320 x 240 is not even close to "adequate" on a 2.6" inch screen. I wish people would stop spreading that myth. The human eye can discern up to 1200 (ppi) pixels per inch. That is why laser printers offer that dpi.
320x240 is not even 200 ppi. Have you ever even seen a 400 ppi display? Let me tell you that you can view web pages readably on a 400 ppi display of around that size, while at 200 ppi you can't.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Can we move past 320x240 screens now? They are not impressive.
Because, for such a tiny screen, 320x240 resolution is more than adequate.
...yes, just like 5mp cameras in other phones are "more than adequate"
For a $600 based on looks and images, I'd like a better screen.
@LMAO
320 x 240 is not even close to "adequate" on a 2.6" inch screen. I wish people would stop spreading that myth. The human eye can discern up to 1200 (ppi) pixels per inch. That is why laser printers offer that dpi.
320x240 is not even 200 ppi. Have you ever even seen a 400 ppi display? Let me tell you that you can view web pages readably on a 400 ppi display of around that size, while at 200 ppi you can't.