Screens better in Tungsten than T-665?

[PCMaven]

I've been reading a discussion in one of the mailing lists in which the author of IconMgr states that the screens in the Tungsten T are noticeably better than the screens of Sony PDAs.
I own a T-665 and can't believe that the screen is that much better in a Tungsten.
Can anyone verify these statements?

[phil ng]

I own both. I say from personal experience, the screen on the T665 is "crisper" and "blue - er" to it, while the Tungsten has a "smoother" and "yellow - er" tint to it.

Tungsten T is a good notch brighter on the brighter setting, but no one turns it that high unless you want to burn battery or use ur palm as a flashlight :)

Oh one major thing, which annoys me to no end.
The T665 has never had any dust under the screen, even after months in my dusty pocket. My N760 has about a pound of dust under my screen. The tungsten has three giant specks of dust under the screen. Although I don't know if this is "better"

[Gazpacho]

The screen of the TT is reflective, whereas the Sony Clies are transflective- a newer and seemingly better technology.

I must say, because the actual pixels of the screen lie a good deal lower than the digitizer on the TT, that alone is enough to annoy me on the TT.

The best (transflective) screens to date are on the TC and the Zire 71. Beautiful, paper like.

Look here (http://www.kyocera.com/kicc/lcd/notes/transflective.htm) for more infos on screen types. Reflective / Transflective / Transmissive.

[PCMaven]

Thanks for the responses...They basically confirm what I thought. Seems as if people think all Clie screens are washed out because the T-615 was...:(