Why doesnt your phone have a 4k display?
>>52025718
for what purpose
>>52025718
Same reason that 4K display doesn't have a phone.
>>52025718
>20 second battery life
No thanks.
I would downgrade my 1440p display to 1080p if I could. I certainly don't need 4k
2k is almost too much
I can barely tell the difference between my galaxy s3 and g4, besides for being able to fit more on the screen from being bigger
On my 720 p phone my 1080p movie collection movies looks immaculate. Why pay a shitload more for a 4k screen when I dont have content for it.
![European-fashion-font-b-wrought-b-font-font-b-iron-b-font-font-b-painting-b[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lkUnwfc.jpg "European-fashion-font-b-wrought-b-font-font-b-iron-b-font-font-b-painting-b[1].jpg")
if my phone was 4K and was 52" wide id put it in my living room
Why the fuck does it need it? Lollipop can't even run 4k properly and marshmallow likely won't by default either
>tfw I have a 720p phone
>tfw it's absolutely gorgeous and I can't even see the pixels
The pixel density is greater than that of a 23 inch 4k display.
Why would I ever need to fit even more pixels on it?
>>52025718
Why the fuck would I want it? I have a hard enough time pressing the 4chan thread expansion button on my Nexus 9
>>52025825
That'll be $4K.
So how's battery life with 4k?
Multiple phone does have a 4k screen.
I'd rather that it had a 1920x1080 screen. 4k on a 5.1" screen is pointless.
>>52025718
because it has a usable battery.
Try not fall for the meme next time
>>5202>>52025747
I have a 2k display and barely get 4-5 of screen on time.
My Droid turbo would have much better battery life without the 1440p screen
On the other hand, it allowed me to see that with Google Glass the "screen door" effect is still in full swing with such a high resolution screen and knowing that the rift/vive will have even lower res displays means I'm noping the fuck out of 1st Gen vr. Thank you based Motorola.
My iPhone 6 Plus is 1080p, I don't think I'll be able to appreciate the resolution if it was any bigger than that.
I even doubt if the tiny smartphone ARM CPU is even able to run an actual 4K movie if I need a souped up graphics card for my computer to achieve the same thing.
We don't need 4K. At least, not right now. It's only a placebo Android gimmick that beta tests for future Apple products.
>>52025718
i had the compact one and the premium
i cant even tell the difference
>>52026340
Most phones on the market today including the iPhone 6S has hardware decode for up to 4K videos. Uses virtually no power.
>>52026340
>I don't think I'll be able to appreciate the resolution if it was any bigger than that.
You're mostly wrong. One thing to consider is the phone is going to be VERY close to your face compared to any sized 4k TV. Your eyes could very easily see individual pixels.
>>52026362
The kid literally has an iPhone. You expect him to know how technology works?
>>52026412
>VERY close to your face
really?
what do you do with your phone?
>>52025718
Because the dpi is already high enough on my phone for individual pixels to not be visible to the naked eye at regular viewing distances so increasing the resolution to 4k would do nothing but drain the battery faster.
>>52026350
Blind faggot detected.
>>52026441
Ok. Go grab your phone and hold it about a comfortable distance that you would actively use it(such as shitposting on /g/). Next in your free manlet hand grab your tv and hold that sucker in the same manner.
I want a battery life that's longer than 4 hours.
>>52025718
>4K on a 5 inche screen
>>52026561
Battery life on phones are better than ever, even with these 2560x resolutions and larger screens.
>>52026571
>technology progress sux
>>52025806
do people really watch movies on their phones?
or am i getting memed here?
>>52025718
You sure can see the benefit of that 4k screen resolution in that 740x418 image.
>>52026578
I'm not paying for this level of "progress". I have no practical need for this kind of technology.
>>52026578
>>technology progress sux
how about work on technology that's useful like faster mobile internet, better battery life or better call connection and not for some meme resolution?
>>52026614
>I have no practical need for this kind of technology.
Should've just said that instead of outright dismissing technological progress.
pointless. just wastes battery. bless you are talking about a 55"+ inch phone
>>52026642
There IS no practical use for this kind of technology. It's a gimmick that needlessly depletes battery and increases the cost of the product. It's like buying toilet paper sprinkled with gold dust.
>>52025718
Anything with 520+ DPI is enough.
>>52026641
>how about work on technology that's useful like faster mobile internet, better battery life or better call connection and not for some meme resolution?
Are they not working on those aspects?
4G LTE speed ceilings are constantly improving, MIMO Wi-Fi AC, battery life is still improving, 4G/Wi-Fi Voice calling. Resolution is just another thing that's improving.
>>52026674
>It's a gimmick that needlessly depletes battery and increases the cost of the product.
UI rendering is so simple it doesn't require much more GPU power to do 4K over 2560x.
Also, battery life is still improving all over the board even with all these recent resolution increases.
Once 4K becomes standard it will become cheap, and the research that goes into making these displays has a lot of benefits for other industries using the same manufacturing techniques.
Again, stop dismissing technological progress just because you have no need for it.
>>52025718
That phone runs the display at 1920x1080 when it isn't playing video though.
I think that is reason enough why my phone doesn't have a 4k display.
>>52026735
The battery hit isn't even in rendering. Higher pixel densities require stronger backlighting which is a huge power drain.
>>52026578
>Battery life on phones are better than ever
But if we limited the resolution to something reasonable for each phone's screen size, you could get so much more time out of that battery per charge.
Why do you think portable chargers have gotten so hugely popular lately?
Literally the only reason to have higher than 1080p on a smartphone is VR, which is a meme anyway.
>>52026794
>Higher pixel densities require stronger backlighting which is a huge power drain.
Not always true, especially with AMOLED displays. Also researching 4K displays help with developing more transparent circuitry for use not only in the LCD industry,
>>52026805
There are already phones with only 1080p and 720p displays. 4K is Sony demonstrating their R&D power and bragging rights. But 4K will definitely become standard on flagships next year whether the Hoi polloi likes it or not.
>>52026882
Though tons of phones are still IPS, which trades energy efficiency for color accuracy.
And it isn't Sony with 4k, but guys like the LG G4 and Samsung Galaxy S6 running 2,560x1,440, too.
>>52025866
Not OP but the distance between your face and the phone is smaller than your face to a TV.
>>52025718
Because Nexus 4 has a 1280x768 screen.
>tfw there will never be another 16:10 phone
>>52025718
>TFW THERE WILL NEVER BE A T.V WITH THE PIXEL DENSITY AS THESE PHONES
why even live
My phone has a resolution of 480x854
I don't need any more, to be honest. My battery is great even with a custom ROM.
>>52025718
4k for is for assholes who do nothing but save or work.
4k is also not important to me. I am a network engineer and so my NIC card is the most expensive thing I own.
10GBs cisco embedded managment software NIC 1nc3v8
>>52025718
>thinking that people can actually tell the difference between regular HD and 4k
Enjoy your placebo anon
>>52027234
>38 days
It's always running 1080p because lollipop doesn't support 4k. Only two Sony apps run in 4k, so have fun with that u cuck.
>>52026210
2k? You mean 1920x1080? Because that's FullHD, nobody calls it 2k, faggot
You mean't QHD (2560x1440), retard
>>52027272
retards call it 2k as a way of expressing their frustration with "4k" as a naming scheme.
>>52025718
>tfw have 1080p phone
>try to play a 1080p youtube vid on 4g
>Can't
Literally no point. Maybe in 5 more years
>>52027199
Golden ratio 16:10 screens are the best.
>>52027222
>No AMOLED / IPS hybrid panel, 500+ PPI 50"+, curved, 140 Hz, 16:10 TV
What's the point in resolutions higher than 1440p when all you guys are gonna do is look at shitpics like >>52027269
>>52027281
>>52027272
Ironically, the only reason we call 1920x1080 'FullHD' is for retards, because they didn't know what resolution was and 1280x720 was being marketed as HD alongside 1920x1080.
Since no two average fucks know what any of these buzzwords or naming schemes are, why is /g/ of all places spouting this dumb marketing shit instead of typing the res?
>>52027199
>>52027301
That's exactly why I upgraded from my Galaxy Note to the Galaxy Note Edge.
>>52027314
I hate that, because every time the tech improves, they have to make a new buzzword that sounds even better.
720p? We'll call it HD!
1080p? We'll call it Full HD!
1440p? We'll call it Quad HD!
2160p? We'll call it Ultra HD!
Any I'm missing?
>>52027234
>THIRTY
>EIGHT
>DAYS
How the fuck did you do this you madman?
>>52025718
whats the point of 4k if there is no 4k video to play on it
>>52026362
Oh so that's why hardware decoding is better than software decoding
>>52025718
Because 720x720 is more than enough
because 1080p on 5.2 inch screen is above 420ppi and i can't see individual pixels even if i try. pic related, phone display resolution reached maximum capacity in 2013.
even if you're a fan of those fuckhuge fablets, 1440p is probably still more than enough, then again, maybe not always.
Humor me this:
When Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone 4 back in 2010 with its 300+ DPI display, he said that at this point you don't need any more pixels. Was he not right? Are all these 500+ DPI displays not completely pointless?
Because /g/ is full of poorfags.
>>52027234
>38 days
Either this is a ruse or this is some sort of god phone I don't know about.
Regardless, what is your secret?
>>52025718
Because I don't look at my phone at 10cm distance.
when there are no innovation just add more pixels
mine does
>>52028370
>no gapps
>powernap (STAMINA mode for phones not on stock sony roms, killer standby life)
>minimised I/O
>deleted every single bloat app (I don't need slideshow daydreams, emergency podcasts - those don't work in my country, phone number lookup)
>greenify the battery hungry apps
>block useless permissions with Privacy Guard
>undervolt up the ass
This is still CM 12.1 from a few days ago with a stock kernel.
Gets like 11 and a half hours of SOT, I don't even know how the fuck is that happening - I used to get less than half that battery life on stock.
>>52028684
Is it worth it buying the greenify donation package?
>>52028693
[spoiler]I pirated it[/spoiler]
>>52028693
>>52028702
Depends on your phone, to be honest. On my old phone it didn't work much, and neither it did on the stock ROM of this phone, but with CM it works wonders.
I don't believe anything over 1080 or 1440 is necessary for phones, I can't see pixels no matter how close I put my face on my 6s plus.
For VR though, you're literally putting a magnifying glass on the screen, so a 4k screen like this would be a godsend.
4k for VR, yes
4k for phones, no
>>52028795
It's good that there are 4k phones out there, drives the cost of the panels down.
>>52028806
This is true, 4k panels will be cheap and widespread which is good for VR devs.
It's still useless for a phone tho.
I've got a 2K screen, and even that is too much.
The Z5 Premium is just a joke. Now if you got 4K in a 10" tabet....
>>52025718
I didn't fall for the 4K meme and it feels good.
>>52025718
I prefer the color accurate 1080p display on my OPO which affords far better battery life than QHD/UHD displays.
