darkwing said:wow too bad it'll probably never get out of Japan
Zoramon089 said:Nono, I understand. So, I did some research. So the cheapest SD Cards, class 2 have a speed of 2MB/s or 16Mb/s. Vita's screen resolution is 960x544 which, because of the weird dimensions, puts it somewhere slightly below 720p. Anyway, for good 720p video I've read it requires 3Mb/s for 30fps, so 6Mb/s as an upper limit for 60fps. So Vita games could be run from an SD card with relative ease...
BTW, I got the 720p bitrate from here. Don't know how accurate it is
http://blog.radvision.com/videooverenterprise/2008/06/24/high-definition-is-next-do-you-know-how-much-bandwidth-you-have/
It's still only going to have 802.11b if the PS3 is hooked up via wireless.PortTwo said:Regarding Remote Play: we really can't speculate that much about it's capabilities, since the PSP version was working with little horsepower, 802.11b bandwidth, and was the initial version. I expect Vita's Remote capabilities will be much, much more robust.
Zoibie said:I asked Shuhei Yoshida about this on Twitter and he said he didn't know
PS3 is Wireless G.Number45 said:It's still only going to have 802.11b if the PS3 is hooked up via wireless.
I'm clearly losing the plot - I completely blanked the fact that the PSP is only B! D:Mr_Brit said:PS3 is Wireless G.
Massa said:
With the back touchpad, this sounds like it'd be quite the cumbersome addition. It's probably going to have to dangle from the bottom of the unit.Massa said:
Luigiv said:With the back touchpad, this sounds like it'd be quite the cumbersome addition. It's probably going to have to dangle from the bottom of the unit.
somehow I got this feeling it's gonna be really expensive, I imagine it'll attach to the back of Vita covering the rear pad, and to compensate, the external battery will have it's own rear pad to use, and that could ad up the cost.Kambing said:Yeah, i will definitely be buying the attachment along with a Vita instead of waiting for a revision. Thanks for posting
Callibretto said:somehow I got this feeling it's gonna be really expensive, I imagine it'll attach to the back of Vita covering the rear pad, and to compensate, the external battery will have it's own rear pad to use, and that could ad up the cost.
Interesting, but aren't there universal devices that do this already?Gouda Jouji said:This is the external battery isn't it?
Sony call it the "Portable Charger", it was announced along with the other Vita accessories but has "TBA Spring 2012" date attached to it.
_dementia said:Interesting, but aren't there universal devices that do this already?
it's Sony's OLED techYdahs said:Any idea on the type of OLED the Vita is using? All it says in the press release is OLED.
I doubt it'll use Super AMOLED Plus (I think it's only on Samsung phones at the moment) but I hope it's at least uses Super AMOLED. Regular AMOLED is still good, but it's too reflective in the sun.
Eh, slightly disappointing, but I guess it makes sense considering Samsung is a competitor.darkwing said:it's Sony's OLED tech
Ydahs said:Eh, slightly disappointing, but I guess it makes sense considering Samsung is a competitor.
oled-info.com says the Vita is using only AMOLED.
MesserWolf said:250
Smartphones with less features and power cost as much as 5-6-700 .
Oled.info just says they're using an amoled display, meaning an active matrix oled screen. It has nothing to do with the marketing terms samsung uses for their displays, such as super amoled plus. That's just a marketing stunt used for their amoled screens in order to distance them from the old ones that were just called amoled. They're all amoled screens.Ydahs said:Eh, slightly disappointing, but I guess it makes sense considering Samsung is a competitor.
oled-info.com says the Vita is using only AMOLED.
Yeah, price is undoubtedly a factor though a SAMOLED would have been nice (brighter, more energy efficient and better in the sun). Maybe it'll have a better screen in a revision.MesserWolf said:250
Smartphones with less features and power cost as much as 5-6-700 .
SAMOLED+ might be a marketing term, but it's still the best mobile OLED screen on the market today. Would have been nice to have a screen that's equivalent to my SG2's screen, but anything less is still good, considering the price of this thing.°°ToMmY°° said:Oled.info just says they're using an amoled display, meaning an active matrix oled screen. It has nothing to do with the marketing terms samsung uses for their displays, such as super amoled plus. That's just a marketing stunt used for their amoled screens in order to distance them from the old ones that were just called amoled. They're all amoled screens.
What i'm saying is we don't know what oled screen vita is using. Just the fact they're saying it's amoled doesn't mean it's the screen samsung was using two years ago on their smartphones. It just means they're using an active matrix oled display.Ydahs said:Yeah, price is undoubtedly a factor though a SAMOLED would have been nice (brighter, more energy efficient and better in the sun). Maybe it'll have a better screen in a revision.
SAMOLED+ might be a marketing term, but it's still the best mobile OLED screen on the market today. Would have been nice to have a screen that's equivalent to my SG2's screen, but anything less is still good, considering the price of this thing.
250 + 50 of the memory is still much cheaper than 5-6-700 . much much cheaper.DaSorcerer7 said:and they also have internal memory, lets not forget that.
At that bandwith you might as well just use SDTV - the 720P quality will be too poor for resolution to give any real benefit.Zoramon089 said:Anyway, for good 720p video I've read it requires 3Mb/s for 30fps
funkystudent said:I think ill probably wait for the hardware revision this time.
I think its probably smart of sony to get some extra cash out of the hardcore early adopters but I just know a vita with better battery life and cheaper memory cards or internal memory is only a year r 2 off.
funkystudent said:I think ill probably wait for the hardware revision this time.
I think its probably smart of sony to get some extra cash out of the hardcore early adopters but I just know a vita with better battery life and cheaper memory cards or internal memory is only a year r 2 off.
Callibretto said:no doubt revision will come, but I don't think it's a mere one years off, I think 2 years at the fastest, how many years between psp 1000 and 2000?
funkystudent said:I think ill probably wait for the hardware revision this time. I think its probably smart of sony to get some extra cash out of the hardcore early adopters but I just know a vita with better battery life and cheaper memory cards or internal memory is only a year r 2 off.
CorrisD said:Seeing as I missed it, does the Vita not come with any onboard storage what so ever?
It has to come with some storage for firmware updates and inbuilt app data, but there's no onboard storage accessible to the user.CorrisD said:Seeing as I missed it, does the Vita not come with any onboard storage what so ever?
The only difference between Samsung amoled and super amoled plus is the lack of pentile. This screen doesn't use a pentile display and is already superior to the one you have in your phone due to its resolutionYdahs said:Yeah, price is undoubtedly a factor though a SAMOLED would have been nice (brighter, more energy efficient and better in the sun). Maybe it'll have a better screen in a revision.
SAMOLED+ might be a marketing term, but it's still the best mobile OLED screen on the market today. Would have been nice to have a screen that's equivalent to my SG2's screen, but anything less is still good, considering the price of this thing.
I'm late to this, but now we can finally put concerns about whether this is coming to retail or not to rest.Callibretto said:
awesome gravity daze cover, hope they don't mess it up for US cover.
Samsung is leading with AMOLED technology. They already have a 5.3 inch AMOLED panel with a resolution of 1280x800, which will be used in their new Samsung Galaxy Note device, released before the end of 2011.gcubed said:The only difference between Samsung amoled and super amoled plus is the lack of pentile. This screen doesn't use a pentile display and is already superior to the one you have in your phone due to its resolution
Errrr, no, just no. Super-AMOLED-plus is just marketing speak. The technology is called AMOLED and the rest is marketing phrases to specify certain variations from certain manufacturers.Ydahs said:Eh, slightly disappointing, but I guess it makes sense considering Samsung is a competitor.
oled-info.com says the Vita is using only AMOLED.