World's Smallest Full HD Display is Just 4.8-inch

[dertechie]

[citation][nom]mman74[/nom]Oooo nice. Question of the day for a thumbs up: With that pixel density, what resolution can get it to display on a standard 24" monitor?[/citation]

24" Monitor at that pixel density is something on the order of 9600x5400.

 

[AMW1011]

For those of you who have seen the iPhone
4's 326 ppi display, you can't deny that it's one amazing-looking LCD. The iPhone screen may still only be 3.5-inches diagonal, but the pixel density suddenly makes the screen much better and more usable.

This might be true. If I held the damn phone inches from my eyeballs.

From my normal holding distance of 1.5-2 foot, like almost ANYONE that isn't blind, I can't notice any significant difference.

The Retina Display is a USELESS GIMMICK.

 

[miloo]

just wondering how much it will cost for this new tech on a smartphone

 

[RazberyBandit]

[citation][nom]stm1185[/nom]That is all well and good but where is my 3840x2160 27inch monitor.[/citation]
You must be talking about TRUE Full HD instead of the commercially-accepted "full HD" right?

Gotta give it up to them for cramming that high a resolution into a screen so small.

 

[jmchien]

PSP2?

 

[lassik]

It's nice what they can do with technology now, but to echo others views, he need higher res monitors!!

But seriously, you'd have to press this thing against your eyeball to notice and significant difference from, say, the retina display.

 

[dthx]

Anything above 300dpi is just a complete whaste of energy (CPU time to calculate those unneeded pixels)

 

[technogiant]

Personal viewing goggles with wireless 1080p media streaming please.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]There really isn't any point to pushing pixel densities very far above 300 dots per inch. You would have to hold the phone very close to your face to even notice the difference.[/citation]

actually in labs we have 1000+dpi displays, but those are made for head mount, so you have a 1.8 inch screen, its magnified and looks like a 50 inch screen at the perfect distance from you.
[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]What are you going to do with all the extra pixels on your 60" television? Not watch the content that doesn't exist? Sounds awesome. I always wished I could have more pixels than I could possibly use.[/citation]

hardware upscaling. i mean with dvds some upscalers to an amaseing job making that video look significantly better than just dvd resolution.

imagine that but with current hd resolutions. right now most of what i get is 720p, would be nice if that upscaled to 1080 and not just staying 720.
[citation][nom]miloo[/nom]just wondering how much it will cost for this new tech on a smartphone[/citation]

it depends, i have heard of stuff costing less than 10$ to make, but it costs a crap ton because it can. look at oled stuff for an example.

 

[Guest]

Hometask for Toms Hardware handymen: please make an awesome projector with this display.

 

[normano]

[citation][nom]zerapio[/nom]You don't need to be an Apple fanboy to orgasm to that. That's one sexy display.[/citation]

you really need to get out more

 

[ohim]

This will be one of those things for an excuse to charge high prices for hand helds .... WOW FULL HD screen ... too bad you`ll need a microscope to actually see all that detail there... i mean i don`t see the difference between bluray and dvd on my laptop screen while watching from my bed at 1-2 meters distance .. what in the world will be the difference between SD and HD on that little screen ? Price only maybe.

 

[Lewis57]

[citation][nom]stm1185[/nom]That is all well and good but where is my 3840x2160 27inch monitor.[/citation]

Exactly. If it wasn't for this "HD" crap on 1920x1080 monitors, 2560 x 1440 would surely be the norm today. HD seems to have killed off larger resolution monitors because people will instantly think 1920x1080p is better than 2560 x 1440.

 

[Chris_TC]

[citation][nom]r0x0r[/nom]Youtube has 4k videos.[/citation]
They are compressed to death. And there aren't very many sources for 4K footage at all. Which makes sense because practically nobody can actually watch it at native res.

Higher resolutions than 1080p don't make sense for TVs at this point in time. As far as computer monitors go.... bring it on, the more res the more productivity.

 

[quantum mask]

[citation][nom]terror112[/nom]This is one problem I see with HD technology is that they like to stick the same resolution on small displays and larger displays for consistency's sake. Now how hard can it be to cram a few more pixels on a 60" tv for god's sake?? It's pretty sad how a 4.8" Lcd can have the same resolution as a 60"er.. I WANT MORE PIXELS.[/citation]
If you're talking about TV, extra pixels won't help as the source will still be 1080P. However for gaming, that would be great! I have a dual monitor setup - a 22" computer monitor and a 37" HDTV for the second monitor. It's a shame that the smaller computer monitor get better resolution.

 

[cookoy]

excellent for display photos. prefer to watch anything Full HD video on a much larger screen, 32" minimum.

 

[Jarmo]

Useless gimmick. 720p would be indistinguishable from this from viewing distances beyond 20cm.
That's not full HD because there'd be any advantage from it, that's full HD so you can say it is.
And that's full HD to get media attention, which seems to work.

 

[mlopinto2k1]

The ignorance runs rampant... ahhhh!!! Catch the ignorance! It's going nuts! That is one sexy ass display. For those who want a high density monitor, may I suggest a 30" Eizo IPS?

 

[Gin Fushicho]

WOW. I want one of these. That'd be awesome, for once I'd be able to watch an HD movie on the go in HD.

My eyes can tell the difference.... they can. I'm near sighted and plant those things close to my face because of it.

 

[mlopinto2k1]

[citation][nom]Jarmo[/nom]Useless gimmick. 720p would be indistinguishable from this from viewing distances beyond 20cm.That's not full HD because there'd be any advantage from it, that's full HD so you can say it is.And that's full HD to get media attention, which seems to work.[/citation]Useless gimmick?? Why the hell would they invest in a technology that yielded NO results if they could save money using 720p res screens? Because this is a useless gimmick??? I call bullsh!t.