Oh absolutely. Don't read me wrong, those are great specs for a screen. I just don't think it's a significant enough improvement (over what was previously available) to deserve being qualified of "staggering".
For Samsung AMOLEDs the plus branding means standard RGB rather than pentile RGBG. At the supposed density I don't think I see much gain from not using pentile. The stated reason for not using pentile in the Galaxy S II was that the large size of the screen combined with the relatively low resolution put it outside of the sweet-spot for pentile RGBG.
it's still lower. I'm sorry about your hurt feelings, but that does not qualify as "staggering"
> and it's AMOLED. It's gorgeous.
Did not enter into the comment I replied to. At all. Again, I'm not saying it's not a great screen, I'm saying calling a 1280x720 4.65" "staggering" in 2011 is overstating it by a mile.
It's not staggering because of the PPI, it's staggering that we're carrying a WXGA display in our pockets. It displays 50% more information than the iPhone 4 screen, which is already pretty amazing.
That sounds a lot like retconning, it makes absolutely no sense in the context of the original comment as the physical screen size detracts from that point. "1280x720 on a phone is staggering" is arguable, "1280x720 in a 4.[65] inch is staggering" is not, because there's nothing staggering about it.
Regardless of your definitions, I too found it staggering. We have reached mobile full HD. The fact that it's a few PPI lower than another device is meaningless--it's full HD and in your pocket. On a consumer device (with consumer pricing!). Staggering.
4.65", not 4.5
That's not really staggering, the screen is huge but at ~316dpi that's a lower density than a Sharp IS03 or an iphone 4.