Samsung said to reach 350ppi pixel density with current production tech, we await Super AMOLED HD Plus

9. Ohrules (Posts: 327; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)

seriously, what would be the point of that? the eye cannot identify pixels at around 300 ppi, so the difference in the clarity of the screen at 400 ppi would not be worth the cost. Although, high ppi is a very useful spec to advertise and win customers.

12. PimpStrong (Posts: 310; Member since: 25 Jul 2011)

I agree. I see no difference on my 40" Samsung when I switch between 720 and 1080 on the XBOX. 1080 is pointless on 4-5.3" screen.

SuperAMOLED 720RGB will be just ridiculously good.

25. Fallout09 (Posts: 421; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

FYI.... 1080 gets more picture on the screen the 720.

36. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)

Actually , 1080p is not meaning less on a 5.3 inch screen, like one on the note for several reasons.

1) There are people, like me, who have good vision, and can distinguish the differences between 300ppi and 400ppi. You could argue that because we only take up the fraction of the market, such investments would not be fruitful, but considering a phone like the Note 2 will only sell to a fraction of the market, the technology would go great hand in hand.

2) There is a definite change in image quality when moving to a higher resolution, especially when the resolution of the image in higher than that of the screen. For example. a 2048x1536 image would look significantly better on an iPad 3 than a Transformer Infinity, because even though the res isn't that much higher in ppi, and the distances at which they are held qualify them to be "retina", every detail is accommodated for with the higher res screen, and your eye perceives the image to be much more sharp. Same goes for an iPad 2 vs a Transformer Prime. If they're ppi's are barely that much apart, and you see a significant improvement, image the improvements 100+ ppi would yield.

Same goes with movies and Blu-Ray

17. blazee (Posts: 414; Member since: 02 Jan 2012)

That's not true some can definitely tell a difference. Some have better vision than others, some have sub super human sight. Also the closer you bring your eyes to the screen the more evident that difference can be. Maybe for most people around 300ppi density is at the capacity of ppi they could see, but definitelly does not apply to everyone.

32. Grishm (Posts: 54; Member since: 18 May 2012)

Seriously, don't tell me you didn't think I was being sarcastic.

33. nofear (Posts: 151; Member since: 22 Jun 2012)

I would like to see this new technology on a tablet 7" to 10" or on laptop. At least, 1080p for now.

34. thebest (Posts: 231; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)

exactly, anything more than 300ppi is useless...it would reduce the battery life and we won't be able to see the extra pixels as well

37. The_Innovation (Posts: 632; Member since: 18 Jul 2012)

Which, essentially, is an Apple tactic.

19. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

and what's next? inventing something above 1080p? take your time and enjoy 720p instead whinning!

26. Fallout09 (Posts: 421; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

News flash.... Above 1080p has already been invented and is already hit the market.... 4k.... heard of it? Basically every new release movie you have seen in the past years was most likely shown in 4k. Sony, Sharp and Samsung have 4k TVs hit the market for home use too..... but as you can guess the price is astronomical.

28. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

pointless resolution
you've been thumbed up for being Interplay follwer (I hope) )

30. Fallout09 (Posts: 421; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

Pointless resolution? Really? 4k is the sole reason you see such clarity on the 30'x70' movie screen. Because of 4k, you can now see every dimple and wiggle on Scarlett Johansson's butt when she walked in the Avengers. 326ppi on a 3.5 screen is a pointless resolution.

20. buggerrer (Posts: 306; Member since: 21 Sep 2011)

with 1080p displays and more than 400+ ppi you need at least 4000mAh battery to get you through a day, maybe half!

23. Klamba92 (Posts: 210; Member since: 25 Jun 2012)

Even though its possible there is no need as the screen size is so small that the human eye wont be able to tell the difference. It would just be wasted opportunity I would rather OEM's make the phones more durable and have longer lasting batteries like the droid razr maxx! and make all phones come with NFC as standard!

35. thebest (Posts: 231; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)

actually samsung should work on increasing the battery life instead of concentrating on the resolution....they should also work on anti glare screens, a 720p anti glare display with better battery life is better than a 1080p display without an anti glare filter and lesser battery life

10. pokharkarsaga (Posts: 417; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)

why not,the more the pixels in an inch field,the more the crystal live clarity.it depends on manufacturers how much money they want to make out from an innovation,therefore have patience.....

16. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

that would be awesome. Though If they just now "cracked the code" they might not be able to get the supply chains up and running with enough time to give it to the GN2. At worst that means it should be in the SGS4.