no VGA is better 640x480
as far as comparing the 6700 to the x50/x51 in my opinon the dells' have the resolution...but the 6700 has the brightest screen i have ever seen.
__________________
"Who needs an IPOD when your PPC-6700 can do all that AND a bag of chips!"
Originally posted by k0diak Just use the built in screen/button lock and you'll be fine.
Is there a way to make that button work?
I lock mine every time I holster it and everytime I take it out, its doing someting funky like calling someone or surfing the web, etc.
Originally posted by SpaceBassVA Is there a way to make that button work?
I lock mine every time I holster it and everytime I take it out, its doing someting funky like calling someone or surfing the web, etc.
I want to jump onto this phone, but this reported issue is freaking me out already
Originally posted by Master_Shake the q stands for quarter
so qvga is one quarter vga
Agreed but what I wonder about is the size discrepancy. Does QVGA mean just that there are 4 times less pixels total or 4 times less per square inch. If it's the first then a VGA screen that is twice as big will only have 2 times as many pixels per square inch as a QVGA screen. Anyone know?
Originally posted by Curious Cat Agreed but what I wonder about is the size discrepancy. Does QVGA mean just that there are 4 times less pixels total or 4 times less per square inch. If it's the first then a VGA screen that is twice as big will only have 2 times as many pixels per square inch as a QVGA screen. Anyone know?
The VGA spec doesn't stipulate Pixels Per Inch, it simply says 640 pixels by 480 pixels.
Originally posted by Curious Cat Agreed but what I wonder about is the size discrepancy. Does QVGA mean just that there are 4 times less pixels total or 4 times less per square inch. If it's the first then a VGA screen that is twice as big will only have 2 times as many pixels per square inch as a QVGA screen. Anyone know?
I don't think there is a size discrepancy. If you take something that is one half the height AND one half the width, it is one quarter of the total area...like folding a piece of paper in half horizontally and vertically.
Originally posted by Gambit I don't think there is a size discrepancy. If you take something that is one half the height AND one half the width, it is one quarter of the total area...like folding a piece of paper in half horizontally and vertically.
No you're missing my point. If the original poster has a screen that is VGA and it is twice the size of the 6700's QVGA then the resultant resolution as measured by pixels per square inch is only double not 4 times as much.
Yes, but screen size and resolution is not the issue. The origional poster just wants to know how many pixels. QVGA HVGA and VGA are just measures of pixel dimensions, not resolution or screen size.
Originally posted by JKingGrim Yes, but screen size and resolution is not the issue. The origional poster just wants to know how many pixels. QVGA HVGA and VGA are just measures of pixel dimensions, not resolution or screen size.
Yes but I was responding to the poster who said that it is 4 times the "resolution"!
edit: BTW, where in any of the original poster's posts did you read that he was only interested in how many pixels. I don't see where he ever even mentioned pixels.
Last edited by Curious Cat : 12-02-2005 at 03:16 PM.
Pixels per square inch? How is that even relevant here? The x50 and the PPC6700 screens have different physical sizes (as well as different resolutions) so I don't see how pixels/sq inch even relates to the discussion.
I know it seems counterintuitive, but it is 100% factual that 640x480 is four times the resolution of 320x240. Do the math (or follow Rally1's calculations above).
Originally posted by luv2chill Pixels per square inch? How is that even relevant here? The x50 and the PPC6700 screens have different physical sizes (as well as different resolutions) so I don't see how pixels/sq inch even relates to the discussion.
I know it seems counterintuitive, but it is 100% factual that 640x480 is four times the resolution of 320x240. Do the math (or follow Rally1's calculations above).
Dan
Well if you are comparing quality, whether it's a screen or a photograph, ultimately it gets down to pixels per square and then distance from the viewer. The density, not the total amount, is what gives the picture clarity. The fact that they are different sizes, is my point in that you can't just compare total pixels.
Login
Panel
