jjesusfreak01
07-05-2005, 09:20 AM
Here is an excerpt from a CNet review of one of Samsungs new smartphones:
The i730's screen resolution is lower than the Treo 650's (240x320 pixels vs. 320x320 for the Treo), but its 2.8-inch rectangular screen is better for Web browsing and video playback than the Treo's square display, particularly when using the Windows Mobile 2003 SE screen-rotation feature.
Now, I would like to know how a smaller screen is better for video just because it is shaped differently. I can load TCPMP onto a Treo 650, play a 240x320 video, and it will just play with borders on the top and bottom. I could even rotate it and do the same thing in landscape.
Here is where it differs. On the Treo 650, I could take a 320x320 video and play it fullscreen, while the Samsung could not do this without scaling. I dont want to put down this phone, as it looks really nice, but these crazy claims really hurt CNets credibility. At least their cellphone editor is a little more sanne than their handheld editor.
The i730's screen resolution is lower than the Treo 650's (240x320 pixels vs. 320x320 for the Treo), but its 2.8-inch rectangular screen is better for Web browsing and video playback than the Treo's square display, particularly when using the Windows Mobile 2003 SE screen-rotation feature.
Now, I would like to know how a smaller screen is better for video just because it is shaped differently. I can load TCPMP onto a Treo 650, play a 240x320 video, and it will just play with borders on the top and bottom. I could even rotate it and do the same thing in landscape.
Here is where it differs. On the Treo 650, I could take a 320x320 video and play it fullscreen, while the Samsung could not do this without scaling. I dont want to put down this phone, as it looks really nice, but these crazy claims really hurt CNets credibility. At least their cellphone editor is a little more sanne than their handheld editor.