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.
Which is Really the better, Retina (+IPS?) or OLED?
- Thread starter frosse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OLED is inherently weak under the sun, we need to wait till the reviews are out to see how well iPhone4 fairs.
If Kobe looked orange, then what does A-Rod look like?
Here's an extreme close-up on the iPhone 4's screen. (56K and possible DSL warning)
They're good at different things. OLED is great for contrast, and good for battery life *as long as lots of your screen is black most of the time*. If you have a white background it's power consumption leaps up.
IPS has a fairly consistent battery life, and much better performance in strong sunlight, and the pixel density on the new iPhone probably isn't possible on OLEDs yet.
OLEDs probably will be better eventually, but today I'd much rather have IPS personally. Your mileage may vary.
Phazer
IPS has a fairly consistent battery life, and much better performance in strong sunlight, and the pixel density on the new iPhone probably isn't possible on OLEDs yet.
OLEDs probably will be better eventually, but today I'd much rather have IPS personally. Your mileage may vary.
Phazer
+1
The answer is that TODAY, and on June 24th, the best choice is IPS. Next year or a few years from now, that will most likely change.
About n1/desire samsung AMOLEDs:
http://blog.javia.org/nexus-one-display-and-subpixel-pattern/
http://www.displaymate.com/Nexus_One_ShootOut.htm
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...exus-ones-screen-science-color-and-hacks.ars/
This:
means discarding some information from my images.
I don't like it.
So not only we're talking about 250ppi VS 320ppi, but those 250ppi of the typical 3,7" WVGA AMOLED are "false", less dense than a real WVGA LCD. (like the Droid)
Since apparently there is still no way to build AMOLEDs with high pixel density without using that TRICK (-33% subpixels), and since AMOLEDs still suck in the sun, and since colors are "WOW" but not very accurate, I prefer an excellent 320ppi IPS lcd.
Also, the tecnique used to fuse the LCD to the glass in the Retina Display gives you:
- unprecedented clarity
- things look like printed ON the screen and not UNDER a glass. (as reported by John Gruber)
ps: funny to see Sharp going QUATTRON and on the other hand SMD going TWO-on. SMD is just doing that to get higher densities at lower price. But at a price for quality. A true RGB subpixels IPS LCD is better. AMOLEDs are just better at BLACKS.
http://blog.javia.org/nexus-one-display-and-subpixel-pattern/
http://www.displaymate.com/Nexus_One_ShootOut.htm
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...exus-ones-screen-science-color-and-hacks.ars/
This:
means discarding some information from my images.
I don't like it.
So not only we're talking about 250ppi VS 320ppi, but those 250ppi of the typical 3,7" WVGA AMOLED are "false", less dense than a real WVGA LCD. (like the Droid)
Since apparently there is still no way to build AMOLEDs with high pixel density without using that TRICK (-33% subpixels), and since AMOLEDs still suck in the sun, and since colors are "WOW" but not very accurate, I prefer an excellent 320ppi IPS lcd.
Also, the tecnique used to fuse the LCD to the glass in the Retina Display gives you:
- unprecedented clarity
- things look like printed ON the screen and not UNDER a glass. (as reported by John Gruber)
ps: funny to see Sharp going QUATTRON and on the other hand SMD going TWO-on. SMD is just doing that to get higher densities at lower price. But at a price for quality. A true RGB subpixels IPS LCD is better. AMOLEDs are just better at BLACKS.
Looks like it's on the camera sensor to me, if it was on the iphone it would be blurred and out of focus, like the picture the bright spot it on.
OLED has better blacks and contrast, but i rather have a higher res screen..
BTW i hope alot of you realize that the "retina" display is pure marketing crap.
its just a high res LCD nothing more.
plus IPS (first time on a mobile phone, and on a tablet i.e. the iPad)
plus "zero gap" lcd to glass fusion for extra clarity and making stuff popping out since the lcd is closer to the surface
(just to be accurate, I agree "retina" is a marketing name)
the lamination I'm more keen on for another reason, should be back to like first gen iphone, no dust under screen, ever.
BTW i hope alot of you realize that the "super" car is purely marketing crap. its just a really fast car nothing more.
I agree with this, but it's not new. Motorcycle companies have been doing forever. Several models across several brands will have the same "new tech" and all will call it different names. I think it's an acronym fetish or something.
Ips is currently the best display tech. I can tell from personal experience that the oled screens suffer because of their strange sub pixel layout.
Although samsung claims their resolution is not far off from the iPhone 4, it's actually nowhere close. Even at 800x480, the sub pixel layout makes it so that the actual resolution is much lower and it's very noticeable to the user.
Also, besides the poor outdoor readability, the colors on oled are very unrealistic and not accurate at all. For something like iPhone where you are watching video and viewing pictures, you really want something with accurate color reproduction.
The other benefit that people talk about with oled is the power consumption. But the truth is that oled is actually more power hungry than ips LCD in most cases. When the picture is not static, it actually used more power than an LCD. Also, when the picture is very bright with lots of white, etc., it also uses more power compared to LCD.
Just wanted to clear up some misconceptions.
Although samsung claims their resolution is not far off from the iPhone 4, it's actually nowhere close. Even at 800x480, the sub pixel layout makes it so that the actual resolution is much lower and it's very noticeable to the user.
Also, besides the poor outdoor readability, the colors on oled are very unrealistic and not accurate at all. For something like iPhone where you are watching video and viewing pictures, you really want something with accurate color reproduction.
The other benefit that people talk about with oled is the power consumption. But the truth is that oled is actually more power hungry than ips LCD in most cases. When the picture is not static, it actually used more power than an LCD. Also, when the picture is very bright with lots of white, etc., it also uses more power compared to LCD.
Just wanted to clear up some misconceptions.
I recently purchased a 23 inch dell IPS monitor and I cannot stress how much better the colors look compared to my Macbook Pro screen. I have not seen an OLED screen but this is for sure a huge improvement.
