QVGA V/s VGA for GTA03 (was something about yummy CPU-GPU combos!)
linux.luser at myrealbox.com
Tue Jun 10 17:40:08 CEST 2008
On 10 Jun 2008, at 02:17, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> browsing full web pages scrammed into a 2.8" screen as many have
> suggested, is
> really... pushing such a tiny screen far beyond its usefulness. web
> pages are
> "designed" for 14" or 17" screens or so. squeezing them down into
> 2.8" is nigh
> madness. it's possible - but vga vs qvga there isn't the factor
> (imho) :)
I'm sorry, Carsten, but this just makes me think you're nuts. Um, I
I mean, I know you know loads more about this sort of thing than I
do, but mobile phone web-browsers are absolutely standard these days.
I can see your point that the size of mobile phone screens makes for
poor viewing, but that doesn't mean we're not going to do it anyway -
viewing a webpage when you're out and about is SO tremendously useful
(maybe not all the time, but when one needs it) that it's got to be a
And to say that 4 times the pixels makes no discernible difference in
this? Well, c'mon!
True, there may be many people who never use the web-browser in their
mobile phone, but my Mum just uses the cheapest mobile phone she got
for £20 from Tesco. Likewise my ex-girlfriend bought her mobile phone
because it was pink, or pretty by whatever other criteria is
important this week.
People buying Openmoko phones will do so because they want to install
applications (if only one or two) on them, and these are the sort of
people who will turn to a web-browser when they're stuck for some
piece of information and away from home.
More information about the community