It seems many of the Apple loyalists here try to argue against SAMOLED+ screens based on only one factor; pixel density/resolution. Mostly I feel that's because it's the only aspect of an AMOLED that is lesser on a spec sheet than the iPhone 4's screen. In every other measurable stat the AMOLED+ beats the iPhone 4's screen. So why does pixel density matter? To be blunt it really doesn't. Why is that? Because arguing that 300 ppi+ is necessary of a 3.5" diagonal phone screen is ridiculous. Apple's own iPad is a 9.7" diagonal screen that runs at nearly the same resolution as the iPhone 4, but has many times the screen surface area (8X as much). So if an iPad can look so awesome at 8X the screen size with the same resolution there seems little reason to complain about the slightly-lower resolution of SAMOLED+, and act as if it's a reason to stay with the inferior LCD technology.
People (including me) used to use 17" or larger monitors running at 1024x768 and it was perfectly fine. Pretending anything less than that res on a handheld 3.5" screen is just silly. It also assumes that all phones that came before it, iPhones included, were inadequate, which is again just silly.
People (including me) used to use 17" or larger monitors running at 1024x768 and it was perfectly fine. Pretending anything less than that res on a handheld 3.5" screen is just silly. It also assumes that all phones that came before it, iPhones included, were inadequate, which is again just silly.
