand that having a GPU is good but I would EASILY trade it for 128MB RAM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekkie Tepsupornchai
You didn't read my post. I already stated that for me, the extra RAM is a minus with the 4700.
No I read you all right, it's just that 64MB on the best-of-the-best 2005 device of the biggest PDA vendor, is NOT a minus, it's more of a killer.
Can you really tell me how would I even own one when as I said I have 58MB free on my 720? This means -6MB, or best case scenario: no available RAM to run anything. Or I had to limit my installation habbits (word "limit" and phrase "best-of-the-best of the biggest PDA vendor" doesn't go together in my mind... I wonder how they fit on yours)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekkie Tepsupornchai
That's ok. There's no need to apologize for your preferences, but at the same time, there's no need to trash the decision of others.
Indeed but when I see this company going SO well with PDA, when their PDA (aside from the personal preference you keep mentioning) are generally mediocre AND expensive for their features (AND don't get me started with the company support which I know first hand), it's Deja Vu all over again, like when I was helplessly watching Wintel rulling the world over MUCH better platforms 15 years ago. It's a pity when companies that could REALLY GIVE to this competition, tomorrow go out of this market just because of the sheer mass of HP (happened before, will happen again) and nothing to do with quality and features.
It's like the Matrix or something.

Anyway "let's all get along".
__________________
---
NLS
 
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-06-2005, 06:04 PM
Ekkie Tepsupornchai
Magi
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,386

Everyone, this thread has gotten derailed quite a bit and I apologize as I know I'm just as culpable as anyone. Let's get back on topic here with the reported HP 65xx/67xx devices. My lengthy discussion with NLS has been taken offline.

Thanks everyone!
 
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-07-2005, 07:02 AM
NLS
Intellectual
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 139
Send a message via MSN to NLS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyvim
Quote:
I wouldn't mind hearing some feedback from the developer types as to the compatibility of the square screen resolution, with existing software. Does anyone have any idea as to how much is likely to be hard coded and therefore not work, opposed to how much existing software will work?
It really depends on the app. I would say the biggest problems are dialog boxes. If they have information that in portrait mode is covered by the keyboard, then that information will be offscreen in square VGA. I believe MS built in support for legacy apps in the form of a scrollbar on the righthand side of the screen for apps with offscreen controls in order to help scroll them into view, but this scrollbar aside from being a less than ideal solution can also obscure some potential information. With the developer resources for WM2003SE MS recommended making sure square resolutions were supported, but I don't know how many developers followed this advice since so far there aren't any square WM2003SE devices out yet (that I know of). I think most developers were concerned with making sure their apps support both portrait and landscape modes (often with different layouts of controls in dialogs to make sure all the info fits on-screen). For developers that decided to use a single layout for both portrait and landscape - effectively using the 240x240 square that is common to both orientations - these will probably be just fine in square VGA. Anyway, I'd guess that apps that were revised to support WM2003SE have a better chance of working with square VGA than earlier "legacy" apps.
MS recomended all right, but really which developer IN PRACTICE will make the effort (because it needs effort) to design or redesign (if existing) their applications to fit in 240x240, needing sometimes a WHOLE SET OF DIFFERENT forms (not just a resize - since wanted details may not fit) just because there is ONE device in whole Planet PocketPC with such resolution? (even with questionable effect in the market)

I know many developers wouldn't make the effort - and knowing that "not everything works" and waiting for "new versions" (if and when), is something more for the tombstone. At least us people that went from QVGA to VGA, we stayed more or less compatible with QVGA (I know I reinstalled ALL programs I used with 5450 to my LOOX 720 - I doubt this would be the case with this... thing).
__________________
---
NLS
 
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-07-2005, 01:49 PM
Steven Cedrone
Moderator
Steven Cedrone's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,878

Posts split from here!

Steve
__________________
"My eyes are rolling back in my head so far I can see my grey matter bubbling and frothing from reading this thread....bleh." JD
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright Thoughts Media Inc. 2009