Tablets Thoughts on the Nexus 7 - My experience so far...

[knucklehead]

I don't care what other reviewers say. Anyone can look that up. It's about what you personally experience. And since you don't own it, it seems like a huge waste of everyone's time you continuing to post in here over and over again... the only sense that can be made out of it is you simply like to argue, and that's your sole motivation.

I value people attempting to be objective, and not trying to carry out a one person propaganda campaign.

Second, show me the data that supports the claim that an overwhelming majority think the device on the Nexus 7 is excellent.

Show some others besides yourself that think the display resolution on the Nexus 7 is a problem (I assume that's what you meant when you typed "device on the Nexus 7" ... but you do have a way of not making sense .... ) According to you, they should be all over the place, and easy to find.

Also, no, I'm not ranting about the problems with the Sexus, I'm pointing out that it's not a Retina screen and why it's not. And that I can actually myself see grainy text. Sometimes things are better: the screen is pretty sharp and so is the text, but it's variable. The iPhone and iPad blow it away in my experience. But science is on my side too.

Again, point out some other people who have used it that agree with you that it represents a problem worth going on, and on, and on about.

Hamburger!

 

[freudling]

The sky is blue. Let us have an earnest discussion wherein we point out and inform people who might be ignorant of this fact.

Man. Everyone knows the Nexus 7 isn't a retina screen. You don't have to spell it out for us. What we're saying is that, retina though it isn't, THERE ISN'T A HUGE AMOUNT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO!

Science disagrees with you!!! And my experience does too!!!

 

[Renzatic]

Science disagrees with you!!! And my experience does too!!!

The science behind retina is vague marketing, and your experience is incredibly subjective.

 

[freudling]

Hamburger!

I value people attempting to be objective, and not trying to carry out a one person propaganda campaign.

The only thing you value is hijacking threads. Just go to other threads there's tons. You won't miss out. But you won't, because you have an addiction, and that's to arguing. Your name pops up on these Nexus threads all over yet you don't own it nor have you seen it. It speaks of someone with a motivation other than to discuss the pitfalls and merits of the product. It's not that people aren't allowed to post in threads where they don't own said product, but to do it as much and as vehemently as you speaks of someone just wanting to argue and nothing more.

Show some others besides yourself that think the display resolution on the Nexus 7 is a problem (I assume that's what you meant when you typed "device on the Nexus 7" ... but you do have a way of not making sense .... ) According to you, they should be all over the place, and easy to find.

I never once said the display resolution on the Sexus was a "problem". You keep making these broad sweeping generalizations based on zero support. My point about the Nexus is that it's 1) Not a Retina display 2) The text is at times grainy to my eye. That's it. I never said the display is some problem in this context for other people and have even stated that, at times, it's decent. It's been about the Retina display and how much more I like it and the science behind it... The rest is your own drivel.

The reality: you said:

...an overwhelming majority think the display on the Nexus 7 is excellent.

Then show us the data, show it. You said it. You made the generalization. You back it up.

----------

The science behind retina is vague marketing, and your experience is incredibly subjective.

The science behind the Retina is NOT vague marketing, and my experience is NOT subjective. I fall into the large average user group with 20/20 vision. All of the science has already been explained.

It is demonstrated and a fact that people with 20/20 vision can reliably, at the same preset distance, discern individual pixels on a screen at x resolution. The benchmark is established and it is a fact. Just like the benchmark is established and is a fact regarding 20/20 vision: standing 20 feet away and seeing the eye chart means you have 20/20 vision: you have normal vision.

This is a fact and is indisputable.

You are simply incredulous and therefore are not adding anything to this discussion other than derailing it.

 

[knucklehead]

I value people attempting to be objective, and not trying to carry out a one person propaganda campaign.

The only thing you value is hijacking threads. Just go to other threads there's tons. You won't miss out. But you won't, because you have an addiction, and that's to arguing. Your name pops up on these Nexus threads all over yet you don't own it nor have you seen it. It speaks of someone with a motivation other than to discuss the pitfalls and merits of the product. It's not that people aren't allowed to post in threads where they don't own said product, but to do it as much and as vehemently as you speaks of someone just wanting to argue and nothing more.

You really don't seem to understand forums, and how they are open to people who might have an interest in getting to the truth of matters. My posting is only in response to your propaganda techniques.

Show some others besides yourself that think the display resolution on the Nexus 7 is a problem (I assume that's what you meant when you typed "device on the Nexus 7" ... but you do have a way of not making sense .... ) According to you, they should be all over the place, and easy to find.

I never once said the display resolution on the Sexus was a "problem". You keep making these broad sweeping generalizations based on zero support. My point about the Nexus is that it's 1) Not a Retina display 2) The text is at times grainy to my eye. That's it. I never said the display is some problem in this context for other people and have even stated that, at times, it's decent. It's been about the Retina display and how much more I like it and the science behind it... The rest is your own drivel.

Everyone already knows that the display is less than what would be considered "retina" by Apple's fuzzy standard. And everyone already knows that you seem to think text sometimes "looks grainy to _your_ eye". No need at all to keep repeating it. We don't care.

The reality?: you said:

...an overwhelming majority think the display on the Nexus 7 is excellent.

Again with the cheap propaganda techniques ... Who do you think you're fooling with this? Anyone can goback a page to post 171 and see you added the period and edited my statement. Why would anyone who has any intrest in the truth do something like that?

Then show us the data, show it. You said it. You made the generalization. You back it up.

Again, that's just your attempt to twist the truth.
You show some others like you that seem to think the "lower than retina" display resolution is worth commenting on repeatedly.

Cheeseburger!

 

[Greg.]

LOL at the arguments over the retina display - at these high pixel density levels, comparisons become largely irrelevant. Retina is a just an Apple marketing term, but some people genuinely seem to believe it's some golden benchmark for where you can make out individual pixels and where you can't. Put it this way: My mid-2010 MacBook Pro has 1280x800 resolution and I've always found that a fantastic screen. The Nexus has the exact same resolution but in a 7" device, which I think is pretty incredible. Even more so when my MacBook cost over $1000 but the Nexus less than $200. Technology is amazing!

 

[The iGentleman]

I said: ...with the benchmark that Apple put out of 300 ppi at a distance of ~11"...

You read it, then you say:



You need to reread your stuff more than 5 times to make sure it sticks.

You seem to have overlooked the part where you said "Apple's benchmark seems to have ended up with the iPhone, with 326 ppi at an average distance of 10"." Whoops. And you just pulled the 10" number out of your behind. Apple says 11" and somehow you wind up with 10. Don't you just love it when people make things up as they go along?

I never pulled any number out of anyone's behind. I used it as a simple example for people like you to show how a device that is effectively an in between device such as the Nexus could have its Retina ppi determined at an in between distance: in between 10 and 15". I never asserted anything, including that people would in fact hold the device that far from their face.

The problem is, you did just pull a number out of your behind. If you didn't then show me the source from whence it came. You'll have to do better than just saying the Nexus is in between the iPhone and iPad, so you put it in the middle and divided by two. That makes no sense and is not mathematically accurate. Since you said you didn't pull it out of your behind, then I'm sure you must have a link with some hard facts showing the distance and ppi the Nexus would have to have. I'll wait on the link

But from everyone measured here in the office the numbers are spot on. What about other people though? Turns out, some other people are saying the 10" for the iPhone and the 15" for the iPad are close and even spot on... that people do hold the device that far from their face, and even farther. Pretty flat out stupid, eh!

So now you're going around conducting surveys, measuring the distance people hold their phones? LMAO Get out of here with that nonsense. LMAO FYI, if you look on the web, you will find it is quite normal for people to hold a tablet 18" or more away from their faces. Gizmodo for example, states between 15-18, and there are other sites that suggest even more than 18". It really isn't hard for a tablet to be held almost 2 feet away from the face.


https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1336685/

Trying even to illustrate something in the simplest of terms is still even to complicated for you. Let's learn the A, B, Cs again.

A. The larger the screen, the farther it's held from your face.
B. The Nexus 7 has a bigger screen than the iPhone, and a smaller screen than the iPad.
A+B= the Nexus 7 is held farther from the face than the iPhone, and closer than the iPad. If the iPad has a known value (264 ppi), we can deduce that the Nexus 7 must have a greater number of ppi than the iPad under Apple's Retina scale. That this must be the case. Therefore, the 216 ppi that the Nexus 7 has right now does not qualify as a Retina display because its pixels are not dense enough at the distance it would be held from the face (more than 10" and less than 15").

And THAT is your problem right there. You deduction is based on a fallacy. Just because the screen is 7" doesn't mean it inherently must be held at a closer distance. Now here's where I destroy the very basis of your argument...you ready? Read on. You're asserting that the Nexus 7 has to be head at a closer proximity because it isn't as large as the iPad. HOWEVER, Displaymate, like Gizmodo, show the typical viewing distance of the iPad to be 15"-18". They show the typical viewing distance for the iPhone to be 12"-15". So if the typical viewing distance between the 3.5" display of the iPhone and the 9.7" display of the iPad, can differ as slightly as 3" (the difference between 15 and 18), there's no reason for you to ASSUME, the Nexus 7 has to be held any closer than the iPad.

To reduce you to absurdity, and to keep things really dead simple:

Using Apple's benchmark of 300 ppi at 11": if the Nexus were held at 11" from the face, it would need 300 ppi to qualify as a Retina. It has 216 ppi, 84 ppi short. If it were held an extra inch from the face, at 12"... 1 foot... which is "just stupid! and can't be so!... nobody would hold it that far from their face!..."

It would need slightly less ppi. On your incredulous take... people will hold the Nexus 7 closer to their face... which means that anything under 11" will mean the ppi will have to increase, ever widening the gap between the 216 ppi that it currently has and the 300+ that it'll need.

Perhaps it is YOU that should re-read. I never said 12" was too far. It's too CLOSE for a tablet. Learn to read with comprehension.

Well, by now you probably are fuming... so I'll save you the embarrassment other than to say that 15" is the benchmark distance Apple set for the iPad 3 and has it at 264 ppi. Full stop. At a normal distance 10" as in the iPhone, 264 ppi does NOT qualify as a Retina display as calculated using the equation Apple itself endorses.

http://apple.stackexchange.com/ques...most-pixels-of-any-tablets-displa/44222#44222

Wrong. Apple NEVER came out and gave a definition for retina in the iPad. Now you're just pulling stories out of your behind. You little link is quite cute, but it still fails to show what the minimum benchmark is at a particular distance. It merely goes off of what was stated about the iPhone. UNFORTUNATELY, that has no bearing on the iPad with a different ppi and viewing distance. So until you show a link that matter-of-factly states what the MINIMUM ppi is at a certain distance (particularly one up to 18"), then you have failed.

A child is schooled once again.

Yes, you have once again been trounced. Now stop embarrassing yourself.

----------

The average human eye at the normal distance the Nexus is held from the eyes can discern the individual pixels. This is a fact. You are the exception. And I doubt anyone on here would believe you anyway: you are motivated not by truth but to simply argue.

Fact? If it's fact, then you shouldn't be having so much trouble finding the proof. Show the proof or close your mouth.

 

[RMXO]

Cheeseburger!

Bacon Cheeseburger, mmmmmm!

 

[tech4all]

Put it this way: My mid-2010 MacBook Pro has 1280x800 resolution and I've always found that a fantastic screen. The Nexus has the exact same resolution but in a 7" device, which I think is pretty incredible.

I'm not sure if the two are indeed the same, but for the sake of arguments lets say they are.

You have a MacBook Pro. You didn't specify what size so let's say 13" - 15" or about double the Nexus 7. You're going to be viewing the MacBook Pro a bit further than you will a Nexus 7 tablet. So the MacBook Pro is more of a retina display than the Nexus since you will be viewing it from a further distance and the individual pixels won't resolve.

With the Nexus having a 7 inch screen you will more than likely be viewing it at a closer distance, thus you will be able to see the individual pixels (in theory of course). That means the Nexus would need to have more PPI to compensate for the shorter viewing distance.

Let's go even more extreme; billboards. From a quick Google search it seems a typical DPI for a billbaord is around 30DPI. But since we're viewing them from a far great distance, they look very sharp and you can't see the actual dots. So there a "retina display."

I was going to say ya'll need a life for debating this topic, but I just added to it so I guess a need life too

 

[The iGentleman]

I'm not sure if the two are indeed the same, but for the sake of arguments lets say they are.

You have a MacBook Pro. You didn't specify what size so let's say 13" - 15" or about double the Nexus 7. You're going to be viewing the MacBook Pro a bit further than you will a Nexus 7 tablet. So the MacBook Pro is more of a retina display than the Nexus since you will be viewing it from a further distance and the individual pixels won't resolve.

With the Nexus having a 7 inch screen you will more than likely be viewing it at a closer distance, thus you will be able to see the individual pixels (in theory of course). That means the Nexus would need to have more PPI to compensate for the shorter viewing distance.

Let's go even more extreme; billboards. From a quick Google search it seems a typical DPI for a billbaord is around 30DPI. But since we're viewing them from a far great distance, they look very sharp and you can't see the actual dots. So there a "retina display."

I was going to say ya'll need a life for debating this topic, but I just added to it so I guess a need life too

The problem with what you assert is if you say the Macbook was 13-15" (we'll use the middle number 14" for the sake of simplicity), then that's double the size of the Nexus 7. Now like you said, you would hold the Nexus 7 closer. However, since it's half the size of the Macbook, you could go half the distance and the effect would be the same. So if I'm normally 30" inches away from the Macbook, half of that would be 15" (in the 15-18" range of normal tablet viewing distance), and since the display is half the size, the proportions remain the same. In other words, there'd be no difference.

 

[The iGentleman]

post deleted

As stated previously, until you bring some cold hard facts to back up your SPECULATION, CONJECTURE, AND OPINION you have no leg to stand on. I've already destroyed your fallacy-ridden stance, so until I see some facts. Nothing you have to say carries any weight. Go find a child to debate with, perhaps you will be closer to their level. With me, you're clearly out of your league.

 

[Renzatic]

iGent, give up while you still have your sanity. He doesn't understand that retina is simply a marketing term applied to high res displays. Or he does, and simply wants to bait you into replying over and over and over again.

Like I said before, the simple fact that every single retina display out at the moment is simply quadrupled from it's original base res is proof of that. If they were testing for optimal resolution at average usage distance using all these metrics he's mentioning above, you'd probably end up with some really weird off kilter resolutions.

You double the res on X and Y and suddenly, almost magically, you get a sharp, crisp screen where pixels aren't discernible to all but the sharpest of eye. Who would've thunk?

 

[The iGentleman]

iGent, give up while you still have your sanity. He doesn't understand that retina is simply a marketing term applied to high res displays. Or he does, and simply wants to bait you into replying over and over and over again.

Like I said before, the simple fact that every single retina display out at the moment is simply quadrupled from it's original base res is proof of that. If they were testing for optimal resolution at average usage distance using all these metrics he's mentioning above, you'd probably end up with some really weird off kilter resolutions.

You double the res on X and Y and suddenly, almost magically, you get a sharp, crisp screen where pixels aren't discernible to all but the sharpest of eye. Who would've thunk?

You're absolutely right. He fails to realize that is the reason he will not be able to find any definite facts to back his claim simply because there aren't any. As you stated, it's a marketing term and nothing more. As a matter of fact, if you really want to get into it, Apple's "retina" display actually really isn't "retina" because it's only based on 20/20. Here's an excerpt from an article that explains it well.

A true “Retina Display” but not an actual Retina Display
The original Retina Display on the iPhone 4 has 326 pixels per inch (ppi). But to qualify as an Apple Retina Display the new iPad does not require the same ppi as the iPhone 4 Retina Display because it is typically held further away from the eye, whose visual sharpness is based on angular resolution rather than the linear ppi resolution on the display. The iPad is typically held 15-18 inches away as opposed to the iPhone 4’s 12-15 inches. As a result, to meet the 300 ppi Retina Display specification made by Steve Jobs at WWDC for the iPhone 4, an iPad Retina Display only needs 240 ppi – and it has 264 ppi. So according to Apple’s own definition, the new iPad is indeed a true “Retina Display.”
However, Apple’s definition of a “Retina Display” is actually for 20/20 Vision (defined as 1 arc-minute visual acuity). 20/20 Vision is just the legal definition of “Normal Vision,” which is at the lower end of true normal vision. There are in fact lots of people with much better than 20/20 Vision, and for almost everyone visual acuity is actually limited by blurring due to imperfections of the lens in the eye. The best human vision is about 20/10 Vision, twice as good as 20/20 Vision, and that is what corresponds to the true acuity of the Retina. So to be an actual “True Retina Display” a screen needs at least 573 ppi at 12 inches viewing distance or 458 ppi at 15 inches. The 326 ppi iPhone 4 is a 20/20 Vision display if it is viewed from 10.5 inches or more. Unfortunately, a “20/20 Vision Display” doesn’t sound anywhere near as enticing as a “Retina Display” so marketing and science don’t see eye-to-eye on this…​

 

[Night Spring]

Here's an excerpt from an article that explains it well.
A true “Retina Display” but not an actual Retina Display

Interesting article. What article is this? Is it avaiable online?

BTW, when you said, back at post #165, "Nobody in their right mind is going to hold a tablet a foot away from their face. The very notion of that is flat out stupid," I too, thought you meant people would hold it closer than that. So that statement wasn't very clear -- it could be taken either way.

 

[The iGentleman]

Interesting article. What article is this? Is it avaiable online?

BTW, when you said, back at post #165, "Nobody in their right mind is going to hold a tablet a foot away from their face. The very notion of that is flat out stupid," I too, thought you meant people would hold it closer than that. So that statement wasn't very clear -- it could be taken either way.

Sorry, I intended to include the link as I did earlier in this thread, but overlooked it this time. Anyway, here's the link lol. http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_ShootOut_1.htm

No, I meant holding a tablet 12 inches from your face is quite close, and a reasonable person doesn't do that.

 

[nickchallis92]

my Galaxy S3 has a retina display

 

[Night Spring]

Sorry, I intended to include the link as I did earlier in this thread, but overlooked it this time. Anyway, here's the link lol. http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_ShootOut_1.htm

No, I meant holding a tablet 12 inches from your face is quite close, and a reasonable person doesn't do that.

Thank you for the link! And of course, it's quite obvious when you think about it that 12 inches is much too close to hold a tablet, but in the heat of an online discussion, it's quite easy to get confused.

 

[yoyomamma]

The problem with what you assert is if you say the Macbook was 13-15" (we'll use the middle number 14" for the sake of simplicity), then that's double the size of the Nexus 7. Now like you said, you would hold the Nexus 7 closer. However, since it's half the size of the Macbook, you could go half the distance and the effect would be the same. So if I'm normally 30" inches away from the Macbook, half of that would be 15" (in the 15-18" range of normal tablet viewing distance), and since the display is half the size, the proportions remain the same. In other words, there'd be no difference.

Wow are you dense. Is this guy for real?

The bigger the screen, the farther it's held away from the face. Just because a screen is double the size doesn't mean a person holds it twice as far from their face. And a 14" screen is not double the size of a Nexus 7 screen. It's much more than that lol.

freuding is right: Apple sets the normal distance of the iPhone at 10", the iPad at 15". They reduce the number of ppi the bigger the screen.

iPhone: 326 ppi
iPad: 264 ppi
rMBP: 220 ppi

And nobody said the normal distance of an iPad is 12". It's 15". Man, are you "aware"?

 

[ChazUK]

I take it yoyomamma is feudling on a second account. If so, boy are the Mods on the ball in banning dupe accounts.

Very swift action.

 

[bitfactory]

I tried one at a local Staples store and loved it. Yeah, the screen isn't as nice as the iPads we own, but I very much liked the way it felt in my hand, and the browser seemed to work well (which is primarily what I'll be suing on it).

I've looked all over for 16GB version, but no go here. I put my name in on Google Play to be notified when they're available again.

Anyway who doesn't think this tablet is worth the 199/249 investment is a fooling themselves. It'll fit in nicely with our tech here at home.

 

[blackhand1001]

The nexus 7 is very smooth. I don't know why Google put chrome by default on it though. The stock jellybean browser is way faster and smoother and reflows text which chrome doesn't. Chrome is a little laggy. The aosp jellybean browser is butter smooth as is dolphin and other third party browsers.

 

[ChazUK]

The nexus 7 is very smooth. I don't know why Google put chrome by default on it though. The stock jellybean browser is way faster and smoother and reflows text which chrome doesn't. Chrome is a little laggy. The aosp jellybean browser is butter smooth as is dolphin and other third party browsers.

This is a good alternative stock based browser.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.beansoft.browserplus

I prefer ICS Browser + over stock browser due to the extended thumb controls.

 

[cwwilson]

Any word on if Google is going to issue a fix for the screen flickering issue? That's one of the only quirks with mine.

 

[nickchallis92]

Why are people comparing the screens of these two machines when one costs about £250 more than the other?

the nexus 7 is a bargain and it is very commendable that google are actually making a tablet with such a small profit margin

 

[blackhand1001]

Paranoid Android is amazing on thing thing.