Originally Posted by FtL1776
Who can argue with that crap math... Oh wait.
It has less sub pixels, not less pixels.
Also how do you get to 1280x800 for having 1 less sub pixel out of 3, thats 2/3s so 1707x1067.
Its not just one less sub pixel. Its one less sub pixel AND
one white pixel.
They are counting a pixel as 2 sub pixels, but to get the same information as an RGB pixel they need 4 sub pixels. Hence, 50%.
Its just a marketing scam. You can't use 2 sub pixels to represent color information, which means that this display will only be "2560x1600" when its representing black and white images, and even then you'll likely get color bleeding.
Try and display this image on a RGBW display:
And not only will you get half the rated resolution, it will likely mess up the colors thanks to the extra white pixel, and the lack color information.
If I wanted to display blue at one coordinate, but the sub pixel arrangement for the corresponding pixel was red-green or red-white or green-white, how exactly would I do that?
My "crap math" comes from undergraduate work I've done on color perception. I know how color works, how light works, how our eye translates light into color, how color is represented digitally, and how our brains perceive color, so when I tell you this is a load of BS, chances are its a load of BS.