▲ | Aachen 2 hours ago | |
I've always considered it a benefit if they don't spend needless money and waste my battery life on rendering more pixels than I'll ever see. My eyesight hasn't gotten better and as a teenager the 720p pixel density of the phablet called Galaxy Note 2 was already smaller than I can make out during normal use (i.e. not if I'm actively trying to see if I can make them out) But sure, higher number sells better, no matter if this actually makes any difference to anyone | ||
▲ | zamadatix an hour ago | parent [-] | |
If it were just that "higher number sells better" reasoning then it wouldn't make sense the density increases had a pretty hard stop after ~2014. Same with why 8k TV hype died down but 4k TV became mainstream - it's about the genuine limit for a typical person at typical TV viewing distance unless they have an absolutely massive TV. I always thought Samsung had a clever approach with a toggle to just render at the lower resolution if you wanted the lower rendering load. Then you still only need to develop 1 cutting edge screen with all of the latest improvements but it will please both use cases well as the cost overhead of shipping models 2 separate screens would. |