HTC has officially confirmed that the HTC HD2 will be available today in the UK, Europe and Asia.The HTC HD2 is HTC's latest Windows Phone which includes the latest operating system Windows Mobile 6.5. The HD2 also comes with HTC's latest user experience, HTC Sense. Sense is based on the TouchFLO 3D interface found on older HTC models. Sense sits on top of Windows Mobile and provides extra functionality and an improved user interface for accessing common applications.
According to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer: "Working with HTC, we've delivered great phones that help customers connect to the people and information they care about, wherever they are," said Ballmer. "The HTC HD2 shows what's possible through our close partnership with HTC and it breaks new ground for Windows phones by delivering a beautiful multi-touch screen that people will love."
The HTC HD2 includes a capacitive touchscreen, Digital Compass, FM Radio and 5MP Camera. The device is powered by a 1GHz Snapdragon processor with 448MB. (Full list of specifications).
The HTC HD2 is available from Expansys in UK priced at £499. HTC and Microsoft also announced that the HD2 would be available in the United States with a major US carrier in early 2010.
Great post and good info right there. I just hope more people read it as well. WM can do quite alot, the only real thing holding the OS back is the UI itself, but newer 6.5.1 builds are showing some nice changes imo.
the thing about 24bits with the wasted 6 bits and all that... the article suggested that the extra 6 bits could be used for transparency, i say thats a good idea... imagine an aero glass-style interface, only the screen itself is physically transparent... so you could see through the wallpaper and see whats behind the screen and stacking windows will also stack opaqueness so it looks like the windows are 'real'... no blur or glare tho, the mobile device has better things to do than simulating something you dont want to see...
no thanks, I like to have my devices usable outside in bright light!
That article may have been 100% accurate in 2005 (when it was written), but welcome to the end of 2009. There are little screens that support 24bit color now. There really is no excuse to only support 65k color.
Is there a visual difference? You bet.
the thing about 24bits with the wasted 6 bits and all that... the article suggested that the extra 6 bits could be used for transparency, i say thats a good idea... imagine an aero glass-style interface, only the screen itself is physically transparent... so you could see through the wallpaper and see whats behind the screen and stacking windows will also stack opaqueness so it looks like the windows are 'real'... no blur or glare tho, the mobile device has better things to do than simulating something you dont want to see...
Seriously? In that case, switch your display to 16bit. I'd like to know how long you leave it in 16bit mode before switching back to 24bit mode. There is clearly a difference in photo realism when it comes to 16bit vs 24bit. I'm not sure you have really done any real comparisons. Or maybe you are color blind?
There is a difference between 65k color and 16.7 million colors. About 16 million colors difference.
In fact, I argue there is a big difference between 16bit and 18bit color. The article trys to make it out like there isn't a difference, but there is. I think it is worth the performance trade off. I think it was worth the performance trade off back in to 2005 when the article was written.
The article is written in terms of "differences" but the truth of the matter is, bit-by-bit is an exponential effect. Its 2^bit. The article is downplaying this significance. Do you think there is a difference between 10 dollars and 100 dollars? I mean, its just 1 silly digit difference.
Last edited by Shadrack on 04 Nov 2009 - 20:12
And nice try comparing it to computers, btw computer displays use 32bit. And have lcds that are superior to the ones that you have on phones
Download the app and put in a standard picture and see how much difference you can make out on your desktop display.
Here's a proof for you. Original picture is 32bit, taken using an HDR camera (wallpaper from interfacelift):
Last edited by /- Razorfold on 04 Nov 2009 - 21:00
Who was talking about the iPhone? I swear, you are obsessed with the iPhone. Every other post, its "iPhone this" and "iPhone that." Get over the iPhone dude....
There is even more reason to have more colors on a "low resolution" device. With higher resolutions at least you have room for dithering.
Name some other phones have 16 million colors. There's the iphone, n900 (which isn't out yet), n97, SE idou (which just came out), and like 2 samsung ones. The vast majority of phones are either 65k or 262k.
And you obviously weren't talking about computers when you compared 65k to 16.7 million color.
Except on higher resolutions (with a similar screen size) pictures and colors look a hell of a lot sharper even with lower colors.
Last edited by /- Razorfold on 04 Nov 2009 - 22:21
And you obviously weren't talking about computers when you compared 65k to 16.7 million color.
Except on higher resolutions (with a similar screen size) pictures and colors look a hell of a lot sharper even with lower colors.
So what you are basically trying to say is:
When an iPhone user says multitasking really isn't that big of a deal... to you, it is a really big deal.
But when the iPhone has the ability to display millions of colors, and your device can only display 10's of thousands of colors...it really isn't that big of a deal.
I see where we are at now. I think I finally understand you.
When an iPhone user says multitasking really isn't that big of a deal... to you, it is a really big deal.
But when the iPhone has the ability to display millions of colors, and your device can only display 10's of thousands of colors...it really isn't that big of a deal.
I see where we are at now. I think I finally understand you.
Excuse me?
Where did I say displaying 16million colors is a bad thing and the iphone sucks because of it? All I said was that an iphones 16million color screen is let down by its low resolution and that fitting more pixels in the same screen size gives a better looking picture than fitting more colors.
And nice try by bringing in multitasking, why don't we talk about the battery life too while we're at it?
Last edited by /- Razorfold on 04 Nov 2009 - 23:06
There is a difference between 65k color and 16.7 million colors. About 16 million colors difference.
In fact, I argue there is a big difference between 16bit and 18bit color. The article trys to make it out like there isn't a difference, but there is. I think it is worth the performance trade off. I think it was worth the performance trade off back in to 2005 when the article was written.
The article is written in terms of "differences" but the truth of the matter is, bit-by-bit is an exponential effect. Its 2^bit. The article is downplaying this significance. Do you think there is a difference between 10 dollars and 100 dollars? I mean, its just 1 silly digit difference.
Calling others colour blind is really offensive.
Not like you'll care, anyway...
Ew, Windows Mobile.
EXACTLY! The stranglehold of the "locked" phones in the USA causes a 6-9 month delay in getting good quality phones. People have become use to getting a phone for "free" or at a greatly reduced price. Whichever carrier in the USA gets this phone will most likely get my busi ness. I'm currently with at&t, but will jump when this one is released. I don't see at&t getting any "top notch" phone because they have their noses so far up Apples butt they can see their tongue. Hopefully, Apple will allow all the carriers in the USA to have the iPhone, so at&t will start getting some better phones. Even now, on their website, the NEW HTC Touch Pro 2 (Tilt2) is at the BOTTOM of the list, but the iPhone, which has been out forever, is at the top of the list. I went into an at&t corporate store before the tilt2 was release asking about it, and the dumb clerk didn't know what I was talking about, but he sure was fast to point me to an iPhone. I said no thanks, if I wanted a toy, I'd get a play station or similar.
Yeah, interesting to see how it stacks up hardware wise. Both have ups and downs but I think N900 will come out as a better user experience over all.
Are there any videos of how smooth the interface runs and responds to touch commands?
Are there any videos of how smooth the interface runs and responds to touch commands?
yeah quite a lot. Wmpoweruser.com is a good source of videos of it. Solopamari been busy comparing there review one to the acer neotouch (another snapdragon winmo device)
Wow. That Acer neotouch is freakin' amazing... I wonder who will get that... I like...
Indeed, if only it has Android.
Wow I have the exact opposite experience. I am on Sprint and tried out the Hero and absolutely hated Android. The onscreen keyboard was terrible and I couldn't ever get it going. It was also super S L O W. Android doesn't seem to be very fast at all. The Hero skin looked pretty but android itself is fugly. I took it back and got a Touch Pro 2 which seems to run circles around it. Also the onscreen keyboard is workable but the physical keyboard on that is the best keyboard on a mobile device i have ever used. Sorry but you can keep your android. in my opinion it sucks.
http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/m...iax10?undefined
However, if Carphone Warehouse get the HD2 in at £99.99 unlocked, I may be persuaded ...
@Gabe3 I wish that HTC gave us a choice between Android and Win Mobile (or maybe both!
I'm really curious about Windows Mobile 6.5 as well. Boy am I glad to see Microsoft working on Windows Mobile again.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.