backtop


Print 16 comment(s) - last by piroroadkill.. on Sep 24 at 8:14 AM

LG Vu 3 has a 5.2-inch 4:3 aspect ratio screen

LG has unveiled its latest big-screen smartphone called the Vu 3. This smartphone is notable because it uses a 5.2-inch 1280x960 resolution display with a 4:3 aspect ratio, while most smartphones today use a 16:9 aspect ratio. LG says that the 4:3 aspect ratio makes the device better suited to reading digital books and viewing websites.

The Vu3 sports a quad-core Snapdragon 800 and runs Android 4.2.2.  The device supports LTE-Advanced and has integrated Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, and features a 13MP rear camera.


LG also integrates its Knock On feature into the Vu 3 that allows users to wake the device from sleep with a double tap on the screen.
 
The phone is expected to launch in Korea starting on September 27 with availability with all three major Korean carriers. Pricing information is unannounced this time.

Source: fonearena



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Holy crap.
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/23/2013 10:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
Damn me but that is one butt ugly phone.

4:3 rations match up to the now obsolete Standard definition TV. Not exactly a forward-looking platform.

I imagine there will be a few who actually like this, but I would rather my thin & tall phone format. A lot easier to hold in my pudgy hands.




RE: Holy crap.
By chµck on 9/23/2013 10:22:30 AM , Rating: 3
Just not too thin and tall.
Bring back the 16:10 master ratio!


RE: Holy crap.
By retrospooty on 9/23/2013 10:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
+1. Yup. It was perfect to me, Desktop, laptop, phone and tablet.


RE: Holy crap.
By MadMan007 on 9/23/2013 6:41:25 PM , Rating: 2
16:10 is very close to the golden ratio so it's inherently pleasant to look at as well.


RE: Holy crap.
By inperfectdarkness on 9/24/2013 2:50:39 AM , Rating: 3
+4

I've been saying that for years. I'm sick of 16:9. And the whole argument about "letterboxing" on a 16:10 is hogwash, thanks to 22:9 movies being standard fare.

16:10 is perfect. I almost wish HDTV never existed so that the unwashed consumer masses wouldn't have such a stupid hard-on for 1080p. How about we just do away with 16:9 source material alltogether?


RE: Holy crap.
By bug77 on 9/24/2013 5:50:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
22:9 movies being standard fare


Actually, movies have no standard, that's the thing to realize. No matter what aspect ratio you choose, you'll see the black bars. It's just that wider monitors are cheaper to build, but no manufacturer will ever tell you "buy this, because it's cheaper for us to make".


RE: Holy crap.
By piroroadkill on 9/24/2013 8:14:51 AM , Rating: 2
8:5, really, or 1.6:1.

But yes. It's the Best Ratio. For everything.

I even think 1.66 movies are the best ratio. Give me some headroom, christ. Too many 2.35/2.39/2.40 films make dialogue shots claustrophobic.


RE: Holy crap.
By bug77 on 9/23/2013 10:56:53 AM , Rating: 2
Most books are printed in 4:3 format (or so). It really is easier on the eyes.
Whether the format is also adequate for a smartphone is debatable, but I'd rather have more choice.

And I wouldn't say the phone is ugly. It's basically the same design as the next phone, only wider.


RE: Holy crap.
By Flunk on 9/23/2013 11:07:37 AM , Rating: 2
I think it's designed to fit perfectly in handbags. I can see a market for it.


RE: Holy crap.
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/23/2013 12:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
I use my Nexus 7 as an ebook reader. It is not 4:3 format, but it is easy to hold and my pages can be longer.

Frankly one of the reasons I like eBooks over paper ones is because I am not constrained to read them in a 4:3 format. I can chose how many lines I can have on my page by adjusting the fonts and margins.

Isn't technology grand? Why not leverage it?


RE: Holy crap.
By Solandri on 9/23/2013 5:07:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most books are printed in 4:3 format (or so). It really is easier on the eyes.

Most books also have margins. Once you subtract the margins (which contain no useful content and correspond to the bezel on a tablet/phone), you're closer to a 16:10 ratio. I grabbed a ruler and measured the text area of a bunch of publications:

small paperback: 1.64 (5.75" x 3.5")
medium paperback: 1.625 (6.5" x 4")
large paperback: 1.67 (7.5" x 4.5")

Nat Geo magazine: 1.57 (22 x 14 cm)
Time magazine: 1.37 (9.25" x 6.75")
College textbook: 1.29 (22 x 17 cm)

Yes the last two are close to 1.33, but they (and Nat Geo) break up the text into two columns. So even they support the notion that 4:3 sucks for reading text.

Going by paperbacks (the most successful format of printed text in history), the ideal aspect ratio for reading text is right around 16:10.


RE: Holy crap.
By Stuka on 9/23/2013 12:05:27 PM , Rating: 1
It's actually a pretty good idea. Fact is we are in a landscape world. The smartphone is the only view screen that is portrait layout by default. If you really split hairs, only archaic print formats are designed in the portrait layout, so which is more forward-looking?

Frankly, I find my 5" 1080p phone to be a bitch to read websites in either format, so I can appreciate the purpose of this phone. I would not buy it, but I like the idea.


RE: Holy crap.
By sleepeeg3 on 9/23/2013 12:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
960 is the standard format for designing most websites, so the horizontal resolution really is not that bad.

However, increasing the vertical resolution to 1920 only extends the length of the phone and allows you to view widescreen content natively. Extending the length really does not have an impact on fitting in your pocket. Overall, 4:3 has no real benefits, other than adding battery life.


double tap to unlock?
By bond007taz on 9/23/2013 10:34:32 AM , Rating: 2
so I have to get shot twice to have my phone wake up? sounds brutal




RE: double tap to unlock?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/23/2013 10:36:54 AM , Rating: 2
Bill Murray is not amused.


RE: double tap to unlock?
By Reclaimer77 on 9/23/2013 11:50:15 AM , Rating: 2
lol B.M. The TOP of the A list!


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki