They Still Haven't Fixed The (Ridiculously) Dim Display...

[JHBThree]

Mmmkay.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Poor white balance, totally incorrect color calibration/saturation, poor brightness, suspect clarity thanks to inferior implementation (pentile), high power consumption, and ghosting/burn in issues with nearly every new handset they introduce.

Tell me how it ISN'T broken.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[Johnly]

Poor white balance, totally incorrect color calibration/saturation, poor brightness, suspect clarity thanks to inferior implementation (pentile), high power consumption, and ghosting/burn in issues with nearly every new handset they introduce.

Tell me how it ISN'T broken.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

The last thing I want to do is spend anytime to convince you that amoled is fine and its own beast of a technology. I have zero issues you raise on my amoled. No problem though, I enjoy reading all the comments about the atrocities of amoled you report.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[I Can Be Your Hero]

That's one of the main things I dislike about AMOLED displays. Living on the East coast of Australia, it's sunny here pretty much all year round. With the Galaxy S3, it was impossible to read anything on the screen outside unless I had cover the screen or go into a shaded area.

I hope brightness has been improved.

 

[DroidXcon]

While that varies from user to user, screen is
AMOLED has been around for a while, tech-wise. .

it really is still a young technology development wise, LCD's have been in development maybe over 100yrs started in the late 1800's with the study of liquid crystals, theory for LCD's started in the 1920s. The first AMLCD display was made in the 1970s
OLED tech is very young, Organic crystals started being studied in the 50's or 60's , the first OLED diode was made in the late 80s not even a display yet. It wasnt until the 90's that they were getting light emission.

 

[Johnly]

it really is still a young technology development wise, LCD's have been in development maybe over 100yrs started in the late 1800's with the study of liquid crystals, theory for LCD's started in the 1920s. The first AMLCD display was made in the 1970s
OLED tech is very young, Organic crystals started being studied in the 50's or 60's , the first OLED diode was made in the late 80s not even a display yet. It wasnt until the 90's that they were getting light emission.

I am so glad you are at AC. People think amoled is broke. It is not, it is just growing up and has some growing pains in the process, but I still don't think it was rushed to market. All panels can have issues. Amoled just keeps getting better.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Serial Fordicator]

AMOLED has always been broken.

I guess my 20-10 eyes must be broken also. I prefer amoled. I like the blacks and colors better, but that's just my opinion. Believe it or not a lot of people like it.

People keep calling amoled out on sunlight viewing, but I'd almost be willing to challenge the RAZR screen in sunlight compared to many other phones.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[JHBThree]

The last thing I want to do is spend anytime to convince you that amoled is fine and its own beast of a technology. I have zero issues you raise on my amoled. No problem though, I enjoy reading all the comments about the atrocities of amoled you report.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

You have all of them. You just choose to ignore them. They are all 'features' of the technology.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[yankeesusa]

...What is the matter with these guys? This was the single biggest reason I didn't buy the S3. It's a total deal breaker for me (and many others). At maximum brightness this display is a joke. By comparison the display on the iphone5 and HTC One is literally twice as bright. Who buys these phones? I don't car if it fries eggs and fluffs your pillows -- the screen is the single most important feature of a smartphone and 258 lux is a complete joke.

4 reasons not to upgrade to the Samsung Galaxy S 4 - GadgetBox on NBCNews.com

>>>In addition to the Galaxy S4?s system performance, we also managed to benchmark the brightness level of the smartphone?s 5-inch 1920 x 1080-pixel Super AMOLED display. One of the biggest complaints we had regarding the S III was how dim its display was at just 213 lux. The Galaxy S4 improves upon that number, topping out at 258 lux. That?s brighter than the Galaxy S3, as well as the Galaxy Note II?s 240 lux rating. Unfortunately, the Galaxy S4 still falls behind the smartphone category average of 299 lux. The Google Nexus 4, meanwhile, came in with an average 399 lux.<<<

How's the brightness on the note 2 compared to s3? I have note 2 but can't compare with the s3 and of course it's better than my Evo 3d and nexus s 4g.

Sent from the Beast that is Galaxy Note 2

 

[jroc]

You have all of them. You just choose to ignore them. They are all 'features' of the technology.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

And I take it LCD screens....are perfect, have no cons?

Anyway.... I am also a former LCD fan. I just like Amoled screens better know. Havent been lucky enough to see or get a phone with an updated LCD screen. If they are better now....they still have to offer me the pros of Amoled before I get a phone with an LCD screen again.

As someone already said...no screen is perfect. If you think so...I dont what to say. My RAZR and Maxx HD having an overall better screen than my Rezound....Its more than just LCD vs Amoled for the pros n cons. Like I already posted....my RAZR having a brighter screen then my G Nex proves that. My RAZR having better outdoor viewing and viewing angles vs my Rezound proves that.

LCD has its cons....in case you didnt know....

 

[xtn]

I'm still using my GS2 and find it usable in direct sunlight, although barely. Still, it is usable. And I happen to love the deep blacks. I lay in bed at night and watch a Netflix movie, and am bothered by lcd screens that get down to a darkish gray. I also set any app that will let me to use white text on a black background. Unfortunately many apps don't have this option, but I like knowing I'm saving a bit of battery power when most of the screen stays black.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

And I take it LCD screens....are perfect, have no cons?

Anyway.... I am also a former LCD fan. I just like Amoled screens better know. Havent been lucky enough to see or get a phone with an updated LCD screen. If they are better now....they still have to offer me the pros of Amoled before I get a phone with an LCD screen again.

As someone already said...no screen is perfect. If you think so...I dont what to say. My RAZR and Maxx HD having an overall better screen than my Rezound....Its more than just LCD vs Amoled for the pros n cons. Like I already posted....my RAZR having a brighter screen then my G Nex proves that. My RAZR having better outdoor viewing and viewing angles vs my Rezound proves that.

LCD has its cons....in case you didnt know....

Of course LCD is not perfect. They just have fewer cons than AMOLED does. The new LCD (like the superlcd 3 I'm typing this on) technology is better than AMOLED in every way. The only thing AMOLED has now is the black levels.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[I Can Be Your Hero]

Of course LCD is not perfect. They just have fewer cons than AMOLED does. The new LCD (like the superlcd 3 I'm typing this on) technology is better than AMOLED in every way. The only thing AMOLED has now is the black levels.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

It's not like black levels on LCD's are even bad now. I have a Nexus 4 (which isn't even the best LCD display) and the blacks are great. Certainly don't look like a dark grey.

 

[DroidXcon]

Of course LCD is not perfect. They just have fewer cons than AMOLED does. The new LCD (like the superlcd 3 I'm typing this on) technology is better than AMOLED in every way. The only thing AMOLED has now is the black levels.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

There is no back light so light doesnt bleed out the sides
This also makes the device thinner
OLEDs are much more effcient and uses less power
Much higher contrast ratio
OLED's can be flexible, transparent, even printed
Infact you can have a larger color gamet
Any limitations on the displays is due to samsungs execution of the display , not the technology itself.
If you want to say superlcd 3 is better technology than samsungs displays thats fine, but to say its better than OLED tech is just uniformed.

 

[JHBThree]

There is no back light so light doesnt bleed out the sides
This also makes the device thinner
OLEDs are much more effcient and uses less power
Much higher contrast ratio
OLED's can be flexible, transparent, even printed
Infact you can have a larger color gamet
Any limitations on the displays is due to samsungs execution of the display , not the technology itself.
If you want to say superlcd 3 is better technology than samsungs displays thats fine, but to say its better than OLED tech is just uniformed.

-Only poorly made LCDs do that. OLED screens can have similarly distracting defects.
-OLED screen assemblies are no longer the thinnest. IPS and superlcd screens have surpassed OLED in that regard.
-OLED is not more efficient. Not in the slightest. Especially when your OS has very little black in it. (OLED is only more efficient in black-heavy situations)
-Again, newer LCDs have matched OLED.
-A larger color gamut is irrelevant if the display is blue or green tinged with colors that do not exist in nature.
-The technology itself is flawed. Samsung's implementation only exaggerates those flaws.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[DroidXcon]

-Only poorly made LCDs do that. OLED screens can have similarly distracting defects.
-OLED screen assemblies are no longer the thinnest. IPS and superlcd screens have surpassed OLED in that regard.
-OLED is not more efficient. Not in the slightest. Especially when your OS has very little black in it. (OLED is only more efficient in black-heavy situations)
-Again, newer LCDs have matched OLED.
-A larger color gamut is irrelevant if the display is blue or green tinged with colors that do not exist in nature.
-The technology itself is flawed. Samsung's implementation only exaggerates those flaws.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

All of those things are problems with the manufacturing as i said. From the thickness to the the efficiency and even the colors you see are all a product of manufactoring. I do this everyday i am still at work even this moment developing OLED molecules and structure.

 

[DroidXcon]

Here is the problem with people saying it is less efficient when white is being used. The problem is that Flourescent materials were being used , in order to create a white Red , Green , and Blue need to be activated, by using Flourescent materials you are losing alot of efficiency. With the use of phosphorescent materials you will gain approx 30% of improvement in efficiency with each phosphorescent color. Until now Samsung only been using Red phosphorescent green and blue were Flourescent lossing a potential 60%(approx) in efficiency. This is not a flaw this is just a problem with the stage of development and execution we are in.

 

[MikeLip]

Here is the problem with people saying it is less efficient when white is being used. The problem is that Flourescent materials were being used , in order to create a white Red , Green , and Blue need to be activated, by using Flourescent materials you are losing alot of efficiency. With the use of phosphorescent materials you will gain approx 30% of improvement in efficiency with each phosphorescent color. Until now Samsung only been using Red phosphorescent green and blue were Flourescent lossing a potential 60%(approx) in efficiency. This is not a flaw this is just a problem with the stage of development and execution we are in.

Ah, the voice of reason. Doomed to be shouted down by the evangelists and obsessives. I remember a very similar argument going on in the Photoshop and photography groups when LCDs started displacing CRTs. Poor color balance! Poor blacks! Lousy contrast! Limited and unrealistic gamut! Eventually LCD panels got better, everyone got over it and went to the new tech. This too shall pass

 

[TheBundo]

Hmmmmmm, seems like you can't have much "speed and user experience" if you can't see the screen

Screen isn't the most important, it's speed and user experience

sent from the best smart phone (not phablet) on the worst network- the galaxy S III unfortunately on T-Mobile

 

[sircody]

It's because the gs2 resolution was much lower.

Nokia did a good job with their AMILED tech in direct sunlight. This was also low resolution though. They switched to LCDs for their HD displays.

AMOLED displays may be difficult to view in direct sunlight compared with LCDs because of their reduced maximum brightness. Samsung's Super AMOLED technology addresses this issue by reducing the size of gaps between layers of the screen.

Current demand for AMOLED screens is high, and, due to supply shortages of the Samsung-produced displays, certain models of smartphones have been changed to use next-generation LCD displays from the Samsung and Sony joint-venture SLCD in the future.

 

[DroidXcon]

Samsung's Super AMOLED technology addresses this issue by reducing the size of gaps between layers of the screen.

Where are you getting this info?


From my Galaxy Note 2 via Tapatalk