# Oooo, this is interesting!



## Awexit76 (Jul 1, 2011)

First look?

http://www.gsmarena.com/exclusive_s...224.php?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

I just saw that and came here to post it. Glad to have the confirmation of no physical keys. I was hoping there would be less useless bezel around the screen, though.

For those who don't really want to read:
1. Click the link and see the purdy picture
2. They confirmed it's a 4.6" 720p display
3. They think it's a curved screen


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

So after playing with some math, this appears to be either a ~4.6" screen or a ~4.3" screen and I can't say which. Why? Well, in the photo, the resolution is reported as 1184x720. Is this the real resolution of the LCD or the "active resolution" as some are reporting? ("Active Resolution" ignores the pixels for the buttons and perhaps also the notification bar.) Well, the answer to that question is what tells us if this is a 4.3" or a 4.6" device. Either way, we know this has a DPI of ~320, so that is a known variable in our equation

Some math for you (or a link for the lazy or mathematically-challenged):

*4.59" Scenario:* Display size: 4" × 2.25" (10.16cm × 5.72cm) = 319.96 PPI, 0.0794mm dot pitch, 102373 PPI²
*4.33" Scenario:* Display size: 3.7" × 2.25" (9.4cm × 5.71cm) = 320.03 PPI, 0.0794mm dot pitch, 102420 PPI²


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

Those three buttons on the bottom don't appear to be part of tthe screen though. The background of the buttons is like to black amd it matches perfectly to the rest of the phone.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

malac0da said:


> Those three buttons on the bottom don't appear to be part of tthe screen though. The background of the buttons is like to black amd it matches perfectly to the rest of the phone.


I don't know. If you look at the right side of the photo, there's a clear distinction between the black behind the buttons and the black around the screen. On the left side you can't see it but it's certainly there on the right side. I think these are on-screen buttons.


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

I see what you mean but I still don't think they are on screen. Its just to black. And the screen with the text is the screen making black. You would think if it could make the black as nice as the keys it would make all black that nice.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

malac0da said:


> I see what you mean but I still don't think they are on screen. Its just to black. And the screen with the text is the screen making black. You would think if it could make the black as nice as the keys it would make all black that nice.


Actually, you bring up a good point here although it's different than what you think it is. ;-)

My question now is, shouldn't the black background around the text on there be MUCH darker since this is an AMOLED? I thought a black pixel = a pixel with no backlighting to it? In this picture, the background behind/around the text is clearly lit up with some kind of backlight (well, I guess unless it was intentionally a dark gray color). Is this an indication that this is a bogus photo?

I've never had an AMOLED device before so I don't know. That's what I understood, though. I wonder if this is simply some other device rotated 180 degrees (to look like it has no buttons) trying to fool us...


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

Lol I don't know. My wife hassle droid charge I will have to look at her screen and see if I can compare. Maybe take a picture of a similar black screen with white text and maybe with a flash and what not. I though Samsung phones had much blacker blacks too compared to that picture. I mean looking at my droidx screen that blacks look blacker than that photo.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

So I was playing with my wife's phone and if I didn't use a flash and reflected light off it like in the picture the black didn't look ad black similar to how it is in the picture. Just not as grey...but then again I don't have a big florescent light like that.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Jonathon (Jun 22, 2011)

"Jaxidian said:


> Actually, you bring up a good point here although it's different than what you think it is. ;-)
> 
> My question now is, shouldn't the black background around the text on there be MUCH darker since this is an AMOLED? I thought a black pixel = a pixel with no backlighting to it? In this picture, the background behind/around the text is clearly lit up with some kind of backlight (well, I guess unless it was intentionally a dark gray color). Is this an indication that this is a bogus photo?
> 
> I've never had an AMOLED device before so I don't know. That's what I understood, though. I wonder if this is simply some other device rotated 180 degrees (to look like it has no buttons) trying to fool us...


With my SAMOLED Nexus S, I'm able to say that even proper blacks have some lightness to them, as I believe some light may filter through from nearby sources. That's just me thinking of a logical explanation but it's particularly noticeable in a dark room, a pure black screen still 'glows' enough to distinguish it from the bezel and the screen when off. This difference is very minuscule however.

Sent from my Nexus S using RootzWiki Forums


----------



## Rythmyc (Jul 23, 2011)

There is a difference between the black on the screen, and the black border on the Charge. However slight, it is there, and i'm sure the lighting played a large role in dulling the black on that screen.


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

I'm beginning to think this photo is a fake. I have no proof but something doesn't quite add up here unless we truly are getting traditional soft keys (like the Evo and TBolt) instead of software-driven soft keys (like in Honeycomb). If those really are Evo/TBolt-like softkeys, then this picture may be legit. Otherwise, I'm calling fake.

I could be wrong.


----------



## leobg (Aug 15, 2011)

This on the leaked picture cannot be an AMOLED display.


----------



## youneek (Jul 25, 2011)

There's no way that's it. There's so much light in the black areas it's not even funny.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

The florescent light could messed with it but I'm doubting its the real deal...the other leaked pocket is definitely just a render though.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## rgray331975 (Jun 10, 2011)

Do we know its even amoled. I would assume thats the only reason samsung won the build contract

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

rgray331975 said:


> Do we know its even amoled. I would assume thats the only reason samsung won the build contract
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


Well, we KNOW nothing but every leak has said it's the Super HD AMOLED screen, so we're taking it for granted.


----------



## kidserious (Jul 2, 2011)

rgray331975 said:


> Do we know its even amoled. I would assume thats the only reason samsung won the build contract
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


That, and because Samsung makes the BEST hardware period.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## malac0da (Jun 6, 2011)

And almost all of Samsung phone are some form of amoled screen. Anyone see the actual images of the phone on my droid world...and the screen shots? There might actually be the soft buttons on the screen cuz they are in the screen shots.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## elliott35 (Jul 17, 2011)

To put this into perspective for me... What is the iphones pixel density


----------



## Jaxidian (Jun 6, 2011)

elliott35 said:


> To put this into perspective for me... What is the iphones pixel density


My first google result says 326.



> iPhone: 320x480 | 3.5 in | 164ppi
> Palm Pre | 320x480 | 3.1 in 186ppi
> Palm Pixie | 320x400 | 2.63 in | 194ppi
> T-Mobile G1 | 320x480 | 3.2 in | 180ppi
> ...


----------



## Revoked (Aug 2, 2011)

so the FCC docs show the gti9250 with a 1000 mA battery... Hopefully this is only because it is preproduction?


----------



## razor2006 (Jul 16, 2011)

"Revoked said:


> so the FCC docs show the gti9250 with a 1000 mA battery... Hopefully this is only because it is preproduction?


Yeah, it'll likely be 1750.


----------

