Quote:
Originally Posted by HansTWN
Technically you could be right, but there is still a light source shining in your face -- unlike e-ink or Mirasol which just reflect light. My point being -- a wonderful screen, but easier on the eyes for long term reading? Probably not.
|
My point really was that AMOLED does not emit light for black. Where as a backlit screen even has black lights up the room. And because of this you can really dim down the screen for an AMOLED screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HansTWN
unlike e-ink or Mirasol which just reflect light. My point being -- a wonderful screen, but easier on the eyes for long term reading? Probably not.
|
Yeah I'm not sure I'm buying that argument. The biggest discomfort I've ever experience was reading my SONY/Kindle2 at night. The glare from the reflected light was so bad I eventually abandoned reading eInk at night. Now I read on my Samsung or nook and much prefer it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hapmas77
I read somewhere that for white background,amoled consumes more power than LCD. Is that true?
|
That hasn't been proven. What you are most likely remembering was a series of test ran some time ago comparing LCD phones vs. Samsung Galaxy S (SGS), read AMOLED, phones. The LCD phones proved to have longer lasting battery life vs the SGS--one of Samsungs big marketing points was the energy saving AMLOED screens provided. The article then went on to explain that for their test they used a web browser with a primarily white background and hence removing any benefit of the AMLOED screen*.
* AMLOED gets is deep black because it does not emit light on the blacks, that also has the benefit of not using energy when using displaying blacks. Where traditional LCD uses the same amount of energy to displaying black as it does for white.