Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 5 hrs, 1 min ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 17 hrs ago - more...
DeboX |
2009-12-21
, 08:42
|
|
Posts: 49 |
Thanked: 2 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#21
|
No one has anything mroe to add???
|
|
2009-12-21
, 09:05
|
|
Posts: 5 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by Nitchers
does it affect in anyway the brightness or contrast of the screen? thanks
I have this one it fits perfect and works great too.
http://www.protectionfilms24.com/art...900-27604.html
|
|
2009-12-21
, 10:38
|
|
Posts: 43 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Marseille , France
|
#23
|
the arm200 is no good for the screen , the touch sensation is different and it adds a kind of rubber effect on the screen. avoid it.
|
|
2009-12-22
, 14:25
|
|
Posts: 1,255 |
Thanked: 393 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ US
|
#24
|
I have wasted $16 so far on two protectors:
1. The one linked on this site for 50% off that requires soapy water. The application was problematic for me.
2. I bought one from eBay that did not require water and installed easy and fit great, but had a mirror surface that distorted the image if you viewed the screen in any angle and also was not very clear then. (yes, I removed both films)
The eBay one would have been perfect without the mirror surface.
1. The one linked on this site for 50% off that requires soapy water. The application was problematic for me.
2. I bought one from eBay that did not require water and installed easy and fit great, but had a mirror surface that distorted the image if you viewed the screen in any angle and also was not very clear then. (yes, I removed both films)
The eBay one would have been perfect without the mirror surface.
 |
|
2009-12-22
, 14:36
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#25
|
Originally Posted by tissot
i found that the original materials can be a tad slippery if not holding the phone firmly whereas the InvisibleShield on the back stops it slipping when you aren't paying attention or have cold hands.
...
I don't find any reason to protect the whole device. It's done from very durable materials, no chrome like materials that would get scratched and Nokia thankfully even went for protecting the camera lens so yeah, can't find absolutely any reason to protect the whole device.
|
|
2009-12-22
, 14:43
|
|
Posts: 308 |
Thanked: 118 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ UK Swindon
|
#26
|
i received a pack of 7 from ebay UK this week but they dont have a hole in for the earpiece doh - cant hear!!! Well designed I'd say - not.
|
|
2009-12-22
, 15:19
|
|
Posts: 6 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by val580
I got an ARMR200 to replace my invisibleSHIELD, and it's exactly the opposite of what you've described. It's smooth and non-tacky, whereas the IS gave a rubbery effect.
the arm200 is no good for the screen , the touch sensation is different and it adds a kind of rubber effect on the screen. avoid it.
It's a non-glossy, anti-glare surface that loves fingerprints - but I've used a similar hard plastic protector for years on my Clie and it never got scratched or worn so I'm confident it'll protect the screen correctly.
|
|
2009-12-22
, 18:31
|
|
Posts: 266 |
Thanked: 83 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#28
|
that is why you should've bought the
Vikuiti™ DQC-160
What i did
Vikuiti™ DQC-160
What i did
|
|
2009-12-22
, 19:03
|
|
Posts: 113 |
Thanked: 30 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#29
|
I manually installed a diy invisible armour, it feels rubbery and was a pain to put on the N900, but keeps the screen nice.
|
|
2009-12-22
, 19:07
|
|
Posts: 65 |
Thanked: 50 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Eugene, Or
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by gravis86
I bought one friday.
IMO, Clarivue makes some of the best. They stick on with static, and are not rubbery. But they don't make one for the N900 yet.
http://www.clarivue.com/nokia-n900-s...protector.html