Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsmith
320 x 240 is 25% less pixels than 320 x 320, not 50% less.
Your point still stands though -- it's a completely lame screen for a WM 6.5 device introduced in late 2009. I can't imagine what Samsung was thinking here.
|
Thanks for the correction.
My thought: this was a WM Standard device and at the last minute, with WM6.5, they swapped it out for...whatever reason.
Had they kept the dimensions and made it 320x320, it would have been like 2.7" which would have been soooo awesome
Quote:
Originally Posted by holdenmichael
where would you see the effect of 80 (x320) less pixels (programs, movies, video podcasts, pictures) and how much of an effect? I could understand this complaint if the Treo Pro had a 640x640 screen or even 640x480 screen, but the video I watched on a Treo Pro (in store) didn't look great. I preferred the screen on the HTC Snap even though it had less pixels.
Darn, I already live on the fringe for most carriers so a weak signal might be a deal breaker. Is it worse than an Apache? TP? I've not dropped a call with either of those. My Q9c did well too.
Speaking of which, the battery life and loud speaker were the hardest things to leave behind when I switched from my Q9c to a Touch Pro.
How loud, compared to a Q9c, is the external speaker on the Intrepid?
|
It just feels cramped. WM6.5 is very "large font" orientated so you can't fit a lot on screen at 320x230, it just feels like a tight fit.
Yeah, it does have a weak signal. Hard to compare others but that and the data speeds are just not that impressive.
Speakers are fine so long as you don't leave it face-up--speaker is completely blocked. But it's nice and loud during speaker phone use, no complaints there.
Look, for a basic email/text and phone device, it ain't half bad, but it could have been much better.