Yes 780 P does exist. Just not standard. 720 is the number of vertical pixels and P is progressive. That's all the number and letter stands for. 720P is the norm. PC users with higher and different resolutions monitors have even higher resolutions than 1080P. I guess when i say 1440P you would say it doesn't exist as well right?? well you'll find out in a year or so.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Video Demo of What a 4" iPhone Screen Looks Like in Action
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes 780 P does exist. Just not standard. 720 is the number of vertical pixels and P is progressive. That's all the number and letter stands for. 720P is the norm. PC users with higher and different resolutions monitors have even higher resolutions than 1080P. I guess when i say 1440P you would say it doesn't exist as well right?? well you'll find out in a year or so.
Now could you just please back that up?
I mean, tell me, we all know that Retina resolution is 330ppi. The current SG3 runs in at 306ppi from what I've read. It manages to get the aforementioned 1280x720 resolution in just 4.7".
My math is shoddy currently and I'm too lazy, but given the Retina resolution the screen would come in at
1280/330 -> 3.89"
720/330 -> 2.18"
Calculate the diagonal by yourself
Yep, my mental math is wrong.
The retina resolution is 326 ppi so the dimensions are
3.93" x 2.21" which is 4.5" diagonal.
720p is an agreed-upon term as part of the ITU-R standards. It refers to a signal with 720 lines, progressive scan, and an aspect ratio of 16:9.
The meaning of 780p, 1440p, etc. could be inferred to also mean a 16:9 resolution, but it's ambiguous. Do you really mean 2560×1440 if you say 1440p? If so, why not say WQHD, since that is the standardised term?
However, there are larger resolutions denoted with the "XXXXp" moniker. 2160p and 4320p are part of the UHDTV proposed standard.
I have no idea what you're trying to say. I said there could be 780P resolution if you wanted to. 1440P is going to be the next resolution for TV's if they jump up or maybe higher. say WQHD?? Just like Full HD when refering to 1080P?? lol It's coined phrase by some company just like apple and "retina".
People are too funny here. It's like talking to a wall. At least the wall understands and just stays quiet.
Super Slick Video Well Done
On the subject this will likely be the first iPhone launch (5) I did not care about.
I opted for a move to an Android Phone (Galaxy Note), and sold my iPhone 4S and will get its update the Note2. I still have 4 iPads in the house, 2 android tablets, and 3 android phones.
The iPhone has to be better than the Note2 or S3 for me to be excited.
Apple won the patent fight but will Samsung show as winning the war ?
What software was used in the video ... nice
tech-news.tv
wuz here
On the subject this will likely be the first iPhone launch (5) I did not care about.
I opted for a move to an Android Phone (Galaxy Note), and sold my iPhone 4S and will get its update the Note2. I still have 4 iPads in the house, 2 android tablets, and 3 android phones.
The iPhone has to be better than the Note2 or S3 for me to be excited.
Apple won the patent fight but will Samsung show as winning the war ?
What software was used in the video ... nice
tech-news.tv
wuz here
Yes, sure, you could create a panel with a 780 pixel vertical resolution, but in reality, if you put that panel in a TV, you're going to be driving it with a 720p signal and upscaling.
Manufacturers have been making panels with a WQHD resolution (mainly for computer displays), and they are now being made big enough to be be adopted by some TV manufacturers, who would then use upscaling to display a 1080p signal on the screen.
However, the whole point of the "720p" and "1080p" monikers is that they are associated with standards for broadcast and media encoding. Anyone making a digital tuner chipset can follow those standards and produce something that works.
There is no proposal for a "1440p" broadcast standard. There is no proposal for it to be adopted by BluRay manufacturers. All that is happening is that some TV manufacturers are using WQHD panels in their TVs.
The next proposed "step up" in signal resolution that has been approved by the ITU-R is 2160p.
My basic point is that "720p" and "1080p" is terminology associated with standards for signal input. They have nothing to do with display panels. The TVs that support these standards often have panels with totally different native resolutions.
Basically, 720p and 1080p are signal formats, not display resolutions.
Last edited:
On the subject this will likely be the first iPhone launch (5) I did not care about.
I opted for a move to an Android Phone (Galaxy Note), and sold my iPhone 4S and will get its update the Note2. I still have 4 iPads in the house, 2 android tablets, and 3 android phones.
The iPhone has to be better than the Note2 or S3 for me to be excited.
Apple won the patent fight but will Samsung show as winning the war ?
What software was used in the video ... nice
tech-news.tv
wuz here
Oh, we'll see later this month.
you have no idea what you're talking about. i'm done after this post. DO you know most blu ray's aren't filmed in "1080P". THEY'RE ALL SCALED TO 1080P OR 720P. Almost every single ps3 and xbox 360 aren't even 720P, closer to 600 P upscaled to 720. Proposal?? If apple wanted to create a tv that just displayed 1330P, and sold a ton of TV's, every company would make it their standards because it's popular. Just like the iphone, when it first came out there were very little apps. After it became a success, everyone adapted and created for it.
There are no standards. Blu ray and HD dvd came out and both were approved. Blu ray came out ahead and became the standard. You have no clue. Honestly some people.... how do u function in real life??
Apple created 1137x 640 screen for the new phone. IS IT STANDARD BY YOUR "OVERSEERER OF RESOLUTION STANDARDS"... OH WAIT, IT'S NOT APPROVED... ... you're an idiot. Companies are making 1080P sets because the mainstream knows the term "1080P" so they will buy only things they know. If apple changed the iphone's name, people would set back on buying their phone. Take a fricken marketing class for a semester or 10 (in your case)... Learn how things are marketed and you'll realize that "standards" aren't approved by some committee. It's approved by the powers of the industry.
Crap. The work I did on Linux DVB tuner drivers must be terrible then.
Yes. Before mastering. The player then outputs the signal in one of the standard 1080p/720p formats.
Upscaled in the console and output in one of the standard formats.
That makes absolutely no sense.
Sure they could put a display in with a 1330 lines, but there's no way broadcasters are going to start sending out signals in some random new format that hasn't been ratified by the standards bodies.
Of course there are. ITU-R (specifically WP11/6) worked on the current HDTV standards over a long period of time, starting in the 1980s.
The DVB and ATSC standards were developed by huge consortiums with hundreds of corporate members over many years.
The new UHDTV standards have been under design since 2003.
Blu-Ray uses the established HDTV signal formats, as specified by the ITU-R. It uses standard MPEG compression. The thing that was new and revolutionary about Blu-Ray is the disc technology, not the output format.
Once again, display panels are different to signal formats.
A 1137x640 screen is great. It is about the right aspect ratio, and will be able to play content created for HDTV output just fine.
No. 1080p refers to the accepted signal input. They create 1080p-compatible TVs so people can actually watch content that is output in that format. Like BluRays and DVB TV.
Industry participants sit on the standards bodies, but the standards bodies really do exist.
Or are the ITU, SMPTE, ETSI, CENELEC, EBU and GA all just figments of my imagination?
Oh my GOD! A taller screen. So revolutionary... Only Apple could have come up with that! Buying.
Wow. Just buy a Galaxy S3. It fits in your hand and has more pixels than the upcoming iPhone 5.
Samsung, for the first time, is making Apple to play the catchup game.
Galaxy S3 resolution - 1280 x 768
iPhone 5 resolution - 1137 x 640
It's irrelevant. Technically the iPhone 5 (and 4,4S) still have better resolution at 326ppi. The S3 is 306ppi, according to others. Although from a practical POV, they would be hard to distinguish apart.
The S3 has more pixels only because it's a larger screen. If that is what you want, go for it. But from a movie quality POV, they will look the same.
I still think the hype about screen size will pass. It's not innovation or patentable. My progression of laptops started at screens around 7inches. I egarly moved up to 11,13,15 and 17 inches. Finally those became too big to carry and I settled on 13 inch as the sweet spot and make use of the dock monitor when necessary.
I think for most the same will happen with phones. I think 4.7 will become too big for most.
Scott Adams says it all
Just look at today's Dilbert cartoon:
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2012-09-02
Just look at today's Dilbert cartoon:
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2012-09-02
No, 16:9 is not just a mathematical expression. It is a mathematical expression though. You seem to have an problem understanding that A can be X, Y and Z at the same time.
I just gave you the context, and you are unclear? You questioned "only giving the lines", arguing for disclosing the "full resolution". I said it wasn't necessary as 16:9 is implied due to being de facto standard.
No. I am trying to tell you that within the particular context, 16:9 is implied.
Making it de facto standard. My point exactly.
Read above. You said 720p only gave the lines, and you didnt understand why they didnt give the full resolution. If 16:9 is implied in 720p (which you argued it was not) the full resolution is already given implicitly.
I never made that claim. Stop pulling **** out of your ass.
Learn to read. I already stated that it is irrelevant (several times, in fact). Now you're just posting crap.
Most certainly. Still wastes processor and battery cycles.
Already commented on. Still dont understand the fundamental distance between a 30" screen and a 4" screen assuming that they are positioned at the same relative viewing distance.
----------
Most people i know stream their media.
A part from owning the largest, most frequently used, media streaming website?
It is not moot. Everything in the world is not "relative the prior version of the iPhone". That said, if you ask me: will people in general be happy with their experience? Most certainly. Dont think i ever argued for the opposite.
And yes, they most certainly tested it. Means very little. Just means its a trade-off worth taking v. other options.
----------
Someone gets it. Yay!
----------
Are they actually putting WQHD panels in TV's now? How stupid. Good thing the standardizing board seems to get it. Going 2x 720 is a half-assed solution with short life-expectancy. 2x 1080p will last "a life time" in comparison.
----------
If the situation was reversed, people would argue that since the Samsung display is larger you would hold it further away, making it "more retina" despite lower ppi.
----------
Mr. Cool techiedude. You obviously know squat. Go hide under your BMW.
P.S. I have already studied both marketing and standardization processes, so that wont work.
Last edited:
More than 10 million Galaxy S3 were sold in the 1.5 weeks. Either you are a liliputian or 10 million people who bought it have elephant hands.
I have owned Galaxy Note and iPhone 4 in the past and can tell you that Galaxy S3 is not a big phone.
More than 10 million Galaxy S3 were sold in the 1.5 weeks. Either you are a liliputian or 10 million people who bought it have elephant hands.
I have owned Galaxy Note and iPhone 4 in the past and can tell you that Galaxy S3 is not a big phone.
I think that was months not weeks. Samsung doesn't release sales figures only phones shipped. Sales are analysts estimates only.
No need to be insulting. Regardless the S3 is a nice phone. But too big at the moment for my personal tastes. If not the hand, certainly more than I wish to have in my front pants pocket.
I showed my wife the S3 and Note in the store: she just broke out laughing...
Good for you that you like it. Taste is always a mixed bag. If the latest iPhone X only came in 4.7", I'd complain but learn to live with it I guess. Because the Apple system works for me. But I have no need for a larger phone at the moment.
I have a wedding to attend this morning or I'd rip this up. But one thing is clear, you and I are using the term "standard" in different ways.
You mean that something is "standard" when we have agreed to all use it as part of some definition. So all 720p and 1080p broadcasts use 16:9, so 16:9 is standardized across all these sets.
I mean that something is a "standard" when a governing body gets together and defines something that previously didn't exist and had no definition. For example, 720p, LTE, TCP/IP, NTSC, etc. These things are "standards" as defined by some governing body. 16:9 being a mathematical expression needs no definition.
This also means that if someone walked up to you on the street and asked for a 16:9 display, you would not have enough information to give them what they needed. All you know is the width relative to the height as a mathematical expression, but not resolution. This is not how people buy displays. However, if they tell you they want a 1080p display, then you now know BOTH the resolution and the aspect ratio. (still need size and such...but that's not the point I was making).
And I get it just as much as Marlor does. (and tranmillitary is clueless) Everything he said is right on. I DO truly understand this stuff....extremely well. Perhaps you and I just keep getting stuck on semantics.
Oh, and since the iPhone 4s already has to downsample to 640 lines, nothing is really changing. We'll continue to downsample, but with less letter boxing. So again, the argument is moot.
----------
More than 10 million Galaxy S3 were sold in the 1.5 weeks. Either you are a liliputian or 10 million people who bought it have elephant hands.
I have owned Galaxy Note and iPhone 4 in the past and can tell you that Galaxy S3 is not a big phone.
Or 10 million people didn't consider one-handed usage or they did and didn't care.
Apparently i had you confused with someone else. You were not the one that made the original post, questioning why "only lines are given". That offers a partial explanation of our stand-still.
That said, my point remains. The 16:9 ratio is standard by fact, convention, and agreement. No, 16:9 in itself is not a standard. But the use of 16:9 in the particular context is. One does not exclude the other. The converse could also be true; e.g., micro-USB is a standard. Use of micro-USB for purpose X within context Y is standardized (cellphone chargers in the EU).
This, by the way, also shows that there is no "newness" requirement for standards to be standards. That said, it doesnt really matter: (the use of) 16:9 is, once more, standard by fact, convention, and agreement. So even by your strict definition, 720p gives you the full resolution (within context).
As for your example, i dont see the relevance. I never made a claim that 16:9 tells you anything else than 16:9. I said that 720p within the particular context gives you the resolution (thanks to 16:9 being standard).