06-25-2002, 04:21 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Faster, wireless Pocket PCs
http://www.msnbc.com/news/771301.asp
Gary Krakow is an MSNBC journalist that I'd like to meet someday - he writes with actual working knowledge about Pocket PCs, which is a rather rare thing in the Palm-biased mainstream media ("Those Pocket PCs are so hard to use, not like my good ol' Palm..."). Give the whole article a read - he has some good first-hand observations about both the new iPAQ 3970 (affiliate link) and the Toshiba e740 (affiliate link). He doesn't go into the XScale performance problems, but that might be good news - if he didn't notice it, perhaps the issue on the 3970 isn't as bad as the Toshiba. Granted, he might not have fired up a video and watched it sputter. What I found most interesting in the article was his gushing over the iPAQ screen - and, trust me, it's quite warranted:
"Now it�s time to talk about the screen in detail. 64K color, 16-bit touch-sensitive transflective TFT liquid crystal display. Sound impressive? All you really need to know is that this is the best screen ever on a handheld computer � and rivals (in quality if not size) the best screens you�ve ever seen on a portable device. The big difference here is that Compaq has changed screens and the way the screen is lit � now from the back instead of the sides. I was never a fan of the Compaq side-lit screen. As a matter of fact the first time I saw it I wondered why many people told me it was so terrific. It looked slightly washed-out in subdued light � and just OK in bright sunlight. The new screen is an entirely different story. This time around Compaq got it exactly right.
To understand why, go to your nearest Compaq dealer and turn on this device. You�ll be bowled over by the quality of the screen resolution and color rendition. My test model came with 3 test photographs. Everyone who has seen them on the 3900 has been completely bowled over." Source: Humphrey Riley, Peter West
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:15 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 27
|
|
The main reason I still haven't upgraded from my Casio EM-500 is because there hasn't been a PPC 2002 device that can compete with the quality of the screen (indoors anyway).
How does the new iPaq screen compare Jason?
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:16 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 381
|
|
Best screen ever?
Ok, I understand that the screen is awesome, but is it really better than the Clie's? I mean, has anyone actually seen the screen on the nr70 @ 320x480 resolution - that is an awesome screen. In fact, even the t615/655 has an awesome screen, which even a better dot pitch.
How does ipaq screen compare to the clies?
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:20 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Re: Best screen ever?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by heov
How does ipaq screen compare to the clies?
|
I didnt' compare them side by side, but I remember being blown away by the iPAQ screen - it's uniformly lit, and doesn't have that "washed out" effect that all the current side-lit screens have. It's just something that you have to see to understand. :-)
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:21 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by b3trio
The main reason I still haven't upgraded from my Casio EM-500 is because there hasn't been a PPC 2002 device that can compete with the quality of the screen (indoors anyway). How does the new iPaq screen compare Jason?
|
Didn't have a lovely Casio screen to compare against, but I really, really, really liked the new iPAQ screen. 
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:22 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 209
|
|
Now, make it reasonably priced and we'll talk about it. Otherwise, it is so close to the price of a laptop, why bother?
Maybe it will be like so many other PDA's. They have a published price and everyone sells it for $50-$100 less.
Who's got the deals??????
__________________
And there you are.
I was just thinking, "What could take this headache I have over that edge to a full blown migrane?"
And there you are.
- Dr. Cox, Scrubs
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:22 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
This is the same screen that the Loox is using is it not? FS Loox announced this long before it was announced in the Ipaq, so I don't understand why everyone is jumping all over this 'new' Compaq screen innovation.
Ok now that I got that out of me 
The more that I hear about this screen the better it sounds. I am reading some rather conficting reports as to how it actually works...I think that is probably since it is new, not many have used it, and some reports are simply misinformed. So someone can kindly correct my mistakes on how the basics of it work..... Being transrefective, it bounces ambient light back thru the display. It is back?, front? lit for use when there is not enough ambient light.
A question to anyone who has used one. How much ambient light can it work on? Can it be used in normal indoor light with out having the light set too high? Hence giving better battery life. Are the colours more vibrant. From the sound of the author of this report they are. As he says less washed out.
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:25 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
This is the same screen that the Loox is using is it not?
|
Unless the LOOX has a different screen from what they were showing at CeBIT a few months ago, certainly not. The Loox screen looked no different than my HP screen. This iPAQ screen is very different!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
The more that I hear about this screen the better it sounds. I am reading some rather conficting reports as to how it actually works...
|
Until I get one to test, I can't confirm whether it offers any better battery life. My hunch is, yes, it will have a significant impact. It takes VERY little light to back-light a screen vs. splash light from the sides.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 05:39 PM
|
|
|
06-25-2002, 06:24 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
although if you read the tech. data it calls it non-reflective, and transflective?
.....non-reflective vs transflective???
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
