Final screen assesment plus other issues!!!

[hel]

Now just to clarify some things...

1. I do know the 1910 can't play snes games as I've had it for 6 months. After being turned off by the screen of the 2215 which I also own, I was hoping the 1945 would be fast enough to play snes games so I could return my 2215. But if the 1945 screen is as bad as the 2215, then there is no point of getting it.

2. In regards to the screen of the 2215, I don't care what some reviewer says, I will go by what my eyes see personally and yes it is washed out, and as bad as the old ipaqs used to be. Everything has a blue hue overshadowing it. If you never had an excellent screen like the 1910, than you will not notice how bad it is, but if you do, then you should stinking know what I'm talking about.

3. The screen isn't just washed out, it also has that annoying grid which covers the entire thing. After a while, you start to notice it more and more. Plus the refresh rate is terrible, and yes it is.

4. As far as labelling it great, I would not go that far, compared with the old ipaqs it's better but identical in the blue hue which consumes the whole screen.

5. Finally after playing so much snes games on the 2215 and the 1910 (slowwww) I have realized the thum pad on the 2215 is TOO SENSITIVE and also non-responsive at times. I don't have a great way of explanning this, but to all who has both devices just load PocketSnes on both (2215 & 1910) and find a rom called Killer Instinct, all the moves (upper cuts, foward-down-foward, semi-circle-forward, quater-circle-backwards...) will be easy to pull of on the 1910 however slow it may be, but on the 2215, some moves are completely imossible to pull off no matter how bad I try.

6. I am not flaming the 2215, in fact I like it for it's speed. I only wish HP did not pull a 3600 series dejavu on the screen and the thumb pad was equally responsive as the 1910, that is all. And if the 1945 has the same screen as the 2215, it can go down the toilet for all I care.

[rsmith4321]

You must have had a defective unit, because the 2215's transflective screen is completely different and far better than the 3600's sidelit screen. They don't even compare, truthfully that comment is so rediculous it pretty much shows that your opinion can't be trusted and you must have a bias. No one who had the 3600 and 2215 side by side would think the screen compared, and I've owned both. One is transflective the other isn't, they are nothing alike. Unless you had a defective unit, which is possible. The 2215 compares very nicely with my 3900 which had one of the best screens you could get. I have no grid on mine, no washed out colors. I do have a slightly uneven lighting at the bottom and slow refresh, but only someone very pickey would even notice.

[charger71]

Originally posted by rsmith4321
You must have had a defective unit, because the 2215's transflective screen is completely different and far better than the 3600's sidelit screen. They don't even compare, truthfully that comment is so rediculous it pretty much shows that your opinion can't be trusted and you must have a bias. No one who had the 3600 and 2215 side by side would think the screen compared, and I've owned both. One is transflective the other isn't, they are nothing alike. Unless you had a defective unit, which is possible. The 2215 compares very nicely with my 3900 which had one of the best screens you could get. I have no grid on mine, no washed out colors. I do have a slightly uneven lighting at the bottom and slow refresh, but only someone very pickey would even notice.

I agree with you as well.. I've owned a 3955 and my wife had a 1910... yes, the 1910 was great, but the 2215 is not that far off! I compared my 2215 to a E755 and a 3955 at compusa 2 days ago, and its nearly the same as the 3955 and much better than the E755.. and for me the screen is extremely important!

You should go compare your 2215's screen to a display model at compusa or some other store.. see how it stacks up against a 3955 and E755.. you probably have a defective one like was stated above..

regarding the dpad, I dont play fighting games, but have not had a single problem with games ranging from chrono trigger to super mario world.. also have no problems using it with Everquest, and rarely if ever skip a page when reading ebooks.

*edit*
I just noticed you already posted this in your last thread.. whats the point of bringing it up again as a new thread??

[imported_KungFuWoo]

I think all of the people complaining about their devices should return their units from wherever they got them, and go back to using a franklin planner. HEY LOOK-THE PAPER IS UNIFORMLY LIT (under good lighting that is) THERE ARE NO GRIDS (except for the printed lines that are supposed to be there) AND THE COLORS AREN'T WASHED OUT (how can B&W be washed out anyways?)

I for one am tired of all of these people who complain more than a 3 yr old child whose toy was just taken away. Hey, if you can do better, why don't YOU go out, do some R&D and make a better unit that if PERFECT. Until then, be quiet and enjoy your device, or at the very least, go away.

[imported_dcorsi]

No question that the 221x and 194x iPaq's have beautiful screens. No question at all. In fact they are better than almost any other Pocket PC competitor.

THAT SAID you can say that in almost every case in Palm and Pocket PC history the screens in a particular manufacturer's line have *improved* with the release of a new model (the only exception I can think of... Palm IIIc to Palm m505) and this is a step back for HP, no matter how small.

When someone thinks of replacing their handheld with a newer model, especially from the same company they expect it to be full of *better* things not a downgrade of any sort.

Isn't that a fair statement?

[imported_KungFuWoo]

however, there have been improvements in just about every other area. So, the screen isn't as perfect. So what? If you don't like it, get a grayscale Palm OS device.

[charger71]

Originally posted by KungFuWoo
I think all of the people complaining about their devices should return their units from wherever they got them, and go back to using a franklin planner. HEY LOOK-THE PAPER IS UNIFORMLY LIT (under good lighting that is) THERE ARE NO GRIDS (except for the printed lines that are supposed to be there) AND THE COLORS AREN'T WASHED OUT (how can B&W be washed out anyways?)

I for one am tired of all of these people who complain more than a 3 yr old child whose toy was just taken away. Hey, if you can do better, why don't YOU go out, do some R&D and make a better unit that if PERFECT. Until then, be quiet and enjoy your device, or at the very least, go away.

Exactly!

But seriously, people come here (myslef included) to find out about new devices, get objective reviews, see what software works, what doesnt, etc.. 99% of people love the 2215.. I'm sure just as many will love the 194X.. We've gone over the screen issue... there isnt a problem with it, according to the vast majority of people here. You may have a defective unit. Check that out, if not, stop making new posts about the same nonsense issues.

As far as the "better screen or downgrade issue" Why is this screen a downgrade? The colors are truer, and it doesnt have the huge corner bleedthrough of the 1910. The screen isnt crooked or tilted. The 2215 has a greater viewable angel.. I can actually see it while its set on my desk at work now..

Sounds like an upgrade to me! Its jus like the old saying, "You cant please all the people all the time.." No use in arguing!

[Vispi]

lol.

I am waiting for somebody to post.
Oh my gawd, my h1945 is defective. It doesn't come with a screen. Oh and it looks bluish too would it have shipped with a screen.

*groan*

come on...somebody, please... please post a super high resolution photo comparison to settle this issue. Otherwise people will keep posting about this over and over again....

[Not2Daft]

Wow! This issue is NOT gonna die...

The 1910 has a better screen, truer color, brighter...etc. Simple as that guys.

Now, the 2215(and the 1945 since it is the same) have great screens as well, however not quite as good as the 1910. Be that as it may, were I to have a choice to buy a 1910 or a 1945 right now I'd buy the 1945. I cannot justify buying the 1945 right now though since I already have a 1910 and the "upgrade" would not really be worth it(this would change if I had need for bluetooth, but I do not).

It is really funny, this argument over the screens. If the 1910 were not already available people would be excited over the screens of these new devices.

[hel]

People, it's ok to admit that the screen sucks. Now I did not say it is the same screen as the 3600 series. No, I understand it's a different technology, however, the overall appearance in real life use of the 2215 is similar to the 3600; washed out colors, blue hue every where, black not appearing as black and so fourth. And yes, the grid is there, and it's very annoying when you want to get lost in a movie.

Anyway, I won't post anymore about this matter as most of you only want to hear opinions that fall in line with your own. Reason does not seem to apply here unfortunately. I'll just return mine tomorrow. Now I give praise to the device for it's speed and size, however I use my pocket pc mainly for movies and pictures as well as my artistic work thus a great screen is an explicit need for me. I will stick with my 1910. I just can't go back to a washed out screen. If it doesn't bother you, that's great - just because you can live with it neither means I should nor should I not express it.

Have a dandy day!