Nokia Lumia 920 is more retina than the iPhone 4S

http://www.virtualpants.com/post/30935634536/nokia-lumia-920-is-more-retina-than-the-iphone-4s

by jharrier • 14 years ago

37 48 14 years ago

virtualpants.com

shakyboy86• 14 years ago

But still Nokia has a long way to reach iPhone level.

cbg0• 14 years ago

In sales, or how exactly?

mtgx• 14 years ago

Both Xperia S and HTC Rezound had 342 PPI, and were launched a long time ago:

http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_s-4369.php

http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_rezound-4099.php

And bragging about having 3 more PPI than the iPhone is just lame...just as bragging about having "better than HD" display because you have 48 extra pixels, is.

sachleen• 14 years ago

It's not just 48px, it's 61,440. But I do agree with both of your points. Not much to brag about there.

jharrier• 14 years ago

Agreed. Not a lot to brag about, but I'd at least mention that it is retina.

pearle• 14 years ago

Why mention it? Isn't retina just an Apple specific marketing term for a high resolution screen?

esolyt4• 14 years ago

What does retina mean? Can you explain to us?

Do we really need a term for "high PPI"? If iPhone 4 is retina, then what is Xperia S? It is certainly not retina, because it would be insulting to call it retina when its pixels are even more indistinguishable. What about Galaxy Nexus? It is 316 PPI, slightly less than iPhone. Is it enough for being retina or not? Who determines?

vesky• 14 years ago

Having 3 more ppi than iPhone is not much. Having that amount of PPI in a screen that's 1 full inch bigger is. And have you ever compared a ClearBlack display with an iPhone screen? I have. The iPhone is better due to the resolution, at night! But in daylight I'd prefer a ClearBlack display over any iPhone. Unless you only go out at night in which case you'll probably be better off with the iPhone.

goombastic• 14 years ago

I would buy a Nokia Android. Awesome hardware, great software. Windows 8 on a Nokia is like taking a camel to a horse race.

moystard2• 14 years ago

Had the exact same thought while watching the conference. The problem does not come from the hardware, it comes from the software.

sv123• 14 years ago

What have you heard negative about it? Seems pretty slick.

powertower2• 14 years ago

> Windows 8 on a Nokia is like taking a camel to a horse race.

What are you basing this statement on?

shuw2• 14 years ago

Well, Windows Phone has failed to gain traction in the marketplace and therefore lacks a proper app ecosystem.

Second, I think the WP8 UI very divisive. You either love it or you don't. Personally, I think it's a Pepsi. Sweet on first impression, but cumbersome to use every day. Too much scrolling (can't use muscle memory) and giant typography which distract from the content.

TheBoff• 14 years ago

"More retina" is meaningless: the whole pointer is that it's indistinguishable from normal use distance.

You can say "higher resolution", or even "retina when held closer to the face", but "more retina" really is nonsense!

iNate2000• 14 years ago

But it's more funnier.

Achshar• 14 years ago

They do indeed have marginally higher PPI, but they, understandably, didn't mention it in spec sheet. Because it's just lame to brag about 2 more PPI. Although I think it is impressive that they have achieved it in a screen that is 1 inch larger then iPhone's.

janardanyri• 14 years ago

Sidenote on marketing: this is probably an amazing screen, but the gadgetmarketspeak designation of "Pure Motion HD+" makes me tune out instantly.

The cleverness of "retina display" was that a single explanatory sentence told you everything you need to know - this phone has better resolution than your eyes can fully perceive.

"Pure Motion HD+" means nothing to me - is that better or worse than 'true HD'? (For that matter, was the original just plain 'HD' actually fake HD?)

I had the unfortunate experience of trying to gauge displays at Best Buy yesterday, where machines in the same category would variously have resolution designations from "1280x800" to "SXGA" to "True HD" to nothing whatsoever, depending on what they thought sounded best, and the cumulative effect was that I felt less aware of my purchase options looking at the actual machines than simply checking opinions on Newegg.

I can't imagine trying to navigate that process as a consumer with other priorities in life. And they wonder why Apple has such healthy profit margins in comparison...

option_greek• 14 years ago

There are some things other companies never seem to learn from apple:

1) Differentiating their phones by weird model numbers that no one remembers

2) Making product announcements with no details about price and availability

3) Cramming all kind of high end features and adding non catchy names like this PureGodKnowsWhatEver+ in their product descriptions and praying people will buy them.

dmansen• 14 years ago

4) Have real products that people can play with in stores (last time I was at Best Buy, not a single phone worked)

5) Support products long after they are released

altrego99• 14 years ago

Both are marketing gimmick at the end of the day. And Apple (Jobs) has been leading in that department very well - Nokia had 3G long before iPhone 3G was released. Nokia had multitasking long before it was there in iPhone 4. And Nokia E6 had a PPI of 328, much before 'Retina Display' was advertised... and such high PPI is useless except for marketing anyway.

rbanffy• 14 years ago

That's great news. All of us time-travelers who sport extra-high resolution artificial eyes will be able to see all the extra detail this higher density allows.

Now, seriously, there is absolutely no need to increase pixel density

wideroots• 14 years ago

We have seen this kind of competition everywhere. It's not about whether human eyes can tell the difference or not. It's about something of product A has higher number than that of product B. This has been the game everywhere (e.g. digital cameras with 10000000 MP). Don't hate players. Hate the game.

jarek3• 14 years ago

> Now, seriously, there is absolutely no need to increase pixel density

Isn't that what they said in 2010, and 2005, and 2000?

When we have a display that's "retina" when being held 1 mm in front of sharp eyes you might be able to say there's "no need." Until then, the market will decide.

MartinCron• 14 years ago

I don't think anyone was saying that there's no need to increase pixel density in 2000 or 2005, at least not to me.

Can you even focus 1mm in front of your eyes? I can't, but I'm old.

RandallBrown• 14 years ago

Nokia should never have released the 900 if this was so close on their roadmap. I say this as someone who bought the 900 and stopped using it because the screen and camera sucked. My 2 year old iPhone 4 was better in almost every way.

lambda• 14 years ago

Can we please say "higher resolution" or "higher density" rather than an abomination like "more retina"?

vilius• 14 years ago

(The yet unreleased) Nokia Lumia 920 is more retina than the (one year old) iPhone. Oh... I mean... more pure motion HD plus than iPhone! And: It’s surprising that Nokia didn’t mention that the Lumia 920 is just like iPhone, but with more widgets, therefore better.

I understand that this kind of marketing works. But how? How come people do not value true innovation and choose to buy "better than HD resolution" when what they really need is already crisp iPhone screen?

grecy• 14 years ago

A product with an unknown price that you can't buy is better than a product you've been able to buy for a year now.

Interesting.

jinushaun• 14 years ago

Too bad the Metro interface doesn't take full advantage of those pixels. Text is now smoother, but flat squares with sharp corners look the same at any resolution.

Nokia Lumia 920 is more retina than the iPhone 4S

Related Stories