Apple iPhone – Disappointing LCD Screen?
By Will Park on Sunday, March 11th, 2007 at 2:39 PM PST In AT&T, Devices, Technologies, iPhone, iPhone OS
Apple has always been an innovator. Now they are a revolutionary mobile device powerhouse that can command the respect of an industry that Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) has only just announced they will break into. Innovation, revolution – these are not words that can describe Apple’s choice of screen size and resolution. But does that mean the screen is a disappointment? First, let’s take a look at the details for the most conspicuous and, arguably, the most important aspect of a mobile device.
Size
3.5 inches in the diagonal direction
Among current smartphones, this screen size puts the iPhone at the head of the pack. A 2 in. wide and 3 in. tall lcd screen is actually pretty big. But keep in mind, more LCD real estate equates to higher battery drain.
Resolution
The screen is 320 pixels across and 480 pixels high, wth a 160 ppi (pixels per inch) pixel density. This is a fairly typical resolution among current smartphones and really isn’t that bad. However, Apple is known for innovation and trend setting design. This resolution is neither innovative nor trend setting.
Interface
Multi-touch
This emerging technology has only recently come into the public eye and has been widely demonstrated on ultra high end applications (read: really really expensive). Furthermore, “multi-touch” should not be confused with “touch screen”. While a touch screen interface is manipulated using touch-based inputs, traditional touch screens can only accept touch inputs from one area or point. This generally limits a touch screen interface’s affect to buttons and sliders that are manipulated through touch. Multi-touch takes things further by allowing gestures at multiple points to affect controls like zoom or scrolling without the need for sliders or zoom buttons or anything of that nature.
Conclusion
So, is the iPhone’s screen a disappointment? Well, it depends on how you look at it. If you only consider the size and resolution of the screen to judge its worth, then it’s a draw. Nice big screen with mediocre pixel density. But mediocrity from Apple is quite disappointing.
But let’s step back for a second and look at the bigger picture. The screen is huge! As mentioned above, the size alone is quite a drain on the battery. Higher pixel density would demand even more juice. And the biggest factor, and almost enough in itself, is the multi-touch interface. I’m sure there are people out there who will say that they would like higher resolution over some gimmicky interface, but it’s easy to dock something you have never tried before. I believe multi-touch will change the way people use touch screens. My Macbook has a track pad that allows me to zoom and scroll with two finger gestures and I can’t imagine going back to using that horrid scroll bar. Add to that a healthy dose of battery life and the resolution starts to look like an incredible compromise. From the perspective of innovation, the screen size and multi-touch interface are innovation defined.
A little disappointing, yes… but will pixel density really matter under all those fingerprints? haha… I just cant wait to play with this baby
Sorry, but this article is rubbish. 160ppi is a lot higher than almost anything else out there. A higher resolution than 320×480 would be a much bigger drain on the battery, and is completely unecessary for a device this size. Apple is not about pushing the envelope for the sake of it. Apple is about innovation in user interface design. Its about making useful features, useable – not adding the latest and greatest for the sheer fact of listing it on a tech spec sheet.
I think he makes some good points. For a device that touts itself as a ‘revolutionary’ portable media device the screen seems like a pretty important part of that picture – so to speak. I think the apple fan-boys just cant accept that there are already devices out there with some advantages over the iphone. — That’s not to say that I don’t want one too.
You don’t need multi-touch to scroll. You don’t need two fingers to scroll a touch screen. PDA’s have had scrollable single-touch screens for a long time and I am not talking about the scroll bar.
Zooming could very easily be done by tapping (touching) a corner for instance, on a non-multi-touch screen.
Point is, I have not yet seen a demonstration of what the iPhone is going to do with multi-touch that cannot be done just as easily with single touch. I think maybe some of you have never used a decent PDA.
As far as resolution, I think that requiring more than 320X480 pixels in that small of an area is nothing but an ego trip. Most people eyes cannot see anything tinier than that resolution at the normal distance you would hold it. A one pixel thin line at that resolution is very thin. Having full VGA (480X640) would really be a waste in that you could not benefit without a magnifying glass.
The screen resolution is a perfect example of Steve Jobs seeing through the kind of nonsense propgated by Dell and others and designing something that is actually practical without being more than is required.
“My Macbook has a track pad that allows me to zoom and scroll with two finger gestures and I can’t imagine going back to using that horrid scroll bar.”
Don’t confuse the issue here. The reason that two fingers are required to scroll on a laptop’s trackpad is because one finger alone is used for positioning the pointer or curser.
This is NOT the case with a touch screen. There is no pointer other than your finger, so there is no need for using two fingers to scroll it.
It seems that everybody is touting the greatness of the iPhone when (a) they have not even used one yet and (b) many of their comments are baseless.
What about selecting things VS scrolling? I think that will be really handy. I hate that on my windows mobile phone i have to use the scroll bars. They’re tiny! it would be so much easier to just grab the screen and move the whole page up and down .
John, what does your “VS” mean?
At any rate, software can be easily written such that tapping an item selects it or dragging the screen with ONE finger scrolls it. A multi-touch screen is simply not required for this. I do this very procedure on my Palm PDA.
Both Nokia N770 and recent N800 have 800×480 on 4.13″ screen and are regarded absolutely by everyone as an ideal pixel resolution for this size. iPhone is little bit smaller, it is 3.5″, hence the VGA pixel count 640×480 would be ideal, not half of that like iPhone has. So the iPhone’s resolution is DISAPPOINTING for internet browsing.
Anyway, try to browse internet with QVGA (320×240) like in most current smarthones – it is terrible job, a nonsence with permanent scrolling. And just try QVGA on a regular PC and you will get sickness. QVGA has only 77K pixels, which is 3 times less than with screens of ANY cameras in the market.
So Steve Jobs’ HVGA on iPhone is mediocre resolution, it is plain minimum acceptable one, no doubts, but hopefully next versions of iPhone will improve it
P.S.
Citing TheInquirer review of N800:
“The screen is of a sufficiently high resolution (800×480 on 4.13″) to make web browsing a delight, and text, even with a very small font, is readable and clear without ever straining the eyes”
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37493
Keep in mind folks, the iPhone is a phone and those Nokias are dedicated Internet Tablets (with the newer one having very weak phone call support). And again, there is the issue of the screen size versus battery life (this includes pixel density).
But you are right Slava, mediocre is not what we expect from Apple
Sharp EM-ONE smartphone has the same 800×480 screen and has decent battery life
http://www.intomobile.com/2007/03/22/emobile-em-one-gives-japan-flat-rate-35g-data-only-handset.html
Yes, it does have a beautiful screen, but again, the EM-ONE is basically an internet tablet. The HSDPA connectivity is reserved for data-only access, it is therefore, not a phone.
And again, I gotta agree with you Slava, the iPhone should have had a better screen, I’m sure the tech heads in Cupertino could have managed to get around the battery drain issue.
willpark says: ” I’m sure the tech heads in Cupertino could have managed to get around the battery drain issue.”
Why are you so sure. Don’t you think that they already try every trick in the book to get the best possible battery life.
I have to wonder if this author has actually visually compared these different pieces of hardware. I’ve owned 5 different Palm devices over the years including Sony’s highest end stuff and the Treo 650 that I gave up for my iPhone. I’ve also owned several different dedicated cell phones. The iPhone is the only device among them all where the pixels are so tight and small that I simply cannot see them even if I try. The screen is so bright that I regularly run it at half intensity and it still seems bright, even in broad daylight. Quite simply, this device has one of the absolute best screens I have experienced on ANY device.
Hi:
Our company main products is IPOD and IPHONE repair parts, like lcd,front
panel,HDD,headphone jack,batteries etc.with 9 years experiences in China,With our
knowledge and experience in this industry ,we guarantee satisfaction in reasonable prices,
high quality and prompt delivery.
hope we can enjoy many more years of doing business together.
I appreciate if you could tell me your MSN or SKYPE ,so i can talk about the detail with you promptly.
msn:soho620@hotmail.com
Gavin
How i wish 3G 8gb black Apple Iphone 2 ceos could send me one unit so I could thoroughly study the thing and not miss important aspects of the iphone when i make my valuable comments. Now im not a hundred percent sure of the real things that this phone could do. Here’s my address: 50 Independence St., Oroquieta city, Misamis Occidental Philippines 7207. I want to have a display on our pharmacy and become a dealer someday. Our family owned radio station is hungry for things to say about it but its not easy to say a thing if you cant even TOUCH one. E-mail me for proper name and address.
After reading this article, I wonder if the author had actually used an iPhone?
I find that in most situations (browsing the web, for example) the 160dpi resolution is *more* than adequate for the device size. In fact, higher density of dots tends to make web graphics appear sharper on this smaller screen. I’ve never had a time when I thought the screen looked “pixellated” and, IMHO, higher res wouldn’t equate to a better experience on this device, just shorter battery life.
Of course, the author is right: multi-touch interface (and the software designed by Apple to use it) makes this a killer device.