Hi Guys,

I for one very strongly believe for a Audio-Visual product maybe also like a Cellphone the display has to be really good especially if you are also gonna use it as an entertainment device. So on the same lines I was having this discussion which later on turned out into an argument with one of my friend.

Now he has a Blackberry-Bold 9700 which has a Transmissive TFT LCD, Which comes with a Light sensing screen and Backlighting. He was saying that the display of Blackberry Bold 9700 is better then that of the N900. Though the pixel ratio of the N900(800x480) could be higher than that of the Bold (480x360). He said that please do not boast about the high pixel ratio and the 3.5 inch screen real estate it could be all futile if it is not able to produce that quality pictures, with the Transmissive TFT LCD and the Backlighting the display of the BB Bold look a lot richer and lively then the N900. When I looked at it though I kind of felt no the N900 had a better display. But frankly speaking I couldn’t really decide, what he was saying also did make sense as the picture in the Bold looked very lively?

What do you guys think? Does the Transmissive TFT LCD, Light sensing screen, backlighting makes the Blackberry Bold 9700 have a better display than that of the N900. This despite being a N900 forum I expect unbiased observations from Die-Hard Fans of the N900 who also equally appreciate a quality product from a competitor if it truly deserves some admiration and appreciation


.

The N900 has a Transreflective TFT LCD. It performs insanely better under sunlight. Transmissive displays (like the one in the N97 Mini) gets whooped under sunlight. Severely whooped. They're totally unusable under direct sunlight, whereas everything is still visible on the N900, just quite monochromatic in appearance.

EVERY LCD (used in a phone) has a backlight. [OLEDs are not LCD's, before anyone suggests it. And (for example) LCDs in watches don't have a backlight, in case anyone wonders.] Ask him to GoogleTFU first, before acting like an expert. The N900 has a Content Adaptive Backlight Control (Backlight adjusts according to content on screen, finally found the goddamned name) + Light sensor. There is no such thing as a light sensing screen on a mobile. The small hidden circle near the top left edge of the N900 (usually very hard to see) is a light sensor. It alters backlight's brightness automatically and subtly. To adjust, go to Settings > Display. The adjusting is allowed by a check next to power saving mode.

The N900's display doesn't have the best contrast, which will make it look duller, but IMO the colours are more accurate, since I find the BB Bold display oversaturated. The N900 is also limited to 65k colours, but that's quite unvisible unless you view an image with a gradient.

If you have problem finding or quantifying the difference, I'd say it's not worth worrying over.

Unless you're doing Pantone referenced artwork on your pocketables. Or your **** is super sensitive of the skin tones reproduction in your pr0ns.

IMHO.

i'd say yes to the above...jejejeje....

Also, what good is a display if the display forces you to squint? A large display of at least 3.5" is necessary IMO - the one on BB Bold 9700 is far too small.

What good is a quality display if my head splits after watching a movie on it after squinting as though I was attempting to discover X-Ray powers?

So see, again we are just talking about the screen Real Estate not the Quality of display only the quantity ? This is exactly what even he was arguing with me on.

There is a minimum quantity required before quality matters.

Take a 1" screen with a 100000000000000000000000000:1 contrast ratio, capable of displaying 64bit colour (2^16 = ~18billion billion colours) and a industry leading colour accuracy. Sure, it might give me the best picture, but I sure as hell ain't going to even bother using it.