Motorola RAZR maxx Ve
Downgrade from the V710 on the Display
The 65,536 (16-bit)display is a deal killer.
What a shame to downgrade from a V710 display to have this phone. The usual websites were wrong again on the display being 262k:
http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/Motorola-maxx-Ve-pho ... »
http://www.mobiledia.com/phones/motorola/razr-maxx-v ... »
http://www.mobile88.com/mobilegallery/specification. ... »
What a shame to downgrade from a V710 display to have this phone. The usual websites were wrong again on the display being 262k:
http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/Motorola-maxx-Ve-pho ... »
http://www.mobiledia.com/phones/motorola/razr-maxx-v ... »
http://www.mobile88.com/mobilegallery/specification. ... »
...
Isn't it possible that this web site has it wrong instead? Maybe?
But with the size of both displays (wow), it would indeed be a disappointment if it is only 65K.
But with the size of both displays (wow), it would indeed be a disappointment if it is only 65K.
...
RavenStar said:
It is only a 65K - I called Motorola today to double check ☹️
It is a beautiful display. Read this thread "Does it matter?" by Rich Brome Apr 23, 2007, 8:43 PM
The Maxx packs in as many pixels as the Motorola Q.
...
I got the phone yesterday and the inside screen is much sharper than the outside screen. I am not qualified to tell you exactly what the resolution is, but if I'm going on what resolutions people have mentioned the outside is 65K...definitely not the inside though.
...
CardinalRule said:
I got the phone yesterday and the inside screen is much sharper than the outside screen. I am not qualified to tell you exactly what the resolution is, but if I'm going on what resolutions people have mentioned the outside is 65K...definitely not the inside though.
Verizon could both be wrong and you could be right:
Testman - Video/Camera
2.0MP camera with autofocus and flash
2.2" 240x320 internal TFT display with up to 65K colors
1.7" 120x160 external TFT display with up to 65K colors
Camera Resolution: 1600x1200, 1280x960, 640x480, 320x240
Color Effects: Antique, Black & White, Negative and Normal
Fun Frames for Photos
...
Seriously? I look at phones for a living, and I have a hard time telling whether a display is 65K or 262K. Only with certain images (with a shallow gradient) can I tell. I don't think it makes big difference at all.
Much more important is the resolution. This one is QVGA, which automatically makes it a huge step up from the V3m and V710.
Other factors also play a larger role, IMO. If it's STN, that's automatically pretty crappy. But simply newer-generation TFTs are much better than older TFT displays.
Much more important is the resolution. This one is QVGA, which automatically makes it a huge step up from the V3m and V710.
Other factors also play a larger role, IMO. If it's STN, that's automatically pretty crappy. But simply newer-generation TFTs are much better than older TFT displays.
...
Rich Brome said:
This one is QVGA, which automatically makes it a huge step up from the V3m and V710.
That makes sense. Most users would just go by the data in the comparison chart, Type: LCD (Color TFT/TFD)
If QVGA is a big difference, the comparison could be improved by showing that.
...
...Most users would just go by the data in the comparison chart, Type: LCD (Color TFT/TFD)
If QVGA is a big difference, the comparison could be improved by showing that.
It does. QVGA means 240 x 320 pixels, which is shown.
There isn't a name for other resolutions like 176 x 220, so it's shown as "240 x 320" to be consistent so you can compare resolutions side-by-side.
In fact, resolution is how it decides which phone is "better" in the comparison highlighting. So if you compare the V710, V3m, and Ve, the Ve is highlighted in bold under "Display" because it's QVGA:
https://www.phonescoop.com/phones/compare.php?id%5B% ... »
🙂
...
Rich Brome said:...Most users would just go by the data in the comparison chart, Type: LCD (Color TFT/TFD)
If QVGA is a big difference, the comparison could be improved by showing that.
It does. QVGA means 240 x 320 pixels, which is shown.
There isn't a name for other resolutions like 176 x 220, so it's shown as "240 x 320" to be consistent so you can compare resolutions side-by-side.
So then essentially, you are saying that the Maxx Ve packs in as many pixels as the Q, correct?
LCD (Color TFT/TFD)
Colors: 65,536 (16-bit)
320 x 240 pixels
...
Yes.
The screen is physically smaller, (2.2" vs. 2.4") so there are more pixels per inch on the Ve.
That means the Ve's display will actually look sharper than the Q's, even though both can display the exact same amount of detail and information.
The screen is physically smaller, (2.2" vs. 2.4") so there are more pixels per inch on the Ve.
That means the Ve's display will actually look sharper than the Q's, even though both can display the exact same amount of detail and information.
...
I have a 710 my wife has a 815 and the max is crystal clear in comparison.
...
that's because the 710 and 815 (identical displays.. even though they both have 262k colors) both only display.. what.. 176x220? while resolution (I've only used qvga since my vm4050.. had the mm5600, chocolate and xv6700 since) plays a huge roll in clarity, if the color depth isn't there, you can tell. I'm a huge gadget freak and I like to make tons of ringers and wallpapers for my phones. I've had phones in the past with 65k colors and they simply aren't as clear. Compare a razr to a chocolate or the inside screen of an enV (vx9900) and there's a vast improvement... but not only because of the bump in resolution. My xv6700 has a qvga display (granted, it's larger) as does my Chocolate... and even though the chocolates screen is much smalle...
(continues)
(continues)
...
THANK YOU RICH...
You guys are discussing the diference between 16-bit and 18-bit color depth per pixel... IT IS ALMOST MEANINGLESS...!!! 16-bit depth is plenty on small format displays... resolution (the actual number of pixels) is what counts...
~ TMBS ~
You guys are discussing the diference between 16-bit and 18-bit color depth per pixel... IT IS ALMOST MEANINGLESS...!!! 16-bit depth is plenty on small format displays... resolution (the actual number of pixels) is what counts...
~ TMBS ~
...
If its made out of cheap light plastic with no weight to it, then thats bogus.
Who else has held one that can describe the build quality.
Who else has held one that can describe the build quality.
...
umm, according to moto it's magnesium, aluminum, and glass.....not plastic.
...
I held it at the Verizon store on Saturday. Lots more stable than my E815, and my E815 is 2 years old and still operating flawlessly *knock on wood*. If the E815, with all its play and plastic-like feel, can go 2 years easily, I imagine this phone will hold up just fine.
...
