2 Comments

Summary:

Loren Heiny is to blame for me wasting some time this afternoon.  He got me to thinking about what the screen resolution of the prototype Ruby mini-Tablet PC might be.  I have been playing around with screen resolutions on my Sony U in portrait mode and […]

Loren Heiny is to blame for me wasting some time this afternoon.  He got me to thinking about what the screen resolution of the prototype Ruby mini-Tablet PC might be.  I have been playing around with screen resolutions on my Sony U in portrait mode and thought I’d offer this possibility.  The first observation I can make about the original photo as posted by Akihabara News is that on that portrait desktop there are 8 icons in a vertical row.  I can duplicate that exactly if I set the Sony to 480×640 resolution.  I then compared this to a 600×800 resolution screen, which is the native portrait resolution of the Sony’s 5 inch screen.  Here’s the comparison of the two:

Sony_480x640 Sony600x800

(L-R: 480×640; 600×800)

Songy_desktop_480x640 Songy_desktop_6oox8oo

(L-R: 480×640; 600×800)

Both of these are full screen images with the taskbar hidden and were made with the original photo displayed in an Internet Explorer window.  I then opened a Minesweeper window which is also present on the Ruby desktop for comparison.  The only conclusion I can reach-  based on the size of the Minesweeper window and the number of icons displaying on the desktop the Ruby screen resolution looks to be 640×480.  I do think it is only 480 in the horizontal direction, based on the number of minesweeper windows that look like it will fit in that direction, which may indicate the vertical really is 640 which fits current LCD technology.  Certainly not scientific but it does shore up my earlier observation that this screen is going to be too small for me to comfortably ink text.

By James Kendrick

You're subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

Related stories

  1. looks more like 800 in the vertical direction (based also on the number of minesweeper windows that fit into this direction); a resolution of 480×800 would also match the (rather strange) aspect ratio of the LCD screen shown in the picture (which looks something like 3/5 H/V ratio)

    Share
  2. Nice sleuthing! But “screen too small for me to comfortably ink text” is not directly related to screen resolution — the Tablet PC digitizers capture data at higher resolutions than the screen display. A 640×480 or 480×800 might be insufficient for nice _viewing_ of ink, but the capture of the ink would still presumably be high resolution (allowing for magnification, text recognition, etc.)

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post